Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Wednesday, March 06, 2019

Derek Jeter wants Marlins fans to focus on the experience, not wins and losses

Derek Jeter knows the Miami Marlins aren’t going to be a good team in 2019. Instead of trying to go out and add talented players who are still sitting on the market, Jeter is opting for a bold, new strategy: Act like you’re a minor-league team.

Attending Marlins games shouldn’t be about who wins or who losses the game this season. It should be about whether you had a good experience, Jeter told WPLG in Miami.

“This is professional sports, and I feel bad for even saying this, but it’s impossible to win every single game. But one thing you always remember is the experience you had while you were at the park. We want it to be a positive experience. We want people to enjoy themselves, and look, a lot of times people come [and] they don’t know who won or lost, sometimes they don’t even know who was playing, but they do know if they had a good experience and that’s what we’re focusing on.”

MY PAIN IS NOT A HOLIDAY (CoB). Posted: March 06, 2019 at 08:22 PM | 103 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: derek jeter, gift baskets, marlins

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 
   1. Rally Posted: March 06, 2019 at 08:35 PM (#5820872)
Sad. Hard to believe such words could ever come from one who was a true Yankee.
   2. base ball chick Posted: March 06, 2019 at 11:03 PM (#5820896)
what the serious f**k????

why would someone go to a BALLPARK, pay parking, pay all that entrance fee to not particularly watch a BASEBALL GAME which is the point - supposedly - of the taxpayers money loss - to have an "experience" ????!!!!!

doing like what??? not knowing the name of the teams or the minor leaguers?????

there isn't even that stupid cheesy statue to look at no mo



   3. Scott Ross Posted: March 07, 2019 at 01:34 AM (#5820901)
“every season that doesn’t end in a World Series results in a series of high-level meetings where our total failure to bring a championship to the fans of New York is thoroughly examined.”

- Derek Jeter’s Diary, June 19, 2014
   4. Fancy Pants Handle struck out swinging Posted: March 07, 2019 at 07:33 AM (#5820910)
You know what a great experience is for fans? Winning games.
   5. BrianBrianson Posted: March 07, 2019 at 08:58 AM (#5820924)
why would someone go to a BALLPARK, pay parking, pay all that entrance fee to not particularly watch a BASEBALL GAME which is the point - supposedly - of the taxpayers money loss - to have an "experience" ????!!!!!


Maybe the gift basket is really nice?
   6. I Am Not a Number Posted: March 07, 2019 at 09:02 AM (#5820925)
I am Derek Jeter. I am whoever you want me to be. I am whoever you need me to be. I am here to accommodate the narrative.
   7. . Posted: March 07, 2019 at 09:19 AM (#5820931)
Wow, you guys are missing a lot in recent days. Jeter's words are simply rhetorical codification of the baseball business and its reliance on the mallpark experience. Nothing more. In point of fact, a bunch of people really don't care that much about wins and losses (*) and much more about an enjoyable experience at the mallpark. Next time you go to a game in person, take note of how many people spend wide swaths of time doing things other than watching the baseball game. Really look closely.

I've made this observation several times now, but the market of "sitting down in your seat for an entire baseball game to do nothing more (**) than watching a baseball game" is no longer that big. Indeed, it's barely even viable in a lot of markets. In places like Pittsburgh, e.g., it isn't viable. A business consisting of attracting patrons to Three Rivers Stadium to watch major league baseball is not viable. (And again, look at a mallpark-free place like Oakland, where we have a nice comparable time series to analyze.)

(*) It bears repeating that the market niche that coalesces around the dominant BBTF philosophy of the sport is very narrow. It's dwarfed by the market that has a significantly different perspective on the sport. Because people spend so much time here advocating for that philosophy, this reality often gets lost.

(**) Beyond making nature calls, of course.
   8. TDF, trained monkey Posted: March 07, 2019 at 09:28 AM (#5820934)
A business consisting of attracting patrons to Three Rivers Stadium to watch major league baseball is not viable.
Hey dumbass - Three Rivers was torn down 18 years ago. The Pirates have played in PNC Park since '01, widely considered the best ballpark in MLB.
   9. Rally Posted: March 07, 2019 at 09:30 AM (#5820935)
Wow, you guys are missing a lot in recent days. Jeter's words are simply rhetorical codification of the baseball business and its reliance on the mallpark experience. Nothing more. In point of fact, a bunch of people really don't care that much about wins and losses (*) and much more about an enjoyable experience at the mallpark. Next time you go to a game in person, take note of how many people spend wide swaths of time doing things other than watching the baseball game. Really look closely.


Sure, there are lots of people at the ballpark that don't seem to pay a lot of attention to the game. Also true that there are a lot more of them when the team is winning games.
   10. Fernigal McGunnigle Posted: March 07, 2019 at 09:30 AM (#5820936)
Hey dumbass - Three Rivers was torn down 18 years ago. The Pirates have played in PNC Park since '01, widely considered the best ballpark in MLB.
Well, you've got to admit that a business based around attracting patrons to a stadium that was torn down 18 years ago isn't viable. He's not wrong there.
   11. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: March 07, 2019 at 10:46 AM (#5820965)

#7 may be wrong about the specifics of the Pittsburgh market (I haven't looked at the numbers), but I don't think he's off on the overall point.

Still sad to see an owner running a team this way. Miami could have gone in a different direction when Jeter & Co. took over -- with Stanton and Yelich, the revenue sharing money they receive, and the decline in pricing for free agents, they could easily have been a contending team that simply makes a bit less money for its owners.
   12. Greg Pope Posted: March 07, 2019 at 10:47 AM (#5820966)
Hey dumbass - Three Rivers was torn down 18 years ago. The Pirates have played in PNC Park since '01, widely considered the best ballpark in MLB.

We would also accept Allegheny Park. Agree on the best park in MLB.
   13. . Posted: March 07, 2019 at 10:55 AM (#5820969)
Hey dumbass - Three Rivers was torn down 18 years ago. The Pirates have played in PNC Park since '01, widely considered the best ballpark in MLB.


Anything on the substantive point at issue?
   14. Tony S Posted: March 07, 2019 at 11:19 AM (#5820979)
Considering that the Marlins are (a) actively avoiding competing on the field, and (b) are usually around the bottom of MLB in attendance, maybe they're not the ideal test case for this exciting marketing approach..
   15. Jose Is An Absurd Balladeer Posted: March 07, 2019 at 11:26 AM (#5820983)
Considering that the Marlins are (a) actively avoiding competing on the field, and (b) are usually around the bottom of MLB in attendance, maybe they're not the ideal test case for this exciting marketing approach..


I'd say they are perfect. It's not like attracting fans to watch a winning team is an option.
   16. TDF, trained monkey Posted: March 07, 2019 at 11:28 AM (#5820984)
Anything on the substantive point at issue?
I was taught a long time ago that when you're wrong on the facts, your opinions aren't worth listening to.

   17. . Posted: March 07, 2019 at 11:41 AM (#5820986)
I was taught a long time ago that when you're wrong on the facts, your opinions aren't worth listening to.


I was wrong on no facts.

So that's a no, then?

Or are you saying that baseball in Three Rivers Stadium -- hypothetically, as would be obvious to anyone reading and discussing in good faith -- would be a viable business in 2019? If it would not be -- and it almost certainly would not be -- that demonstrates the indispensability of the mallpark and the mallpark patron to the business.
   18. Greg Pope Posted: March 07, 2019 at 11:49 AM (#5820989)
Or are you saying that baseball in Three Rivers Stadium -- hypothetically, as would be obvious to anyone reading and discussing in good faith -- would be a viable business in 2019?

I now understand what you mean. If there was no Allegheny Park, and Three Rivers was still around, it wouldn't be viable because it's not a mallpark.

It was not clear from your original post.
   19. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 07, 2019 at 11:52 AM (#5820991)
I now understand what you mean. If there was no Allegheny Park, and Three Rivers was still around, it wouldn't be viable because it's not a mallpark.

But that's not true. The Yankees had no trouble attracting fans to the old(er) Yankee Stadium. They drew over 4 million fans four straight years. The Red Sox and Cubs have no trouble drawing people to 100+ y.o. ballparks.

It's pretty simple. You win, fans show up.
   20. Bote Man Posted: March 07, 2019 at 12:02 PM (#5820994)
Miami could have gone in a different direction when Jeter & Co. took over

Miami should have gone a different direction by selling the team to Jorge Mas & Co., son of a Cuban-American with strong local ties, lots of money from a thriving construction business, and a keen interest in baseball as a competitive sport. This current ownership group is a farce.
   21. . Posted: March 07, 2019 at 12:05 PM (#5820995)
But that's not true. The Yankees had no trouble attracting fans to the old(er) Yankee Stadium. They drew over 4 million fans four straight years. The Red Sox and Cubs have no trouble drawing people to 100+ y.o. ballparks.


But that doesn't mean the same thing would work in, say, Pittsburgh.(*) You see the logical gap there, right? There are some markets where baseball qua baseball is or would be viable. Not all current major league markets fit that criterion.

Three Rivers barely worked when it wasn't (seen as) outdated. Today? I think not.

(*) I certainly don't mean to single out Pittsburgh here. I'm perfectly fine with baseball qua baseball and actually prefer that culture, as should be clear from my posts. I went to a bunch of games in Three Rivers, and have been to the Vet and Riverfront and have (had) no issues with any of them. Same with the Metrodome.
   22. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: March 07, 2019 at 12:08 PM (#5820996)
The Pirates have always drawn like ####. They drew like #### in an old-school park like Forbes Field, they drew like #### in a '70s concrete bowl like Three Rivers, and they still draw like #### at PNC Park, arguably the best of the current mallparks.
   23. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 07, 2019 at 12:14 PM (#5821000)
But that doesn't mean the same thing would work in, say, Pittsburgh. You see the logical gap there, right? There are some markets where baseball qua baseball is or would be viable. Not all current major league markets fit that criterion.

See [22]. The mallpark isn't drawing fans either. They drew 1.45 million last year.

People only turned out when they Pirates had a contending team.
   24. Bote Man Posted: March 07, 2019 at 12:48 PM (#5821007)
People only turned out when the Pirates had a contending team.

That echoes what the late great Frank Robinson said back in 2004 after the final home game of the Expos. Jump to the 6:00 minute mark to skip the press conference (which was neat in its own way). "If you put a good product on the field, the fans will show up." True as ever.
   25. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 07, 2019 at 01:05 PM (#5821010)
That echoes what the late great Frank Robinson said back in 2004 after the final home game of the Expos. Jump to the 6:00 minute mark to skip the press conference (which was neat in its own way). "If you put a good product on the field, the fans will show up." True as ever.

It shouldn't be hard. It's true in every field of entertainment. Make a product people want to watch, and they'll show up. Make a crappy product, they won't.
   26. Cris E Posted: March 07, 2019 at 01:35 PM (#5821015)
I think the mallpark gambit is an approach to surviving with smaller crowds. Everyone can survive handsomely when drawing 3.5m, and there's always an effort to win as much as possible within the resources available, but if you're only going to have 1.6m showing up then you need to extract as much money as possible from them.

EDIT: The discussion is where to put the "resources available" limit, how many chips to put on the table. But mallparking is separate from that.
   27. . Posted: March 07, 2019 at 01:40 PM (#5821019)
Make a product people want to watch, and they'll show up. Make a crappy product, they won't.


Too reductionist. The mallpark is part of the "product," (A), and the league in aggregate puts out a mediocre .500 product each and every year (B).
   28. TDF, trained monkey Posted: March 07, 2019 at 01:47 PM (#5821021)
The Pirates have always drawn like ####. They drew like #### in an old-school park like Forbes Field, they drew like #### in a '70s concrete bowl like Three Rivers, and they still draw like #### at PNC Park, arguably the best of the current mallparks.
Pittsburgh is a pretty small market. It's crazy to think they'll draw like the Yankees.
It shouldn't be hard. It's true in every field of entertainment. Make a product people want to watch, and they'll show up. Make a crappy product, they won't.
Since they won the division in '92, the Pirates have finished more seasons 30+ games out (6) than fewer than 10 games out (4). From '93-'12 they went 20 straight seasons without a winning record.

They could hand out coke and hookers at the gate and still not draw.
   29. base ball chick Posted: March 07, 2019 at 01:50 PM (#5821022)
i need some help here

what exactly, is the "mallpark experience"?

i have only ever been to minute maid and the ballpark t arlington (or whatever its name is now) twice and i sure didn't see anything to do except for watch a game

well, the Box has this kind of play area for little kids and a bar that doesn't face the park. not much for "entertainment" - you could walk down the wall behind the CBoxes/LF and look at the names of famous astros and the homers they hit, but it would be tons cheaper on a tour day and you could actually go into the dugout.

so, where is the "experience"?

but you'd STILL have to pay parking (unless you know where the few remaining free spaces are) and admission. and for, what??? i guess a SRO ticket would be a lot less like 10 or 15 bucks, but if you don't have any interest in watching the game, you are gonna do what? WHY would you pay all that money to park and for admission when you can go to an actually good restaurant with actually good food without paying admission or parking OR standing in line for HOW long in the 95 degree heat and having to go through security

now i know that pretty much anywhere, people for some reason i do not get, seem to prefer to be on their phones to anything else, don't ask me why. and that even before cell phones were everywhere and wireless/phone service was spotty at best at the game, people would sit in their seats and not pay attention and talk about anything else and i couldn't figure out why go in the first place if you just want to talk about your sessuwill hexperiences or football games or bidness troubles etc
   30. base ball chick Posted: March 07, 2019 at 01:55 PM (#5821024)
TDF, trained monkey Posted: March 07, 2019 at 01:47 PM (#5821021)

They could hand out coke and hookers at the gate and still not draw


- well, im not really into soda, but as for the hooker, would depend on his resemblance to grady sizemore. or dr smooth...
   31. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 07, 2019 at 01:59 PM (#5821026)
what exactly, is the "mallpark experience"?


Basically a bunch of restaurants and bars (hideously overpriced of course) and more souvenir shops.
   32. Rusty Priske Posted: March 07, 2019 at 02:00 PM (#5821027)
While I get what a lot of people are saying, I also kind of agree with Jeter.

Otherwise you are saying that a team with a losing record should have a home attendance of zero. Even if the team isn't great, the players are out there doing their damnedest to win.

Winning is more fun, obviously, but if you only cheer for your team when they are winning, you are not much of a fan.

(And yes, my favourite team kind of sucks,too.)
   33. TDF, trained monkey Posted: March 07, 2019 at 02:07 PM (#5821031)
Winning is more fun, obviously, but if you only cheer for your team when they are winning, you are not much of a fan.
Since you seemed to miss it, here's what Jeter said:

We want people to enjoy themselves, and look, a lot of times people come [and] they don’t know who won or lost, sometimes they don’t even know who was playing, but they do know if they had a good experience and that’s what we’re focusing on.
   34. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: March 07, 2019 at 02:16 PM (#5821033)
They could hand out coke and hookers at the gate and still not draw.
Well, nothing against the fine city of Pittsburgh, but I have to assume their hookers aren't quite of the caliber of New York and L.A. hookers.
   35. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: March 07, 2019 at 02:17 PM (#5821035)
Since they won the division in '92, the Pirates have finished more seasons 30+ games out (6) than fewer than 10 games out (4). From '93-'12 they went 20 straight seasons without a winning record.


The Pirates have drawn like #### in seasons when they put a playoff-caliber team on the field, too. The last time they finished even in the top half of the NL in attendance was 1990, when their rank was a robust sixth out of twelve. Their most recent playoff season (2015), in which they won 98 games and made the postseason for the third year in a row? Ninth out of fifteen. Their most recent championship season, in which they also won 98 games, swept the Big Red Machine in the NLCS, and rallied from a 3-2 deficit in dramatic fashion against the Orioles in the World Series? Tenth out of twelve.
   36. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: March 07, 2019 at 02:20 PM (#5821037)
a lot of times people come [and] they don’t know who won or lost, sometimes they don’t even know who was playing
I mean, that's not a wrong statement on its face (outside of the general sleaziness that is the Marlins). I've seen it a million times at Wrigley - lots of "fans" there couldn't name more than 3 active Cubs players.
   37. Steve Parris, Je t'aime Posted: March 07, 2019 at 02:20 PM (#5821038)
You know what would be fun at a Marlins game? A vivid, absurd sculpture behind the outfield of a leaping Marlin every time the home team hits a HR. Tell Jetes no charge for the idea.
   38. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 07, 2019 at 02:21 PM (#5821040)
Winning is more fun, obviously, but if you only cheer for your team when they are winning, you are not much of a fan.

Yeah, but you want them to at least be trying to win. The Miami ownership and front office have zero interest in winning. The players may be making an honest effort, but the team is not.
   39. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: March 07, 2019 at 03:15 PM (#5821066)
I've made this observation several times now, but the market of "sitting down in your seat for an entire baseball game to do nothing more (**) than watching a baseball game" is no longer that big. Indeed, it's barely even viable in a lot of markets. In places like Pittsburgh, e.g., it isn't viable. A business consisting of attracting patrons to Three Rivers Stadium to watch major league baseball is not viable. (And again, look at a mallpark-free place like Oakland, where we have a nice comparable time series to analyze.)
Ever since Jim exiled OTP, I've only occasionally popped my head in here. I see that I didn't miss anything with respect to FLTB doing his FLTBing.
   40. . Posted: March 07, 2019 at 03:16 PM (#5821067)
The players may be making an honest effort, but the team is not.


The players are who you're watching. The Knicks aren't trying to win this year, either, but I root for the players wearing Knicks jerseys to win.

When did things cross the line to, "There's no reason to be a fan of your team, unless the front office is doing A, B, and C"? When and how and why did that happen? If a Marlins fan just stops paying attention this year because the franchise isn't putting a lot of effort into the major league product, then how exactly were they a "fan" to begin with?
   41. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: March 07, 2019 at 03:17 PM (#5821068)
#7 may be wrong about the specifics of the Pittsburgh market (I haven't looked at the numbers), but I don't think he's off on the overall point.
Of course he's off on the overall point. He implies that something has changed about baseball to make it less attractive to fans, as opposed to "mallparks" bringing in extra people above and beyond that baseline of fans.
   42. . Posted: March 07, 2019 at 03:18 PM (#5821069)
Ever since Jim exiled OTP, I've only occasionally popped my head in here. I see that I didn't miss anything with respect to FLTB doing his FLTBing.


Stalkers gonna stalk.
   43. . Posted: March 07, 2019 at 03:18 PM (#5821071)
He implies that something has changed about baseball to make it less attractive to fans, as opposed to "mallparks" bringing in extra people above and beyond that baseline of fans.


No, he didn't "imply" it -- he said it.
   44. Omineca Greg Posted: March 07, 2019 at 04:24 PM (#5821084)
If you were a baseball fan in Miami, wouldn't it be easier just to always root for the visiting team? Read Derek's little statement...

This is professional sports, and I feel bad for even saying this, but it’s impossible to win every single game. But one thing you always remember is the experience you had while you were at the park. We want it to be a positive experience. We want people to enjoy themselves, and look, a lot of times people come [and] they don’t know who won or lost, sometimes they don’t even know who was playing, but they do know if they had a good experience and that’s what we’re focusing on

It's not like something a fire chief would say...

This is professional fire-fighting, and I feel bad for even saying this, but it’s impossible to put out every single fire. But one thing you always remember is the experience you had while you were at the blazing inferno. We want it to be a positive experience. We want people to enjoy themselves, and look, a lot of times people come [and] they don’t know if their house was merely heavily smoke damaged or if it burned down to the foundation, sometimes they don’t even know what the cause of the fire was, but they do know if they had a good experience and that’s what we’re focusing on.

You know, it wouldn't seem right.

Or a financial advisor...

This is professional investing, and I feel bad for even saying this, but it’s impossible to make money on every single investment. But one thing you always remember is the experience you had while you were sitting in the waiting room wondering where all your money went. We want it to be a positive experience. We want people to enjoy themselves, and look, a lot of times people come [and] they don’t know if it was the counterfeit debentures or the pump and dump, sometimes they don’t even know who put what money where, but they do know if they had a good experience and that’s what we’re focusing on

You know, those statements don't even make sense. Or like one of my employees said to me just the other day...

This is professional baking, and I feel bad for even saying this, but it’s impossible for every cake not to be contaminated with medical waste. But one thing you always remember is the experience you had while you were picking out band-aid plastic from between your teeth. We want it to be a positive experience. We want people to enjoy themselves, and look, a lot of times people come [and] they don’t know chocolate from vanilla, sometimes they don’t even know what the hell that chunk of anomalous non-foodstuff blob is, but they do know if they had a good experience and that’s what we’re focusing on.

But you see, none of those things are zero-sum; winning a baseball game is. Some will win, some will lose, que sera sera, even the losers get lucky sometimes, you get the idea. Miami fans should just identify with the visiting team. It's like back in the 70s, when people would wife-swap and stuff, if you had wanted to stick with your same old wife, you should have just stayed at home (which is what I would have done, I hate taking keys off and on those little rings, it's the modern age, you would think we would have thought of something better than than that by now, my fingernails aren't made of iron). The very fact that you bothered to come out to the old ballyard shows you're curious about how the other teams play. Admit it...

It doesn't necessarily follow that just because somebody works near you means you should identify with them. I live 5 blocks from a KFC, but I'll still cross town to the Omineca's other KFC, because I don't care what they say at the first one, I prefer my coleslaw less "sunkissed" than that. And Marlins fans should prefer their ballteam less "shittastic" than that. And as there's always going to be another team there, the decision seems straight forward. Just get an all purpose death to fish cap, like this one. Or get this one, and liquid paper a big "NO" on top of it. It's just like those swappers, you may not know anything about who you're spending the evening with, but you know damn well it's better than what you usually get at home.

This post is in no way an endorsement of wife swapping. That was just a teaching tool. Sometimes I think Horace and I are the only ones who get it...

It's you I love and not another
And I know our love will last forever
You I love and not another
And I know we'll always be together
Some men have one love, two and three love
Four and five and six love

But I believe in one love
I believe in one love
Baby girl, do you love me?

Some men don't feel secure
Unless they have a woman on each arm
They have to play the field, prove they have charm
They say don't lay your eggs in one basket
If the basket should fall all your eggs'll be broken

But I believe in one love
I believe in one love
Oh, girl, I believe in one love
I believe in one love

It's not the everyday you'll find the woman of your dreams
Who will always be there no matter how bad things seems
Ever so faithful, ever so sure
No man could ever ask for more

I believe in one love
I believe in one love, oh, girl
I believe in one love
I believe, girl, oh yeah
In one love, in one love
In one love, in one love
I believe, I believe, I believe in one love
I believe in one love
I believe in one love, in one love

del Naja/Marshall/Vowles
   45. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 07, 2019 at 04:27 PM (#5821085)
The players are who you're watching. The Knicks aren't trying to win this year, either, but I root for the players wearing Knicks jerseys to win.

Why? Why would you invest your time and loyalty in such a dysfunctional, and despicable bunch of morons? If people withdrew their support when the Dolan disaster started, he would have been forced to sell by now.

When did things cross the line to, "There's no reason to be a fan of your team, unless the front office is doing A, B, and C"? When and how and why did that happen? If a Marlins fan just stops paying attention this year because the franchise isn't putting a lot of effort into the major league product, then how exactly were they a "fan" to begin with?

Always. Being a fan isn't blind loyalty. Attendance and ratings have always gone down when the teams sucked and weren't trying. The Phillies and Browns used to draw 2,000 fans a game BITD.


   46. . Posted: March 07, 2019 at 04:38 PM (#5821090)
Why? Why would you invest your time and loyalty in such a dysfunctional, and despicable bunch of morons?


Because I'm a fan of the team. Why else?

Is this actually a question that you have, or are you just trying to score debating points? It's a simple question with an obvious answer. I go and watch because I'm a fan of the team, and 19,000 or so other people do the same thing every home game. (*) Plus the countless others who watch on TV, and the members of the Knicks diaspora outside the NYC area who also watch on League Pass or listen to the radio on League Pass, or look at the score/story in the newspaper.

Or is the concept of actual fandom yet another thing that the BBTF sports market niche sees completely differently from the bigger sports market niches? It's like you're treating sports fans as mere customers, when they're anything but. Bizarre.

(*) By and large; there are a few tourists there.
   47. Tony S Posted: March 07, 2019 at 04:41 PM (#5821091)
There's a difference between an organization that's got a long-term plan for success, even if they're not winning this year, and an organization like the Marlins, which doesn't even pretend to have any interest in putting a competitive team on the field. The former will keep most of its fans even during the down years; the latter -- well, the Marlins' attendance patterns speak for themselves.

If the Marlins don't intend to try to win, and given that they've been so ineffective at selling the "mallpark experience", what exactly does their marketing department DO?
   48. . Posted: March 07, 2019 at 04:43 PM (#5821092)
There's a difference between an organization that's got a long-term plan for success,


Every organization has one of those, and it's not complicated -- get really good players. Very few people go to games of shitty teams that otherwise wouldn't go simply because they've made the judgment that the team has a "long-term plan for success." That's a generally false conceit of your orthodox baseball saber types (*) and admirers of things like the Sixers' Process. But it's not needle-moving or even close.

The former will keep most of its fans even during the down years; the latter -- well, the Marlins' attendance patterns speak for themselves.


Then the Marlins never really had much of an actual fanbase to begin with, which is probably far closer to the truth.

(*) I'll note here a passage that caught my eye in the BP Annual write-up of the Diamondbacks, which is available as a free sample on Kindle, that kind of makes the point, albeit unwittingly:

For the hardcore baseball fan, immersed in the numbers and fascinated by the minutae of team-building, the Diamondbacks will be fun to watch over the coming year. For most fans, though, and for anyone who enjoys the game on the field more than the behind-the-scenes details of its production, they might be something of a bummer.
   49. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 07, 2019 at 04:55 PM (#5821096)
Because I'm a fan of the team. Why else?

The question is why are you still a fan? I ditched the Knicks 15 years ago.

When a team is run by despicable idiots (Dolan still takes advice from Isaiah Thomas and would hire him back if the NBA would let him), and doesn't give a rats ass about fans, except for separating them from their money, it's time to walk away.

This isn't blood (and I'd stop talking to relatives who behaved like the Knicks), it isn't country, it isn't religion. It's a sports team.

Pick another one to root for. The Nets are actually pretty good now, and aren't run by sociopaths.
   50. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 07, 2019 at 04:58 PM (#5821097)
Every organization has one of those, and it's not complicated -- get really good players.

Yeah, but when you refuse to pay actually money for them, it's not an actual plan. It's a wish. They'll take good players if they stumble upon them, but won't actually sacrifice any profit to get or keep them.

If the Marlins knew with certainty they could win 50 games a year and make $100M, or win 100 games a year and make $75M, they'd pick the 50 win option. And they do. Every year, except when they need to scam Miami for a new ballpark.
   51. . Posted: March 07, 2019 at 05:03 PM (#5821099)
The question is why are you still a fan?


Because I've been one for decades and have intense brand loyalty. It's not a family tradition, but it's now a personal tradition and I've introduced my son to it. I was a fan from afar starting from boyhood in the 70s, mainly based on the Knicks championship teams, the books on them which I liked, and the general appeal of NYC to ambitious people out of NYC. To now have come full circle and sat next to my age-7 and 8 son at Knick playoff games (*) and watch him scream "DEE-FENSE!!" to the organ the way the fans have done since those 70s teams is an irreplaceable experience.

Pick another one to root for. The Nets are actually pretty good now, and aren't run by sociopaths.


I've given it some thought, but it would never take. This isn't a matter of reason or rationale. We need things like that in our lives. They're enriching.

(*) Game 4 against the Heat in 2012; Games 1 and 5 against the Celtics, 2013.
   52. . Posted: March 07, 2019 at 05:07 PM (#5821101)
Yeah, but when you refuse to pay actually money for them, it's not an actual plan. It's a wish.


The plan is to draft them -- which, let's face it, is pretty much every team in every sport's plan.(*) Paying them when they reach free agency is another matter, and the Marlins are hardly alone in being unlikely to pay many of them. They did make a big foray into the free agency market the Buehrle/Reyes year and it was a disaster.

(*) That's how you win in every sport. Draft good players. Every team in every sport tries to do that. Teams vary in the degree to which they do other things, but those other things are tangential to drafting. Draft well, you'll have an appealing and successful franchise; don't draft well, you probably won't. Pretty much an iron rule, though with all rules, there are exceptions. It's virtually impossible to buy your way out of bad drafting in baseball. The best you're going to be able to do is trade one generation of sparse draftees for a new, more plentiful generation of someone else's draftees who will hopefully renew your franchise.
   53. Eric J can SABER all he wants to Posted: March 07, 2019 at 05:20 PM (#5821104)
There's a difference between an organization that's got a long-term plan for success,

Every organization has one of those, and it's not complicated -- get really good players.


If only the Marlins had a chance to get some really good players - like, say, the 2017 NL MVP, or the 2018 NL MVP, or a third excellent outfielder to complete the set. Maybe then they would actually try to win.

Guess we'll never know.
   54. KronicFatigue Posted: March 07, 2019 at 05:24 PM (#5821105)
Agree with Snapper w/r/t the Knicks. I know bandwagon jumping is considered distasteful, but I've come around to being against the opposite: sticking with a team that doesn't deserve fans. The Knicks don't deserve fans. Dolan doesn't few them as fans, he views them as suckers and wants to part them with their money.

I also agree with Jeter, to a certain extent. We're in an echo chamber on a baseball site, talking about the reason to go to a game. Certainly, most of us have gone to games with people who aren't into the game, right? People who probably don't know the rules, kids who are most excited about the ice cream, young adults who stroll in in the 3rd inning b/c they've been tailgating for 4 hours.

My kid plays softball, so understands the game well enough. And definitely enjoys "winning" and being part of a crowd that's enjoying a winning game. But she had more fun at a Cyclones game than any Mets game, b/c of all the extra nonsense they do between innings. I went to a Mets game this year solely to catch up with friends. Sure, we were facing the field while we talked. but we talked a lot.

I'd love to see a stat that shows what percentage of tickets were sold to people who actually watched a full game on TV, start to finish, without their face buried in their phone. Baseball, taken in its entirety, is quite boring for a large portion of the population.
   55. . Posted: March 07, 2019 at 05:29 PM (#5821109)
If only the Marlins had a chance to get some really good players - like, say, the 2017 NL MVP, or the 2018 NL MVP, or a third excellent outfielder to complete the set. Maybe then they would actually try to win.


They tried with those guys and didn't win. The 2017 Marlins were 77-85. (*) An autopsy will almost certainly reveal that they didn't draft well enough to fill out a winning roster. Take Fernandez off the doomed boat and they're probably about a .500 team. With the MVP, a likely Cy Young candidate, a budding MVP, another star outfielder, and an elite catcher. How anyone could possibly say the 2017 Marlins weren't "trying to win" is pretty much beyond comprehension.

Virtually every franchise in professional sports has at least one star. Other than in basketball, one or two or three aren't enough to fill out a winning roster.

(*) And of course they also had probably the sport's best catcher.
   56. . Posted: March 07, 2019 at 05:34 PM (#5821111)
When the Marlins step up to the podium this year for the draft, is the expectation that they'll just have the commissioner draw a name out of a hat, since they aren't "trying to win"?
   57. Eric J can SABER all he wants to Posted: March 07, 2019 at 05:40 PM (#5821113)
They tried with those guys and didn't win. The 2017 Marlins were 77-85. (*) An autopsy will almost certainly reveal that they didn't draft well enough to fill out a winning roster. Take Fernandez off the doomed boat and they're probably about a .500 team. With the MVP, a likely Cy Young candidate, a budding MVP, another star outfielder, and an elite catcher. How anyone could possibly say the 2017 Marlins weren't "trying to win" is pretty much beyond comprehension.

The 2017 Marlins, were trying, sure - but 2017 predates Jeter and Co.'s ownership of the team (the sale was announced in August of that year). All three of Ozuna, Yelich, and Stanton (along with Realmuto) were available to the Marlins for at least the next three years, and only Stanton had any real cost (by MLB standards) associated with keeping him around. There was nothing preventing the Jeter-era Marlins from trying again to win with those guys, and maybe use some of their revenue-sharing money to fill in some average players around the edges.

That is... not the direction they went.
   58. . Posted: March 07, 2019 at 05:48 PM (#5821116)
The 2017 Marlins, were trying, sure


OK, then they should have developed a fanbase that would still be loyal a mere two years later.

We should probably admit here what is really pretty obvious -- the Marlins simply don't have a representative fanbase big enough to support the inevitable highs and lows of a pro sports franchise. It wasn't the fault of Joe Robbie Stadium or all the other factors typically pointed to. It's a relatively new team that simply hasn't taken root. The 2003-05 teams were filled with young, charismatic, appealing guys who actually won a World Series, and they drew 1.3, 1.7, 1.85.(*) Not close to good enough.

(*) In 2002, they went 79-83 and had a young roster/prospect group that was a year away from turning into a Yankee-slaying World Series winner and they drew ... 814,000 fans. In 2002.
   59. KronicFatigue Posted: March 07, 2019 at 05:59 PM (#5821119)
OK, then they should have developed a fanbase that would still be loyal a mere two years later.


This is a solid point. If a team I support is having a bad year, or even rebuilding, but I still believe they're trying their best, I welcome the lower-priced tickets and might wind up attending more games.
   60. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 07, 2019 at 07:32 PM (#5821135)
The plan is to draft them -- which, let's face it, is pretty much every team in every sport's plan.(*) Paying them when they reach free agency is another matter, and the Marlins are hardly alone in being unlikely to pay many of them. They did make a big foray into the free agency market the Buehrle/Reyes year and it was a disaster.

They draft 'em but they won't keep them. Teams that want to win keep their good players at least through their arb years, and try to extend them early for a few FA years.

The Marlins had Yelich through 2022 on a ridiculously team-friendly deal, and still traded him, because they'd rather not pay a 5 WAR player $10M, even though it's an awesome value.
   61. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 07, 2019 at 07:35 PM (#5821137)
OK, then they should have developed a fanbase that would still be loyal a mere two years later.

We should probably admit here what is really pretty obvious -- the Marlins simply don't have a representative fanbase big enough to support the inevitable highs and lows of a pro sports franchise.


That's because successive ownerships have gutted the team 4 times in under 20 years, and consistently run one of the lowest payrolls in MLB. No fans are going to put up with that.

Because I've been one for decades and have intense brand loyalty.

Why? What did the brand ever do for you? If you have always bought Hondas would you continue to do so if their cars had the quality of a Ford Pinto?

Being a Knick fan or a Marlin fan is like staying with an abusive spouse. Cut your losses and move on.
   62. Random Transaction Generator Posted: March 07, 2019 at 07:47 PM (#5821139)
They did make a big foray into the free agency market the Buehrle/Reyes year and it was a disaster.


They tried for exactly ONE season.

Buehrle/Reyes were on the Marlins for just one season before they traded them away.

That's not an honest effort at all.



   63. . Posted: March 07, 2019 at 07:59 PM (#5821140)
That's because successive ownerships have gutted the team 4 times in under 20 years, and consistently run one of the lowest payrolls in MLB.


No, it's not.

Why? What did the brand ever do for you?


Seriously? Not only is the question silly, I actually put up an effort to try to explain when you pressed. If you aren't into being an actual fan of a team, fine -- but it's empirically silly to pretend millions of people aren't. And then even more off-point to develop a bunch of "theories" around your misimpressions.

Being a Knick fan or a Marlin fan is like staying with an abusive spouse.


It's literally nothing like staying with an abusive spouse. The two things have literally zero in common. A sports franchise bears zero resemblance to a wife beater and a fan of a sports franchise bears zero resemblance to a spouse who's been beaten. The experience of sports fandom bears zero resemblance to the experience of being beaten by a spouse.
   64. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 07, 2019 at 08:07 PM (#5821142)
Seriously? Not only is the question silly, I actually put up an effort to try to explain when you pressed. If you aren't into being an actual fan of a team, fine -- but it's empirically silly to pretend millions of people aren't. And then even more off-point to develop a bunch of "theories" around your misimpressions.


They haven't done anything for you in 20 years. Move on.


It's literally nothing like staying with an abusive spouse. The two things have literally zero in common. A sports franchise bears zero resemblance to a wife beater and a fan of a sports franchise bears zero resemblance to a spouse who's been beaten. The experience of sports fandom bears zero resemblance to the experience of being beaten by a spouse.


They take from you everything they can, and give nothing but pain back. That's very much like an abusive spouse, which can be a husband or a wife.
   65. . Posted: March 07, 2019 at 08:14 PM (#5821144)
They haven't done anything for you in 20 years. Move on.


LOL at the idea that you're a better judge at what they've done for me and the rest of the Knick fanbase than I or they are.

They take from you everything they can, and give nothing but pain back.


Ditto. Bizarre that you would conclude on my behalf that they've given me nothing but pain, (*) especially after I relayed an example of the non-pain they've given me.

Your understanding of actual fandom is so breathtakingingly removed from reality that it effectively nullifies all your theories on things like "trying to win." It's among the the most "Ray-botic" set of observations in the history of the site.

(*) And they don't "take" anything from me, including money, that I don't voluntarily part with.
   66. Tony S Posted: March 07, 2019 at 09:18 PM (#5821157)
If an organization legitimately intends to compete, it reacts to a subpar season by retaining its good players and replacing its bad ones. Logic would suggest that's how one improves.

The Marlins did the exact opposite.

But I'm sure attendance will boom now that they're emphasizing the storied mallpark experience.
   67. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 07, 2019 at 10:22 PM (#5821164)
Ditto. Bizarre that you would conclude on my behalf that they've given me nothing but pain, (*) especially after I relayed an example of the non-pain they've given me.

You could have enjoyed any other sporting event with your son. He would have had just as much fun watching the Mets or Yankees, or Nets, or Giants, or Rangers.

Your understanding of actual fandom is so breathtakingingly removed from reality that it effectively nullifies all your theories on things like "trying to win." It's among the the most "Ray-botic" set of observations in the history of the site.


Fans shoudln't take the fanatic part of the name to heart. The actual attendance and TV ratings of teams that don't try to win suggest that most fans take my view.

(*) And they don't "take" anything from me, including money, that I don't voluntarily part with.

Yes, they treat you like a sucker, and you can't quit them.
   68. . Posted: March 08, 2019 at 06:50 AM (#5821187)
You could have enjoyed any other sporting event with your son. He would have had just as much fun watching the Mets or Yankees, or Nets, or Giants, or Rangers.


No, he wouldn't have and I wouldn't have. Why? Because for among other reasons, as I've explained, I'm not a fan of the Mets or Yankees or Nets or Giants. Continuing to inject your preferences and beliefs into other people is, as they say, not a good look.

The actual attendance and TV ratings of teams that don't try to win suggest that most fans take my view.


It doesn't in the least. You're badly confusing cause and effect, and the causation arrows generally.
   69. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: March 08, 2019 at 10:33 AM (#5821220)

I am a pretty big Mets fan. I can get to Citi Field in about 40 minutes on public transportation. But when they're terrible, I maybe go to one game per season, and only watch them on t.v. sporadically. When they are competitive and exciting, I'll go to 4 or 5 games, maybe more, in person and watch them on t.v. regularly. I think this is pretty typical fan behavior.

(Last year, they were exciting to watch even though they weren't that great. I still went to a few deGrom and Syndergaard starts and watched a bunch of games.)
   70. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: March 08, 2019 at 10:39 AM (#5821221)
Of course he's off on the overall point. He implies that something has changed about baseball to make it less attractive to fans, as opposed to "mallparks" bringing in extra people above and beyond that baseline of fans.

Right, what's changed is that mallparks have brought additional fans to the stadium. In the 70s, the Pirates could draw 1.4-1.5 million fans and be in the top half of hte league in attendance. Now, when they draw 2.5 million fans they are in the bottom half. So if you rely on just the die-hard baseball fans and don't cater to the people who are there for the mallpark "experience", you're missing out on tens of millions in revenue and are going to be at a disadvantage relative to the other teams in the league, especially as player salaries have increased over the years commensurate with the rise in revenues.
   71. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: March 08, 2019 at 10:44 AM (#5821223)
Also, I have a friend who was a lifelong Knicks fan but switched to the Nets a couple of years ago. I thought it was kind of silly as the Nets have been almost as bad as the Knicks, but it's looking like a pretty good decision now (especially since he grew up and lives in BK).

I've stuck with the Knicks but haven't been to a game in a couple of years now and never watch on t.v., even though I live and work within a 10-minute walk of MSG. I don't even think that the Knicks aren't "trying" -- they're just so poorly run it's laughable.
   72. BrianBrianson Posted: March 08, 2019 at 10:50 AM (#5821225)
People can be fans of teams for different reasons. Bandwagon if you like, prioritise whatever. I remain a die-hard Nordiques fan, even though they haven't tried to win for more than two decades. It's not about that. The ownership needn't be the "team", in some sense. Being an Indians fan during the movie Major League would've been truly excellent for me, even if Snapper would've abandoned the team during the opening credits.

That's fine. We don't all need to be the same.
   73. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 08, 2019 at 10:54 AM (#5821226)
People can be fans of teams for different reasons. Bandwagon if you like, prioritise whatever. I remain a die-hard Nordiques fan, even though they haven't tried to win for more than two decades. It's not about that. The ownership needn't be the "team", in some sense. Being an Indians fan during the movie Major League would've been truly excellent for me, even if Snapper would've abandoned the team during the opening credits.


Just to clarify, I wouldn't drop a team merely for being bad. I didn't drop the Yankees in the early 90's, and I haven't dropped the football Giants during their recent ineptitude.

What I would do is drop a team when it's clear the ownership and front office are simply strip mining the franchise for profits, with no intention to reinvest in the team. It's the indifference to losing that gets me angry, not the losing itself.
   74. BrianBrianson Posted: March 08, 2019 at 11:54 AM (#5821237)
I suppose the front office in Major League wasn't indifferent to losing.
   75. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: March 08, 2019 at 11:57 AM (#5821238)
There's a difference between an organization that's got a long-term plan for success,

Every organization has one of those, and it's not complicated -- get really good players. Very few people go to games of shitty teams that otherwise wouldn't go simply because they've made the judgment that the team has a "long-term plan for success."
Of course, that's not even a little bit true. "Get really good players" isn't a plan; it's at best a mission statement or the like. A plan is, "Build the team around stars X and Y" or "Trade all our veterans for prospects" or "Invest a lot in foreign free agents" or the like. (Yes, those are oversimplifications, but they're the skeletons of plans.) Fans do indeed distinguish between teams that are rebuilding and teams that are just tanking for the revenue sharing bucks. (Which is why teams doing the latter pretend they're doing the former.)
   76. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: March 08, 2019 at 12:25 PM (#5821242)
Your understanding of actual fandom is so breathtakingingly removed from reality that it effectively nullifies all your theories on things like "trying to win." It's among the the most "Ray-botic" set of observations in the history of the site.

Fans shoudln't take the fanatic part of the name to heart. The actual attendance and TV ratings of teams that don't try to win suggest that most fans take my view.
You guys are both wrong. FLTB is wrong in failing to distinguish between being bad and not trying to win. Snapper is wrong about what being a fan is. Fandom is inherently irrational; it doesn't impact your life if 'your' team wins or loses. So picking teams based on whether they win or lose misses the point. (Apathy is different than switching teams, which is what Snapper was suggesting.)
   77. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: March 08, 2019 at 12:30 PM (#5821244)
(Apathy is different than switching teams, which is what Snapper was suggesting.)
"Richard said withdrawal in disgust is not the same as apathy."
   78. Spahn Insane Posted: March 08, 2019 at 12:31 PM (#5821245)
the league in aggregate puts out a mediocre .500 product each and every year

Uh... no ####, sherlock.
   79. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: March 08, 2019 at 12:37 PM (#5821248)

I remember the Darryl Strawberry B-R page used to have a quote at the top (back when you could "sponsor" a player's page on B-R) along the lines of "Choosing a favorite player is more like falling in love than selecting a mutual fund", or something to that effect. It was a great quote, and I think you could say the same thing about choosing a favorite team. It's not rational, it's emotional.
   80. . Posted: March 08, 2019 at 12:45 PM (#5821251)
What I would do is drop a team when it's clear the ownership and front office are simply strip mining the franchise for profits, with no intention to reinvest in the team.


Then you aren't really a fan of the team.

The franchise is an institution, entirely separate from, and far broader than, the temporal owners/managers.

Do you drop the United States as your country when it has a shitty president? Did you drop the Catholic Church when ... well ... you know.

   81. Zonk Will Be Reinstated in August Posted: March 08, 2019 at 12:52 PM (#5821253)
I don't understand why baseball cannot put out an aggregate .600 product like they used to before people started ruining it with math.
   82. BrianBrianson Posted: March 08, 2019 at 12:55 PM (#5821254)
Functionally, the NL teams had a .537 winning percentage in 1899. There's no reason you could placate fools like snapper by putting a few chum(p) teams on permanent road duty.
   83. Misirlou cut his hair and moved to Rome Posted: March 08, 2019 at 01:28 PM (#5821267)
The franchise is an institution, entirely separate from, and far broader than, the temporal owners/managers.

Do you drop the United States as your country when it has a shitty president? Did you drop the Catholic Church when ... well ... you know.


hey, two can play at this game.

Do you keep going to your favorite restaurant when they start serving shitty meals? Do you keep buying music from your favorite band when they start putting out shitty records? Do you keep watching your favorite TV show when they start putting out shitty episodes?
   84. Lassus Posted: March 08, 2019 at 01:38 PM (#5821271)
Did you drop the Catholic Church when you realized at 10 years old it had the same validity as Norse Mythology?
Yes.
   85. BrianBrianson Posted: March 08, 2019 at 01:55 PM (#5821274)
Do you keep watching your favorite TV show when they start putting out shitty episodes?


I watched the whole second season of Heroes, yes.
   86. Misirlou cut his hair and moved to Rome Posted: March 08, 2019 at 01:58 PM (#5821275)
I stopped watching the Office about halfway through the season after Michael left. I think that was the one with James Spader.

I stopped watching the Simpsons many years ago.
   87. Greg Pope Posted: March 08, 2019 at 02:02 PM (#5821276)
Do you keep watching your favorite TV show when they start putting out shitty episodes?

I used to. I don't think I saw the last 2 seasons of Friends. But that was before I had a DVR. So I used to have to make an effort to be in front of the TV on Thursday nights. Once I didn't care so much, I didn't make the effort, so I just stopped watching.

Now, though, the DVR keeps recording the shows so I do end up watching them most of the time. There are a couple that I will let go, but it's less than before. If I had ever DVRed the Simpsons, I'd probably still be watching instead of giving up after season 10 or so.
   88. Pat Rapper's Delight (as quoted on MLB Network) Posted: March 08, 2019 at 02:09 PM (#5821277)
Did you drop the Catholic Church when ... well ... you know.

YR, is that you?
   89. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 08, 2019 at 02:39 PM (#5821285)

Then you aren't really a fan of the team.

The franchise is an institution, entirely separate from, and far broader than, the temporal owners/managers.

Do you drop the United States as your country when it has a shitty president? Did you drop the Catholic Church when ... well ... you know.


No. The team is simply a corporation in the business of providing entertainment. If they cease being entertaining, why not cease patronizing them.

Citizenship and religion are so different as to not even warrant a response. But, to humor you, I'm Catholic because I believe in the truth of the teachings that come from God, not because I like how the organization does business. I hate how the Church has been run in my lifetime.

There's no truth in sports and entertainment.
   90. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 08, 2019 at 02:41 PM (#5821286)
Did you drop the Catholic Church when you realized at 10 years old it had the same validity as Norse Mythology?


Yes.

Most people, probably including you, believe in many things far more preposterous than Christianity.
   91. BrianBrianson Posted: March 08, 2019 at 02:56 PM (#5821296)
In many ways, aren't hopelessly inept and evil teams more entertaining? Like watching a car crash? The Maple Leafs are probably the most profitable NHL team (though about tied with the Rangers), and the ownership has long been totally disinterested in winning (I think the Ontario Teachers' Federation Pension Plan no longer owns them?) People ######' love it, though.
   92. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: March 08, 2019 at 03:08 PM (#5821299)

Just to clarify, I wouldn't drop a team merely for being bad. I didn't drop the Yankees in the early 90's, and I haven't dropped the football Giants during their recent ineptitude.


Wait, snapper is using the Yankees and Giants as examples of hard-luck franchises? Wow, the Giants haven't won the Super Bowl in all of 8 years.

Try being a Lions fan.
   93. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: March 08, 2019 at 03:11 PM (#5821302)
Citizenship and religion are so different as to not even warrant a response.


In some places, not others. I grew up in Lincoln, Nebraska. I can tell you there that the Cornhuskers are a form of civic religion, yes. And I didn't grow up a fan myself. But I found that when I left the state that other people tended to treat me better when the Cornhuskers were playing well, since that was the only thing they knew about the state. So the team affected my fortunes directly whether I was a fan or not.
   94. . Posted: March 08, 2019 at 03:58 PM (#5821325)
No. The team is simply a corporation in the business of providing entertainment.


Putting aside the obvious fact that they generate different levels of passion and devotion than typical business corporations, this isn't even true on its face. The team is also in the business, with its fellow teams, of competing for awards and glory. A major league sporting event is manifestly not merely entertainment. No one goes to a playoff series Game 7 and walks out of the arena saying to the other fans, "Hey, the Rangers lost but I don't care the game was very entertaining."
   95. . Posted: March 08, 2019 at 04:00 PM (#5821326)
Try being a Lions fan.


I've been one since the fall of 1970, when I was 7 years old. It's the worst franchise in pro sports, probably, run virtually the entire time by the Ford family's Fredo with too much drinking thrown in. My dad was at the NFL championship game in 1957 where they demolished the Browns. They've won one playoff game since. Through all this, the team still has a wide and deep and loyal fanbase. If they ever make a run in the playoffs, the city and state will blow the roof off.
   96. KronicFatigue Posted: March 08, 2019 at 07:06 PM (#5821428)
No one goes to a playoff series Game 7 and walks out of the arena saying to the other fans, "Hey, the Rangers lost but I don't care the game was very entertaining."


Disagree. Have you seen the crowd at a superbowl? It's a status symbol to be there, and the percentage of hardcore fans is much lower than regular games.

I used to go to a LOT of Yankees playoff games. The crowds were different for the WS compared to other playoff games, and the secondary market for tickets was insanely different. I presume game 7 of an ALCS is more "important" than game 2 of the WS, but prices for WS tickets were off the charts more expensive than ALCS. A lot of that was casual fans and fans of being scene at "the place to be" start flocking the stadium.
   97. base ball chick Posted: March 08, 2019 at 07:32 PM (#5821431)
snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 08, 2019 at 10:54 AM (#5821226)


What I would do is drop a team when it's clear the ownership and front office are simply strip mining the franchise for profits, with no intention to reinvest in the team. It's the indifference to losing that gets me angry, not the losing itself


- or even worse, TRYING to lose so as to p[ay the very least amount of money and make the most profits

or telling the fan base straight out (like the braves did) that they are all about making $$$ for stockholders, not paying ballplayres and having a winning team

- i left my ex-team because they stopped playing real baseball

but if i was a braves fan and they made it more than clear that they don't care about winning, well, i'd quit em too

i would have left the marlins after loria made it very clear that he was not interested in the least in winning
   98. KronicFatigue Posted: March 08, 2019 at 07:45 PM (#5821434)
Does the "I'm at the game to watch the team win" crowd leave early if their team falls behind by enough runs to make winning improbable? I admit, I beat the traffic now most games, but only by an inning. Are people leaving after the 5th if it's 6-0?
   99. Eric J can SABER all he wants to Posted: March 08, 2019 at 07:46 PM (#5821435)
No one goes to a playoff series Game 7 and walks out of the arena saying to the other fans, "Hey, the Rangers lost but I don't care the game was very entertaining."

This may not be common, but it's definitely not nobody - I was rooting for the Rangers in the 2011 World Series, but I still enjoyed the insanity of Game 6 more than I would have a routine Rangers victory.
   100. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 08, 2019 at 08:06 PM (#5821436)
Does the "I'm at the game to watch the team win" crowd leave early if their team falls behind by enough runs to make winning improbable? I admit, I beat the traffic now most games, but only by an inning. Are people leaving after the 5th if it's 6-0?

I'll leave early if it's a blowout either way. But, we're talking 8th inning, maybe 7th if it was 14-0. Mostly it the length of the game. Once it hits three hours, I've been in the stadium for close to four hours, and it's getting old, and getting late, if it's a night game.

If they could play it in 2:30, I'd stay for all 9 of a blowout.
Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Downtown Bookie
for his generous support.

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogBaseball Hall of Fame denies Curt Schilling's request to be removed from ballot for 2022 vote
(24 - 12:21pm, Jul 31)
Last: Ron J

NewsblogBraves revamp outfield with deals for Jorge Soler, Eddie Rosario, Adam Duvall
(6 - 12:10pm, Jul 31)
Last: snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster)

NewsblogNew York Yankees acquire LHP Andrew Heaney from Los Angeles Angels for minor leaguers
(2 - 11:06am, Jul 31)
Last: snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster)

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 7-30-2021
(56 - 11:05am, Jul 31)
Last: Pat Rapper's Delight (as quoted on MLB Network)

NewsblogSan Francisco Giants acquire Kris Bryant from Chicago Cubs for two prospects
(5 - 11:01am, Jul 31)
Last: snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster)

Gonfalon CubsThis all sucks
(24 - 10:34am, Jul 31)
Last: bfan

NewsblogPadres Acquire Daniel Hudson From Nationals
(8 - 10:24am, Jul 31)
Last: bfan

NewsblogTrevor Story 'confused' after Rockies keep star shortstop at MLB trade deadline
(6 - 10:20am, Jul 31)
Last: bfan

NewsblogNBA 2021 Playoffs+ thread
(3540 - 10:05am, Jul 31)
Last: Dandy Little Glove Man

NewsblogEmpty Stadium Sports Will Be Really Weird
(13508 - 3:48am, Jul 31)
Last: Never Give an Inge (Dave)

NewsblogLos Angeles Dodgers acquire veteran pitcher Danny Duffy from Kansas City Royals
(2 - 1:23am, Jul 31)
Last: RoyalsRetro (AG#1F)

NewsblogOT Soccer Thread - In Which Euro 2020 Is Played in 2021
(798 - 12:06am, Jul 31)
Last: AuntBea odeurs de parfum de distance sociale

NewsblogTRADE DEADLINE DECOMPRESSION OMNICHATTER, for July 30, 2021
(79 - 12:04am, Jul 31)
Last: Howie Menckel

Sox TherapyDance With Who Brung Ya'
(9 - 9:12pm, Jul 30)
Last: jacksone (AKA It's OK...)

NewsblogSeattle fills closer role in deal for TB's Diego Castillo
(4 - 7:14pm, Jul 30)
Last: Boxkutter

Page rendered in 0.7547 seconds
48 querie(s) executed