Surprised there's no mention of how the switch to WS Night Games is what coerced the Cubs into adding lights.

Not just little kids on the East Coast who miss out on WS Baseball. The parents of little kids also miss out, because Christ, 9pm is LATE now in a way it wasn't pre-toddler.

I can't believe we've had to wait until today for a WS game

You actually have to wait til tomorrow.

The schedule is set months in advance, I think that's been the case for a few decades. As baseball moves to cable/streaming, I wonder if they can start going to a more flexible post-season schedule. It's still on Fox for now, but it is probably just a matter of time until they put it on TBS or even Amazon - the college basketball and football championships are already on cable. I can't imagine you can't move reruns of Friends or Family Guy for baseball.

Surprised there's no mention of how the switch to WS Night Games is what coerced the Cubs into adding lights.

If the Cubs hadn't given away that 1984 LCS, there was talk that their WS games were going to be shifted to St. Louis. That would've gone over big, I'm sure.

As baseball moves to cable/streaming, I wonder if they can start going to a more flexible post-season schedule.

It's already flexed to the point where the starting times for this year's WS games weren't even posted until two days ago. And I'll believe they'll start at "8:03" when I see it.

The times were set two days ago (or made public, in reality they've known these times were set barring scheduling conflicts), but the dates have been known for months.

"...it's been the case for a few decades."

My first thought was "eh, it hasn't been THAT long" because I remember a time that once both teams participating were decided they took one day off and then started.

Then it struck me...I am more than a few decades old.

The times are known within an hour as well. There's just slight variability based on the teams and stadiums - a west coast game will usually start at more like 8:30 eastern rather than 8.

My first thought was "eh, it hasn't been THAT long" because I remember a time that once both teams participating were decided they took one day off and then started.

In 1989, both LCS ended in just five games (in a best of 7), concluding on Oct 9. The WS didn't begin til October 14.
In 1975, both LCS were three game sweeps (in a best of 5), ending on Oct 7, but the WS didn't begin til October 11

So it seems like this has been the case for awhile, I'm guessing since TV has been involved. Can't pre-empt All in the Family!

Tuesday and Wednesday would have been great nights for the World Series to gain viewers without competition from regular season NFL and college football.

Yes I'm pretty sure the WS dates have basically always been set well in advance. Prior to divisional format, of course they started right after the season ended but occasionally having to make room to play off a tie and I suppose travel time back in the train days. In the divisional era -- season ended on Sun, they wrapped up the divisional playoffs by the next Sun, WS started on the following Tues. At some point in there, they did get the idea that having both LCSs running on the same schedule wasn't optimal for ratings and you started having one series potentially ending on Mon.

So in 1969, both LCSs were 3-0 sweeps, both running Oct 4-6. No travel day -- Balt to Minn can't have been that easy. The WS started on the 11th. The odd thing that season was that the season ended on a Thurs so the playoffs kicked off on Sat.

Again in 1970, both LCSs were 3-0 sweeps, both running Oct 3-5 (Minny to Balt this time but Cincy to Pitt is about a 3 minute drive). Another Sat start. The WS started on the 10th.

I don't know how you could realistically do it otherwise. It's not just TV. It must be hard enough to coordinate "we may or may not need ticket takers, ushers, security, vendors, etc. on Oct 10-11 and 17-18" on 6-7 weeks notice, how could you possibly add "any chance you could come in on Oct 7-8 and 14-15 instead?"

#9 ... there was no Thurs night football back then. Avoiding Monday night was definitely part of the decision-making. I'm too lazy to look it up but I wonder when they finally added the travel day for the LDS.

On the general topic, does anybody here believe that a weekday daytime game would actually draw viewers? I'm not sure that the weekend games should be prime time but I have zero doubt that the weekday games need to be. Back in the early 70s, baseball might have still had a big enough pull on the national psyche that folks would take time off to watch but those days are clearly long gone, it's apparently hard enough to pull viewers away from Nazi propaganda on the history channel.

Back when this was actually a hot topic, it always irked me that the people beating the drums loudest for daytime World Series games were guys who would be getting paid to attend and cover them. While I'd be at work cussing. Guys who would be up in the press box were writing, "Isn't sneaking off and pressing your ear to the radio for a couple of stolen minutes at the office the most romantic and sentimental thing ever?" No...NO!

in the 1990s, the NBA had some flexibility in series starts.

for instance, they might block out Sundays, Wednesdays, and Fridays for games.

in the event of sweeps by both teams, they would start sooner. if both went 7, then of course the latest possible start.

so MLB could have it set up that the Series starts on Friday UNLESS both teams finish by Sunday - in which case Game 1 is two days earlier. something like that.

as for stadium employees and such, with the NBA model they knew they were off on Mondays, Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays. that's helpful assuming they are juggling two part-time jobs. one perhaps critical difference is that there are no rainouts with basketball games.

the NBA also for a while had a 2-3-2 setup for home games in the Finals. the concept was business-related - sponsors, media, etc. all knew they had 5 straight days in the same city so easier to coordinate parties and other social events.

but iirc, the format was just too lopsided in terms of competitiveness so they scrapped it (still do? no idea).

Gotta adore the photo above the article. Mere seconds after Cleon Jones catches the final out of the '69 World Series and the fans at Shea have begun storming the field, note the scoreboard message doesn't exclaim, "Miracle Mets are the Champs!" or "Amazin' Mets Win the World Series!"

No, it soberly reads: "GOOD AFTERNOON AND THANK YOU FOR COMING. PLEASE ARRIVE HOME SAFELY."

The problem with World Series night games is that too many of them end way too late for East Coast viewers who either have children or who have to get up early for work. While I can see the argument against day games, seems like setting the starting time at 7:00 or 7:30 would be a reasonable compromise.

Of course I'm going under the assumption that it's better to miss the first few innings of a game than the late innings, since the late innings are when the most memorable action takes place. It's especially galling that the much smaller number of West Coast fans find it much easier to see the end of the games in a Series where no West Coast teams are even in it. If it were the Dodgers vs the Mariners, I might feel differently.

The deciding game of the World Series last year was in prime time, and had a little over 14 million viewers.

The average Sunday Night Football game had 18.1m viewers.
The average Thursday Night Football game (when Fox was broadcasting it) had 15.4m viewers.

I get that the NFL dominates almost anything on TV, but I wonder what the rating for the WS game would have been if it was not during primetime?

I get that the NFL dominates almost anything on TV, but I wonder what the rating for the WS game would have been if it was not during primetime?

FTA, Manfred:

“I understand that there is a romantic notion out there about a World Series game played during the day and that children will be flocking from everywhere in order to watch that game,” he said. “The fact of the matter is we know who watches. We play day games during the postseason. We do not, in fact, attract more children to those games, and given that fact, we will continue to put games on at the point in time when we can get the biggest audience we can possibly draw because we feel that’s how we serve our fans.”

Wow, Manfred will consider anything, but apparently not this.

Wow, Manfred will consider anything, but apparently not this.

He's like Meatloaf that way.

You know what's funny? The time you might be most likely to get children to watch a baseball playoff game is...when children's shows are typically on, weekend mornings.

The NFL has Sunday morning football about four times a year (European games). If that had been something available to me when I was between the ages of about 8-18, I would have definitely watched that. In fact, Sunday morning sports like Wimbledon and the British Open are some of the first memories I have of being exposed to those two sports on television. Just sayin'.

Wow, Manfred will consider anything, but apparently not this.

He's like Meatloaf that way.

You better believe it...!

If the Cubs hadn't given away that 1984 LCS, there was talk that their WS games were going to be shifted to St. Louis. That would've gone over big, I'm sure.

I remember reading that and thinking, if they're so determined to have WS night games, why not play at Comiskey? I mean, Cubs fans would've hated that, obviously, but at least they wouldn't have to drive 300 friggin' miles. (And what about Milwaukee? Also an awful idea, but it's closer than St. Louis.)

EDIT: Oh, hell, just play all the games in Detroit, which is also (slightly) closer to Chicago than St. Louis is!

Shared Primey for #18 and 19.

note the scoreboard message doesn't exclaim, "Miracle Mets are the Champs!" or "Amazin' Mets Win the World Series!"

No, it soberly reads: "GOOD AFTERNOON AND THANK YOU FOR COMING. PLEASE ARRIVE HOME SAFELY."

I thought for sure that was gonna end with "THE IMPOSSIBLE DREAM!!"

During the 1969 World Series I refused to go to school....well, actually I went in the morning of game 3, but I just walked out during lunch time and left to go home. The school freaked out.

So I just didn't go into school at all for games 4 & 5. Watched at home.

I was 10 years old, 4th grade.

If the Cubs hadn't given away that 1984 LCS, there was talk that their WS games were going to be shifted to St. Louis. That would've gone over big, I'm sure.

I would think that Comsikey would have been a better solution.

During the 1969 World Series I refused to go to school....well, actually I went in the morning of game 3, but I just walked out during lunch time and left to go home. The school freaked out.

So I just didn't go into school at all for games 4 & 5. Watched at home.

I was 10 years old, 4th grade.

I had a very understanding mom who would almost always sign notes to the teacher attesting to my "sore throat" or "cold symptoms" that somehow always arrived at the beginning of the World Series. One of the few times she didn't go along, I missed Larsen's perfect game.

Other times the teacher(s) would set up a TV in another room for the final innings, which is how I suffered through the agony of Johnny Podres' masterpiece. I can still hear Vin Scully's call of Elston Howard's game ending grounder to Pee Wee Reese, ending with "and the Brooklyn Dodgers are the champions of the world". It was one of the blackest moments of my 11 year old life.

If the Cubs hadn't given away that 1984 LCS, there was talk that their WS games were going to be shifted to St. Louis. That would've gone over big, I'm sure.

I would think that Comiskey would have been a better solution.

Well, that's what they did in 1918. And the Braves and the Red Sox played in three consecutive World Series between 1914 and 1916. In 1914 the Braves played their "home" games in Fenway, while in 1915 and 1916 the Red Sox played their "home" games in Braves Field. In all of those cases the switch was due to the larger seating capacities of their city rivals' ballparks.

Silly as it sounds but leagues still kinda mattered in 1984 and I suspect some knucklehead was stuck on "gotta be a NL park." Still, Cincy as good an option as StL -- maybe that was divisional pride. :-)

I recall the nuns setting up a TV for us to watch the end of the games in the 70 series. I was in a different school for the next series and no such tradition.

Maybe the better option would've been to let them just play day games in Wrigley. It's not as if they didn't know that Wrigley didn't have lights before the season started.

I remember reading that and thinking, if they're so determined to have WS night games, why not play at Comiskey? I mean, Cubs fans would've hated that, obviously, but at least they wouldn't have to drive 300 friggin' miles. (And what about Milwaukee? Also an awful idea, but it's closer than St. Louis.)

The point was the Cubs (and probably the NL) were trying to convince Chicago to allow lights, so threatening to move the games to St. Louis was the best way to convince them.

For Game 5 of the 1981 NLCS, I listened on a transistor radio in my jacket (which I never took off) through a earphone (which just went in just one ear ) and then leaned that ear on my hand all day in class. I even took an essay test in AP US History while listening to the game.

I got an A on that.

The batteries died in the 9th inning.

Who won?

Who won?

Brooklyn.