Wednesday, November 26, 2014

The World Series by the Numbers

            For me, the World Series is huge. It is certainly on my TV every night that there’s a game. Why? Well, it’s America’s national past time, and there’s nothing better than the World Series. However, baseball is no longer the way that Americans pass their time, not even during the World Series.
            A big ratings boost for World Series game seven made MLB executives breathe a sigh of relief, as it ensured that the 2014 Fall Classic would not be the least watched of all time. It came darn close though.
            This year’s Series averaged 13.8 million viewers per game. An average of 8.2 percent of U.S. households watched the game. Nielson calls that a rating of 8.2.
            These are atrocious numbers. Only two other World Series (2012 and 2008) averaged fewer viewers per game than this year. Prior to 2000, not one World Series averaged less than 20 million viewers per game.
            Baseball’s World Series has become a local affair, not a national one. In the Kansas City market, 77 percent of televisions had the game on, so there was obviously huge excitement for it there. But unlike the Super Bowl, it is no longer must-see television across the nation.
            I think that there are multiple reasons for the declining viewership.

Fox/the Fox broadcast crew
            In World Series where Fox’s Joe Buck is the lead play-by-play broadcaster, the average viewership is 18 million onlookers per game. In Fall Classics where Buck isn’t behind the microphone, the World Series averages 33.1 million viewers per game. Coincidence? I’m afraid so. Even though the “Joe Buck Sucks” Facebook page has over 33,000 likes, I don’t think that even any of even those likers, or haters if you will, would go so far as to not watch a World Series simply because of Buck.
            The reason that the numbers drop off so severely when Buck is calling games is because the popularity of baseball today is a fraction of what it used to be, regardless of who is calling it. If Joe Buck had been calling games in the 1980s, when his dad Jack Buck was announcing the World Series, I think that the numbers would improve.
            With that said however, I think that Fox does a mediocre job at best with their baseball coverage. From a production standpoint, they hit out of the park, and all of the people who work behind the scenes for Fox Sports do an excellent job. It’s the ones who are in front of the camera who are the problem.
            Lets first start with Buck. The game of baseball struggles with popularity because it isn’t exciting enough. It needs a play-by-play man who can make it exciting. That’s the job of a broadcaster, and Joe Buck does not do his job. Red Sox fans enjoy the excitement of play-by-play broadcasters Joe Castiglione, Don Orsillo, and Dave O’Brien, whose voices convey the highs and lows of the game. Buck speaks in a monotone, which leaves me aching for excitement. I think that there are better options, such as MLB Network’s Matt Vasgersian or ESPN’s Dan Shulman, for the top broadcasting job in the game.
            As for the rest of the crew, Harold Reynolds talks way too much. So much so that Tom Verducci, perhaps the most insightful of the trio, can hardly get a word in, which is frustrating at times as a viewer.

Speed of the game
            The speed of the game is definitely a big part of why the game is so unpopular. I wrote a column a few weeks ago explaining what the executives of the game of baseball need to do to speed it up, and in a nutshell, they need to create new rules to ensure that batters don’t step out of the box as much as they do, enforce their rule that forces pitchers to deliver the ball within 12 seconds, and to limit the number of pitchers on a team’s roster so that there are fewer pitching changes and more offense.
            Baseball is a dying sport but it’s not dead yet, and there is still time to save it. Speeding it up puts the MLB well on their way to doing so, but there also needs to be more offense and more offensive stars for people to watch.

Length of season
            Each MLB team plays 162 games in a season. Every NFL team plays 16. That is why the NFL is way more popular than baseball. The number of games in a season means that each game counts for less, and makes it so that there is very little excitement generated for your average regular season game. When you watch the NFL, part of the draw is that each game counts so much. I’m not suggesting that the MLB cuts their season down by a lot, but they could do just fine with 102 regular season games.

More on TV
            According to Nielsen, the average household receives 190 channels. Only one of those is carrying the World Series. This is an unfixable problem. When the World Series first came to TV, most people only got ABC, NBC, and CBS. Now if you want sports you can turn to any of the 35 cable sports networks, or your local cable sports network(s). There are so much more competition for out attention than there used to be, which, I think, hurts the MLB’s ratings.
***
            It is a collection of all of those things that lead to the lower ratings that the MLB has been getting for its World Series. It’s also interesting to note, however, that even though the national ratings are poor, every team has a local cable sports network that carries all of their games, with the exception of blackouts, and the ratings for teams in their respective local markets are fairly good. Baseball consistently does well on local cable TV, which means that there is some popularity for the game in areas where there are teams—but it’s important to remember that there are 30 teams in the MLB.

            You can enjoy the game of baseball, but as a fan, you can’t ignore these numbers. They are too important to keeping the game alive and well, and if you don’t focus on how to bring them up now, the MLB may never do so. When Commissioner-elect Rob Manfred steps into office, he needs to take immediate action on the field, to help generate excitement off the field.

No comments:

Post a Comment