LOL yeah you're implying when your team is up everyone is involved in the offense? Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
Sandra
When did Football overtake Baseball in popularity?
- Thread starter Mets82
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 74
- Views 12K
LOL yeah you're implying when your team is up everyone is involved in the offense? Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
Sandra
No. When the team is in the field, everyone is involved in defense. Baseball is the only sport where the defense controls the balls. Most plays and highlights are defensive
Yeah, I get that...but that's not what I said. My post specifically stated offense, and just reponded by talking about defense.
The original statement was 'How many players are involved in every play?' And you said 'All of them' because unlike football everyone plays offense and defense...which is true.
What you neglected to say is that while his team is playing offense, very often ONE GUY is the only one playing offense. Just keeping it real.
Sandra
If one sport has 10 times the number of games they damn well had better "aggregate" numbers.
The part I have bolded kinda says it all. People will watch football when their teams are not playing. Not true for baseball.
By "watched" you seem to be talking about attendance at the stadiums. Again, a one-to-many comparison. The true indication is that the TV ratings for the conference championships are on the rise, while baseball playoff ratings are at best stagnant. I haven't attended any "Conference championship" parties, but I do "watch" the games...
NFL Scores Best Championship Sunday Since the Year of ‘The Catch’ (1982) - Ratings | TVbytheNumbers
The fact that you seem to rely on the actual physical attendance at games (and then use the Bengals as your barometer no less) is pretty weak. As said earlier, if a sport has 10 times the number of games they had better have the higher actual attendance than the other. I live within a short driving distance of two NFL stadiums (three teams). Due to the fact that it's very hard to get tickets to these teams I haven't attended a game in person in 7 years. But, I do watch games of those teams and others on TV. For the millions that cannot afford or get the tickets or aren't close enough to realistically attend games, watching them on TV is the next best thing and the numbers show football's rising popularity while baseball ratings are stagnant at best.
osu1991 said:
Exactly. Somehow I think a 2:54 min baseball game is a cooked stat. Every game I have tried to watch drones on forever. I can't sit through one on tv. It's like a medically induced coma. Football might have lots of stops, but there is action every 40 seconds, in baseball it can take that long for the pitcher to stop scratching his balls.
That said, around here, there are throngs of Cubs and Cards fans, they are fanatic. I can't be bothered. I do think attending a game in person is probably a lot more fun than on tv, but I suspect that has more to do with beer.
Sent from my iPad using SatelliteGuys
True.
My point was two separate ones though:
1. Players are involved in both offense and defense
2. All players are involved in every play (meaning defensive since plays in baseball are defensive)
The reference was to the championship games in both leagues. In football they attend and maybe watch the event, many do not watch it.
No. Any list or highlights of the top plays of all time, of the day, or of a season are mostly defensive. Webgems for example are defensive plays
Very few games I watch go over 3 hours. The only games that seem to go over 3 hours are those involving the Yanks and/or Sox.
But when you turn on the days wrap up, you see the Home Runs long before you see anything else.
I would guess that the avg. game goes 3:15 to 3:45, just a guess though and those games are skewed somewhat by the Red Sox and yankees games.
Baseball has been and always will be my favorite game. As a young kid I started out playing with my neighborhood friends. Not all of us had bats or gloves but we always shared and had enough to play. I played in High School, mostly right field. Love the game. Wished SC had a pro team, but still like going to my local fields with friends or just with Carol and watch the local boys play. While I enjoy football, I find that I can enjoy the company of friends more watching a baseball game.
Just my .02
Just my .02
Last edited by a moderator:
Cosmo,
I won't argue because sports are a religion and no matter what the evidence, no one's mind will be changed by any facts, figures, stats or any other physical evidence. I'll just restate my point and hope readers understand.
MY ORIGINAL POINT: Baseball is NOT becoming less popular. By EVERY barrometer one can come up with Baseball is more popular now than ever before. But the rate of growth has slowed. MORE people are watching/listening baseball games, in the stands, on TV, on the radio, and on the internet now than were watching/listening to baseball 10, 20, 30, 40 and 50 years ago. Baseball is raking in more revenue now than ever before even AFTER you adjust for inflation. So to say Baseball is losing popularity is a LIE by any definition you want to come up with. Commercial TV ratings are stagnant because of tremendous growth in alternate delivery systems including mobile divices, and increased attendance at the ball parks.
In my previous post I mentioned the Bengals as a joke in response to the anecdotal references in earlier posts.
I won't argue because sports are a religion and no matter what the evidence, no one's mind will be changed by any facts, figures, stats or any other physical evidence. I'll just restate my point and hope readers understand.
MY ORIGINAL POINT: Baseball is NOT becoming less popular. By EVERY barrometer one can come up with Baseball is more popular now than ever before. But the rate of growth has slowed. MORE people are watching/listening baseball games, in the stands, on TV, on the radio, and on the internet now than were watching/listening to baseball 10, 20, 30, 40 and 50 years ago. Baseball is raking in more revenue now than ever before even AFTER you adjust for inflation. So to say Baseball is losing popularity is a LIE by any definition you want to come up with. Commercial TV ratings are stagnant because of tremendous growth in alternate delivery systems including mobile divices, and increased attendance at the ball parks.
In my previous post I mentioned the Bengals as a joke in response to the anecdotal references in earlier posts.
TNGTony said:
Except perhaps 1) there are far more people today which could skew your stats, and 2). Even with the increase in popularity (if it is true), football is EVEN more popular. Maybe both are increasing over time, but football more
Sent from my iPad using SatelliteGuys
Hart5150 mentioned this earlier and it definitely makes sense as being a contributor to football's rise in popularity: the salary cap
MLB Attendance Stuck in Downward Spiral : Sports Business Digest
MLB Attendance Stuck in Downward Spiral : Sports Business Digest
This is the second time you mentioned cooked or skewed stat. Do you have any way of knowing if these stats or cooked or skewed? It is pretty simple to calculate the average length of a game, for example. You simply add up all of the combined times of each game and divide by the total number of games. There is no reason to cook this stat nor is the math all that complicated. There are official records that you can look up and even calculate yourself.
The same is true for attendance and viewership. All one has to do is look at the average and total number of people attending games throughout the years and see that it has increased. Look at the total revenue of both leagues in baseball and total salaries of the players and see that both have increased. Look at the TV contracts and the amount they pay to broadcast and the number of games shown on TV and see that both have increased. When I was a kid the Dodgers were on TV about twice a week and now just about every single team shows every single game. Look at the total number of viewers watching games and see that that too has increased (even though percentage may go down.)
This is true for pretty much all of our major sports. It is just that the NFL has grown at a faster rate, passing baseball in daily average.
The same is true for attendance and viewership. All one has to do is look at the average and total number of people attending games throughout the years and see that it has increased. Look at the total revenue of both leagues in baseball and total salaries of the players and see that both have increased. Look at the TV contracts and the amount they pay to broadcast and the number of games shown on TV and see that both have increased. When I was a kid the Dodgers were on TV about twice a week and now just about every single team shows every single game. Look at the total number of viewers watching games and see that that too has increased (even though percentage may go down.)
This is true for pretty much all of our major sports. It is just that the NFL has grown at a faster rate, passing baseball in daily average.
Last edited:
All statistics can be manipulated or merely skewed depending on what they include. my point initially was that if you take avg game time over a long period of time, I suspect you would find that the avg length of time has gone up OVER time, but that years of shorter game times would bring the aggregate numbers down. But the actual source data was never referenced, and even if it was, I can't say I'd take the time to sort it out.
Re: Tony's post, my point was that there is a much larger US population to draw from to watch baseball today than 30 years ago. Raw numbers don't tell us anything, sure, you can fill stadiums, there are a LOT of people to fill it with; but percent of people attending would be the more relevant stat.
Again, I am just musing. Its also clear that given your username and signature, and everything else I know about you, 1) You love baseball (fine -- enjoy!); and 2) you love to argue just to argue. (ok, if it floats your boat). I grew up a Yankees fan in NY, but simply find the game horrendously slow and boring. But I live in the land of die-hard Cubs fans (and equally die-hard Cards fans -- nobody seems to care about the Sox), to each their own.
If I could hazard a hypothesis for the rise of football is would be:
1) much more action and less ball scratching
2) less games; everyone counts -- not so true with 163 games of baseball
3) more violence -- Americans love a good hit, like it or not
4) shorter season/less time required to fanatically follow your team
Of course stats can be manipulated, but there really is no point for MLB to manipulate their official times. These are the times and can easily be calculated by anyone.
Comparing lengths of games to those in the past would be something I would be very interested in seeing as well.
True. Even that has its limits as stadiums have capacities. What would be more interesting is to compare changes over time of all sports by percentage and totals
What gave that away?
Sorry if I come off that way, but that is not my intention. Like everyone here I will challenge points made and debate topics. Many on this thread are "arguing."
Many non fans feel that way. I feel the same about soccer. I am not here to change your mind about baseball. But if someone brings up a point that I think is not accurate, I will challenge them. As most others do as well.
As long as it is not another player's balls.
Speaking of the topic of "skewed" or "cooked" stats. The stats are just stats. What changes stats is HOW it is argued or what is being left out. It's like telling a half truth. It is only truthful if you do not leave everything out. Same as stats...if you do not give the full scope of the stat that is being presenting...then you are skewing the data.
Moving along....you may return to your regularly scheduled discussion.
Moving along....you may return to your regularly scheduled discussion.
