MLB All-Star Game a ratings game: 3 reasons slumping viewership is cause for concern

[TMC]

http://sportsjournalism.org/sports-m...e-for-concern/

It counts. So what?: After the 2002 debacle in Milwaukee, with the game ending in a 7-7 tie, MLB decided to increase the stakes for the All-Star Game. In 2003, home field advantage for the World Series goes to the winning league.

The game counts!

Did the move have the desired effect? In 2003, the game did a 9.5 rating, the same as 2002. In fact, it never got as high as that mark again, holding steady between 8.1 and 9.3 from ’04 through ’08.

You could counter that having the game count might have held off possible ratings erosion after the ’02 game. But it definitely didn’t spark a ratings windfall and it hasn’t prevented the recent slide.

Even though there is a prize at the end, the game still feels like an exhibition in the eyes of many viewers. Starters come out early; pitchers don’t go more than inning. No matter how hard they try, the intensity level isn’t the same.
Judging by the ratings, people aren’t tuning to see which league gets home field for the World Series.

Star vacuum: Fans tune in to watch big-name stars. Just ask the NBA about LeBron James.

Say what you will about the steroid guys, fans watched them play. Bonds, McGwire, Sosa, Clemens, ARod, etc.

Aside from the juicers, also gone are perennial big-name stars like Ken Griffey, Greg Maddux, and Cal Ripken Jr.

Who are fans tuning in to watch Tuesday? Miguel Cabrera is terrific, but he still doesn’t move the needle. Mariano Rivera will be a great story, but again how much will he impact the ratings?

The game is in a bit of transition now on the star front. Young players like Mike Trout, Paul Goldschmidt and Bryce Harper clearly are baseball’s future. But they haven’t established themselves yet as year-after-year superstars.

Fox’s Joe Buck agreed that there might be a bit of a star vacuum.

“Four guys are in this game that are 21 years old or younger,” Buck said. “Manny Machado is a kid. On a national level Manny Machado isn’t well known, yet he’s one of the best players in the game. We’ve had a bit of a changing of the guard and it’s going to take a little while for national audiences to know who these guys are and to get excited to watch them play in a game that doesn’t maybe affect their team locally.”

The good news, Buck notes, is that some of these young players are the most gifted and athletically talented to come around in a long time. So it bodes well for the future, although it might not help the ratings cause Tuesday.

It’s a baseball thing: Ratings have been down across the board for baseball. There are various reasons: a glut of national games during the regular season; a string of World Series lasting only four or five games, etc…

Assessing baseball’s popularity is complicated and too involved to explore in detail here. However, if you look at the recent ratings for the All-Star Game, it begs the question about whether it is a key barometer of the game’s overall health, at least in regards to TV.

Have viewers lost interest in the All-Star Game because they have lost interest in baseball? Sometimes, people speak with their remotes.

The wrap-up: Listen, Fox still will do a strong number Tuesday. The fact that the game is in New York will help the cause. More viewers from the nation’s No. 1 market are likely to tune in to see the big event taking place in their backyard.

It also will help Fox if there isn’t a 5-0 score after the first inning, as was the case last year when the National League jumped all over Detroit’s Justin Verlander. A good game goes a long way in generating ratings.

Baseball’s All-Star Game still is the best in sports, no question about it. But clearly, it isn’t what it once was, at least as far as the ratings are concerned.
And that’s compared to 2008, let alone McCarver’s first in 1986.

[TMC]

http://officialfan.proboards.com/thr...ng-kid?page=18

http://officialfan.proboards.com/pos...5/quote/475375

The big topic of conversation on social media today appears to be the sharply-declining ratings in the MLB All-Star Game. In fact, ratings have declined 80 percent since 1999, but ratings for playoff and World Series games, though dipping as well, are decreasing at a much less significant rate. The question is why are ratings for the midsummer classic crashing, and the answer is simple: interleague play.

Using Red Sox fans as an example, through the 1970s, 1980s and a majority of the 1990s, the only way Red Sox fans had the opportunity to see superstar National League talent was in the playoffs, the occasional nationally-televised game, This Week in Baseball, or the All-Star Game. With the advent of interleague play in 1997, that changed, albeit slightly, as it was relegated to division-versus-division. The only time a Red Sox fan could watch Sammy Sosa, Mark McGwire or Barry Bonds was, again, in a national game. In 2002, interleague play expanded to include entire divisions, and now we're at the point where interleague play is year-round.

While interleague play isn't directly to blame, as cable has expanded options for game choices, as ESPN, ESPN2, TBS and MLB Network carry games nationally, the cache and appeal of the game, to have the rare opportunity to see superstars of the National League, is no more. If this game were happening 15 years ago, I'd be giddy at the chance to see exciting, elite talent like Carlos Gonzalez, Bryce Harper, Clayton Kershaw, Joey Votto, Buster Posey or Aroldis Chapman on display. But now, with a three-game series every season or with the opportunity to watch them any night on ESPN or MLB Network? The excitement just isn't there anymore.

[catlover79]

Well, I did my part. I watched the whole game the other night from start to finish.