Question about baseball attendance. (1 Viewer)

[KeithH]

How bad is baseball attendance these days? I see a lot of empty seats on TV, and today, I received an e-mail message from New York Yankees customer service saying that tickets are still available for this week's games against the Arizona Diamondbacks:

Tickets are still available for the New York Yankees Inter-League games against the Arizona Diamondbacks, Monday, June 10 @ 7:05 PM, Tuesday, June 11 @ 7:05 PM, and Wednesday, June 12 @ 1:05 PM. To purchase tickets, simply visit Yankees.com call Ticketmaster at (212)-307-1212, or visit the Yankee stadium box office.

I know these games are on weekdays, but I am surprised to see tickets available for games between the Yankees and the defending champion Diamondbacks. Back in June 1998, I went to an interleague game on a Monday night between the Braves and Yankees at Yankee Stadium, and the game was sold out. If I could, I would go to one of the games this week in a heartbeat.

 

[Jason Seaver]

::resists taunting vis-a-vis Yankees fans not being able to handle second place::

I dunno. It looks like Bud Selig's anti-marketing is working: Tell people enough that the game is in trouble, and eventually they'll stop supporting it.

 

[Bill Slack]

Overall, it's still near it's all time record for attendance. Sure, the Twins and Jays aren't going to draw three million like they did ten years ago, but the Yankees will, and they drew terribly ten years ago.

For awhile they set a new record every year. Receeding attendance isn't a good thing, but ticket prices keep going up and attendance is still huge.

In Boston basically everything sells out. But you can still go to the box office and get standing room ($18!) and obstructed view ($25) tickets the day of any game without a problem.

 

[KeithH]

Jason, I agree. Bud Selig is bad for baseball, plain and simple. He continues to spread the B.S. that owners are broke and he talks about contraction.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Keith,
There will probably be a lot of walk up ticket sales for those games. Also, the Yankees lead the major leagues in attendance.




Crawdaddy

 

[KeithH]

Robert, I could see these Yankee games selling out, but I was just surprised that they aren't sold out already and that the Yankees sent out an e-mail message to that effect. I have not checked attendance around the league, but I am not surprised that the Yankees lead in that category. Thanks.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

Well, here in Detroit there are plenty of good seats available for any game. Come on over if you want to pay major league prices to watch a minor league organization. The novelty of the new stadium wore off in a hurry here.

 

[KeithH]

Scott, and for first dose of interleague play this year, the Tigers fans (those who actually care) got to see the Phillies. :frowning:
My girlfriend is from Pittsburgh, and she and I went there over the Memorial Day weekend to visit her parents and friends. From what I heard out there, the situation with the Pirates is similar to what you described with the Tigers. The Pirates have a beautiful stadium in a nice part of the city, but they are not putting a good product on the field. That's the bottom line. So, there are a lot of empty seats.

 

[Joe Fisher]

Saw a little chart in the NY Daily News on Tuesday(6/4). The chart basically stated that attendance isDOWN 5.7% FROM LAST YEAR. Keep up the good work Bud.
:rolleyes

 

[Joseph S]

The chart basically stated that attendance isDOWN 5.7% FROM LAST YEAR. Keep up the good work Bud.

Actually, they're on record pace for the greatest drop in attendance during the second year of a new ballpark at Bud's own park in the same year they host the All-Star game. He still can't even get season tickets sold with the All-Star bonus.

The problem is that 60% of the teams not only have no chance of winning, but also are so bad that you feel sorry watching them get slaughtered every night. It is actually embarrassing to see he Red Sox and Yankees sweep almost every single series versus the Jay, O's, and Devil Rays. Now, with the unbalanced schedule the Sox and Yanks are guaranteed nearly 60 victories within their own pathetic division. 18 of the 30 teams can't even win half their games and 5 are actually at .400 or below. The overall level of competition in the league is laughable.

 

[KeithH]

More often than not in baseball these days, the on-the-field stories that dominate baseball these days involve individual achievements, not teams. Bonds this, Bonds that. Before Bonds, it was McGwire. Sosa garners a lot of headlines too. Don't get me wrong. These accomplishments are worthy of headlines, but we don't hear enough about the good teams or the good games. It seems that if the media isn't talking about Bonds moving up the all-time home run chart, they are talking about a possible strike, contraction, steroid use, and other off-the-field problems. Yep, baseball is American, like apple pie and Chevrolet. :frowning:

 

[Mitty]

More often than not in baseball these days, the on-the-field stories that dominate baseball these days involve individual achievements, not teams.

I'm not entirely sure of that. At least I'm not sure the mix is any more skewed towards individual achievements than it's ever been.

After Bonds, the biggest story in baseball last year was the play of the Seattle Mariners. In '98, it was the Yankees. The surprisingly good showing of the Twins last season (continuing into this year) was also a pretty good story, as well as the performance of the A's over the past few seasons despite a limited payroll.

As long as I've been watching baseball, individual achievements have been garnering headlines; George Brett flirting with .400, Rickey Henderson swiping ungodly numbers of bases, Ripken's streak, Nolan Ryan piling up no-hitters and strikeouts, etc.

One thing I do lament about baseball these days is that there is so much focus on how much money players make. That contract negotiations are as much in the headlines as on-the-field achievements is distressing to me.

 

[Jared_B]

All last year, and into this year, almost every Mariners game has been sold out. It's very hard to get tickets with short notice. Last year I believe they set the ML record for attendance. It's disturbing to see what little support other teams get.

 

[Jack Briggs]

What are the chances that contraction will actually take place?

Also, these single-season homerun records being established, it seems, almost every other year have cheapened the currency of this benchmark statistic. Yawn, Player X threatens to hit 75 homers.

Funny how none of these steroid- and genetically enhanced giants on the field these days has approached Hack Wilson's record 190 RBI.

And, damn it, the ball has been juiced ever since 1994. These records don't mean anything.

If we're keeping the rabbit ball, then let's raise the pitching mound back to its pre-1969 height of fifteen inches. And let's get rid of the damn DH in the AL.

I'm sick of something I used to love. (Still haven't recovered completely from the 1981 player's strike, much less the debacle that was 1994.)

 

[Jared_B]

Jack, what happened in 94? Changed manufacturer of baseballs?

 

[Jason Seaver]

18 of the 30 teams can't even win half their games and 5 are actually at .400 or below.

Well, 18/30 under .500 isn't that far off from half being below and half being above. This isn't Lake Woebegon, where all the children are above average.

Besides - and I know it's easy for me to say when my local team has the sport's best record - isn't having a few exceptionally good and a few exceptionally bad teams a good thing for the game? The good teams are exciting, they generate attendence spikes when they visit, and they threaten records, generating interest; the bad teams make radical changes and try new things which teams that hover around .500, perpetually "one player away" don't.

 

[Jack Briggs]

Strategy, Jason, strategy! Do you play your pitcher in a tight situation, or remove him for a pinch hitter? That sort of thing. I miss it.

But I agree about abolishing interleague regular-season play. It's not right. And it cheapens the World Series.

Everything's cheaper about baseball these days except for ticket prices and players' salaries.

 

[Bill Slack]

RBIs are largely a function of luck.

There has always been a large dichotomy in baseball with a few teams dominating at a time.

The problem is there are teams in Tampa Bay, with a horrible stadium and team. In Montreal where people just don't CARE about baseball anymore. In Oakland where they barely care, and there's a beatiful new park across the bay. The Brewers? I wouldn't go either, just to make Bud Selig look bad.

The Twins? They were setting attendance records a few years ago. So were the Blue Jays. But they haven't been good teams in a long time. You can be respectable without spending 120 million. There needs to be some amount of change so any team can afford to spend the ~60-70 million it requires to be consistenly competitive though.

The big change that is needed is Bud Selig. He is the worst thing to happen to baseball in decades.

And how big of a problem are 'roids, really?

Here are your top 20 OPS leaders of all time:

1. Babe Ruth+ 1.3791 1920
2. Barry Bonds 1.3785 2001
3. Babe Ruth+ 1.3586 1921
4. Babe Ruth+ 1.3089 1923
5. Ted Williams+ 1.2874 1941
6. Babe Ruth+ 1.2582 1927
7. Ted Williams+ 1.2566 1957
8. Babe Ruth+ 1.2530 1926
9. Babe Ruth+ 1.2517 1924
10. Rogers Hornsby+ 1.2449 1925
11. Lou Gehrig+ 1.2395 1927
12. Babe Ruth+ 1.2248 1930
13. Mark McGwire 1.2224 1998
14. Jimmie Foxx+ 1.2181 1932
15. Frank Thomas 1.2167 1994
16. Rogers Hornsby+ 1.2031 1924
17. Jeff Bagwell 1.2009 1994
18. Mark McGwire 1.1977 1996
19. Hugh Duffy+ 1.1955 1894
20. Babe Ruth+ 1.1951 1931

 

[Joseph S]

isn't having a few exceptionally good and a few exceptionally bad teams a good thing for the game?

No. The exceptionally bad teams make average teams look exceptionally good. The Red Sox have one of the worst bullpens in their recent history and it doesn't even matter because there is no way that the D'Rays, O's, or Jays can beat them. Playing the crap of the league for 60+ games overinflates records of these better than average teams. Note, that the 60 doesn't include the games they play against KC, Det, Tex, San Diego, and Colorado.

The better teams just spend more money when they screw up by signing or trading for another player. The Red Sox, for example, had more money tied up in bad signings these past few years than the Expos, Twin, or A's had in total salary.

The Red Sox have $30 Million tied up with players either not playing or not contributing. (Oliver, Offerman, Clark, Nixon, Garces, Hermanson, Banks, Pickering, Crawford, and Coleman) That would leave them with Varitek and $500,000 to spend filling out the roster.

So it takes $80 mil of perfect spending and that doesn't even get you a decent bullpen. Most teams can't do this. That is why NFL style revenue sharing is the only hope in the long term. Unfortunately the owners are led by Selig. He would rather lock out the players and call them greedy instead of saving the game.

Oh yeah, ND is in the College World Series. They already beat the #1 seed Florida State!!!!! Go Irish!!!