Should the Rockies just give up before the WS starts since they are......

SanctionII

.......playing the storied "BoSox"? Can the Rockies even hope to compete?

I bet the TV execs were glad that Boston won last night so at least one "Name" team is playing for the crown. I bet they also hope that the games are of the kind that will draw and keep viewers glued to the set. Come to think of it, I bet the baseball bigwigs are glad the BoSox won last night also.

TheVon

Don't you think that TV execs would hope for games that draw and keep viewers glued to the set every year? I can't imagine a scenario where Fox would hope for boring games with poor viewership.

stitzen

Baseball is immune to poor ratings...if MLB and the networks cared about having a good audience for the playoffs and world series, they wouldn't stack the schedule during the regular season with sox/yanks/mets.

Truth is, the networks make way more money over the course of 162 games than they do over the playoffs and world series, so they load up the regular season with big market teams.

Estil

Actually, I was thinking just the opposite. The Rockies, winners of 20 out of 21, clean sweeps of the NLDS and NLCS? At this rate the Red Sox will be lucky to avoid a sweep. The Red Sox had their day in the sun in '04 and this being the Decade of Underdogs, I look for that streak to continue this year.

My prediction: ROCKIES in five.

Connecticoin

The Rockies are a great story, and, IMO, will have national appeal in the World Series.

Those predicting any easy series for the Sox are very foolish -- I am certain the Red Sox will be taking them seriously. I think the Rockies have more momentum which will take some top notch pitching by the Sox to slow it down. I see the series going 7 games and either team winning.

Goot

I think the NLCS ratings speak for themselves. NOBODY cared!

TheVon

<< <i>Baseball is immune to poor ratings...if MLB and the networks cared about having a good audience for the playoffs and world series, they wouldn't stack the schedule during the regular season with sox/yanks/mets.

Truth is, the networks make way more money over the course of 162 games than they do over the playoffs and world series, so they load up the regular season with big market teams. >>



You may be right that MLB doesn't care (that much) about the ratings so long as there are people in the stands, but your point that the networks don't want good ratings doesn't make sense to me. The networks can't control who makes the playoffs so to a certain extent the ratings are out of their control. The networks do get some say in who they televise throughout the season, however. You can argue that showing the Sox/Yankees, Yankees/Mets, Cubs/White Sox and some of the other interleague games might dilute the interest in those matchups come October, but the Networks want to gather the ratings while they can and not just hope for a compelling matchup in the post season. I don't think there's a logical connection between showing games for high ratings during the season and a lack of desire for good ratings in the post season.

metalmike

Let's see- a new skewl team who in the last 21 games, have won 20, a small market team with a payroll of half of the best the AL can offer? Best of 7...let's do it.

RonBurgundy

Funny how MLB and fans misunderstand this issue a bit. Sure, larger market teams increase the probability of higher ratings but they don't determine higher ratings. The product ultimately determines the ratings. The more people that care about the sport generally, the higher the ratings are going to be no matter what the matchup is. In other words, it's the product, stupid. Look at 2 years ago, for example. Houston and Chicago are two of the larger markets in the league and FOX practically had to beg people to watch a 4 game wipeout.

The fact is, MLB is always going to have issues getting people interested in a 7 game series in this day and age where most folks just don't have time to tune in for all the games. That's one reason why the Super Bowl has eclipsed the WS as America's premier sporting event - it's one game that occurs in about 3 1/2 hours. And then they compound matters by starting the games at ridiculously late times during the week, and refuse to even consider having day games on the weekends. Gee MLB, do you even care about getting kids interested when you start the games an hour before their bedtime?

"Ratings" jabber gives me tiredhead anyway. Once upon a time, the game existed to determine a champion, not to see how many people tuned in to see it.




Ron

Estil

Same goes with the NCAA Tournament; they're all one game and you're in or done and it makes it more exciting that way. Especially if KENTUCKY can make a deep run this coming 2008 season; the tenth anniversary of our last championship!

rube26105

they can't give up the world series on tv ,they make too much money off ads of beer and car commercials on there!!!usually one right after the other,or dane cook, i dont kow if they make any money off his or not lol

BobaFett72

"I think the Rockies have more momentum which will take some top notch pitching by the Sox to slow it down. I see the series going 7 games and either team winning."

still see it going 7 games?

sox should sweep, the 8 day layoff has killed the rockpile and the sox have ALL the momentum now.

Estil

And I can see my Rockies in five prediction won't happen now. Seriously, I just figured they were too red hot to be stopped by anyone but I guess that eight day layoff had something to do that. But you know what else? There's also playoff experience on the Red Sox' part. I mean, they have the same mananger and much the same players as the 2004 team, so...

Let's just see if the Rocks can put up a better fight at Coors.