Are you kidding? Philadelphia is a much bigger market than Tampa. Not to mention half the people who live there are in a retirement home and are in bed before all of these games started. Tampa was the main reason the rating were so low. Weather, start time, and crapty announcers also helped play a role. Yes, the ratings would have been much better if the Sox, Yankees, Dodgers or Mutts were in it, but that doesn't make it a better series. Hell, even though it was only 5 games, this series wasn't close to being the worst this decade. The 2004 and 2007 World Series were horrible. At least the games this year were close and included a walk-off. I could care less about ratings, because Fox making money doesn't affect me, but if the MLB wants better ratings, here is what you do. When the series is between two East teams, heck the West Coast and start the games at 7. And not the coverage, the games. This way casual fans can actually stay up to watch the games and you can avoid the kind of disasters like Game 5. People on the West Coast don't even to show up to watch their own teams play when they're at home, so why are we pandering to them when two teams are playing on the East Coast? Also, start the season earlier and schedule some double-headers so that the postseason can start earlier and end before the horrible weather sets in in the North. Rain delays are huge rating killers. The turning point of this series (in terms of viewers) was Game 3. Despite being a great game, it started when the majority of the East coast was in bed.
ZOMG someone's still mad he had to find something else to do last sunday night instead of watching football. :moe: :laughy32: don't mind people like phigles and steve, too many people out there can only pay attention to a babaric game like football because baseball is too cerebral of a game for them. kind of like many people would rather play frogger than play chess. a02:
How is Baseball cerebral?!?!? Other then subbing in and out pitchers and what pitches are attempted to be thrown at what time there is NO STRATEGY AT ALL. Football on the other hand is all about what formations and what plays are called on both sides every play. Football is SOOOOOO MUCH MORE a thinking mans game.
way to prove my point phigles as i didn't say football doesn't take intelligence to play. i was clearly stating that baseball is too cerebral for some sports fans to follow along with because it doesn't come with the violence that football does. but seriously- football, a thinking man's game ? that is the 1st time those two terms have ever been in the same hemisphere let alone in a sentence. :laughy32:another frogger fan.
go read my first post again and try and follow along. where did i come anywhere close to talking about playing the games ? well ? does pointing out why some fans like watching football over baseball have anything to do with the playing of the game ? christ man, stop being so overly sensitive.
so, i point out the obvious, you go off on a wild rant that had nothing to do with my point and won't take a step back to admit you were wrong. nice trait. no wonder you defend reid so much - you have his stubborness.
Ok....let's review for the slower folks out there in GIF land You said football is a babaric game (which I assume meant barbaric) and baseball is too cerebral of a game for them. You said the game itself. Therefor I assumed you meant the way the game is played. So who is wrong and won't admit it? While we are reviewing here is what I said in response to your characterization of baseball being the more cerebral game then football. ^^^^^Wild rant??? No. Now if your argument is that people who don't like baseball are just barbaric people who like to watch men smash into each other violently like they do in football then you should have said THAT. Many of the intelligent football fans who watch the game for the strategy and skill and not JUST the hits might have taken offense to your generalization but at least I wouldn't be wasting my time arguing with you.
so most fans that watch football watch it to follow the stragegies as opposed to loving the action and violence ? wrong, the average football fan loves the game for the violent aspect of the contest. the ones that watch it for the stradegies are in the minority. my point was about the people watching the games and it was meant as a little poke. did you miss the smiley at the end of the post ? do i need to explain that a smiley at the end of a post is meant to point out that you're joking and/or being sarcastic or are you going to interprut that the way you want to as well ?
There's actually a lot of strategy in baseball as far as pitchers versus hitters goes...have you ever seen a pitching coach or a bullpen coach looking at the charts and books on the opposing hitters? Then there is all of the shifts and what-not for each player in the field. Where to hit the ball, when to steal, when to hit and run, when not to... When to walk a guy, when to pinch hit, when to substitute run, when to sub in a defensive player... Batting lineups... There's a lot more to it than just subbing players in and out. There's a crapload of strategy in baseball...
not as much as red sox vs dodgers with manny/nomar/lowe and ex yankee Torre going against the Red Sox. You know that's what MLB would have wanted. btw, Who the heck cares about the freaking ratings? The Phillies were in it and freaking dominated. I could give two hecks if joe jerkoff from minnesota or kentucky was watching, I watched it and freaking loved it!!!!!!
