Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobbyraz49
They only people MLB had to convince were owners and players, IMO. More money coming in from TV and gate revenue. All playoffs are on national TV. More money in = bigger checks to clubs and players.
|
I agree with everything you said but it goes WAY beyond the additional playoff TV revenues.
More playoff teams = even more teams in wild card contention later in the season = sustained interest in each of these fan bases later in the season = more ticket sales, concession and merchandise sales and more LOCAL TV revenues as well.
It's driven by the goal of sustaining fan interest in as many markets as possible as late in the season as possible.
Especially today, when attention spans aren't what they used to be with so many other diversions available.
The vast majority of young fans today (not all) have no interest in 'wasting time' on losers who've been eliminated from playoff contention by the end of May. There are alternatives. Lots of them.
And that is why MLB's current CBA proposal would have SEVEN playoff teams in each league. (and all but the worst clubs would remain in contention until late in the season)
As more of a traditionalist, the idea of seven teams in each league (almost 50%) 'qualifying' for the post season is abhorrent to me. What is the sense of playing a 162-game season to eliminate so few teams?
Having said that, the owners and players are in business and which is the better model, strictly from a business point of view?
If I were an owner, I'd quickly set my traditionalistic views aside.