My boss is on vacation. So I am on vacation, only at work.
If you had to kill one professional sports league, would you choose MLB or NFL? (I'm leaving the NBA and NHL out of this because they're already dead.)
My first consideration is that, after one is gone, we'll be left with only one pro sport to watch (discounting EPL, MLS, NBA, NHL, because nobody here watches those regularly anyway.) So, which sport would you be more willing to devote all of your sports-appreciation research energy to?
It has to be baseball. Casual fans sometimes complain that baseball is too boring. But, the more you watch baseball the more interesting it becomes. Stuck with one sport all year casual fans would be forced to learn the game and appreciate its finer points.
The opposite is true with football. It's great if you're a casual fan, but the more you hear about the sport the less appealing it becomes. First, there's the concussions and long-term injuries. Athletes just a few years removed from the game are in deep depression, have permanent brain damage, are killing themselves for no apparent reason, and the league isn't helping. Sure, the hits are fun, but who wants to see these men slowly killing themselves (at worst) or permanently damaging their legs? It's uncomfortable. The more you learn about football, the less fun it is to watch.
Steroids, of course, take away from baseball. But they do that to football, too. Add to that dogfighting, and all of the shit tracked at ProFootballTalk's Turd Watch, and it's clear that baseball players are more likeable, too.
Second, game format.
This point goes to football. Sitting down on a Sunday at 1, you know exactly how long you'll be there (which is probably until 12, after SNF wraps up). Football games are far more watchable than baseball. Whether it's the clock or the action, spending an entire sunday in front of the NFL is easy. Watching even one baseball game, if it gets past the 3 1/2 hour to 4 hour range, can become tedious for any fan. Again, though, watching three straight games after you learn what these guys are doing to themselves can be disconcerting. But the format is still better, so football gets the point.
Third, season format.
Baseball, no doubt. It's a marathon, sure. But fans become much more deeply invested in their teams than do football fans. While football makes each game matter a whole lot more, and thus makes each individual game a little more tense, and pressure filled, baseball slowly drags you in until, after the ups and downs of an entire season you feel nervous for the entire month of September no matter what you're doing. It becomes part of your life. Watching football is a hobby, watching baseball is a lifestyle choice.
Fourth, playoffs.
Toss-up, to Baseball. Football's playoffs take the best part of any potential baseball playoff series (Game 7) and make it the entire series. Imagine all of the excitement for an entire baseball playoff series packed into one game. That said, it's a flash in the pan. Baseball's playoffs are the right balance of drawn out tension and packed excitement, balanced perfectly between the NBA and NFL. To see which is better, compare two of the greatest Championship performances in recent history: Sox-Yankees in 2004 and Colts-Pats in 2006. Colts-Pats was an incredible game, but then it was over. Sox-Yankees built, and built and built until Game 7 and something legendary happened. Just the thought that we might see an epic comeback and slow collapse makes baseball's playoff format better.
Throw in the uniquely baseball personal accomplishments that fans might see on any give day - the perfect game, no hitter, cycle, 4 HRs, 5 stolen bases, unassisted triple play - and the fact that Wiffle Ball is more fun than touch football, and it's clear which league needs to stay.
So, I would kill the NFL. Because baseball is more intensive for fans, it gets better the more you know about it, and the playoffs are the playoffs. For all that, I'll trade an occasional drawn-out game.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Nice points, good post, but I have to respectfully disagree.
I agree with you Dre on all points.
Of course the season format is a huge plus for baseball. There is a game at least 6 nights a week, so whenever you are in the mood you can sit down and watch as much or as little of a game as you want. Football, while sunday is great, it is only one day. I also can't stand how much ESPN drags out coverage of football, and not the games but during the week. They over react to everything that happens. While the smaller events are more important in football because it is only 16 games, ESPN over reacts none the less.
Baseball Tonight is 10x better than NFL Live.... enough said.
Another consideration is attending the games. It is hard enough to get football tickets but if it were the only sport it would be damn near impossible. While it would be more difficult to get tickets to baseball games I have to believe that the 162 chances would give your some better odds to get out there.
Baseball is also obviously the historical choice. I mean after all it is the one constant over the years. (That reminds me, more good baseball movies then football movies)
I was also trying to think which would be better to watch a game between the two shittiest teams. I really don't think there is an answer to this one. While you might be able to make arguments for both, it is just too close to call.
Football does have the Draft which is deff a leg up. But does the Hot Stove and waiting for prospects to be called up counter act that?
While there are some questions that have yet to be answered, the answer for me is clear.
It's got to be Baseball
Good point Bry - and even when you do get tickets to an NFL game, the atmosphere is nowhere near as exciting as baseball, unless you pony up a few hundred bucks for sideline tickets. I actually find watching football live from the seats I can afford to be much worse than watching it on TV. Baseball is the opposite.
Well Dre, it appears as if you've thrown journalistic objectivity out the window on this one... and I guess you'd have to in order to reach a conclusion on this issue because the sheer question prompts an entirely subjective response (which is impervious to objective reasoning).
As men born in the early 80s, we've spent the last 23-24 years of our lives watching sports. We were weened on these leagues as babies and as we approached adolescence, we were groomed to support and fall in love with our city's teams (or in some cases, the teams our dads and grandpas rooted for). I have no recollection whatsoever of any baseball games I might have watched with my dad, but I can easily recall the many Sunday NBA games on NBC (with the famous intro/outro music providing a stellar soundtrack). I remember all the Eagles games I ever attended with my dad and brother... For that matter, I remember the many discussions I've had with my sister regarding the Eagles (both during and after the game)... Even Linny will inquire about football games, but make little to no mention of baseball.
Back in the 70s and 80s, Philadelphia was a basketball town (this was not only due to Dr. J and Moses Malone, but credit should also be doled out to the college teams that comprised the Big 5: St. Joes, Temple, Penn, Villanova, Lasalle)... Ever since the late 80s and early 90s, Philadelphia has morphed into a football city... and those were formative years in my career as a fan.
This leads me to the point that I've (very slowly) been trying to make:
All of us have already made our choices, prior to any analysis (or rubrics). I'm not a baseball fan. I never have been. I never liked playing it, and the only time I ever found it semi-watchable was on a Friday or Saturday night in 613, when it would provide background entertainment for our pre-gaming festivities. (Note: the '04 ALCS was certainly a great time - I watched every game, aside from Game 3 which I listened to on the radio because I was stuck in traffic - but that was a once-in-a-lifetime series).
You can tell me that these football players are injuring themselves (far more than baseball players) and I'll tell you that that's because they're warriors. They leave it all out on the field while doing battle in the form of a full-contact organized sport. Doesn't that make football more enjoyable to watch? We're seeing modern-day gladiators at their best... only in this case, no one is holding a gun (or sword) to their head... this is the life they want to live. You mentioned some abhorent behavior (dogfighting and making it rain), but keep in mind how large of a cross-section you are looking at... there are 53 men on 32 teams... good lord, not all of them are model citizens. While you can cite a team like Cincinatti that reached double-digit arrests last year, I can point out the players on a team like the Eagles, who have caused little to no trouble over the past decade (aside from the coach's sons who are jack asses - not players - and Jerome McDougall who was robbed and then shot, by no fault of his own).
I won't even delve too deep in to the racial and social repurcussions of stripping the NFL players of their league while allowing the MLB to monopolize professional sports in America. After Jesse Jackson made a fool out of himself and ruffled many feathers among the baseball community, I doubt baseball fans on this blog would entertain this argument. But on some level, isn't that what it boils down to when you're championing the proper conduct (or as some might call it, subservient behavior) of the MLB as opposed to the unruliness of the NFL? Sheffield called the American black athlete defiant. There are many reasons for this character trait; far too many for me to try to trace, or even comprehend (environmental pressures, stereotypes, historical implications)... but if you're going to disband a league made up of predominantly black athletes in favor of a league comprised of predominantly white and hispanic athletes due to their off-field indiscretions, doesn't social context come in to play?
2) As I've already mentioned, I'm predisposed to love football while adopting a lukewarm attitude toward baseball... so of course I'm going to say that the game format of the NFL is far more enjoyable. In my completely subjective opinion, NFL games are exceedingly watchable. I could watch just about any two NFL teams play, while I would struggle to make it through any MLB game (even one in which the Phils are involved). Plus, it's a lot more fun to watch four football games on split-screen than it would be to watch baseball.
3) Without a doubt, Football. I never miss one Eagles game (and as I just said, I'll often catch other teams playing too). The NFL Network is far superior to the YES Network (are there any other channels designated entirely to baseball?). DirectTV offers much cooler options for football viewing (the red zone channel and their supreme highlight packages)... Also, from a fantasy perspective, Football beats out Baseball. I'd much rather stock up and prepare for one gameday a week. Unless you're a hardcore baseball fan, you lose interest and stop managing your fantasy baseball team on a consistent basis. And need we forget, women would much prefer to have a league with 1/10th the amount of games... I'm just saying, it's important to keep the Queen happy.
4) Hands down, FOOTBALL!!! I can't tell you how much I look forward to the first two weeks in January. It's such a great pick-me-up after the holiday season. When there are four do-or-die football games going round the clock on a January weekend, you can find me strapped to the couch with a huge smile on my face and a High Life in my hand. Oh, and the NFL doesn't find it necessary to run annoying promos during the middle of their playoffs, shamelessly begging fans to continue watching the games even after their teams have been eliminated. Enough said.
So, taking into account my openly acknowledged football bias, I would say ditch the MLB and the let the NFL continue its rein as the number 1 most-watched sport in America.
Post a Comment