The Sports Impact of COVID-19

[beachperroAZ]

On 8/24/2020 at 11:50 AM, DG_ThenNowForever said:

Imagine being a pro athlete, in the prime of your physical condition, and being told you can't go out and get laid.

 

I wonder how agents are managing this, and if there's some kind of quarantine or screening process for conjugal visits. And boy am I glad I didn't ask that question on national TV!

You would be cancelled like they are trying to do to Mike Mulberry. 

[BBTV]

Do people still feel like all of this season's championships are "cheap" or shouldn't count?  I was of that opinion at first, but after now watching a little of the basketball, a little of the hockey, and a lot of the baseball, it all seems pretty legit to me.  It's different, especially the winter sports, but it seems like it's all at a very high level, the players are playing for real, and they're certainly going to consider their respective championships as legit - so shouldn't we?

[The_Admiral]

NBA and NHL aren't cheap, they should count. Other than the layoff, they've played near-full seasons and mostly normal postseason draws under normal rules. It's baseball, always the most asterisk-demanding of the four, that feels cheapened. They will have played about a third of a season and let over half the teams qualify with a neutral-site LCS/World Series and phony-baloney magical leadoff doubles in extra innings. And given the time and resources that go into building a short-window baseball contender, either winning the wacky year or -- perish the thought -- having hoped for the stars to align in 2020 only to have it be the wacky year and then badly losing the wacky year feels like it would have to be a critical blow to a franchise. Imagine the Padres winning the West and getting dropped by an 8 seed that wouldn't be near October in a normal year. That smarts.

 

I'm not saying there shouldn't be extra qualifiers for a shortened season, or that neutral sites and everything about the pandemic present a unique set of challenges that will make a world championship a well-earned achievement, just that it's so far removed from anything before and, God willing, anything after that it will pretty much demand a footnote.

[BBTV]

What's this about a neutral-site World Series?

 

It's actually starting to make me wonder why there needs to be 162 games at all.  Or 154.  Or 120.  Start in May, end in mid-October, and have a reasonable amount of off days in between.

[DG_ThenNowForever]

54 minutes ago, BBTV said:

Do people still feel like all of this season's championships are "cheap" or shouldn't count?  I was of that opinion at first, but after now watching a little of the basketball, a little of the hockey, and a lot of the baseball, it all seems pretty legit to me.  It's different, especially the winter sports, but it seems like it's all at a very high level, the players are playing for real, and they're certainly going to consider their respective championships as legit - so shouldn't we?

 

If the Lakers win, it's real. If they don't, it's not. Prepare for a lot of that, but insert your team there. 

 

[SFGiants58]

2 minutes ago, DG_ThenNowForever said:

 

If the Lakers win, it's real. If they don't, it's not. Prepare for a lot of that, but insert your team there. 

 

If the Bucks lose their series, that’s gonna be the narrative going forward for the franchise.

[The_Admiral]

50 minutes ago, BBTV said:

What's this about a neutral-site World Series?

 

LCSs in the respective L.A. parks, World Series at Arlington Costco Shed

[BBTV]

6 minutes ago, the admiral said:

 

LCSs in the respective L.A. parks, World Series at Arlington Costco Shed

 

Is that real or just speculation?

[ManillaToad]

1 hour ago, BBTV said:

 

Is that real or just speculation?

 

[DEAD!]

8 hours ago, the admiral said:

 

LCSs in the respective L.A. parks, World Series at Arlington Costco Shed

No playoff baseball should be played at Angel's Stadium this season.

[BBTV]

8 hours ago, ManillaToad said:

 

 

I guess a bubble takes away the need to fly across country after every other game in a best-of series, but maybe it should start after the first best-of-3 round?  Just play all three games in the higher-seeded-club's park then move to the bubble for the remainder.  

[OnWis97]

14 hours ago, the admiral said:

NBA and NHL aren't cheap, they should count. Other than the layoff, they've played near-full seasons and mostly normal postseason draws under normal rules. It's baseball, always the most asterisk-demanding of the four, that feels cheapened. They will have played about a third of a season and let over half the teams qualify with a neutral-site LCS/World Series and phony-baloney magical leadoff doubles in extra innings. And given the time and resources that go into building a short-window baseball contender, either winning the wacky year or -- perish the thought -- having hoped for the stars to align in 2020 only to have it be the wacky year and then badly losing the wacky year feels like it would have to be a critical blow to a franchise. Imagine the Padres winning the West and getting dropped by an 8 seed that wouldn't be near October in a normal year. That smarts.

 

I'm not saying there shouldn't be extra qualifiers for a shortened season, or that neutral sites and everything about the pandemic present a unique set of challenges that will make a world championship a well-earned achievement, just that it's so far removed from anything before and, God willing, anything after that it will pretty much demand a footnote.

I tend to agree with most of this.  The NBA and NHL are going to be remembered as strange but the playoffs and the seeding ended up being not exact, but similar to what they'd have likely been had it played out.  MLB is going with a very short season, expanded playoffs, large rosters, temporary rules, etc. Whoever wins the World Series will forever be considered on a very short list for the least legitimate champion.  Go Twins; we'll take anything here.

 

I actually do think there should not be extra qualifiers for the very reasons you allude to (an 8-seed with a record of 27-33 knocking out a 1-seed and maybe even winning the whole thing).  The playoffs should be their regular setup (or less; but that's a bigger discussion). 

Obviously, it was short season or bust.

[OnWis97]

I wonder about some of the long-term impacts.  Assuming we get back to normal.

 

I think MLB is a candidate for some of what we've been talking about sticking. I honestly think we've seen our last DH-free game (well, until Ron Gardenhire or someone screws up their lineup card).  I hope the runner-on-second thing does not happen.  I know, it's probably akin to the NHL shootout and I assume it won't be used in postseason but it's a tough pill to swallow. I am actually OK with the 7-inning double-header, though when fans come back, that's a bad optic unless you pair them on one ticket, which doesn't seem likely.

 

I support MLB going back to a 154-game schedule but I don't want it getting too small for the simple fact that I like being able to decide to go to a game on a Tuesday and drop 14 bucks for mediocre seats.

 

As discussed above, the NBA and NHL didn't change a lot. I suppose I could see a reduction in the regular season in favor of some sort of "mini season" to determine the last few playoff spots (There's already been NBA talk of a play-in between 8 and 9, right?).  Integrity-wise, it's bad, but it's a way to add more games that generate interest/excitement.

 

Then there's the general fan experience regarding food, drink, etc. I foresee a few precautions becoming general practice.

[SFGiants58]

I think Bucks fans will curse how this was their season, only for the pandemic and bubble to screw things up.

 

Maybe a Bucks curse becomes a mainstream thing now? The Curse of Kareem?

[DG_ThenNowForever]

34 minutes ago, OnWis97 said:

As discussed above, the NBA and NHL didn't change a lot. I suppose I could see a reduction in the regular season in favor of some sort of "mini season" to determine the last few playoff spots (There's already been NBA talk of a play-in between 8 and 9, right?).  Integrity-wise, it's bad, but it's a way to add more games that generate interest/excitement.

 

 

 

I wonder if the bubble experience translates into Adam Silver being able to implement his secondary tournament idea. It would be hard to schedule a mini-tournament during a season, but if you, say, took the regular season down to 72 games and implemented a single-elimination tournament that guaranteed a playoff spot in February or something, you could do a whole 32-team tournament in a week.

[Seadragon76]

1 hour ago, OnWis97 said:

I wonder about some of the long-term impacts.  Assuming we get back to normal.

 

I think MLB is a candidate for some of what we've been talking about sticking. I honestly think we've seen our last DH-free game (well, until Ron Gardenhire or someone screws up their lineup card).  I hope the runner-on-second thing does not happen.  I know, it's probably akin to the NHL shootout and I assume it won't be used in postseason but it's a tough pill to swallow. I am actually OK with the 7-inning double-header, though when fans come back, that's a bad optic unless you pair them on one ticket, which doesn't seem likely.

 

I support MLB going back to a 154-game schedule but I don't want it getting too small for the simple fact that I like being able to decide to go to a game on a Tuesday and drop 14 bucks for mediocre seats.

 

I agree on the part about the DH. It makes sense at this point. The runner on base in extra innings is a gimmicky idea that would only work if it was used in a way to make it count...

 

My idea: Use it for 'overtime'. Make regular season games last only 12 innings. In the 12th inning, you place a runner on 2nd base in what would be an 'overtime' inning. If neither team scores in this inning, then the game ends in a tie.

[ManillaToad]

I don't understand why anyone, especially people involved in MLB's decision making, think extra inning games are this huge problem that needs sorted out. It makes MLB extra money, the fans who like it get more baseball, and the fans who can't be bothered to watch 14 inning games go on with their lives. I won't put it past Manfred to implement it for good of course, as it's just another rule change that doesn't address a real problem, and he really likes adding those.

[BBTV]

2 hours ago, ManillaToad said:

I don't understand why anyone, especially people involved in MLB's decision making, think extra inning games are this huge problem that needs sorted out. It makes MLB extra money, the fans who like it get more baseball, and the fans who can't be bothered to watch 14 inning games go on with their lives. I won't put it past Manfred to implement it for good of course, as it's just another rule change that doesn't address a real problem, and he really likes adding those.

 

I don't need more baseball on a Tuesday night when I just want to go home at a reasonable time so I can make it to work the next morning without being a zombie.  I also don't want to leave a game that I've paid for without seeing the conclusion, so if the numbers show that the runner on second idea cuts down on the time duration of extra-inning games, then I'm fine with it.

 

I don't know anyone that likes to stay up till 1AM to see two mediocre teams battle it out in the 16th inning.

[DG_ThenNowForever]

13 minutes ago, BBTV said:

 

I don't need more baseball on a Tuesday night when I just want to go home at a reasonable time so I can make it to work the next morning without being a zombie.  I also don't want to leave a game that I've paid for without seeing the conclusion, so if the numbers show that the runner on second idea cuts down on the time duration of extra-inning games, then I'm fine with it.

 

I don't know anyone that likes to stay up till 1AM to see two mediocre teams battle it out in the 16th inning.

 

I went to a baseball game last April that went to 12 or 13 innings. The Mariners lost, and it was about 40 degrees by the end of the game. It sucked and the Mariners sucked and we had less time at the bar we went to afterward as a result.

[OnWis97]

23 minutes ago, BBTV said:

 

I don't need more baseball on a Tuesday night when I just want to go home at a reasonable time so I can make it to work the next morning without being a zombie.  I also don't want to leave a game that I've paid for without seeing the conclusion, so if the numbers show that the runner on second idea cuts down on the time duration of extra-inning games, then I'm fine with it.

 

I don't know anyone that likes to stay up till 1AM to see two mediocre teams battle it out in the 16th inning.

I've been all for a maximum number of innings (12, but not sure why) and calling it a tie.  I know we hate ties, but I wonder how much the "runner on second" rule will speed games up.  The data will have to be generated.  All else equal, I don't love gimmicks, but just like nobody wants to see a six-period NHL game on a Tuesday in February, we don't need a June Tuesday going 16 innings. I generally lean purist, but this is an instance where the times have changed.  Most games are at night, nine-inning games are going much longer than they used to.  This all dates back to before there were lights and nine-inning games tended to go about 90 minutes. Teams also didn't worry about wear and tear on pitching staffs like they do now.  Things change.  As with the NHL, I assume postseason would be "old school."

 

But MLB has to find a way to speed up their games in general.  Nine-inning games go well over three hours with regularity.