Sports things you DON'T miss.

[goalieboy82]

On 5/26/2020 at 10:57 AM, B-Rich said:

Two things I don't miss:

 

-- Smoking in the stands.  I can remember this occurring at many outdoor stadiums and ballparks, and even indoor ones like the Superdome.  My daughter and I watched a replay of game 7 of the 1965 World Series the other day and she commented on how ridiculously prevalent it was. 

 

-- Pretty much before my time, but racially segregated seating.

i was listening to a local area sports show and one of the gentlemen on the show was saying that (when he was younger) he went to a NBA game (with his father) and by the 3rd quarter there was a haze of smoke in the rafters.

 

[Guest]

On 8/18/2020 at 6:35 AM, Discrim said:

I remember when score bugs didn't exist.  All hail the score bug.

 

I thought about an idea for a smaller second screen above or below (or even movable so you can choose to place it above, below or completely away from your TV set) that only displays the score and you'd be able to watch the entire field/court/rink on your TV set without the permanent or sporadic score bug obscuring any part of the action.  Of course, the TV set manufacturers would have to coordinate with a bunch of stations, OTA and cable, to make that happen. I'm sure it's doable but perhaps not worth the money for the parties involved to join and roll out this feature.

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

On 8/18/2020 at 9:35 AM, Discrim said:

I remember when score bugs didn't exist.  All hail the score bug.

 

I have been watching some games from 1986 lately, as I found three of Tom Seaver's starts with the Red Sox. And what I noticed (apart from the lack of personality on the Red Sox' broadcasts) is how much I missed the simple pleasure of an unobstructed screen. Death to the score bug.

[Red Wolf]

I absolutely loathe ESPN's bottom line.

• It's gigantic
• It's mostly empty
• The right side is just there for ads
  • Those ads are just other Disney-owned things like Star Wars
  • Or it's sports stuff that is advertised constantly
• A giant chunk of the left side is dedicated to telling you which channel you're on
• Scores and news don't need a bottom line because I have the internet which tells me all of that, plus which channel the games are on
• "Score alerts" make the whole damn thing turn yellow, which of course makes you think that a flag has been thrown when watching football

Score bugs are fine when done right, but the bottom line can go to hell, especially ESPN's.

[JayMac]

48 minutes ago, Red Wolf said:

I absolutely loathe ESPN's bottom line.

• It's gigantic
• It's mostly empty
• The right side is just there for ads
  • Those ads are just other Disney-owned things like Star Wars
  • Or it's sports stuff that is advertised constantly
• A giant chunk of the left side is dedicated to telling you which channel you're on
• Scores and news don't need a bottom line because I have the internet which tells me all of that, plus which channel the games are on
• "Score alerts" make the whole damn thing turn yellow, which of course makes you think that a flag has been thrown when watching football

Score bugs are fine when done right, but the bottom line can go to hell, especially ESPN's.

The bottom line did serve a purpose in the 90s (I think that is when it was introduced) but, like you said, I have the internet and/or apps for that now right in the palm of my hand.

 

The only real purpose is that it acts as a huge Disney ad at this point.

[floydnimrod]

ESPN's bottom is way too big, but I don't mind have the scores at the bottom. If I'm watching a game, I'm not looking at my phone, I'm watching the game.

[Red Wolf]

1 hour ago, JayMac said:

The bottom line did serve a purpose in the 90s (I think that is when it was introduced) but, like you said, I have the internet and/or apps for that now right in the palm of my hand.

 

The only real purpose is that it acts as a huge Disney ad at this point.

 

One of the things that really bugged me with the new bottom line is that when they first introduced it, the ad space on the right was directly below the score bug and they were almost identical in size. So I wanted them to move the score bug into that slot so that the score would always be visible, even during a commercial break like the rest of the bottom line. Instead, they made a new score bug that's probably 2/3 the height of the gigantic bottom line, stuck the bug on top of that, and made it the width of the screen so that their stupid graphics take up even more room!

 

Here's a blurry photo I just took. Look how much empty space there is. There is no point in this thing being this big. It serves no purpose. As you mention, it was cool in the 90s, but it just isn't necessary anymore, and certainly didn't need to become bigger.

 

 

EDIT

  

20 minutes ago, floydnimrod said:

ESPN's bottom is way too big, but I don't mind have the scores at the bottom. If I'm watching a game, I'm not looking at my phone, I'm watching the game.

 

If you watch college football, you will look at your phone or something because the commercial breaks are lengthy and numerous. Flipping channels like a madman is the only way to watch this wretched sport.

 

Also, if I edit in a quote after the fact does it send a notification to that person?

[floydnimrod]

59 minutes ago, Red Wolf said:

 

EDIT

  

 

If you watch college football, you will look at your phone or something because the commercial breaks are lengthy and numerous. Flipping channels like a madman is the only way to watch this wretched sport.

 

Also, if I edit in a quote after the fact does it send a notification to that person?

It does! (if you were talking about me, the added quote. I have no idea if it sends another one to the first person).

 

I know I'm the weird one here, but I'll just keep watching the same 7 commercials each game haha. I still have no idea how the networks still think they can get a college football game in a three hours window

[goalieboy82]

I don't miss it when people were able to call in to the PGA about a rule violations.  

[TrueYankee26]

On 10/31/2020 at 10:08 AM, Red Wolf said:

I absolutely loathe ESPN's bottom line.

• It's gigantic
• It's mostly empty
• The right side is just there for ads
  • Those ads are just other Disney-owned things like Star Wars
  • Or it's sports stuff that is advertised constantly
• A giant chunk of the left side is dedicated to telling you which channel you're on
• Scores and news don't need a bottom line because I have the internet which tells me all of that, plus which channel the games are on
• "Score alerts" make the whole damn thing turn yellow, which of course makes you think that a flag has been thrown when watching football

Score bugs are fine when done right, but the bottom line can go to hell, especially ESPN's.

Ever since then, NESN & MLB Network redid their bottom lines which now resemble ESPN's.

 

 

So methinks that style of bottomline is here to stay.

[Red Wolf]

2 minutes ago, TrueYankee26 said:

Ever since then, NESN & MLB Network redid their bottom lines which now resemble ESPN's.

 

 

So methinks that style of bottomline is here to stay.

 

Hiss and boo. I guess they're still worldwide leader after all.

[JerseyJimmy]

might get some heat for this one, but the pre-wild card era of baseball where you had to win the division or else you missed the playoffs... even if the other division winner had a significantly worse record than you.  two(?) words: 1993 Giants.

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

On 7/17/2022 at 6:02 AM, JerseyJimmy said:

might get some heat for this one, but the pre-wild card era of baseball where you had to win the division or else you missed the playoffs... even if the other division winner had a significantly worse record than you.  two(?) words: 1993 Giants.

 

The 1993 NL West race shows why the format of having to win the division to advance was superior.  At that time tere was actually something at stake in the regular season.  Whereas, if the second-place finisher had been going to the playoffs anyway, then there would have been no comparable drama to the end of that season.

 

Indeed, this scenario actually happened in 2001, when the Astros and Cardinals vied for for the NL Central lead, and then finished in a tie for first place.  Not only was there no playoff (as there had been every previous time teams had tied for a division title), but both teams went ahead and declared themselves division champions!  In fact, the Astros were the champs and the Cardinals were the wild card; but, because the regular season had been devalued to the extent that both qualified for the post-season, it didn't matter.

The 1993 season was a message from the Universe telling us loudly and clearly why the wild card is a bad idea.  One can only hope that, upon the next expansion to 32 teams, the leagues will split into four 4-team divisions a piece, and once again only the division champions will advance to the post-season.  While some divisions will inevitably be stronger than others in any given season, this phenomenon is cyclical.  The important point is that the regular season is the first round of the overall championship competition, and it should be respected as such by giving only to its winners the privilege of advancing.  Let us note that absolutely nobody claims, after a round of the playoffs, that a team that lost in that round to a strong opponent should advance to the next round anyway.  Such an argument is equally invalid as it pertains to a team that failed to win a strong division.  The post-season should be for division champions only.

[BBTV]

I used to feel that way, but I also used to look at sports as life and death rather than something that should be as fun as possible for fans.

 

For example this year, if only division winners advance, the Phillies season would have been completely over before June.  Every game since then would have been nothing more than an exhibition or an opportunity to play spoiler. 

 

But they fired Sleepy Joe Girardi and are 20 games over .500 since, and have the third best record in all MLB since (albeit #2 is the Braves.)  But now I have a reason to watch, a reason to go to games, a reason to scoreboard watch, and a reason to care.  I'm not sure how that's bad, and why anyone would want to take that away from any fan.  

 

I totally understand the point of a potentially-lousy team upsetting a 100+ win team and that the World Series is essentially the culmination of a tournament (similar to the NCAA tournament) rather than the crowning of a true champion, but at the same time, I get to watch meaningful baseball when otherwise the Phillies amazing run would have been completely worthless.

[OnWis97]

11 minutes ago, BBTV said:

I used to feel that way, but I also used to look at sports as life and death rather than something that should be as fun as possible for fans.

 

For example this year, if only division winners advance, the Phillies season would have been completely over before June.  Every game since then would have been nothing more than an exhibition or an opportunity to play spoiler. 

 

But they fired Sleepy Joe Girardi and are 20 games over .500 since, and have the third best record in all MLB since (albeit #2 is the Braves.)  But now I have a reason to watch, a reason to go to games, a reason to scoreboard watch, and a reason to care.  I'm not sure how that's bad, and why anyone would want to take that away from any fan.  

 

I totally understand the point of a potentially-lousy team upsetting a 100+ win team and that the World Series is essentially the culmination of a tournament (similar to the NCAA tournament) rather than the crowning of a true champion, but at the same time, I get to watch meaningful baseball when otherwise the Phillies amazing run would have been completely worthless.

I liked Ferdinand's post and not yours. It's because the logic of his post is spot on with my ideals. That said, I'm being dragged kicking and screaming as we speak towards this philosophy. I can say the same about the Twins as you do about the Phillies. They're mediocre. Right now, mediocre keeps you in the hunt most of the season. Pre wild-card, I'd be going to a game only in perfect weather, and not even finding out whether they won or lost most days. Now, let's say the Phillies or Twins win the World Series. Are they the best team? No. Neither one has a reasonable chance to play back into that conversation. Is it ideal (from a neutral perspective)? Not really. 

At this point it's bad business just to have the pre-1969 or the pre-wild card format. And the more I accept that it's just business, the more I feel I have no choice but accept that the "integrity" of the championship is going to take a hit. It can be a tough line to draw, though. I was steadfastly against the second wild card because too inferior of a team can beat a better team with a one-game playoff (and one game is not what baseball is about). The new format? I admit I don't  like it because a part of me will always miss when making the MLB playoffs was special, but at the very least, I understand it.

 

(Then again, corporate sponsors on the uniforms is good for business and I hate that with a raging passion.)

 

It's a balance...gotta make money but can't totally turn everyone off. Sure, if the Yankees played every game at home, their opponents would probably make more revenue...but that's one piece of integrity I don't see pro sports totally crapping on.

[BBTV]

I completely understand your and FC's arguments, and from an ideal standpoint, I agree.  However, I've made this argument before, but pro sports is not just about the game.  Anyone who truly cares about "the game" should watch amateur sports.  Pro sports is about entertainment, and it's not entertaining to pay $50 to watch a bunch of losers and to never experience cheering for something that matters.  I've done a complete 180 on this as I've gotten older and realize I have less time to be miserable about sports.

 

Honestly, why would you cheer for your local team if they were always eliminated by May?  I grew up cheering for losers, and all it did was make me miserable.  In hindsight, I should have adopted some other team like the Braves or A's or something (but it was a little tougher to do that before Al Gore invented the internet.)  The argument of keeping playoff teams to a minimum is akin to saying that only fans in New York, Boston, LA, and every now and then some other team deserve to enjoy going to baseball.

 

Hell - we have salary caps in most sports just to try and keep some level of competitive balance (and a de facto cap in MLB) which kinda goes against the principle of being allowed to build the best team you possibly can, so right off the bat it's not really about competition when a team is essentially forced to let go of good players and start rookies because rules say they have to.

[Red Comet]

All of the above reasons are why I think a bunch of sportswriters who grew up in New York calling the 50s the Golden Age of Baseball is about as legit as the (at the time) St. Louis based Sporting News calling the Cardinals the Best Fans In Baseball.  

[Sport]

I used to be pretty hardline about playoffs and baseball, but the old system is how the Cleveland baseball team went 4 decades without a postseason appearance. That's bad for the sport when 75% of the league has no shot before a single spring training game is played.  

 

I'll never see another Big Red Machine in my lifetime. The structure of the sport won't let it happen in this market. My only hope for seeing another Reds World Series is recreate the 2015 Royals or sneak in as a wildcard and get hot like the 2019 Nationals. Even if they've lessened the importance of the regular season and caused a few other unintended negative consequences, on the whole expanded playoffs are a net positive. 

[ManillaToad]

The first three playoff systems MLB had were right for their times, though I think the LCS format should have started in 1962 instead of '69, and the wildcard format should have started right when they expanded in 1993 instead of waiting a year.

 

The original wildcard system was perfect. The WC game was stupid, though it is kind of funny to force the teams who couldn't win their divisions to play in a joke one-game playoff.  The format they have now is just embarrassing. Letting more teams in made winning the division mean nothing, winning the pennant mean almost nothing, and because of those it indirectly made winning the World Series mean less.

 

 

[DG_ThenNowForever]

I'm a fan of expanded playoffs. More markets mattering is always better to me; I'm a fundamentalist about this.