(08-07-2013 12:41 PM)Jackson1011 Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 07:41 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  I watch MLB network for all my baseball coverage now. ESPN has very little I'm interested in watching aside from live games.

+1 MLB network blows away anything espn does with baseball

I'm an MLB Network convert too. I love Quick Pitch, especially when they do the local radio simulcast with the highlights.

(08-07-2013 12:41 PM)Jackson1011 Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 07:41 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  I watch MLB network for all my baseball coverage now. ESPN has very little I'm interested in watching aside from live games.

+1 MLB network blows away anything espn does with baseball

Yep, MLB network is great and really has taken away the last thing that I still did enjoy about ESPN which was their serious baseball coverage. Now ESPN really offers nothing I care about.

how big of a factor is the olympics in these ratings?

(08-07-2013 09:34 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  ESPN's summer lineup is pretty garbage. I watch SportsSouth for Braves games. ESPN for ... uhh ....... nothing. Even College Football Live is an unbearable exercise in SEC gentle ball cupping by the "Worldwide Leader".

I agree, even as an SEC fan. Worse, they are always a day behind on stories. I think that will slow down now that Chris Fowler and Herbie are getting back into the picture. They do a better job of making sure the coverage is spread around.

Never watch ESPN until football season, and when I do it has to be a meaningful game.

(08-07-2013 01:19 PM)john01992 Wrote:  how big of a factor is the olympics in these ratings?

There really isn't much of a factor. If anything, the Olympics would have had more of a negative effect on ESPN's ratings last year since it's the one event that sports fans don't instinctively turn to watch ESPN for. (Even when events like the NFL postseason and NCAA Tournament aren't on ESPN, SportsCenter generally enjoys a ratings boost showing their highlights. That isn't the case with the Olympics.)

People are just reading too much into this. ESPN hardly had any Heat and Lakers playoff games in May and June compared to last year and the Yankees went from a top competitor last year to a mediocre team this year in June and July. That explains the vast majority of the ratings decline. (In contrast, the NBA playoff rotation allowed TNT to carry a ton of Heat games, including the 7-game Eastern Conference Finals, and they enjoyed a great ratings boost compared to last year based on that fact alone.)

America wants to watch marquee franchises. So, be careful for what you wish for: poor ratings for ESPN with non-brand name teams means that they'll feel the need to jam the same 15 or so college football programs down our throats even more than they do now.

Does anyone have HARD evidence that the Cubs carry national interest when playing well? I only ask because that would be like what? Once every 20 years, the sample size would be so small it would be worthless. To lump the Cubs or to even mention them in the same sentence as the Yankees and Red Sox is beyond laughable. STOP! Take a seat and think about that just for a minute…Yankees/Red Sox/Cubs, which one of those don’t belong in terms on national appeal? Heck, the Cardinals have FAR greater national appeal than the Cubs and they don’t even get mentioned.


Fact, no matter how anyone spins it the rating are down year over year for the same time frame. Its inevitable BSPiN has and is going to continue to loose market share (overall)...how much remains to be seen. Nobody here can tell anyone how much or when everything settles in long term for (1) nobody has the detailed market research in addition to the internals of what the focus groups have had to say about BSPiN/NBCSN/FOX Sports1 (2) attempting to predict long term trends of the sports consumer is not as easy as some may think (3) there is most certainly a large segment of the sports consumer that is unhappy and thinks BSPIN has turned into a mix of sports/politics/hip-hop/over hype and that’s something they simply are just tired of and think BSPiN should just stick with sports…has anyone noticed all the promotion of the new FOX Sports 1 has been completely absent of Hip Hop influence, this is calculated to be sure….just for the record I have nothing against Hip Hop, just making an observation (4) this is just anecdotal evidence which is meaningless but I use a ton of different sources for sports and news (as I'm sure everybody does)and I think I can say this with great confidence, when reading fan comments and such the overwhelming majority are ALWAYS bashing BSPiN, and this includes the top 10 sports sites. (4) BSPiN has alienated a large segment of sports fans by veering off into other areas, how that plays out long term no one can tell and if they act like they can they are basically full of BS. (5) people use your brains, this isn’t rocket science and a first grader could figure out if you have Zero competition you control the message, narrative and the ratings……if you have three different players and all have MASSIVE resources with a world class marketing arm to reach the consumers it kind of stands to reason the so called dominate player is going to lose market share…and this doesn’t even factor in the RSN’s which are incredibly valuable assets, some of these RSN’s are destination channels.


Disney/BSPIN has an incredible line up of properties, second to none in cable.

But you can’t just dismiss what they don’t have as being meaningless of not worthy of attention to the avid and casual sports consumer.

What they don’t have or share

The NFL is dominated by the other networks *****
The Summer Olympics *****
The Winter Olympics *****
NHL *****
The Stanley Cup *****
Shares MLB *****
MLB playoffs and World Series *****
Currently shares NBA with TNT *****
Notre Dame FB home games *****
Shares Big 12 football *****
Shares Big 12 basketball *****
Shares PAC 12 football *****
Shares Pac 12 basketball *****
Shares NASCAR (but is about to be frozen out of all three series) *****
Big East basketball *****
All kinds of major international soccer leagues and championships
The Triple Crown *****
Tour De France
Shares the PGA
The French open *****
The Masters *****
NCAA March Madness *****
UFC



And this doesn’t even figure in the close to 40 RSN’s, most carry NBA/MLB and when I say that I mean they each carry a TON NBA/MLB of the regional teams, which in some cases are incredibly popular for these regions and are ratings bonanza’s for the RSN’s.


Always remember Disney has share holders. That’s why we have seen the 200 plus layoffs at BSPiN, the shuttering of the BSPiN 3D operation, walking away from NASCAR once the deal expires….BSPiN does not have unlimited resources like some might think. The NBA is more important to them than NASCAR and just guessing they can’t have both in this competitive world (which is new to them) so the saving from not renewing NASCAR goes to retaining or sharing the NBA (probably sharing) and trying to get at least a piece of the BIG10 when it comes up. Personally I think both the NBA (with either NBC or FOX) and the Big 10 (with Fox) are going to be shared with BSPiN. But it wouldn’t surprise me at all if FOX gets the Big 10 outright.


So it’s true most everything with the exception of the NBA/Playoffs and Big10 are locked up long term. But, what’s also true is these two exceptions are HUGE and could have monumental impact in shaping things long term if either FOX/NBC gets a piece of one or each. For some reason this is either ignored or just goes unnoticed. If either NBCSN or FOX Sports gets at a minimum a piece of each or one outright and a piece of the other THEN WE ARE TALKING GAME CHANGER on a diffeerent level than anything we see currently. It’s far from certain and probably not very likely Disney doesn’t at a minimum end up sharing the NBA and the NBA Playoffs, same deal with the BIG 10. If they end up sharing anything it’s not going to be like Disney clearly gets the lions share of all the top programming either, more likely to be more of a even deal. Also be mindful of what Disney paid for the new college FB playoff and the other 3 or 4 bowls, this was a truly staggering amount of money for so few hours of programming, this also probably factored in heavily in walking away from NASCAR. So again they do not have unlimited resources, remember they shared the Big12/Pac12 with FOX. If Disney gets both the NBA/Big 10 outright good for them and bad for FOX/NBC, however the odds of that are slim when you have both FOX/NBC with the resources to put the brakes on that from EVER HAPPENING.


Ever heard of that word triangulation…..that could be the FOX Sports 10 year plan.


Keep your eye on the ball people. Follow short and long term trends and pay attention for yourself. AND ALWAYS REMEMBER THE SENIOR MANAGEMENT ON DOWN AT DISNEY/NBC/FOX KNOWS A LOT MORE THAN WE DO AND THEY ARE ALL ARMED WITH THE MARKET RESEARCH AND HARD NUMBERS THAT WE ARE NOT PRIVY TO. THESE ARE THE PEOPLE MAKING DECISIONS AND ALLOCATING RESOURCES BASED ON INFORMATION THEY AND ONLY THEY HAVE. IT’S EASY FOR MESSAGE BOARD POSTERS TO SPEND OTHER PEOPLES MONEY AND SCOUR THE INTERNET FOR STORIES TO SUPPORT ANY THEORY EITHER PRO OR CON. YOU KNOW HOW THE NFL HAS ARM CHAIR QB’S? THE MESSAGE BOARD COMMUNITY HAS ARM CHAIR CEO’S…HA-HA!
THE DEAL WITH NBC AND FOX IS A MARATHON, of course I know most can’t see or refuse to look at anything long term.

"What they don’t have or share"

But they do have MACtion! During which the E$PN announcers spend half the time talking about another game coming up including Alabama or Ohio State or Oklahoma, and the other half implying that the MAC teams are on a completely lower level than every BCS school.

That's the other reason I don't like E$PN.

(08-07-2013 02:33 PM)Tiger8589 Wrote:  Does anyone have HARD evidence that the Cubs carry national interest when playing well? I only ask because that would be like what? Once every 20 years, the sample size would be so small it would be worthless. To lump the Cubs or to even mention them in the same sentence as the Yankees and Red Sox is beyond laughable. STOP! Take a seat and think about that just for a minute…Yankees/Red Sox/Cubs, which one of those don’t belong in terms on national appeal? Heck, the Cardinals have FAR greater national appeal than the Cubs and they don’t even get mentioned.

I'm a diehard White Sox that loathes everything about the Cubs. But, YES, the Cubs absolutely are massive draws when they are anywhere close to semi-competitive. The hitch, of course, is that they are famously not competitive for long stretches of time. The Cardinals definitely don't have greater national appeal - they might have the most loyal fan base (the equivalent of, say, Nebraska football fans), but the interest in them doesn't extend very far beyond their home region (outside of Cardinal fan transplants). Look back at the TV ratings from 2003-04 and 2007-08 when the Cubs were actually in contention at the same time as the Yankees and Red Sox - they were every bit as much of a national draw (and, in fact, those are literally the only three MLB franchises that matter from a national TV perspective). The one dream for Fox executives in continuing to pay for MLB rights is to be there if the Cubs ever get to the World Series (preferably against the Yankees or Red Sox). And I say that as someone that can't stand the Cubs or their obnoxious fans.

(08-07-2013 04:47 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 02:33 PM)Tiger8589 Wrote:  Does anyone have HARD evidence that the Cubs carry national interest when playing well? I only ask because that would be like what? Once every 20 years, the sample size would be so small it would be worthless. To lump the Cubs or to even mention them in the same sentence as the Yankees and Red Sox is beyond laughable. STOP! Take a seat and think about that just for a minute…Yankees/Red Sox/Cubs, which one of those don’t belong in terms on national appeal? Heck, the Cardinals have FAR greater national appeal than the Cubs and they don’t even get mentioned.

I'm a diehard White Sox that loathes everything about the Cubs. But, YES, the Cubs absolutely are massive draws when they are anywhere close to semi-competitive. The hitch, of course, is that they are famously not competitive for long stretches of time. The Cardinals absolutely don't have greater national appeal - they might have the most loyal fan base (the equivalent of, say, Nebraska football fans), but the interest in them doesn't extend very far beyond their home region (outside of Cardinal fan transplants). Look back at the TV ratings from 2003-04 and 2007-08 when the Cubs were actually in contention at the same time as the Yankees and Red Sox - they were every bit as much of a national draw (and, in fact, those are literally the only three MLB franchises that matter from a national TV perspective). And I say that as someone that can't stand the Cubs or their obnoxious fans.

Hahahaha! I used to follow the Cubs heavily when I gave a damn about Baseball but when I stopped playing I stopped caring about the game.

You are absolutely correct about the depth and breadth of Cub Nation. You can see it in affect at their away games. I live in Arizona now and their Cactus League operations are some of the most heavily attended of all teams. That means travel and money spent.

I am sure you wont wish to admit it Frank but generally speaking, the Cub following in Chicago is more affluent than the Sox following.

The Cubs absolutely have The most loyal following of fans in all of Major League Baseball.

All of the above are why Sox fans hate the Cubs so much. It is a great in city rivalry.

(08-07-2013 04:53 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Hahahaha! I used to follow the Cubs heavily when I gave a damn about Baseball but when I stopped playing I stopped caring about the game.

You are absolutely correct about the depth and breadth of Cub Nation. You can see it in affect at their away games. I live in Arizona now and their Cactus League operations are some of the most heavily attended of all teams. That means travel and money spent.

I am sure you wont wish to admit it Frank but generally speaking, the Cub following in Chicago is more affluent than the Sox following.

The Cubs absolutely have The most loyal following of fans in all of Major League Baseball.

All of the above are why Sox fans hate the Cubs so much. It is a great in city rivalry.

Oh yes, the Cubs have a larger and more affluent fan base. Their stadium is situated in the middle of probably the densest concentration of yuppies of any place in the country (and like what seems to be the case of 90% of all Big Ten grads, I lived in that area coming out of school despite my White Sox fandom since that's where young grads want to live in Chicago).

I'll give credit where credit is due: the Cubs are the only team in baseball besides maybe the Red Sox that would still be drawing 35,000 per game with the way that the Cubs are playing right now. That doesn't make Cubs fans smart, but they'll continue to buy tickets both at Wrigley and on the road (as you've seen in Arizona).

(08-07-2013 05:02 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 04:53 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Hahahaha! I used to follow the Cubs heavily when I gave a damn about Baseball but when I stopped playing I stopped caring about the game.

You are absolutely correct about the depth and breadth of Cub Nation. You can see it in affect at their away games. I live in Arizona now and their Cactus League operations are some of the most heavily attended of all teams. That means travel and money spent.

I am sure you wont wish to admit it Frank but generally speaking, the Cub following in Chicago is more affluent than the Sox following.

The Cubs absolutely have The most loyal following of fans in all of Major League Baseball.

All of the above are why Sox fans hate the Cubs so much. It is a great in city rivalry.

Oh yes, the Cubs have a larger and more affluent fan base. Their stadium is situated in the middle of probably the densest concentration of yuppies of any place in the country (and like what seems to be the case of 90% of all Big Ten grads, I lived in that area coming out of school despite my White Sox fandom since that's where young grads want to live in Chicago).

I'll give credit where credit is due: the Cubs are the only team in baseball besides maybe the Red Sox that would still be drawing 35,000 per game with the way that the Cubs are playing right now. That doesn't make Cubs fans smart, but they'll continue to buy tickets both at Wrigley and on the road (as you've seen in Arizona).

It really isn't all about the Cubs. Their local following absolutely is partly due to the experience of Wrigleyville. I don't follow baseball anymore but I could be talked into going to a Cubs game because the real good time is after the ball game.

Once you have experienced that, it does bring about a very endearing quality not just about the Cubs but about the entire culture surrounding them there in Chicago.

Are there a bunch of yuppies there? Yes but that is not the entirety of where the Cubs find their support. Just wanted to clarify that for those reading so that they don't just take the word of a Sox fan on that.

(08-07-2013 02:33 PM)Tiger8589 Wrote:  Does anyone have HARD evidence that the Cubs carry national interest when playing well? I only ask because that would be like what? Once every 20 years, the sample size would be so small it would be worthless. To lump the Cubs or to even mention them in the same sentence as the Yankees and Red Sox is beyond laughable. STOP! Take a seat and think about that just for a minute…Yankees/Red Sox/Cubs, which one of those don’t belong in terms on national appeal? Heck, the Cardinals have FAR greater national appeal than the Cubs and they don’t even get mentioned.


Fact, no matter how anyone spins it the rating are down year over year for the same time frame. Its inevitable BSPiN has and is going to continue to loose market share (overall)...how much remains to be seen. Nobody here can tell anyone how much or when everything settles in long term for (1) nobody has the detailed market research in addition to the internals of what the focus groups have had to say about BSPiN/NBCSN/FOX Sports1 (2) attempting to predict long term trends of the sports consumer is not as easy as some may think (3) there is most certainly a large segment of the sports consumer that is unhappy and thinks BSPIN has turned into a mix of sports/politics/hip-hop/over hype and that’s something they simply are just tired of and think BSPiN should just stick with sports…has anyone noticed all the promotion of the new FOX Sports 1 has been completely absent of Hip Hop influence, this is calculated to be sure….just for the record I have nothing against Hip Hop, just making an observation (4) this is just anecdotal evidence which is meaningless but I use a ton of different sources for sports and news (as I'm sure everybody does)and I think I can say this with great confidence, when reading fan comments and such the overwhelming majority are ALWAYS bashing BSPiN, and this includes the top 10 sports sites. (4) BSPiN has alienated a large segment of sports fans by veering off into other areas, how that plays out long term no one can tell and if they act like they can they are basically full of BS. (5) people use your brains, this isn’t rocket science and a first grader could figure out if you have Zero competition you control the message, narrative and the ratings……if you have three different players and all have MASSIVE resources with a world class marketing arm to reach the consumers it kind of stands to reason the so called dominate player is going to lose market share…and this doesn’t even factor in the RSN’s which are incredibly valuable assets, some of these RSN’s are destination channels.


Disney/BSPIN has an incredible line up of properties, second to none in cable.

But you can’t just dismiss what they don’t have as being meaningless of not worthy of attention to the avid and casual sports consumer.

What they don’t have or share

The NFL is dominated by the other networks *****
The Summer Olympics *****
The Winter Olympics *****
NHL *****
The Stanley Cup *****
Shares MLB *****
MLB playoffs and World Series *****
Currently shares NBA with TNT *****
Notre Dame FB home games *****
Shares Big 12 football *****
Shares Big 12 basketball *****
Shares PAC 12 football *****
Shares Pac 12 basketball *****
Shares NASCAR (but is about to be frozen out of all three series) *****
Big East basketball *****
All kinds of major international soccer leagues and championships
The Triple Crown *****
Tour De France
Shares the PGA
The French open *****
The Masters *****
NCAA March Madness *****
UFC



And this doesn’t even figure in the close to 40 RSN’s, most carry NBA/MLB and when I say that I mean they each carry a TON NBA/MLB of the regional teams, which in some cases are incredibly popular for these regions and are ratings bonanza’s for the RSN’s.


Always remember Disney has share holders. That’s why we have seen the 200 plus layoffs at BSPiN, the shuttering of the BSPiN 3D operation, walking away from NASCAR once the deal expires….BSPiN does not have unlimited resources like some might think. The NBA is more important to them than NASCAR and just guessing they can’t have both in this competitive world (which is new to them) so the saving from not renewing NASCAR goes to retaining or sharing the NBA (probably sharing) and trying to get at least a piece of the BIG10 when it comes up. Personally I think both the NBA (with either NBC or FOX) and the Big 10 (with Fox) are going to be shared with BSPiN. But it wouldn’t surprise me at all if FOX gets the Big 10 outright.


So it’s true most everything with the exception of the NBA/Playoffs and Big10 are locked up long term. But, what’s also true is these two exceptions are HUGE and could have monumental impact in shaping things long term if either FOX/NBC gets a piece of one or each. For some reason this is either ignored or just goes unnoticed. If either NBCSN or FOX Sports gets at a minimum a piece of each or one outright and a piece of the other THEN WE ARE TALKING GAME CHANGER on a diffeerent level than anything we see currently. It’s far from certain and probably not very likely Disney doesn’t at a minimum end up sharing the NBA and the NBA Playoffs, same deal with the BIG 10. If they end up sharing anything it’s not going to be like Disney clearly gets the lions share of all the top programming either, more likely to be more of a even deal. Also be mindful of what Disney paid for the new college FB playoff and the other 3 or 4 bowls, this was a truly staggering amount of money for so few hours of programming, this also probably factored in heavily in walking away from NASCAR. So again they do not have unlimited resources, remember they shared the Big12/Pac12 with FOX. If Disney gets both the NBA/Big 10 outright good for them and bad for FOX/NBC, however the odds of that are slim when you have both FOX/NBC with the resources to put the brakes on that from EVER HAPPENING.


Ever heard of that word triangulation…..that could be the FOX Sports 10 year plan.


Keep your eye on the ball people. Follow short and long term trends and pay attention for yourself. AND ALWAYS REMEMBER THE SENIOR MANAGEMENT ON DOWN AT DISNEY/NBC/FOX KNOWS A LOT MORE THAN WE DO AND THEY ARE ALL ARMED WITH THE MARKET RESEARCH AND HARD NUMBERS THAT WE ARE NOT PRIVY TO. THESE ARE THE PEOPLE MAKING DECISIONS AND ALLOCATING RESOURCES BASED ON INFORMATION THEY AND ONLY THEY HAVE. IT’S EASY FOR MESSAGE BOARD POSTERS TO SPEND OTHER PEOPLES MONEY AND SCOUR THE INTERNET FOR STORIES TO SUPPORT ANY THEORY EITHER PRO OR CON. YOU KNOW HOW THE NFL HAS ARM CHAIR QB’S? THE MESSAGE BOARD COMMUNITY HAS ARM CHAIR CEO’S…HA-HA!
THE DEAL WITH NBC AND FOX IS A MARATHON, of course I know most can’t see or refuse to look at anything long term.

Every poll I've seen has the Cubs as the #3 team among baseball fans behind the Yankees & Red Sox. And that's without a World Series appearance since 1945, or a World Championship since 1908.

Pretty remarkable.

(08-07-2013 01:08 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 12:36 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  The flagship station is pretty much talking-head nonsense when there isn't a sporting event aired. Seriously...between airing what you can hear on the radio, or watching the theme and variation chat shows, it's literally nothing...

...and then after it airs on ESPN, it repeats on "The Deuce."

I pine for the days when they used to fill in their slots with all sorts of random programming, like Magic: The Gathering tournaments. As bad as those were ("He plays a...HOWLING MINE!!!"), they kept it on the actual event...not the interpretation.

This might be all true, but it isn't what is causing the ratings decline (as much as some people wish it were to be the case in order to slam ESPN's talking head shows). Instead, it's simply the lower number of quality ratings-drawing events compared to last year. If anything, the lower ratings numbers are actually giving ESPN more ammunition against another common fan complaint, which is that ESPN concentrates too much on the marquee teams like the Yankees, Heat, Lakers, Cowboys, etc. The ratings this summer are bearing out to show that America truly isn't as interested in watching plucky small market teams like the Spurs and Pirates no matter how good they might be competitively (even though a lot of sports fans *say* that they are tired of the talk about the Yankees and Lakers), so ESPN is showing that it makes perfect business sense to pimp the most popular teams as much as possible to draw in the largest number of viewers.

I wouldn't totally jump to these conclusions. Nothing gets aired without sponsorship. And production cost factors. The break-downs and miscues therein...

They're just overly obsessed with synergy over there. Stuffing segments of Sportscenter to promote other ESPN material, product-to-program integration, etc. It's good business to air material that will get the same ratings and share as other material but simply cost less. It's not good business (or good ethics) to air material that will draw less but costs less. I *HATE* that they air their radio programs on the main station. Cheap thrills. Self-generated hype. Sports interlaced in there somewhere...

What ESPN is doing, MTV was over a decade ago. Having tracked media and advertising, that's what makes ESPN so bad to me. It's been done, MTV got thumped for doing it, but you can't tell Disney how to run its business!

(08-07-2013 05:42 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 05:02 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 04:53 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Hahahaha! I used to follow the Cubs heavily when I gave a damn about Baseball but when I stopped playing I stopped caring about the game.

You are absolutely correct about the depth and breadth of Cub Nation. You can see it in affect at their away games. I live in Arizona now and their Cactus League operations are some of the most heavily attended of all teams. That means travel and money spent.

I am sure you wont wish to admit it Frank but generally speaking, the Cub following in Chicago is more affluent than the Sox following.

The Cubs absolutely have The most loyal following of fans in all of Major League Baseball.

All of the above are why Sox fans hate the Cubs so much. It is a great in city rivalry.

Oh yes, the Cubs have a larger and more affluent fan base. Their stadium is situated in the middle of probably the densest concentration of yuppies of any place in the country (and like what seems to be the case of 90% of all Big Ten grads, I lived in that area coming out of school despite my White Sox fandom since that's where young grads want to live in Chicago).

I'll give credit where credit is due: the Cubs are the only team in baseball besides maybe the Red Sox that would still be drawing 35,000 per game with the way that the Cubs are playing right now. That doesn't make Cubs fans smart, but they'll continue to buy tickets both at Wrigley and on the road (as you've seen in Arizona).

It really isn't all about the Cubs. Their local following absolutely is partly due to the experience of Wrigleyville. I don't follow baseball anymore but I could be talked into going to a Cubs game because the real good time is after the ball game.

Once you have experienced that, it does bring about a very endearing quality not just about the Cubs but about the entire culture surrounding them there in Chicago.

Are there a bunch of yuppies there? Yes but that is not the entirety of where the Cubs find their support. Just wanted to clarify that for those reading so that they don't just take the word of a Sox fan on that.

I am old enough to remember when Wrigley Field used to be empty when the Cubs played. You could just walk in that dump and get a seat anywhere. All you could hear were those exploding plastic that people used to stomp on to amuse themselves while the Cubs were taking another vicious and severe butt kicking. Thank God for Bill Madlock, Dave Kingman, Fergie Jenkins, Rick Monday and Manny Trilljo.

(08-07-2013 09:05 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 05:42 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 05:02 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 04:53 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Hahahaha! I used to follow the Cubs heavily when I gave a damn about Baseball but when I stopped playing I stopped caring about the game.

You are absolutely correct about the depth and breadth of Cub Nation. You can see it in affect at their away games. I live in Arizona now and their Cactus League operations are some of the most heavily attended of all teams. That means travel and money spent.

I am sure you wont wish to admit it Frank but generally speaking, the Cub following in Chicago is more affluent than the Sox following.

The Cubs absolutely have The most loyal following of fans in all of Major League Baseball.

All of the above are why Sox fans hate the Cubs so much. It is a great in city rivalry.

Oh yes, the Cubs have a larger and more affluent fan base. Their stadium is situated in the middle of probably the densest concentration of yuppies of any place in the country (and like what seems to be the case of 90% of all Big Ten grads, I lived in that area coming out of school despite my White Sox fandom since that's where young grads want to live in Chicago).

I'll give credit where credit is due: the Cubs are the only team in baseball besides maybe the Red Sox that would still be drawing 35,000 per game with the way that the Cubs are playing right now. That doesn't make Cubs fans smart, but they'll continue to buy tickets both at Wrigley and on the road (as you've seen in Arizona).

It really isn't all about the Cubs. Their local following absolutely is partly due to the experience of Wrigleyville. I don't follow baseball anymore but I could be talked into going to a Cubs game because the real good time is after the ball game.

Once you have experienced that, it does bring about a very endearing quality not just about the Cubs but about the entire culture surrounding them there in Chicago.

Are there a bunch of yuppies there? Yes but that is not the entirety of where the Cubs find their support. Just wanted to clarify that for those reading so that they don't just take the word of a Sox fan on that.

I am old enough to remember when Wrigley Field used to be empty when the Cubs played. You could just walk in that dump and get a seat anywhere. All you could hear were those exploding plastic that people used to stomp on to amuse themselves while the Cubs were taking another vicious and severe butt kicking. Thank God for Bill Madlock, Dave Kingman, Fergie Jenkins, Rick Monday and Manny Trilljo.

Daaaaaaaaaamn!!!

(08-07-2013 11:30 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 11:11 AM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  No major live sports expect baseball = low ratings. Pretty common sense really.

So, with apologies to all the fans of teams like the Pirates, Rays, Tigers, A's and Orioles out there, the dearth of marquee MLB franchises playing well is a drag on ratings for ESPN, Fox and TBS this year. People are NOT tuning out ESPN simply because it's ESPN.

They aren't even broadcasting those teams.

(08-07-2013 09:05 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 05:42 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 05:02 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 04:53 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Hahahaha! I used to follow the Cubs heavily when I gave a damn about Baseball but when I stopped playing I stopped caring about the game.

You are absolutely correct about the depth and breadth of Cub Nation. You can see it in affect at their away games. I live in Arizona now and their Cactus League operations are some of the most heavily attended of all teams. That means travel and money spent.

I am sure you wont wish to admit it Frank but generally speaking, the Cub following in Chicago is more affluent than the Sox following.

The Cubs absolutely have The most loyal following of fans in all of Major League Baseball.

All of the above are why Sox fans hate the Cubs so much. It is a great in city rivalry.

Oh yes, the Cubs have a larger and more affluent fan base. Their stadium is situated in the middle of probably the densest concentration of yuppies of any place in the country (and like what seems to be the case of 90% of all Big Ten grads, I lived in that area coming out of school despite my White Sox fandom since that's where young grads want to live in Chicago).

I'll give credit where credit is due: the Cubs are the only team in baseball besides maybe the Red Sox that would still be drawing 35,000 per game with the way that the Cubs are playing right now. That doesn't make Cubs fans smart, but they'll continue to buy tickets both at Wrigley and on the road (as you've seen in Arizona).

It really isn't all about the Cubs. Their local following absolutely is partly due to the experience of Wrigleyville. I don't follow baseball anymore but I could be talked into going to a Cubs game because the real good time is after the ball game.

Once you have experienced that, it does bring about a very endearing quality not just about the Cubs but about the entire culture surrounding them there in Chicago.

Are there a bunch of yuppies there? Yes but that is not the entirety of where the Cubs find their support. Just wanted to clarify that for those reading so that they don't just take the word of a Sox fan on that.

I am old enough to remember when Wrigley Field used to be empty when the Cubs played. You could just walk in that dump and get a seat anywhere. All you could hear were those exploding plastic that people used to stomp on to amuse themselves while the Cubs were taking another vicious and severe butt kicking. Thank God for Bill Madlock, Dave Kingman, Fergie Jenkins, Rick Monday and Manny Trilljo.

I was in Chicago in the late 1960's. My first game was right behind the Cub dugout in 1968. I was just 7, but I died when the Cubs fell off a cliff in 1969.

Banks, Williams, Santo, Jenkins, Kessinger, Beckert, Hundley, etc. Four Hall of Famers. The best team in baseball history not to win a championship of any kind.

(08-07-2013 09:28 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 09:05 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 05:42 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 05:02 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 04:53 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Hahahaha! I used to follow the Cubs heavily when I gave a damn about Baseball but when I stopped playing I stopped caring about the game.

You are absolutely correct about the depth and breadth of Cub Nation. You can see it in affect at their away games. I live in Arizona now and their Cactus League operations are some of the most heavily attended of all teams. That means travel and money spent.

I am sure you wont wish to admit it Frank but generally speaking, the Cub following in Chicago is more affluent than the Sox following.

The Cubs absolutely have The most loyal following of fans in all of Major League Baseball.

All of the above are why Sox fans hate the Cubs so much. It is a great in city rivalry.

Oh yes, the Cubs have a larger and more affluent fan base. Their stadium is situated in the middle of probably the densest concentration of yuppies of any place in the country (and like what seems to be the case of 90% of all Big Ten grads, I lived in that area coming out of school despite my White Sox fandom since that's where young grads want to live in Chicago).

I'll give credit where credit is due: the Cubs are the only team in baseball besides maybe the Red Sox that would still be drawing 35,000 per game with the way that the Cubs are playing right now. That doesn't make Cubs fans smart, but they'll continue to buy tickets both at Wrigley and on the road (as you've seen in Arizona).

It really isn't all about the Cubs. Their local following absolutely is partly due to the experience of Wrigleyville. I don't follow baseball anymore but I could be talked into going to a Cubs game because the real good time is after the ball game.

Once you have experienced that, it does bring about a very endearing quality not just about the Cubs but about the entire culture surrounding them there in Chicago.

Are there a bunch of yuppies there? Yes but that is not the entirety of where the Cubs find their support. Just wanted to clarify that for those reading so that they don't just take the word of a Sox fan on that.

I am old enough to remember when Wrigley Field used to be empty when the Cubs played. You could just walk in that dump and get a seat anywhere. All you could hear were those exploding plastic that people used to stomp on to amuse themselves while the Cubs were taking another vicious and severe butt kicking. Thank God for Bill Madlock, Dave Kingman, Fergie Jenkins, Rick Monday and Manny Trilljo.

Daaaaaaaaaamn!!!

It is not even that long ago. The Cubs didn't become that popular until the Tribune Company launched WGN nationally back in the 1980's as a Super station. Before that national launching only real Cubs fans even bothered watching the Cubs on television locally and only real gluttons for punishment even dared going to Wrigley Field to watch Jack Schmidt, Willie Stargell, the Big Red machine and the Cardinals just beat the living Hell out of the Cubs. I am not joking when I write this, but Bill Madlock was literally the Cubs only bright spot between 1969 and 1984; and he got the Hell out of town around 1977 after he won his second batting title. The real kick in the nads was that he was raised in Decatur, Illinois and he chose going to Pittsburgh over staying in Chicago. True enough Pittsburgh was good in those days, but it also showed just how much the Cubs sucked and still do.

(08-07-2013 10:06 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 09:05 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 05:42 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 05:02 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 04:53 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Hahahaha! I used to follow the Cubs heavily when I gave a damn about Baseball but when I stopped playing I stopped caring about the game.

You are absolutely correct about the depth and breadth of Cub Nation. You can see it in affect at their away games. I live in Arizona now and their Cactus League operations are some of the most heavily attended of all teams. That means travel and money spent.

I am sure you wont wish to admit it Frank but generally speaking, the Cub following in Chicago is more affluent than the Sox following.

The Cubs absolutely have The most loyal following of fans in all of Major League Baseball.

All of the above are why Sox fans hate the Cubs so much. It is a great in city rivalry.

Oh yes, the Cubs have a larger and more affluent fan base. Their stadium is situated in the middle of probably the densest concentration of yuppies of any place in the country (and like what seems to be the case of 90% of all Big Ten grads, I lived in that area coming out of school despite my White Sox fandom since that's where young grads want to live in Chicago).

I'll give credit where credit is due: the Cubs are the only team in baseball besides maybe the Red Sox that would still be drawing 35,000 per game with the way that the Cubs are playing right now. That doesn't make Cubs fans smart, but they'll continue to buy tickets both at Wrigley and on the road (as you've seen in Arizona).

It really isn't all about the Cubs. Their local following absolutely is partly due to the experience of Wrigleyville. I don't follow baseball anymore but I could be talked into going to a Cubs game because the real good time is after the ball game.

Once you have experienced that, it does bring about a very endearing quality not just about the Cubs but about the entire culture surrounding them there in Chicago.

Are there a bunch of yuppies there? Yes but that is not the entirety of where the Cubs find their support. Just wanted to clarify that for those reading so that they don't just take the word of a Sox fan on that.

I am old enough to remember when Wrigley Field used to be empty when the Cubs played. You could just walk in that dump and get a seat anywhere. All you could hear were those exploding plastic that people used to stomp on to amuse themselves while the Cubs were taking another vicious and severe butt kicking. Thank God for Bill Madlock, Dave Kingman, Fergie Jenkins, Rick Monday and Manny Trilljo.

I was in Chicago in the late 1960's. My first game was right behind the Cub dugout in 1968. I was just 7, but I died when the Cubs fell off a cliff in 1969.

Banks, Williams, Santo, Jenkins, Kessinger, Beckert, Hundley, etc. Four Hall of Famers. The best team in baseball history not to win a championship of any kind.

My pops was a great Cardinals fan and before he passed away he always mentioned that 1969 Cubs team as the greatest collapse in sports history. That fellow would just laugh and laugh about that season; and he always said that it was payback because the Cubs were stupid enough to trade Lou Brock to the Cardinals, who oddly enough turned into a Hall of Fame player with the Cardinals.