Why is length of games so important?

All I'm hearing is how the length of games in MLB is a tremendous concern and the top priority of the new commissioner, Manfred, is to find ways to reduce the time of games. I personally don't understand this concern. As much as it costs to see a game these days, I don't feel like I got my money's worth when a game flies by and ends in 2 1/2 hours. I like as long an experience as possible to get more bang for my buck. Even better if it goes extra innings. Now I understand I may be in the minority as I live five hours away and don't get to see that many games. I might see things differently if I were a season ticket holder and went to every home game. Or if things were like they were in the good old days. I remember being able to buy bleacher seats at Memorial Stadium for under a buck. These days, it costs $200 or more to take your family to a game and have decent seats so I want my money's worth.

All I'm hearing is how the length of games in MLB is a tremendous concern and the top priority of the new commissioner, Manfred, is to find ways to reduce the time of games. I personally don't understand this concern. As much as it costs to see a game these days, I don't feel like I got my money's worth when a game flies by and ends in 2 1/2 hours. I like as long an experience as possible to get more bang for my buck. Even better if it goes extra innings. Now I understand I may be in the minority as I live five hours away and don't get to see that many games. I might see things differently if I were a season ticket holder and went to every home game. Or if things were like they were in the good old days. I remember being able to buy bleacher seats at Memorial Stadium for under a buck. These days, it costs $200 or more to take your family to a game and have decent seats so I want my money's worth.

It could be six hours for me. I'd still enjoy it. Television would like it around three hours for national scheduling.

It could be six hours for me. I'd still enjoy it. Television would like it around three hours for national scheduling.

Me too. More baseball! Like the phrase from the movie Vanilla Sky, "pleasure delayed."

I do see where quicker games would bring in more casual fans though. And more revenue yada yada...

Twice as many commercials and an increasing number of irrelevant ceremonies disrupting the rhythm of the game. That's different from getting more baseball for your buck.

That's what she said

Twice as many commercials and an increasing number of irrelevant ceremonies disrupting the rhythm of the game. That's different from getting more baseball for your buck.

Longer commercials too, in the post season. I heard pitchers are done with their warmups, standing waiting for the ok for the inning to start.

Twice as many commercials and an increasing number of irrelevant ceremonies disrupting the rhythm of the game. That's different from getting more baseball for your buck.

I'm not talking about postseason games. We all know the extended postseason games are a joke. I'm talking about MLB wanting to speed up regular season games. Saying they want the pitcher to throw a pitch every so many seconds and saying they want to eliminate the batter stepping out of the batter's box between pitches, etc.

I'm with you on the original post. Between innings, I socialize with the folks who are with me at the game. That's part of the in-person experience for me as well. If watching on TV, there's plenty to do here between innings. For games I watch a tad behind, I fast forward through the commercials till I'm caught up on my DVR. I can't get enough as I generally try to catch most of O's Extra before and after the game and the WBAL postgame with Tom Davis (see my screen name) and Dave Johnson is a must for me.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

I don't have a problem with the time of game.

The way I understand the effort to shorten the game its to have a faster pace game to attract younger fans. They are used to football which is fast paced. The effort is to take the down time of time between pitches and relievers coming into the game to a minimum.

I don't have a problem with the time of game.

The way I understand the effort to shorten the game its to have a faster pace game to attract younger fans. They are used to football which is fast paced. The effort is to take the down time of time between pitches and relievers coming into the game to a minimum.

Makes sense to want to speed the game up to attract younger fans. But as specialized as the game has become, I don't know what they can do about relievers coming in to a game.

I'm with you on the original post. Between innings, I socialize with the folks who are with me at the game. That's part of the in-person experience for me as well. If watching on TV, there's plenty to do here between innings. For games I watch a tad behind, I fast forward through the commercials till I'm caught up on my DVR. I can't get enough as I generally try to catch most of O's Extra before and after the game and the WBAL postgame with Tom Davis (see my screen name) and Dave Johnson is a must for me.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

Last game I was at the gentleman next to me DID NOT want to socialize. Kind of ticked me off. That's part of the fun as far as I know. Plus, games in person always seem to go by faster, either way it doesn't matter to me! The more baseball, the better!

It probably doesn't matter to us. But, of course, we are posting on an Orioles site, watch extra inning games in Seattle that end at 3 AM, mortgage our house for playoff tickets and memorabilia. So, I don't really know that we are the people that MLB is targeting. We would watch the games if they cost twice as much and lasted twice as long.

I think it is not so much speeding up the game, but adding quality. Watching EVERY hitter in MLB get out of the box EVERY pitch and go through the Mike Hargrove routine of fixing gloves, etc. is just dumb. Having to wait for managers now to run out on the field to stall while their guy somewhere is looking at video for replay is just dumb. Pitchers who wait, wait, shake off, then have the catcher run out so they can talk into their gloves (and when did that dumb habit start? Is there some lip reading guy with a telescope somewhere?). Quality is important. If it reduces the overall time of games, fine.

I'm not talking about postseason games. We all know the extended postseason games are a joke. I'm talking about MLB wanting to speed up regular season games. Saying they want the pitcher to throw a pitch every so many seconds and saying they want to eliminate the batter stepping out of the batter's box between pitches, etc.

Count me as someone who wants the game speeded up. There are only about 15 minutes of actual action in a baseball game (fact), and prolonging the time between pitches with batters stepping out and fiddling with their batting gloves and pitchers wandering around off the mound is a complete bore. That stuff adds nothing to the game.

I know it won't happen but if they would get rid of the challenges and replays it would knock off around 10 to 15 minutes a game. I'd rather complain about the Ump than sit through that.

I know it won't happen but if they would get rid of the challenges and replays it would knock off around 10 to 15 minutes a game. I'd rather complain about the Ump than sit through that.

I don't agree at all. I think the challenges and replays are handled quickly and efficiently. The average challenge takes 1 minute 48 seconds, and there are only about .48 challenges a game. http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/has-expanded-replay-worked-well-in-baseball-heres-our-call/ That's pretty negligible, and in my opinion, the old method of having the manager come out and just argue for the sake of arguing took longer, and was largely pointless.