Jump to content

Will the fans show?


Todd-O

Recommended Posts

o

I understand what Powell is saying, and I agree with his overall point ........ but his memory is inaccurate if he indeed said that

When Powell was playing, drawing 1 Million fans in a year was considered a general mark of respectability.

In 1979 ........ 5 years after Powell was traded to the Indians, and 2 years after he retired ........ the Orioles drew the most that they had in their history ...... 1.681 Million.

These are the Orioles' attendance figures between 1966 and 1974, when Powell and his teammates were at the height of their glory:

1966: ) 1.2 Million

1967: ) 955,000 (Less than a Million)

1968: ) 943,000 (less than a Million)

1969: ) 1.062 Million

1970: ) 1.057 Million

1971: ) 1.023 Million

1972: ) 899,000 (Less than a Million, 154-game season due to the Players Strike)

1973: ) 958,000 (Less than a Million)

1974: ) 1.002 Million (Barely over a Million)

Great work, as usual, Patrick. What is striking to me is that the city's population was probably higher then and the per capita income adjusted for inflation was probably higher too. So the 1960's - 1970's Baltimore area fans had even less excuse to attend than today's fans. Yet....the team won, because they trotted out a steady stream of HOF's and All Stars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
o

I understand what Powell is saying, and I agree with his overall point ........ but his memory is inaccurate if he indeed said that.

When Powell was playing, drawing 1 Million fans in a year was considered a general mark of respectability.

In 1979 ........ 5 years after Powell was traded to the Indians, and 2 years after he retired ........ the Orioles drew the most fans that they ever had in their history in Baltimore since 1954 ...... 1.681 Million.

These are the Orioles' attendance figures between 1966 and 1974, when Powell and his teammates were at the height of their glory:

1966: ) 1.2 Million

1967: ) 955,000 (Less than a Million)

1968: ) 943,000 (less than a Million)

1969: ) 1.062 Million

1970: ) 1.057 Million

1971: ) 1.023 Million

1972: ) 899,000 (Less than a Million, 154-game season due to the Players Strike)

1973: ) 958,000 (Less than a Million)

1974: ) 1.002 Million (Barely over a Million)

Actually, I think it was my memory that was fuzzy and couldn't remember whether he said one million or two million. So I went with the high number. I pulled that from my memory of a show I saw one time over 20yrs ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they need a packed house to perform their jobs to the best of their ability then they all need to do a little self reflecting after the season. Take a little pride in what you do and play your tail off... and that should be the case whether it's empty or packed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe with better crowd support they'd be doing better. Yes, I'm serious. It must be very deflating to have a 6-3 road trip, beating Detroit and Boston, and then find out that your fans aren't coming out to support you in critical games.

I don't totally disagree with you, as I believe some fan energy could've helped, but I must say I'm disappointed with Adam bringing this up like this. I don't even think his comments were at all egregious, but this team is busy choking away, just hemorrhaging away a playoff berth, and they are whining about fans? I get it, as I've posted a lot about our fans sucking, but the only thing that has been worse than the fan support has been the play this miserable homestand.

I'd like him to worry about solving David Price tomorrow, and maybe salvaging a win. Not this BS.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't totally disagree with you, as I believe some fan energy could've helped, but I must say I'm disappointed with Adam bringing this up like this. I don't even think his comments were at all egregious, but this team is busy choking away, just hemorrhaging away a playoff berth, and they are whining about fans? I get it, as I've posted a lot about our fans sucking, but the only thing that has been worse than the fan support has been the play this miserable homestand.

I'd like him to worry about solving David Price tomorrow, and maybe salvaging a win. Not this BS.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Tell me having a 6-3 road trip is choking? No one showed op after that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




  • Posts

    • Not that I am in any way full agreement, but this is a classic post.  Doesn't Machado play chess?  Maybe we could get some chess boards in the clubhouse and junk all the legos.  Not all great baseball men are John McGraw bad asses.  Some can be Christy Mathewsons as well, I suppose.  Not that I imagine today's young players much resembling McGraw or Mathewson, but they are the first two contrasting old school types that come to mind.  I will say just based on his postseason alone I'd much rather have Tatis over Machado.
    • Well I refuse to believe that only the O's have no players that want extensions.
    • Customer advocate groups have tried for decades to force the cable companies to allow channel by channel (a la carte) subscriptions, but the cable companies fought this because it would result in far less revenue (than forcing us to pay for a hundred channels we don't watch).  The government refused to intervene, so we've been stuck with the existing business model for all this time.  Streaming is forcing the change because streaming -- for now -- is an a la carte model.   MLB's fear must be this: if the regional sports network cable channel model goes away, will most users pay anywhere close to what these channels made as part of a cable bundle for just one streaming channel where all you watch are Orioles games (or maybe Orioles and Nats games -- whatever the case may be)?  So if you pay $100/month for cable with MASN, you are probably watching at least a few other channels too.  But will you pay $15/month (or whatever the price may be) just to watch the Orioles -- even during the months when there is no baseball?  The existing basic cable model has been quite stable because people tend to watch at least 5 or 6 channels.  They're reluctant to cancel their whole cable package just because baseball season is over -- or they've been too busy to watch many games this season.  But with a single streaming channel of just baseball there is bound to be a far more unstable revenue base.  All the streaming channels are already dealing with this problem.  I think MLB is maybe reluctant to go all in on streaming for this reason.  Perhaps they're looking for new different model that could allow them to bundle individual team channels with Netflix, or Prime, or maybe with your cell phone plan or something else.  This could give them some stability, but it could also be a turn off for the more hardcore fans who just want the Orioles and little else.  It will be interesting to see how this all shakes out and if MLB, and the Orioles, will prosper or suffer as a result.
    • What if they don’t want to be extended?
    • I don't want the O's to lose much, but I do want there to be a massive streaming deal with Amazon or some other company the O's are left out of.  This blackout nonsense is bullsh!t. 🤬
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...