Jump to content

MLB looking into starting the season in MAY


Uli2001

Recommended Posts

I get that this seems really strange, because it is.  But the reasoning is that getting paid something is better than not getting paid at all.  Some revenues from TV are better than no revenues at all.  The complications are many, including what happens when a team has multiple players who get the virus and need to be quarantined?  That seems pretty likely.

We hear all kinds of stories of pro athletes being bankrupt within a short amount of time after being out of the league.  You know that there are MLB players who essentially live paycheck to paycheck, counting on their salary to pay for their $2M house and the house they bought for their mom and house they bought for their best buddy, and the $2500 a month for their Aston Martin, and the attendant for their pet tiger.  That's the kind of guy who wants to play in front of no fans in Arizona. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If, and this is a big unknown if, IF the games are televised to the HOME RSNs, MASN YES NESN etc., then I'm all for it.

Butts in front of screens means revenue for the league and the teams. Means the players get PAID. It's all FAR from ideal but it is what it is in these strange days.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, scOtt said:

If, and this is a big unknown if, IF the games are televised to the HOME RSNs, MASN YES NESN etc., then I'm all for it.

I think TV would be the whole point. Would get the league some revenue and give us fans some entertainment while we are still in semi-lockdown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, scOtt said:

If, and this is a big unknown if, IF the games are televised to the HOME RSNs, MASN YES NESN etc., then I'm all for it.

Butts in front of screens means revenue for the league and the teams. Means the players get PAID. It's all FAR from ideal but it is what it is in these strange days.

 

 

Without a doubt they are televised.  Production quality may be unknown.  Maybe a camera behind home plate that doesn't move like college teams and maybe one or two cameramen controlling established cameras remotely or on-site.  My guess is it would be one camera crew covering the game and it would have announcers remotely.  This is done with Olympics and European soccer games.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Enjoy Terror said:

I just wonder what happens when you start throwing 26+ in a locker room and someone picks up the virus? Like, say the Yankees have Gleyber, Cole, Tanaka, and four members of the bullpen get this thing.... do the Yankees still play games?

If it's the Yanks or Sox I think the only correct options are to have them use minor league players or forfeit.  Anyone else they just postpone the games.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, jarman86 said:

Without a doubt they are televised.  Production quality may be unknown.  Maybe a camera behind home plate that doesn't move like college teams and maybe one or two cameramen controlling established cameras remotely or on-site.  My guess is it would be one camera crew covering the game and it would have announcers remotely.  This is done with Olympics and European soccer games.  

I just came up with the greatest idea ever: Have Tom Davis roam around the empty stadium, giving the out-of-town scores and pretending to steal the non-existent people's food like it's a bizarro version of HTS in 1989.

  • Upvote 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone watched late night shows without audiences?? It has largely failed. Comedians, entertainers, pro athletes etc need a live audience for it to be enjoyable. The games will be nothing more than a scrimmage, get 'er done, adios. Players get paid, teams will get T revenue. Baseball (and other team sports) are not exactly good role models for hygiene. Spitting, throwing drinks, gum, etc around, and some poor dugout guy cleans up their shit. Social distancing?? These guys away from family are not going to sit in a hotel room and watch TV. A dozen or so games in AZ each day, night..... I think temps are commonly in the upper 90's +.  As Enjoy Terror said, what if a team member tests positive? Do you really think he is likely to be the only positive on the team? And for those that pity the overstretched finances of players, think about all the small businesses that are NOT likely to come back. Baseball will come back, the players and teams will once again make huge sums of $$$. This MLB plan, driven by owner billionaires will be an embarrassment to the game IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, UpstateNYfan said:

Has anyone watched late night shows without audiences?? It has largely failed. Comedians, entertainers, pro athletes etc need a live audience for it to be enjoyable. The games will be nothing more than a scrimmage, get 'er done, adios. Players get paid, teams will get T revenue. Baseball (and other team sports) are not exactly good role models for hygiene. Spitting, throwing drinks, gum, etc around, and some poor dugout guy cleans up their shit. Social distancing?? These guys away from family are not going to sit in a hotel room and watch TV. A dozen or so games in AZ each day, night..... I think temps are commonly in the upper 90's +.  As Enjoy Terror said, what if a team member tests positive? Do you really think he is likely to be the only positive on the team? And for those that pity the overstretched finances of players, think about all the small businesses that are NOT likely to come back. Baseball will come back, the players and teams will once again make huge sums of $$$. This MLB plan, driven by owner billionaires will be an embarrassment to the game IMO.

I still watch Daily Show religiously, and you are right, it is weird, but to me it is also better than nothing.  That is my approach on pro sports.  It will be weird if they start, just like it was weird to watch the O's/White Sox game during the riots.  I don't recall hearing any cussing, but its been awhile. 

Sponsors/teams/television stations with contracts are losing money.  They want to clog that gap.  Players who are pending free agents don't want to miss a season or be ppd one season away from free agency.  I think everyone is getting a bit cabin fever and for players sitting in hotels playing their game, probably 6-7 hour days would be better than being stuck at home.  

Am I sure its the right or smart idea? No.  Is it possible we start up and shut down again in a month? Yes.  Will I watch games if they start? Absolutely.  

  • Upvote 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, jarman86 said:

Without a doubt they are televised.  Production quality may be unknown.  Maybe a camera behind home plate that doesn't move like college teams and maybe one or two cameramen controlling established cameras remotely or on-site.  My guess is it would be one camera crew covering the game and it would have announcers remotely.  This is done with Olympics and European soccer games.  

I didn't think of that. I wondered to myself that Thorne, Bordick the rest of the crew aren't going to sequester themselves for the duration. And it sounds like they are not going to be able to come in, then leave, then come back in. Remote announcers works (even if they're not our announcers.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, jarman86 said:

I still watch Daily Show religiously, and you are right, it is weird, but to me it is also better than nothing.  That is my approach on pro sports.  It will be weird if they start, just like it was weird to watch the O's/White Sox game during the riots.  I don't recall hearing any cussing, but its been awhile. 

Sponsors/teams/television stations with contracts are losing money.  They want to clog that gap.  Players who are pending free agents don't want to miss a season or be ppd one season away from free agency.  I think everyone is getting a bit cabin fever and for players sitting in hotels playing their game, probably 6-7 hour days would be better than being stuck at home.  

Am I sure its the right or smart idea? No.  Is it possible we start up and shut down again in a month? Yes.  Will I watch games if they start? Absolutely.  

ALL of this post! Especially the bolded part. It would be better than nothing. It would be baseball for fans to watch and for players to play. It would be weird but these are unprecedentedly weird times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Were I running the show, I'd test all players for coronavirus upon reporting to Arizona and at semi-regular intervals. If they test positive, they go on the IL and can't be activated until they test negative. Obviously that's not a complete policy, but it's the jist of what I think they should do if they decide to go forward with this

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From Roch's interview with Cal posted today:

Quote

Roch: ... How hard is it going to be for these players having to stop and restart spring training and perhaps play a season under very unusual circumstances - like the latest report about the possibility of playing all of the games in Arizona?

Ripken: “I’m someone, as you know, who likes to think about things and have more details before you offer an opinion, but my first response was positive. I’m glad that MLB is trying to figure this out, as complicated as it is, because I think the role of Major League Baseball is one of helping in times of trouble. There’s no way that I would have believed after 9/11 the role that baseball would have played, but coming back and playing baseball is a way to kind of focus on America’s pastime and to feel good and maybe be a distraction. And maybe in that case to heal a little bit.

https://www.masnsports.com/school-of-roch/2020/04/ripken-on-twitter-account-strike-out-hunger-campaign-and-more.html

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Posts

    • I'm glad it's all about reverence for valued members of the team instead of trying to win.  Mullins has been terrible offensively and should see some serious bench time until he starts hitting at least some.
    • When Markakis was Beavers’ age he was putting up a .799 OPS in the majors.  
    • But Mountcastle probably wasn't going to ever get up to tie it...I mean, maybe he would have, but after Gunnar you had Adley who was going to hit lefty, then you had lefty O'Hearn.  And then Tony who was gonna hit lefty if he had a chance to hit had the game not been decided yet.   So because Hyde was a slave to the righty/lefty matchup, he left his best bat on the bench.  And he would have for the rest of the inning had things gone differently.  He wouldn't pinch hit for Westy.  He probably wouldn't pinch hit for Cowser.  You'd have to wait until extra innings when Hays, Mullins and Mateo got up to bat to find a spot to put Mounty in there, so why not just do it in the 9th somewhere? I don't consider Stowers a viable bench bat in that situation.  I can see why some would, I just don't see it right now.  125 at bats in the majors, 43 strikeouts, and 8 walks.   Mateo...not a good hitter overall, but has been surprisingly decent lately.  And you want to get him on base because of his speed, he can score from first.  I don't see how Stowers for him is a great swap...but like Mullins being so bad, I don't think Stowers had much of a chance right there despite being a lefty.  Stowers hasn't flashed much at all in his time in the big leagues...now part of that is because he hasn't received consistent playing time but that's another debate for another thread. Getting back to Mullins being an automatic out, I'd have preferred to see Stowers hit for Mullins if Hyde was so hell bent on getting Stowers in there.  I'd have let Mateo take his chances. I'm not comping Mateo and Mullins offensively.  What I am saying is that I don't think Hyde wanted to pinch hit for Mullins in that spot because he's a veteran leader on the team and he doesn't want to show that he doesn't have confidence in him....despite Mullins having given every reason to not have confidence in him for awhile now. I'm saying that Mateo, despite being a severely flawed offensive player, has been a relatively important part of the team these past couple years and he's done everything he's been asked to do with a smile on his face.  Stowers for Mateo, even though it was the right move from a matchup perspective wasn't a good move for political/clubhouse reasons.  Pinch hitting someone who's barely broken his rookie status for a vet like Mateo?  I dunno, I didn't like it.    
    • There are a lot of bad teams in the league like @eddie83 mentioned and I have to think one of them will take a flyer on Baumann. I'd prefer he slip through waivers because there's a decent chance we could use him as a mop up pitcher later this summer.
    • I’d take that. 
    • Agreed on all but the 2030 timeline. Clear evidence for all to see, on every pitch, is unsustainable at this rate. With improvements in the tech, a solution must come sooner. 
    • Cal is only going to be around for public relations with the fans. Elias isn't going to put up with Cal trying to interfere with baseball operations and I don't see Rubenstein listening to Cal's input on how to run the team like we did with Brady Anderson and the Angelos family.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...