Jump to content

Orioles will have 3 games on Peacock this year


Going Underground

Recommended Posts

What they've been doing with streaming games on Youtube is the best way to appeal to the younger audience. Kids nowadays pretty much watch Youtube and Twitch exclusively. There are live chat features on those services that get them more involved as well. Knowing MLB, I'm sure they'll sacrifice this in order to throw games on Peacock, Apple TV etc. which kids are NOT using. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, eddie83 said:

I’m sure they would argue that even with Apple games roughly 156-58 games will still be available. 
 

 

Who gives a rat's ass what "they" would argue? At the end of the day, some fans want to watch every game or at have access to every game without playing Frickn' streaming damn service Roulette. Personally, I have cable and pretty much every streaming service but it's still a damn pain in the ass. 

Piece mailing in streaming services when people are paying to see EVERY GAME on MASN is a bunch of short-sighted money grabbing from an organization that is always short-sighted and money grabbing. 

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

I don't know if the younger generation can be appealed to by throwing random games up on Peacock and hoping for the best.

It starts before that.  MLB needs to do a better job of getting kids involved with the game at a young age before they can find something else that's faster pace like soccer or basketball or lacrosse.  If they're trying to target kids that are 10+, it's probably too late.  

MLB was way better at marketing their players and the game in the 1990’s. Putting a few games on different streaming platforms is not going to gain any significant number of younger people as loyal MLB fans.

My kids are school age and as far as I can tell baseball isn’t even on most children’s radar. MLB is running into a huge demographic problem as the boomer generation enters retirement age. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole pitch of mlb.tv for out-of-market  folks like myself was “every game, whenever you want it.” Which was great. Then they split off a few for Apple and Peacock. Then they forgot to mention early on last year (oopsie!) that the postseason wasn’t part of the package anymore. That really ticked me off. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

That one.  Their 2nd tier (and above) programming package.  

Yeah thanks. That’s exactly what I had and will be going back to in a month or so unless there’s a shocking announcement that they have made it available on other services. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tony-OH said:

Who gives a rat's ass what "they" would argue? At the end of the day, some fans want to watch every game or at have access to every game without playing Frickn' streaming damn service Roulette. Personally, I have cable and pretty much every streaming service but it's still a damn pain in the ass. 

Piece mailing in streaming services when people are paying to see EVERY GAME on MASN is a bunch of short-sighted money grabbing from an organization that is always short-sighted and money grabbing. 

 

I assume these Peacock games were dictated by MLB, not a choice the Orioles made.   

I’m hoping these games will be free and you won’t have to subscribe to Peacock to get them, like with Apple last year.   Basically, it gives them the chance to get some eyeballs on their network, run ads for their shows during the commercial breaks, and get people interested in subscribing.  
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, eddie83 said:

Thing is if it’s not exclusive Peacock won’t want it. Baseball is a regional sport. They need local fans to watch their product.  

I know very little about the streaming business other than how to switch a few of them on through Roku. I would have thought those services would pay for the right to stream games games even if they're available elsewhere, but of course the fees would be much lower. But maybe that's just wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, AnythingO's said:

Cmon Frobby, You get each of your kids to get 1-2 services and you combine them all for all participants. I have HBO Max thru cell and Amazon Prime but get Hulu, Netflix, Disney+, Pandora, Peacock thru the kids.

I'm on that program, or a version of it, but I sure don't like it. And it doesn't get me to Peacock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/31/2023 at 3:08 PM, SteveA said:

Flip side is there are a lot of younger folks who have ditched cable/satellite completely and get all the TV they get from a combination of various streaming services. They don't get MASN or ESPN.    This might expose some of them to MLB that they wouldn't otherwise be exposed to.

In my experience, not a lot of people become baseball fans by watching two or three games a year on TV. If MLB wanted to make a sincere effort to reach out to cord-cutters -- as opposed to maximizing revenues by splitting one source of revenue into two, while maintaining the full price for the first -- this has to be about the worst way to do it. "Mark it down on your calendars, cord-cutting streamers. Two weeks from tonight, see the Cardinals battle the Brewers, only on Peacock. And then we'll have another game, with different teams, just three weeks after that." Really, MLB?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, spiritof66 said:

In my experience, not a lot of people become baseball fans by watching two or three games a year on TV. If MLB wanted to make a sincere effort to reach out to cord-cutters -- as opposed to maximizing revenues by splitting one source of revenue into two, while maintaining the full price for the first -- this has to be about the worst way to do it. "Mark it down on your calendars, cord-cutting streamers. Two weeks from tonight, see the Cardinals battle the Brewers, only on Peacock. And then we'll have another game, with different teams, just three weeks after that." Really, MLB?

 

Well, that’s not really an accurate reflection of what they’re doing. Basically, it’s a Game of the Week format.   If you’re on Peacock, you’re basically getting as much baseball as the NBC network was giving you in 1975.   Don’t know about you, but I pretty much grew up with Game of the Week being the only national baseball broadcast.  Now, of course, there’s MLB Network on cable, MLB.TV streaming, ESPN, Fox, TBS, and then Peacock and Apple.  Plenty of ways to watch way more baseball than I ever watched as a kid.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Tony-OH said:

Who gives a rat's ass what "they" would argue? At the end of the day, some fans want to watch every game or at have access to every game without playing Frickn' streaming damn service Roulette. Personally, I have cable and pretty much every streaming service but it's still a damn pain in the ass. 

Piece mailing in streaming services when people are paying to see EVERY GAME on MASN is a bunch of short-sighted money grabbing from an organization that is always short-sighted and money grabbing. 

 

This applies to all MLB teams. It’s a National deal. When the Yankees are on Peacock or Apple the YES Network does not have the games 

I don’t have Peacock and I would like the ability to watch all the games as well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, eddie83 said:

This applies to all MLB teams. It’s a National deal. When the Yankees are on Peacock or Apple the YES Network does not have the games 

I don’t have Peacock and I would like the ability to watch all the games as well. 

Let me make this clear, I don't think for a second this is an Orioles derive issue. It's a MLB issue and another black mark on how they deliver their sport.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
27 minutes ago, Frobby said:

For those who complain about MASN not having a standalone streaming option, or about MLB pushing a few O’s games onto Apple and Peacock: did you know that the Yankees sold the exclusive rights to 20 of their games to Amazon Prime?   https://www.si.com/extra-mustard/2023/03/29/yankees-amazon-prime-20-regular-season-games

only a matter of time before you need 50 different streaming services to watch baseball, then the MLB will cry about it's ratings. 

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

    • Good point, no other metropolitan area has more than one team.
    • Could it be that they allowed the Gnats to reside within 30 minutes of their home. Effectively cutting their market in half? 
    • Got my all-time low rarity score on today's game - 6.
    • 41 freaking years and here's this guy with the name pickles telling me I should be happy with 91 wins and getting owned in the playoffs again. 😂 😂 I saw a team that looked terrible the second half and probably didn't even deserve that spot the way they were playing .
    • Lol. Here's the funny they know more then you know. Typical Oriole fan who's happy with getting punched in the mouth. 
    • I don’t like the wall. I think it’s affecting our hitters. I’ve mentioned before that I think it has totally warped Mountcastle into something he was never really meant to be. The guy came up as a pull-heavy HR hitter, and in his first season-plus (725 PAs), he puts up 38 HRs and a 116 wRC+. Since then, the wRC+ is down to 110, and his approach has totally changed, with his pull numbers plummeting (down from 39% in 2021 to less than 28% this year). He still hits the ball hard, but constantly underachieves his batted ball data — probably because he’s trying to avoid the pull field and hitting balls to the deepest parts of pretty much every other park. Will the same thing happen to Mayo? Maybe he has more pure power, but it’s always going to be a challenge for a RH slugger to survive with that wall. So much harder to do damage.   Beyond that, I think it’s also creating a serious risk of changing our LH hitters’ approaches too. These guys (Henderson, Holliday, Cowser, 2/3 of Adley) have come up with a reputation for being able to drive the ball to all fields. But how long does that continue when they just can’t hit it out to the opposite field? Our LH hitters had a combined 44 wRC+ at OPACY, and only one HR. They had the 3rd most balls hit to LF at home by LHHs, but the lowest wRC+ of any team on those balls (for the second straight year). The Royals, ironically enough, were the only team that was lower than a 70 wRC+ — that’s how much worse our lefties fared going oppo (at OPACY) than everyone else’s. By player: Gunnar Henderson: 112 wRC+ / .160 ISO (51 PAs) Adley Rutschman: 10 wRC+ / .026 ISO (38 PAs) Anthony Santander: 14 wRC+ / .095 ISO (43 PAs) Colton Cowser: 58 wRC+ / .057 ISO (36 PAs) Ryan O’Hearn: 47 wRC+ / .091 ISO (55 PAs) Cedric Mullins: 23 wRC+ / .100 ISO (41 PAs) Jackson Holliday: -72 wRC+ / .000 ISO (16 PAs)   On the road, they had a combined 126 wRC+ (with 9 HRs) going to left field, so it’s not like they’re bad at it. It’s just Death Valley out there in LF for them at OPACY.  How long will it be until these LH guys just start going full pull-happy? Essentially, the opposite of what’s happened with Mountcastle. When (a) your team’s philosophy is to focus on doing damage and (b) you can’t DO damage to the opposite field — the rational endpoint is just to try to pull everything. I don’t think that’s a good outcome. I think it makes them much worse hitters in the other 81 games, and I think it’s a terrible waste of a bunch of really talented hitters with all-field abilities.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...