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

    • I think there is a better term than "angry" to describe some of the O's. Anger seldom results in anything positive. Now, playing with attitude is another thing. GH is certainly the "King" of attitude on this team, no one is going to beat him. I believe there are several position players that show attitude in different ways. Pitchers?? SP throw 90 or so pitches. They can't afford to display emotions or they would be worn out much earlier. They also can't afford to have the "deer in the headlights" look. Of the O's starters, I believe CP is in that world at present. It's mainly an experience and growth thing.  GR, IMO, has approved significantly in that department over the last year. 
    • On close examination of Kjerstad today (July 7), I hope he is not part of any trade package. This kid is a bull, with power potential that is off the charts.  He runs surprisingly well and that throw to the plate from left was very impressive, if a bit high. I can see him planted in left field for a long time, perhaps in a platoon with Hays the rest of the year, but eventually full time if he proves able to hit southpaws.
    • I like this idea better, but I am curious to what it would take to secure Mason Miller.
    • I totally get it.  It’s a huge risk vs. reward situation, but getting someone like him (if he’s still strong) or Skubal could make a major difference come October for you guys over the next three seasons.
    • IMHO it's not about whether Crochet is an "opener" or a reliever, it's the innings.  He's never thrown more than 65 innings (at college in 2019) in his entire college or pro career and stands at 105.1 today.  Let that sink in.  On top of that, there is Crochet's TJ surgery, where he missed all of 2022 and had multiple stints on the IL in 2023 as he was recovering, tossing a total of 25 IP. Does any of this mean he cannot throw double (130 IP) or triple (195 IP) his prior max?  No one can say for certain, but I'd think any reasonable person would agree that, at the very least, it's a far riskier proposition for someone like Crochet than a pitcher who has been a starter and has thrown 150+ IP before.  So, to recap: The most innings he's ever thrown was 65 IP in college (2019) After throwing 54 innings of relief for the White Sox in 2021, he missed all of 2022 with Tommy John surgery He followed up in 2023 by throwing a total of 25 innings of relief, as he dealt with a couple of IL stints recovering from TJ His first ever pro start came this season and he's been dynamite through 105.1 IP Elias and Sig are well aware of the risks and it will be interesting to see how it all shakes out.
    • Gunnar doing a good job of hitting the ball to all fields.
    • Tell me the cost and I would probably sign up. What about you Qauntrill, Scherzer and Yates and you got to keep all top 4 prospects?
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...