Im pretty sure Im in the minority on this board but its my opinion

[Sports Guy]

15 minutes ago, blid said:

Maybe... I don't know though.   I see your point but if you don't trust the outcomes of games anymore to be legitimate you might quit watching.  People love to righteously boycott things now.

Players, managers, umpires all live in the same world we do. They are increasingly likely to have been exposed to gambling in their lives which will leak into the game.

They are exposed to it anyway. 

[sportsfan8703]

1 hour ago, Moose Milligan said:

 

Everyone:  Gambling is a vice that shouldn't be advertised and marketed.

sportsfan8703:  BUT ALCOHOL IS WORSE WHY AREN'T WE TALKING ABOUT ALCOHOL

No it's more like you go to a game, or watch a game, and the only two ads you see are alcohol and gambling.  So why is gambling so much worse than alcohol?  

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, sportsfan8703 said:

No it's more like you go to a game, or watch a game, and the only two ads you see are alcohol and gambling.  So why is gambling so much worse than alcohol?  

How exactly are you missing all the target pharmaceutical ads?

Are Penis Pill ads illegal in your State?

No one has diabetes? 

[sportsfan8703]

Look, can we just get cheerleaders at the games?  That's all I really want.  The bird is cool and everything.  I like gambling and alcohol, but lets just serious and get all the debauchery going.  

[Moose Milligan]

1 minute ago, sportsfan8703 said:

No it's more like you go to a game, or watch a game, and the only two ads you see are alcohol and gambling.  So why is gambling so much worse than alcohol?  

I don't think anyone said that gambling is worse than alcohol, that's a conclusion you've jumped to that no one here has said.

If you're paying attention to the discussion, the ads are just a symptom of the larger issue, which is MLBs decision to get in bed with companies like FanDuel and DraftKings.  

[sportsfan8703]

3 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

I don't think anyone said that gambling is worse than alcohol, that's a conclusion you've jumped to that no one here has said.

If you're paying attention to the discussion, the ads are just a symptom of the larger issue, which is MLBs decision to get in bed with companies like FanDuel and DraftKings.  

But it's not like MLB teams haven't partnered with shady partners before.  Remember Enron Field?  haha

[Just Regular]

2 hours ago, sportsfan8703 said:

Also, a good time to say that you can get Gunnar at +700 now for AL ROY.

I saw Adley the 5th favorite for MVP yesterday too.    At least according to the ad being run during Jorge Mateo's interview.

When do customers start getting to find out whether Jorge Mateo is Out, Doubtful, Questionable or Probable tomorrow?

[Tony-OH]

1 hour ago, Sports Guy said:

We have a winner!

Now, take this a step further and really apply this to baseball. It brings eyeballs to the sport and, even more importantly, younger eye balls.

When you embrace the gambling and you bring in new rules that increases the pace of play, you get more viewers and more long term viewers.

This is all very important and really, your own personal feelings about it mean far less than growing the game and making it appealing to the younger generation.

Baseball has a marketing problem. It has an age problem. This may be something that can fix that..or at least help fix it.

I don't disagree with this take at all, but it doesn't mean we have to like it anymore just because it's bringing in "younger fans." Obviously I find getting barraged with gambling advertisements during commercials, in pre game, and worse of all during the telecast by the announcer just awful. I can't say it ruins my experience, but it does not make it more enjoyable. 

If I watch the pregame show at all, which is rare, but if I do I immediately turn the channel when they start talking odds and crap. I just don't care. I didn't need gambling to enjoy watching the Orioles games before, so I'm not going to start now. Saying that, I understand why they are doing this and yes, like 99% of the things nowadays, if you just follow the money you can find the ultimate answer. 

I will say this though, I don't understand how Fan Duel and Draft kinds think they are gaining customers by showing the same commercial 4 or 5 times a game (at least). Is there anyone who in the 7th inning of a game is like, "You know, I think NOW I'm going to try this betting thing!"

In fact, I would argue that the inundation of the advertising makes me want to partake less. Now I could be in the minority (though it appears on here I'm not), but if I can't annoyed by seeing the same commercial over and over, I actually will not buy their product/service or whatever. I understand advertising, heck, the Hangout makes money because of advertising, but if I made you click off ads between screens or all you ever saw was Draft Kings ads all over the site, it would become monotonous and boring.  

Basically my biggest issue with all of this is it's all overkill.

If I have to watch Kevin Hart's barking dog, career "jumping the shark moment" commercial one more time I'm going to . Oh, and Lisa Kearney "fake interviewing" the "winners" where her giant lips and her overexaggerated "Hmmm," like she heard something profound, drives me bonkers as well. Maybe at least make rule that they can only show the same commercial once in a broadcast so it makes them go out and make like 12 different commercials. 

Then again MASN has done this for years. They always have about 3-4 main sponsors that they run those same commercials from. By May you are ready to poke your ear drums out.

 

[Tony-OH]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

How exactly are you missing all the target pharmaceutical ads?

Are Penis Pill ads illegal in your State?

No one has diabetes? 

But wait, I've done the research on the internet and I found out how you can get your Cialis for the cheapest price.

That commercial bugs me too. If you are paying $60 a pill for a boner, that better come with a girl.

[waroriole]

I think this is almost a unanimous opinion. I haven’t seen any positive reactions to all the gambling ads in sports now. And yes, the hypocrisy is brazen. 

[Sports Guy]

8 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

I don't disagree with this take at all, but it doesn't mean we have to like it anymore just because it's bringing in "younger fans." Obviously I find getting barraged with gambling advertisements during commercials, in pre game, and worse of all during the telecast by the announcer just awful. I can't say it ruins my experience, but it does not make it more enjoyable. 

If I watch the pregame show at all, which is rare, but if I do I immediately turn the channel when they start talking odds and crap. I just don't care. I didn't need gambling to enjoy watching the Orioles games before, so I'm not going to start now. Saying that, I understand why they are doing this and yes, like 99% of the things nowadays, if you just follow the money you can find the ultimate answer. 

I will say this though, I don't understand how Fan Duel and Draft kinds think they are gaining customers by showing the same commercial 4 or 5 times a game (at least). Is there anyone who in the 7th inning of a game is like, "You know, I think NOW I'm going to try this betting thing!"

In fact, I would argue that the inundation of the advertising makes me want to partake less. Now I could be in the minority (though it appears on here I'm not), but if I can't annoyed by seeing the same commercial over and over, I actually will not buy their product/service or whatever. I understand advertising, heck, the Hangout makes money because of advertising, but if I made you click off ads between screens or all you ever saw was Draft Kings ads all over the site, it would become monotonous and boring.  

Basically my biggest issue with all of this is it's all overkill.

If I have to watch Kevin Hart's barking dog, career "jumping the shark moment" commercial one more time I'm going to . Oh, and Lisa Kearney "fake interviewing" the "winners" where her giant lips and her overexaggerated "Hmmm," like she heard something profound, drives me bonkers as well. Maybe at least make rule that they can only show the same commercial once in a broadcast so it makes them go out and make like 12 different commercials. 

Then again MASN has done this for years. They always have about 3-4 main sponsors that they run those same commercials from. By May you are ready to poke your ear drums out.

 

I get all the arguments why it’s not good. I’m not even disagreeing with them.

What I am saying is they don’t care(they meaning MLB) about your opinion. And when I say “your”, I mean the big baseball fan.

They aren’t going to turn you off to watching with these ads. You may hate them but it’s not stopping you. It’s like moving some of these games to the streaming services. You don’t like it but again, they don’t care.

They want a new audience. A younger audience. That’s what they care about. 
 

Maybe that’s unfortunate. I see both sides but it is just the way it is and it’s something we just have to deal with and get over because it’s not going away.

[Tony-OH]

11 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

I get all the arguments why it’s not good. I’m not even disagreeing with them.

What I am saying is they don’t care(they meaning MLB) about your opinion. And when I say “your”, I mean the big baseball fan.

They aren’t going to turn you off to watching with these ads. You may hate them but it’s not stopping you. It’s like moving some of these games to the streaming services. You don’t like it but again, they don’t care.

They want a new audience. A younger audience. That’s what they care about. 
 

Maybe that’s unfortunate. I see both sides but it is just the way it is and it’s something we just have to deal with and get over because it’s not going away.

I don't disagree. I realize MLB could care less about the 45+ somethings out there. I also realize that at 53, I'm getting to the point that things like homer hoses, pounding their chests after getting a single in a 11-2 game, and gambling ads are things that annoy me, but they aren't going to stop me from watching. 

Then again, I have the disposable income they are after so at some point they need to balance this attraction to new fans while keeping us old guys semi-happy too.

[Can_of_corn]

5 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

I don't disagree. I realize MLB could care less about the 45+ somethings out there. I also realize that at 53, I'm getting to the point that things like homer hoses, pounding their chests after getting a single in a 11-2 game, and gambling ads are things that annoy me, but they aren't going to stop me from watching. 

Then again, I have the disposable income they are after so at some point they need to balance this attraction to new fans while keeping us old guys semi-happy too.

That's what the Springsteen and Joel concerts are for. 

[jamalshw]

38 minutes ago, waroriole said:

I think this is almost a unanimous opinion. I haven’t seen any positive reactions to all the gambling ads in sports now. And yes, the hypocrisy is brazen. 

I don't like ads of any kind, but they're a necessary evil and I really don't care on the gambling ads except when it's over and over, but that's the case for me with any ad. If I see it literally every commercial break that's too much, but I'm an out of market fan so I watch on mlb.tv. I'm a casual fan on the betting side. I've placed some bets. Betting and fantasy sports are literally the only reason I follow NFL at all. 

As for baseball, I'm a baseball fan and have obviously been watching and following long before any of the betting stuff came into legitimacy. That said, I'm in the (apparently) minority that has zero issue with it. In fact, I am more in favor of it than I am of the pitch clock...but that's another topic altogether. 

I don't know that I call it hypocrisy. I get the argument, players/coaches/managers/etc. betting on the game is a cardinal sin ever since the Black Sox Scandal, but it's that way to preserve the integrity of what happens on the field. Fans betting doesn't impact on the field whereas players/coaches/managers/etc. (or anyone that has the ability to impact decisions/actions on the field) does impact the integrity of the game. As for the Pete Rose angle, I get he was betting on his team to win which is not as bad as betting on his team to lose, but does impact the decisions he makes as a manager as he could potential make different decisions than he would otherwise make, looking to win his bets. Obviously, he would always be trying to win, but in a 162-game season we see managers making decisions everyday that is the right decision for the team's long term success over the season compared to that specific game. 

So, to me, there's a difference and a big one. I get that having gambling closer to the game blurs the line a bit and could be a bit more tempting for those players/coaches/etc. to take part, but I also feel like the salaries we are dealing with nowadays (even those on league minimum) make it a bit less of an appeal than it was in the Black Sox days or even Pete Rose's days. 

All that to say, sure, I get why people aren't a fan. There is a bit of an optics issue on a macro level, but I don't really have an issue with it personally. (Much like the homer hose has some optic issues, but I don't have an issue with it myself). 

[eddie83]

I get the concern but the part I don’t get is the idea that players/officials are suddenly going to be more likely to throw a game. 
 

When there is an odd amount of money being bet on a specific game or outcome the bells go off. You want to tell me that someone in theory could make some side money, ok but why? You are going to risk your income for less money than you are already making?  Makes no sense. 
 

As far as the constant commercials all the same one being played over and over again get on my nerves. There are some radio ads that get on my nerves because I have heard them 10,000 times.