Bluntly, MLB doesn't care that much about you. Or me. They care about our kids and the audiences for whom there's no such thing as appointment TV or "nothing else on".
MLB would be fine with a 4 hour game if they had the excitement of last night's GSW-OKC game, but... 2.5-4 hours of a bunch of dudes basically standing around - with a few minutes (total) interruption by fun action - is boring. It's the same reason I can't stand golf even when there's nothing else on - I'd rather turn the TV off. I know casual viewers feel the same way about baseball.
This is a great post. I do hear the same attitudes from people from time to time, and I think baseball should work to address both the delivery / availability side, and also the structural side about making it appealing to an audience. My sense, over a long time watching as a rabid fan, is that baseball is something that grows on you, if/when you take the time to figure out how the batter-pitcher psychological warfare really plays out, atbat-to-atbat and over the course of a game. The essence of baseball is the mutual command of the strike zone, pitcher deception and batter anticipation.
So, baseball is never going to appeal to those who only are interested in balls-in-play. This isn't tennis, it's more of a thinking-man's game than that. I certainly wouldn't advocate any changes that mess with the carefully-calibrated balance of power between pitcher and batter, nor would just about anyone on SoSH, I'd assume. But where baseball can make the biggest difference in excitement, without fundamentally changing the game mechanics, is in that dead time between pitches. P/PA is up, league-wide in a long-term multi-decade trend, due to an increased recognition of the value of a walk. So game length depends and will continue to depend on the pace of pitches. Everything MLB can do to eliminate dead time - pauses between pitches, catcher conferences, stepping out of the box, even pitching changes - is thus, to me, a plus. There shouldn't be a taboo about changing baseball's rules - the way the game is played shifts over time, and the structure should respond to those shifts by guiding it towards the best sport it can be. And sports are supposed to be entertaining.
Two ideas that might help MLB build that casual fanbase:
1) Build a very good video game franchise on all platforms. My interest in NBA is partly linked to 2K, and my very very occasional interest in soccer is solely linked to FIFA. The last great multi-platform baseball game was MVP 2005. Which means half a generation has basically missed the fun of playing on-screen.
2) Make the MLB radio free to all streamers via streamiung services (Pandora, etc). I shot many a basketball hoops while listening to Sox radio.
Distribution is another great angle to how baseball can improve, no doubt. But I question whether these changes are really the essence of what they need. For #1, you've got MLB The Show which is cross-device at least within the Sony universe, but you've got console + handheld. You've also got the RBI Baseball franchise which was resurrected two years ago by Microsoft and is cross-platform for XBox, PS4, Android and iOS (and has a
pretty cool frontman). I don't think they're lacking in the video game department, even if they don't have a household name like Madden.
For #2, that's not a bad idea, but they do make a piss-pot of money currently through MLB.TV audio, and its distribution is limited by partnerships with cable providers who want to control coverage (if you have cable, you can get it for free depending on your provider, but in some places you can't get it at all because the regional sports network is full of hatred or fear). Those networks would probably tie up any Pandora deal in litigation. Does anyone here know whether that would be a meaningful barrier?
@Dehere
Bear in mind, it took baseball 20 years for the Dodgers to become the first to demonstrate that radio distribution didn't threaten gate receipts and was a net-positive to revenue. I find it hard to believe they're going to overcome their own inertia towards new mediums while simultaneously placating their distribution partners who are eternally worried about disintermediation.