Pace of game rules in the AFL saved an average of 10 min off the game time

[soxhop411]

Brian Costa ‏@BrianCostaWSJ  43s
 
MLB has created a new committee to "study the issue of pace of game" and improve pace of play, decrease time of game in 2015.
 
https://twitter.com/BrianCostaWSJ/status/514083470029893632
 
Hopefully they do not do anything drastic for next season

 

[soxhop411]

 

 
Andy Martino ‏@MartinoNYDN  3m
 
One #MLB owner last week said new commish Manfred takes pace of game issue very seriously, will make high priority. This news supports that.

 

[ifmanis5]

Spoiler alert: shortening the long commercial breaks that make everybody lots of money will not be considered.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

Two easy steps for them...
 
1) cut 30 seconds per break between half-innings (which they'll never do).
 
2) make every pitcher study Mark Buehrle and emulate his pace.

 

[hbk72777]

Spoiler alert: shortening the long commercial breaks that make everybody lots of money will not be considered.

 
Yup. And it's only going to get worse after the fat tv contracts these companies have handed out.
 
Have you looked at the channel guides in the last year? They're putting 3 half hour shows in a 2 hour time period. These are newer shows like Reba and King of Queens, where they were already made to be only 19-21 minutes to fit syndicated time slots. You're getting 20 minutes of commercials for 20 minutes of show. Movies that are an hour and 20 minutes are spread over 3 hours.

 

[OfTheCarmen]

The amazing thing to me is that they already have rules in place to combat this, but I have literally never seen nor heard of anyone having witnessed them being enforced,
 
Rather than wasting time and money figuring out what the problem is, try doing what you already figured out might help alleviate the goddamn problem.....jerks.

 

[glennhoffmania]

If I made a list of the problems with MLB today the length of games wouldn't crack my top ten.  Maybe not even my top twenty.

 

[HriniakPosterChild]

If I made a list of the problems with MLB today the length of games wouldn't crack my top ten.  Maybe not even my top twenty.

 
They don't care about you. They already have your eyeballs.

 

[riboflav]

Serious questions - Why do they think this is a problem? Have they done a scientific survey of fans? If they find a way to shorten games, what do they expect the outcome will be - higher ratings, increased attendance, happier fans, earlier bedtimes for players and team execs?

 

[glennhoffmania]

Serious questions - Why do they think this is a problem? Have they done a scientific survey of fans? If they find a way to shorten games, what do they expect the outcome will be - higher ratings, increased attendance, happier fans, earlier bedtimes for players and team execs?

 
Exactly.  They're trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist.
 
NFL games are certainly longer than they used to be.  They never seem to finish in under three hours anymore.  Remember when all of the late games used to start at 4pm?  Where's all of the uproar over how long football games last today?

 

[Harry Hooper]

Serious questions - Why do they think this is a problem? Have they done a scientific survey of fans? If they find a way to shorten games, what do they expect the outcome will be - higher ratings, increased attendance, happier fans, earlier bedtimes for players and team execs?

 
It's costing MLB money from the tv networks as extending gametimes play havoc with programming schedules and also lead to more wandering clickers. A brisker pace would also let them get away with extending the between-innings breaks a bit more.

 

[rymflaherty]

 
 
They don't care about you. They already have your eyeballs.
 

 
 
On the topic of getting new eyeballs, I heard a rather damning point of view on a recent ESPN Radio Chicago podcast, and admittedly it was one I hadn't even thought of...
I
n short, the two radio personalities were younger guys and they pointed out that all the discussion (in the media) about baseball being in a state of crisis and needing to change was being led by an older generation and/or baseball enthusiasts.
There stance, and they argued their friends and really there generation as a whole was they didn't care if baseball changed because they really don't care about baseball.  It's a fringe, mostly regional sport that they have a mild interest in. They essentially laughed about ideas, such as shortening the game, saving the sport....because again, they really don't care. Cutting a game from 3:15 to 2:50 wasn't going to somehow make them love the game.  Either way it's essentially a 3 hour investment and one they don't care to make.
I don't know what percentage of younger sports fans that actually does represent, but I do think it represents some which is why I found it interesting, and why now when I see something like this my mind immediately thinks it may actually wind up being about keeping current fans rather than creating an influx of new fans.
 
Personally, I'm happy they are exploring it and while I don;t expect any radical changes, I'll welcome anything as an improvement.  While the current pace isn't a deal breaker to me, I wouldn't mind them speeding things up. The LLWS was a reminder of how exciting and engaging the game can be without the lulls...obviously MLB is never going to move at that pace, but any step in that direction, even a shuffle, is a good thing.

 

[FL4WL3SS]

 
 
On the topic of getting new eyeballs, I heard a rather damning point of view on a recent ESPN Radio Chicago podcast, and admittedly it was one I hadn't even thought of...
I
n short, the two radio personalities were younger guys and they pointed out that all the discussion (in the media) about baseball being in a state of crisis and needing to change was being led by an older generation and/or baseball enthusiasts.
There stance, and they argued their friends and really there generation as a whole was they didn't care if baseball changed because they really don't care about baseball.  It's a fringe, mostly regional sport that they have a mild interest in. They essentially laughed about ideas, such as shortening the game, saving the sport....because again, they really don't care. Cutting a game from 3:15 to 2:50 wasn't going to somehow make them love the game.  Either way it's essentially a 3 hour investment and one they don't care to make.
I don't know what percentage of younger sports fans that actually does represent, but I do think it represents some which is why I found it interesting, and why now when I see something like this my mind immediately thinks it may actually wind up being about keeping current fans rather than creating an influx of new fans.
 
Personally, I'm happy they are exploring it and while I don;t expect any radical changes, I'll welcome anything as an improvement.  While the current pace isn't a deal breaker to me, I wouldn't mind them speeding things up. The LLWS was a reminder of how exciting and engaging the game can be without the lulls...obviously MLB is never going to move at that pace, but any step in that direction, even a shuffle, is a good thing.

Holy shit. You literally got something wrong, fixed it and then got it wrong again. That was amazing.

 

[Rasputin]

Holy shit. You literally got something wrong, fixed it and then got it wrong again. That was amazing.

Truly a tour de force of dumbfuckery.

Oh, and, not a problem, there's already a rule on the books, blah blah blah.

 

[Chemistry Schmemistry]

I stopped watching regularly about 20 years ago, when the games started closing in on three hours on average. That was about the time they lengthened the between-inning breaks and started running commercials during every pitching change.

I also pretty much stopped going to games. I used to go to maybe 5-10 per year. It's been ten years since I've gone at all.

For me, it is absolutely the television experience. If I don't watch regularly, I don't have the bug to see the games in person. Then I stop following the standings. Which means I pretty much only pay attention if my team makes the World Series. Even the playoffs are longer than they were when I was a kid and fell in love with the game.

So, there are two problems. One is the length of the game. But, really, why is 2:30 acceptable and 3:00 not acceptable? It's the television experience as well.

This is what I'd do if I were baseball czar:

1. Change the commercials. Commercials haven't changed much from the big transition in the '50s when they were finally able to film them elsewhere and splice them into the broadcast. But viewing has changed considerably. We're no longer a captive audience. We have internet and devices and, for those of us who still watch television (my viewing is less than half of what it was in the past) there are hundreds of channels. Yet commercials remain repetitive and in long blocks.

Viewership continues to decline, and what do they do? They add commercials (I don't think baseball has in the last ten years, but they haven't reduced them) and make commercials even more annoying. They're louder than regular television (the new law on that remains completely unenforced) and now they're starting to add tricks to draw your eye - like shaking the camera.

It's actually quite an unpleasant experience to wait through a commercial break. I've stopped "live" watching all television except for sports. My 400 channels exist solely to channel-flick during commercial breaks during games.

So I'd reduce the number of commercials (yeah, they won't, but they need to). I think many of us DVR everything but sports. Fewer commercials still works for soccer. I'd charge an arm and a leg for this commercial time. What's Coca Cola going to do? Max out on the 50th new ripoff of Naked and Afraid? Signage at the ballpark should make up a higher percentage of ad revenue.

I'd also enforce a code of conduct for advertisers. Basically, don't annoy me. Don't force me to change the channel.

2. Yes, I would enforce the no leaving the batter's box rule and the pitching clock. I know they tried it in the minors and it didn't go over well. It will take a long time to phase in.

3. In the 1990s, some sports producer at Fox came up with a new idea - one that forever screwed up televised baseball. Rather than long shots that seemed repetitive and boring, he added cameras and decided that between each pitch, the cameras should go in for closeups on faces. People in the crowd. Managers. The pitcher looking for the sign. He'd "tell a story" by following someone at the game.

It was new and different and everybody copied it. It also coincided with longer delays between pitches. And it was really annoying. I don't want to watch Ron Washington's open-mouth gum-chewing between every pitch. Every single pitch. Chomp chomp chomp chomp chomp. Players spit a lot. In close-up, this is rather disgusting. In long shot, doesn't matter. No more extended fan shots. All they do is stuff their faces or play with their cell phones anyway.

I'd bring back the long shot between pitches. Save the close-ups for when something interesting happens.

4. No mound visits. Take the uniforms off of the coaches and managers. Signal your pitching changes from the top step of the dugout.

5. No leaving the dugout except to take your position. Anyone who interrupts the game to argue is automatically ejected. Expand the challenge system, but managers have to signal that challenge immediately. Use a national service, as the NFL is doing this year.

6. Since everyone has these smart devices these days, engage them more. Game-long contests where you guess what the next pitch will be. Guess the score. Guess the winner of the sausage race. This will require a team of tech people at every game to run these contests. Open to both people at the game and at home. This will give you some material for your long-shots now that the manager is no longer chomping gum in extreme close-up between every pitch.

 

[Lose Remerswaal]

We've got a Pace of Game idea thread here
 
 

 
Exactly.  They're trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist.
 
NFL games are certainly longer than they used to be.  They never seem to finish in under three hours anymore.  Remember when all of the late games used to start at 4pm?  Where's all of the uproar over how long football games last today?

 
Remember when the NFL changed the rules so the clock restarts on out of bounds plays except for the last few minutes of each half?  That was one rule change they made to speed up the time of games.

 

[snowmanny]

I basically agree with Chemistry Schmemistry in that: if they want to shorten the games in any meaningful way they have to make dramatic changes and let everyone figure out how to deal with them, whether it's shortening the commercial breaks (and figuring out other ways of advertising), banning mound visits, banning arguments on the field in some manner, speeding up the pitchers and the batters. I have long been in favor of shortening the game to eight innings and going with an eight-man lineup (no pitcher/no DH; batting stats would stay ~same as total PA's/player would be roughly the same).  They'll never do that but everything should be on the table.
 
Also studying Mark Buehrle is a good idea.  How long would a game between a pitching staff of Mark Buehrles pitching to a line-up of AJPs last? I mean, assuming it wasn't 0-0 in the 15th.

 

[SumnerH]

For fun:

 
This looks like game times have basically plateaued from 1992-2013; some dips and some peaks, but pretty much in the 175-minute range.  
 
2014 looks to be significantly higher, but that graph was made in early August; I have no idea if that's mostly SSS and we'll see some regression, whether it's a biased sample (e.g. late season games tend to be shorter or something), or whether it's a legitimate change.
 
The biggest spike was from 1978-1986, where games got about 20 minutes longer.  I believe that coincides with the extra time between innings being added for televised games.

 

[jimc]

Not that I expect this to be the driving force, but is there data on what fraction of games went to extra innings in each season? 2013 set the record:
 

 
There have been 239 extra-inning games in Major League Baseball so far [in 2013]. In 2011, there were 237, which was the previous record-holder. Prior to that, the most games to head to extras in history in a season was 220, which was done in 1986, 1991, 2007 and 2010. So four of the top six extra-inning seasons in history have come in the last seven seasons.

 
Small thing in the scheme of things, I'm sure, but the pedant in me wants to see the data with extra innings games removed.

 

[FL4WL3SS]

For people that argue eliminating or reducing commercials, would you be willing to deal with running ads across the TV while the game is going on? How much would a company like Coca-Cola pay to run an inning long scroll across your screen or some little animation in the corner of the screen while you watched the game?
 
Is this even a viable solution? I'm not sure, but I think I'd much rather the constant in-game distraction (granted only if it was minimized) with rare plugs during down times (think old radio "brought to you by" spots). If I could watch a game start to finish, live, with no commercials, I'd be a much more avid viewer.
 
As it is, I've slowed my viewing of the NFL and MLB because of the slow nature of the game. When I watch sports, I watch to be excited, not to be lulled to sleep during long pauses in the action. The NHL, thankfully, doesn't have this problem since the action is dictated by whistles and stops in the game where the action can go for half a period without a whistle. Also, there are stricter commercial rules during the playoffs. The one thing the NHL has done right.

 

[dbn]

I'm going to a Dodgers game tomorrow and will be there when the gates open and not leave until the game is over. It's a event, and an expensive one, and I want to maximize the time I get that experience for the money I've spent. 
 
Of course, part of this is that I'm on the wests-side and it'd take 2hrs to get there if I left home at 5pm, so my buddy and I are going to hang out downtown all afternoon. Also, I don't have a job to keep me from going early, or kids to keep me from getting home late. Most importantly, though, is that it's "sleeved-blanket night". No way in hell I'd get there late and miss out on a free Snuggy.
 
 
For me it isn't the length of the game that is the problem, per se, but the pace. If it were faster-paced - and as such more entertaining - and still lasted over three hours, fine. I actually watched more baseball at work when I was working than I do now that I'm unemployed. Baseball is the only sport that I can watch while working and follow both, because of all the down time. Now that I'm home all day, I feel the need to get up and do something useful instead of watching 45 minutes (or whatever, I just made that up) of action spread over 3+ hrs.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

For people that argue eliminating or reducing commercials, would you be willing to deal with running ads across the TV while the game is going on? How much would a company like Coca-Cola pay to run an inning long scroll across your screen or some little animation in the corner of the screen while you watched the game?
 
Is this even a viable solution? I'm not sure, but I think I'd much rather the constant in-game distraction (granted only if it was minimized) with rare plugs during down times (think old radio "brought to you by" spots). If I could watch a game start to finish, live, with no commercials, I'd be a much more avid viewer.
 
As it is, I've slowed my viewing of the NFL and MLB because of the slow nature of the game. When I watch sports, I watch to be excited, not to be lulled to sleep during long pauses in the action. The NHL, thankfully, doesn't have this problem since the action is dictated by whistles and stops in the game where the action can go for half a period without a whistle. Also, there are stricter commercial rules during the playoffs. The one thing the NHL has done right.

 
They already have been doing in-game ads for years, starting with the signs behind home plate.  Most of the time these days, the sign boards are just blank green screens on which the broadcasters can super-impose whatever they want.  Home, road, and national broadcasts can all put their own ads in those spaces.
 
I'd be willing to deal with advertising bugs on screen as long as they weren't too intrusive (the animated ones that pop out and seem to take up half the screen while they're on suck balls).  They work for soccer broadcasts where there are little to no commercial breaks other than at halftime.
 
And frankly, bring on the uniform advertisements.  Put Dunkin Donuts above the 11 on Buchholz's back.  Put Giant Glass on Tazawa's right sleeve so it faces the CF camera when he comes set.  Put Sullivan Tire on the side of Pedroia's helmet.  I don't care.  If it means shaving 30 seconds per commercial break, that's 18 minutes of my life back.
 
Combine that with actually enforcing the pitch clock that's already in the rules, and I think they'd have something.  I'm not holding my breath that they do anything at all.

 

[InsideTheParker]

 
They already have been doing in-game ads for years, starting with the signs behind home plate.  Most of the time these days, the sign boards are just blank green screens on which the broadcasters can super-impose whatever they want.  Home, road, and national broadcasts can all put their own ads in those spaces.
 
I'd be willing to deal with advertising bugs on screen as long as they weren't too intrusive (the animated ones that pop out and seem to take up half the screen while they're on suck balls).  They work for soccer broadcasts where there are little to no commercial breaks other than at halftime.
 
And frankly, bring on the uniform advertisements.  Put Dunkin Donuts above the 11 on Buchholz's back.  Put Giant Glass on Tazawa's right sleeve so it faces the CF camera when he comes set.  Put Sullivan Tire on the side of Pedroia's helmet.  I don't care.  If it means shaving 30 seconds per commercial break, that's 18 minutes of my life back.
 .

But it's so easy to deal w/ the ads by watching thru the DVR------just start watching about an hour after game time and you can skip thru the ads. That's my solution, and now that will be sabotaged by all this visual pollution. If I am determined to watch live I just mute and read an article from the news for 2 minutes. That's far preferable to the screen being junked up w/ ads.

Of course they aren't cutting the ad time anyway. I am in favor of mlb telling the umps to enforce the rules in place for batters and pitchers.

 

[NDame616]

 
Exactly.  They're trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist.
 
NFL games are certainly longer than they used to be.  They never seem to finish in under three hours anymore.  Remember when all of the late games used to start at 4pm?  Where's all of the uproar over how long football games last today?

 
Easy. betting and fantasy football make it so the biggest block of people wantching "neutral" games make it so they want to watch it until the last snap.
 
I may not care about a Colts/Titans matchup, but if I bet on it of if I have Andrew Luck starting, I'm watching it until the end no matter the score because I'm concerned about hitting the over, Luck getting one garbage time TD, etc.
 
How many fans do you think are watching a neutral (eg non-home team) game that is a 5-run game in the 9th? 

 

[Infield Infidel]

 
They already have been doing in-game ads for years

 

[glennhoffmania]

 
They already have been doing in-game ads for years, starting with the signs behind home plate.  Most of the time these days, the sign boards are just blank green screens on which the broadcasters can super-impose whatever they want.  Home, road, and national broadcasts can all put their own ads in those spaces.
 
I'd be willing to deal with advertising bugs on screen as long as they weren't too intrusive (the animated ones that pop out and seem to take up half the screen while they're on suck balls).  They work for soccer broadcasts where there are little to no commercial breaks other than at halftime.
 
And frankly, bring on the uniform advertisements.  Put Dunkin Donuts above the 11 on Buchholz's back.  Put Giant Glass on Tazawa's right sleeve so it faces the CF camera when he comes set.  Put Sullivan Tire on the side of Pedroia's helmet.  I don't care.  If it means shaving 30 seconds per commercial break, that's 18 minutes of my life back.
 
Combine that with actually enforcing the pitch clock that's already in the rules, and I think they'd have something.  I'm not holding my breath that they do anything at all.

 
Plus every score graphic is sponsored by someone, calls to the pen are sponsored by AT&T, pitch trackers have ads on them, and random other crap like NESN booth visits.  It's nonstop ads throughout the game.
 

 
Easy. betting and fantasy football make it so the biggest block of people wantching "neutral" games make it so they want to watch it until the last snap.
 
I may not care about a Colts/Titans matchup, but if I bet on it of if I have Andrew Luck starting, I'm watching it until the end no matter the score because I'm concerned about hitting the over, Luck getting one garbage time TD, etc.
 
How many fans do you think are watching a neutral (eg non-home team) game that is a 5-run game in the 9th? 

But that isn't the issue.  The question isn't why are more people watching the end of football games than baseball games.  The question is why are people bitching about the length of baseball games but not football games.  If people are going to lose interest in a 5 run game in the 9th, they'll do so whether the game took 2:45 or 3:30.  If someone bet on the Colts/Titans game, why wouldn't they rather have the game last 3 hours like it did 10 years ago instead of maybe 3.5 hours now?
 
Honestly the length of football games annoys me far more than football, only because it interferes with the 4pm start times and for the prime time games that don't start until 8:30 it means I'm up past midnight.  If a 7pm baseball game ends at 10:30 I don't give a shit.

 

[Spacemans Bong]

Baseball teams play five or six games a week at night, a football team might play three night games all season - and that's if they're pretty good. 
 
I'm a late night guy so it's cool, but baseball crimps on your bedtime more. 
 
Anyway, just enforce the 12 second rule and tell batters that short of injury, a broken bat, or a contact falling out, they're not allowed to leave the box. Bing bang boom, you've just shortened games by 20 minutes, if not more, without fundamentally changing anything. 

 

[Spacemans Bong]

 
 
On the topic of getting new eyeballs, I heard a rather damning point of view on a recent ESPN Radio Chicago podcast, and admittedly it was one I hadn't even thought of...
I
n short, the two radio personalities were younger guys and they pointed out that all the discussion (in the media) about baseball being in a state of crisis and needing to change was being led by an older generation and/or baseball enthusiasts.
There stance, and they argued their friends and really there generation as a whole was they didn't care if baseball changed because they really don't care about baseball.  It's a fringe, mostly regional sport that they have a mild interest in. They essentially laughed about ideas, such as shortening the game, saving the sport....because again, they really don't care. Cutting a game from 3:15 to 2:50 wasn't going to somehow make them love the game.  Either way it's essentially a 3 hour investment and one they don't care to make.
I don't know what percentage of younger sports fans that actually does represent, but I do think it represents some which is why I found it interesting, and why now when I see something like this my mind immediately thinks it may actually wind up being about keeping current fans rather than creating an influx of new fans.
 
Personally, I'm happy they are exploring it and while I don;t expect any radical changes, I'll welcome anything as an improvement.  While the current pace isn't a deal breaker to me, I wouldn't mind them speeding things up. The LLWS was a reminder of how exciting and engaging the game can be without the lulls...obviously MLB is never going to move at that pace, but any step in that direction, even a shuffle, is a good thing.

 
 
25 year old Cub fans think baseball sucks, quelle surprise. I've yet to see a sports fan from a city in a pennant race just decide they're not interested. No doubt Kansas City and Pittsburgh are full of people who have just fallen in love with baseball all over again.

 

[glennhoffmania]

Baseball teams play five or six games a week at night, a football team might play three night games all season - and that's if they're pretty good. 
 
I'm a late night guy so it's cool, but baseball crimps on your bedtime more. 

But to NDame's point, people watch football games even if their team isn't playing.  I watched the NY/Chi game last night, but I went to bed at 11:30 and it wasn't over yet.  A 7pm Sox game may end at 10:30.  That's fine. 
 
I don't really mind the length of games in either sport except for the convenience issue at times.  But I definitely get more annoyed at the constant commercial breaks in football than in baseball.  You can watch football for ten minutes and see eight minutes of commercials if there's some combination of a time out, an injury, a score, a punt, a kickoff, a turnover or a quarter ending.

 

[Al Zarilla]

But it's so easy to deal w/ the ads by watching thru the DVR------just start watching about an hour after game time and you can skip thru the ads. That's my solution, and now that will be sabotaged by all this visual pollution. If I am determined to watch live I just mute and read an article from the news for 2 minutes. That's far preferable to the screen being junked up w/ ads.

Of course they aren't cutting the ad time anyway. I am in favor of mlb telling the umps to enforce the rules in place for batters and pitchers.

But, but, you can't game-thread watching that way.   
Actually, I find if I am posting and reading the game thread, I'm usually busy catching up with the thread between innings or during pitcher change times, so I just basically hear the commercials. So, to me, game threading makes the long games much more tolerable, except for the 4+ hour Yankee-Red Sox games, about which I hate to admit, I kind of agree with Joe West. I even sometimes game thread for Giants games, but the one active board I know of them for them, an MLB.com forum, is not very good. I guess I'm addicted. Still, even though I can pass the time on game threads during games, it's not to say that games aren't too long in general. I'm old school and got used to the 2 - 2 1/2 hour games of years ago. Pitchers should more emulate Buehrle and hitters not emulate Nomar, as much as I like him, or Mike Hargrove, the human rain delay.  

 

[SumnerH]

But it's so easy to deal w/ the ads by watching thru the DVR------just start watching about an hour after game time and you can skip thru the ads. That's my solution, and now that will be sabotaged by all this visual pollution. If I am determined to watch live I just mute and read an article from the news for 2 minutes. That's far preferable to the screen being junked up w/ ads.

Of course they aren't cutting the ad time anyway. I am in favor of mlb telling the umps to enforce the rules in place for batters and pitchers.

 
Watching delayed sports sucks viscerally, though.  Half the fun is feeling like you're part of a mass shared experience, and knowing that things are on a significant delay kills the emotion--I'd rather follow live game threads and online boxes than watch delayed TV broadcasts.

 

[InsideTheParker]

But, but, you can't game-thread watching that way.   
 

 
Watching delayed sports sucks viscerally, though.  Half the fun is feeling like you're part of a mass shared experience, and knowing that things are on a significant delay kills the emotion--I'd rather follow live game threads and online boxes than watch delayed TV broadcasts.

I understand that, though I don't feel quite that way. I like to catch up by skipping commercials and watch the later innings live as I catch up to the game thread. So I'm experiencing the most exciting time with everyone else. I just posted what I did in response to some folks wanting to have commercials  on the tv screen or the uniforms during play if it would encourage mlb to shorten the commercial breaks. My way is better for me.

 

[hbk72777]

 
Watching delayed sports sucks viscerally, though.  Half the fun is feeling like you're part of a mass shared experience, and knowing that things are on a significant delay kills the emotion--I'd rather follow live game threads and online boxes than watch delayed TV broadcasts.

 
I agree. I never dvr any game, I'd rather not watch.
 
Especially when you're rooting during a rally that happened and hour before. Just feels weird.

 

[hitatater]

For people that argue eliminating or reducing commercials, would you be willing to deal with running ads across the TV while the game is going on? How much would a company like Coca-Cola pay to run an inning long scroll across your screen or some little animation in the corner of the screen while you watched the game?
 
[snip]

 
 
Call me crazy, but it looks to me like we already HAVE 'ads across the TV' during the entirety of the game: The live pitch count/scorebox is often sponsored, there is always an ad on the walls behind the catcher, stadium shots always have some sponsor placement, etc. 
 
There are a lot of ads.

 

[Fuzzypants]

Instead of attempting to shorten games, maybe what MLB should be looking at are new ways to keep fans involved in games.  If the committee realized that, as SumnerH so eloquently put it "...half the fun is feeling like your part of a mass shared experience..." and how things like discussion boards can build community and keep people involved, it may be a way to stimulate more interest and keep people from caring how long games run. 
 
Maybe something like an app that let's fans interact during games while also providing some kind of real-time fantasy participation.  They could make the experience even better for those who attend games in person, to keep ticket sales up. 
 
Acknowledge that most people multi-task and figure out a way to market baseball as the thing you watch or listen to while you do other things.

 

[Lose Remerswaal]

Nothing is going to get me to turn off a game more quickly than a bunch of tweets along the bottom of the screen or any social media or anything else other than the game being shown on the screen.
 
The idea is to improve this great game in and of itself, not to drown it in a bunch of ancillary distractions that will make it palatable to those who like distractions.

 

[YTF]

Instead of attempting to shorten games, maybe what MLB should be looking at are new ways to keep fans involved in games.  If the committee realized that, as SumnerH so eloquently put it "...half the fun is feeling like your part of a mass shared experience..." and how things like discussion boards can build community and keep people involved, it may be a way to stimulate more interest and keep people from caring how long games run. 
 
Maybe something like an app that let's fans interact during games while also providing some kind of real-time fantasy participation.  They could make the experience even better for those who attend games in person, to keep ticket sales up. 
 
Acknowledge that most people multi-task and figure out a way to market baseball as the thing you watch or listen to while you do other things.

 
I vote 1000 times no. I already hate the stupid, meaningless in game polls that NESN currently run as well as the other "interactive" crap that is being interjected into sports TV broadcasts. I don't need or want my announcers tweeting in game and sharing what others are tweeting back. To be honest, I would like to see game lengths shortened, but would rather see this stuff eliminated first. For me it's it just detracts from the game.

 

[JimD]

And frankly, bring on the uniform advertisements.  Put Dunkin Donuts above the 11 on Buchholz's back.  Put Giant Glass on Tazawa's right sleeve so it faces the CF camera when he comes set.  Put Sullivan Tire on the side of Pedroia's helmet.  I don't care.  If it means shaving 30 seconds per commercial break, that's 18 minutes of my life back.
 

 
You're kidding yourself if you think that the eventual arrival of uniform advertisements will reduce commercial time or any other in-game advertising distractions. 

 

[brs3]

I looked into this yesterday, but can't find the links to show my work. The avg MLB game is 3:08. The avg NFL game is 3:10 long. The avg MLB fan during the last World Series was 54 years old. The avg NFL fan during the last Super Bowl was 47 years old.
 
I don't think the MLB really is seeking a way to speed up the game or make their fanbase younger. The fan base would be younger if games didn't end at 10pm or later. In the case of the postseason, 11PM or later. They're never going to bring back more day games for a ton of reasons. If they installed a pitch clock and charged a balk every time the clock ran out, it might speed up the game.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

Here's a suggestion that won't really affect the time of every game, but certainly would cut out some of the bull shit time wasting.  Something like this happens...every player that comes out of the dugout or the bullpen is booted from the game and fined.  There were no punches thrown or even an overly heated exchange in this instance, just one guy yelling at another.  Absolutely no reason for the benches and bullpens to empty like they did.  There never is.  If the hitter wants to charge, let him go one on one with the pitcher or catcher or whomever but also let him deal with the consequences of charging despite being out-numbered by as many as 9 to 1.  Nothing worthwhile ever comes of 35 guys from each side running out to the middle of the field to mill around maybe yell at each other for five minutes.  Usually, it ends up with an elderly bench coach on the ground at the feet of an all star pitcher.  Nobody wants that.

 

[tims4wins]

I looked into this yesterday, but can't find the links to show my work. The avg MLB game is 3:08. The avg NFL game is 3:10 long. The avg MLB fan during the last World Series was 54 years old. The avg NFL fan during the last Super Bowl was 47 years old.
 
I don't think the MLB really is seeking a way to speed up the game or make their fanbase younger. The fan base would be younger if games didn't end at 10pm or later. In the case of the postseason, 11PM or later. They're never going to bring back more day games for a ton of reasons. If they installed a pitch clock and charged a balk every time the clock ran out, it might speed up the game.

 
There are a two HUGE differences, though, IMO. One, the NFL plays only once a week - 3 hours once a week for 16 weeks is a LOT different than 3 hours 6-7 times a week for ~26 weeks. Two, the games are (mostly) on Sunday afternoons, so staying up late is less of an issue on a nightly basis.

 

[glennhoffmania]

Three nights per week there are football games on that start at 8:30. Unless you plan to stay up until midnight you won't see any of the endings. That to me is a much bigger problem than a baseball game that may end at 10:30.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

Three nights per week there are football games on that start at 8:30. Unless you plan to stay up until midnight you won't see any of the endings. That to me is a much bigger problem than a baseball game that may end at 10:30.

But if you are watching those 3 games, you are a diehard NFL fan and not just a Pats fan. Watching 100+ baseball games as opposed to 16 football games? Redsox games would keep you up way longer on west coast trips anyway. This isn't really even debatable as to which is more harmful to your sleep.

edit: Granted there are probably way more casual fans that watch 16 Pats' games a year than casual fans that watch 100 Sox' games. Or whatever local team.

 

[HriniakPosterChild]

I don't think the MLB really is seeking a way to speed up the game or make their fanbase younger. The fan base would be younger if games didn't end at 10pm or later. In the case of the postseason, 11PM or later. 

 
My kid saw the end of Game 6 and the trophy presentation last year. He was in bed by 10pm . 
 
(We live in the Pacific Time Zone.)

 

[geoduck no quahog]

I stopped watching regularly about 20 years ago, when the games started closing in on three hours on average. That was about the time they lengthened the between-inning breaks and started running commercials during every pitching change.

I also pretty much stopped going to games. I used to go to maybe 5-10 per year. It's been ten years since I've gone at all.

For me, it is absolutely the television experience. If I don't watch regularly, I don't have the bug to see the games in person. Then I stop following the standings. Which means I pretty much only pay attention if my team makes the World Series. Even the playoffs are longer than they were when I was a kid and fell in love with the game.

 
Uhhh...just out of curiosity, why do you frequent a board about baseball? You seem not to be a fan of the sport.

 

[cromulence]

I don't understand how anyone can think pace of play isn't a problem, even if you personally don't mind it. If your mindset is "I love baseball, so I want more baseball, so I want long games" - it's a flawed one. First of all, baseball is on every night, all summer long, with lots of games each night. There is no shortage of baseball for you to watch. Making the games move faster will not rob you of baseball - it will rob you of watching guys stand around doing nothing. Secondly, I know it's easy to focus only on your own experience, age group, region, etc and conclude that baseball is doing just fine. And it's certainly not dying. But as someone who loves the sport, I don't want to see it marginalized and diminished, and there's no question that it's on that path right now and has been for some time. When I was growing up (27 now), "baseball is boring" had already become a commonly held opinion among kids. There weren't nearly as many kids obsessed with baseball as basketball or football. The best way to inject some life into it is to speed things up and get rid of the incessant time-wasting. 
 
Let me put this another way - to everyone who has declared that this is pointless and something that doesn't matter to them, do you actually think it would make you enjoy baseball less? Do you truly value all the standing around? I just don't get it.

 

[glennhoffmania]

But if you are watching those 3 games, you are a diehard NFL fan and not just a Pats fan. Watching 100+ baseball games as opposed to 16 football games? Redsox games would keep you up way longer on west coast trips anyway. This isn't really even debatable as to which is more harmful to your sleep.

edit: Granted there are probably way more casual fans that watch 16 Pats' games a year than casual fans that watch 100 Sox' games. Or whatever local team.

 
But what are we talking about here?  Finishing in time to get to bed at a reasonable hour?  Enjoyment of the game going down if the game lasts longer than three hours?  Or losing viewers because of the pace of play?
 
I'm not debating what's better for my sleep.  When the Sox are on the west coast I simply don't watch the whole game.  That represents a small percentage of their games per year so if I miss the end of 25 games, big deal.  Football is on once per week.  Each game is far more important to the season than any single baseball game.  With the endless commercial breaks and other stoppages in play there is no way a night game will ever end by 11:30.  I'm not worried about what's harmful to my sleep.  If I'm tired I'll go to bed.  And that's what usually happens because I get sick of waiting for the game to actually proceed.
 
This ties into the third issue- people getting bored because of the pace of play.  You can watch 30 minutes of football and see 10 minutes of actual play.  Yes, baseball games can drag on due to mound visits, pitchers stepping off, etc.  But at least you're watching something other than commercials.  I think what it boils down to is the issues with baseball are on the field- the behavior of players, coaches and umps slow the game down- but the issue with football is the networks and tv contracts.  The former is tougher to fix because it would require a change in behavior by many people.  The latter is very easy to fix in theory, but since maximizing profits is the main goal it'll never happen.

 

[tims4wins]

But there is a huge difference in pace of play in football vs. baseball - which is replay. Almost every single football play gets replayed immediately. So even though an NFL game has only like 10 minutes of "action", when it's not in a commercial break there is something to watch/analyze. Whereas in the middle of an at bat in baseball, there is nothing to really focus on. I think that's a huge issue.

 

[gryoung]

Nothing is going to get me to turn off a game more quickly than a bunch of tweets along the bottom of the screen or any social media or anything else other than the game being shown on the screen.
 
The idea is to improve this great game in and of itself, not to drown it in a bunch of ancillary distractions that will make it palatable to those who like distractions.

 
My feelings exactly.
 
Exhibit A - NESN's stupid text polls during the game. 

 

[SumnerH]

I don't understand how anyone can think pace of play isn't a problem, even if you personally don't mind it. If your mindset is "I love baseball, so I want more baseball, so I want long games" - it's a flawed one. 
...
Let me put this another way - to everyone who has declared that this is pointless and something that doesn't matter to them, do you actually think it would make you enjoy baseball less? Do you truly value all the standing around? I just don't get it.

 
It's a matter of degrees.  A little tightening or loosening here and there isn't a big deal, and people are fairly amenable to small adjustments (enforce the pitch clock, don't always grant time to the batter).  When taken to extremes, it sucks and has the potential to ruin the sport for people who enjoy it in order to attract people who don't--look no further than Twenty20 and the impact it's had on real test cricket in India.
 
In the case of baseball, look at the graph I posted: basically, since 1960 we've seen the 18 minutes added because of longer commercial breaks between innings.  That's annoying, but it's not coming back and isn't on-field standing around from the TV viewer's perspective.  And it's happened to every major televised sport.  Aside from that it's like 5-10 minutes of difference--again, maybe worth adjusting but not worth dramatically changing the game over.
 
The biggest problem with baseball is that it isn't football.  The average football game has less than half as many plays, last longer, and has more time between plays than the average baseball game, but it's far less frequent that you hear people complain about the pace of play.  The difference?  More people are football fans, so watching the replay from 3 different angles is "fun" and they put up with touchdown, commercial, PAT, commercial, kickoff, commercial without thinking twice about it.  They're not baseball fans, so watching the replay between pitches is "boring" and they complain about it.
 
 

Nothing is going to get me to turn off a game more quickly than a bunch of tweets along the bottom of the screen or any social media or anything else other than the game being shown on the screen.
 
The idea is to improve this great game in and of itself, not to drown it in a bunch of ancillary distractions that will make it palatable to those who like distractions.

 
Done right you should be able to turn them on or off, like you can with closed captioning.  As we move more toward online viewing with more user control, I expect we'll see a lot of this sort of feature coming in as optional "enhanced" viewing (much like you can view with just the park noise, or home announcer, or turn on/off some of the fancy pitchfx stuff currently).