Just Asking...Was Hamilton Correct?

[KRAM1]

So, if you are a Major League Baseball player and/or fan, do you wonder if Hamilton's comment about not being a baseball town might just be correct?

Here are the ratings when the Rangers went against the Cowboys Sunday...a MUST win game for the Rangers and just another early season game for the Cowboys....

Cowboys - 26.8 rating & 711,620 homes

Rangers - 5.9 rating &156,663 homes

The Cowboys out rated the Rangers 4.5 to 1. That's pretty darn significant in the TV world and in what area viewers seem to favor.

That a gigantic difference, and gives me pause to wonder if Josh might have had a valid point. A must win game for the Rangers in order to secure at least one more game, and a so-so early season game for the Cowboys and there is this much separation between the size of the audience?

It was noted that in the 1 hour and 45 min. That the Rangers bumped up against the Cowboys the Rangers pulled a 6.7 rating. The Cowboys peaked at 29.6 early in the 4th quarter.

So, did Josh at least have a talking point? Still really happy the Rangers rid themselves of Hamilton, but does he not have at least a point about the area's sports preference?

[forevereagle]

So we are comparing a weeknight on cable to a weekend afternoon on broadcast and expecting the same results? The Cowboys game didn't have the same level of competition for viewers as the game has little new programming competition as it is not during prime-time. What did the game get in Tampa? What is the average rating on a weeknight for a Rangers game? Those numbers have almost no context by which to judge them.

Add to this that he went to the Angels, which is easily not a "baseball town."

Edited October 1, 2013 by forevereagle

[UNT90]

There are 162 Ranger games on television each year. There are 16 Cowboy games.

Baseball is a casual viewing regular season sport. Football is event viewing for all games ( although I haven't planned to watch a Cowbpy game in about 8 years).

If the Cows played 162 games a year on TV, you would see similar ratings.

[oldguystudent]

I don't think any team in the AL West is a baseball town. At all. But then, then number of baseball towns in general is pretty low. I'd go with Boston, New York, Chicago, San Francisco, and in spite of its reputation for fans arriving in the third and leaving in the seventh, Los Angeles. Outside of that, you don't really see the random cab driver with one hand on the wheel and an ear glued to the car radio for a meaningless day game in late September.

Baseball in general just isn't nearly as popular as I remember it being when I was a kid. My impression on the rare occasion that I do go to a major league game is that outside the cities listed above, it's a giant circle jerk of Oakley sunglasses and people showing off their ability to purchase $100 tickets and $12 beers. But rarely do I see people actually watching the game. Especially in the regular season.

So, yes, Josh had a point, but Arlington is hardly alone.

[UNT90]

I don't think any team in the AL West is a baseball town. At all. But then, then number of baseball towns in general is pretty low. I'd go with Boston, New York, Chicago, San Francisco, and in spite of its reputation for fans arriving in the third and leaving in the seventh, Los Angeles. Outside of that, you don't really see the random cab driver with one hand on the wheel and an ear glued to the car radio for a meaningless day game in late September.

Baseball in general just isn't nearly as popular as I remember it being when I was a kid. My impression on the rare occasion that I do go to a major league game is that outside the cities listed above, it's a giant circle jerk of Oakley sunglasses and people showing off their ability to purchase $100 tickets and $12 beers. But rarely do I see people actually watching the game. Especially in the regular season.

So, yes, Josh had a point, but Arlington is hardly alone.

But Josh went to... Anaheim.

Hardly a baseball town and not LA

[MeanGreenTexan]

There is only one "baseball town" in Texas, and that is Corpus Christi.

Yes Josh was right, but boy was it a great rally cry for the bandwaggon jumpers who will likely not return when the Rangers start losing. It's a cycle. The window is closing. That sucks.

And no, Josh didn't go to a "baseball town" either... although, if you look at all of the talent in the bigs, a significant amount are from so-cal.

[oldguystudent]

But Josh went to... Anaheim.

Hardly a baseball town and not LA

A) I said no town in the AL West is a baseball town. That would include Anaheim.

B ) I said Los Angeles. I didn't say Anaheim. I've lived in both places, and believe me I know the difference.

Edited October 1, 2013 by oldguystudent

[UNT90]

A) I said no town in the AL West is a baseball town. That would include Anaheim.

B ) I said Los Angeles. I didn't say Anaheim. I've lived in both places, and believe me I know the difference.

I know you and I know the difference. It was said for the benefit of others.

I just find of funny that the living, breathing definition of double standard would dis the metroplex's baseball acumen while heading off to play in the baseball Mecca know as Anaheim, CA.

And how is one so pasty white after playing ball a full summer in SoCal? Looked pale and skinny in the season ending series...

Edited October 1, 2013 by UNT90

[mattmartin817]

No, that proves nothing, football ratings always CRUSH baseball game ratings in every market. It doesn't matter where it is. Like someone said earlier, football games are an event, there are only 16 a season, there are 162 televised baseball games a season. No market is going to have giant ratings for a baseball game.

And who gives a crap what Josh Hamilton said. He's going to be out of the league in 2 years maybe 3. He's a complete asshat, and should be treated as such.

[Rudy]

Add to that that most of the fans had probably accepted the Rangers' season as over.

[CMJ]

Add St. Louis to the baseball town list.

I'd think you could make a case for a few other "old" cities as well (when Cleveland was consistently good in the late 90's they had like a million sellouts in a row). Basically most baseball towns are ones that have had their teams for like 75-80 years or more.

[oldguystudent]

Add St. Louis to the baseball town list.

I'd think you could make a case for a few other "old" cities as well (when Cleveland was consistently good in the late 90's they had like a million sellouts in a row). Basically most baseball towns are ones that have had their teams for like 75-80 years or more.

You are absolutely correct with STL. Detroit and Cleveland would've been there at some point, but I don't think so anymore.

[CMJ]

You are absolutely correct with STL. Detroit and Cleveland would've been there at some point, but I don't think so anymore.

I think Detroit is sorta getting back that mojo..

Cleveland needs to have some more consistentcy, but I still think they are. It hasn't been that long since they were the poster child for baseball cities.

Pittsburgh may be getting there...they've just been down for so long people there forgot. But they've had great attendance the last couple of years now that they're relevant again.

[MeanGreenTexan]

I think Detroit is sorta getting back that mojo..

Cleveland needs to have some more consistentcy, but I still think they are. It hasn't been that long since they were the poster child for baseball cities.

Pittsburgh may be getting there...they've just been down for so long people there forgot. But they've had great attendance the last couple of years now that they're relevant again.

When I think of Detroit sports, the first team that pops into mind is the Red Wings.

Pittsburgh has a very rich baseball history, and not just the Pirates (Do yourself a favor and look up the Pittsburgh Crawfords)... Unfortunately, they also have a very rich football history too.

[CMJ]

When I think of Detroit sports, the first team that pops into mind is the Red Wings.

Pittsburgh has a very rich baseball history, and not just the Pirates (Do yourself a favor and look up the Pittsburgh Crawfords)... Unfortunately, they also have a very rich football history too.

Well, some cities are known for rabidly supporting multiple sports teams. Chicago does for example - check out their support for the Blackhawks (even though that's usually not the first team that comes to mind when one think of Chitown, they have among the most supportive fanbases). Likewise I think Detroit is a hockey and baseball town.

Edited October 1, 2013 by CMJ

[TheFranchise]

Yeah, this really proves nothing. Baseball plays 10x the number of games. Football plays simply once a week. This is the same in every market.

My big question is this -- what does he define as a "baseball town?" Because from where I observe things, Anaheim is even less supportive than Arlington. On top of that, does a city that loves its football team more than any other team in town make it any "less" of a "baseball town?"

I would consider Boston a "Football town." I'd also consider it a "baseball town." Furthermore, I'd consider it a "Basketball town" and a "Hockey town." My point is, they go all-out for all of their teams. The four teams are independent of each other and one can love them all.

Dallas-Fort Worth being a team that supports the Cowboys rabidly has no bearing on how much we support the Rangers.

What I saw was a team that most saw as "done" this weekend drawing a crowd that was roughly 80% of the ballpark's capacity for the final three games of the season and #163. What I saw was a team that topped 3,000,000 fans for the second straight year (and nearly the third -- 2,946,949 in 2011) and ranked fifth in the league in home attendance.

I'd say that's pretty dang good, and worthy at least of discussion as a "baseball town."

[GrayEagle]

It's comparing apples to oranges. The Los Angeles area has no professional football.

So, let's compare this season's average attendance for the Rangers with that of the Angels. Texas averaged about 38,800 per game; about 1,500 per game more than Los Angeles/Anaheim. But, to say that there are no baseball towns in the AL West is wrong. The Rangers ranked fifth in the major leagues and the Angels were seventh. That would mean that there are only four of the 30 major league teams in 'baseball towns'.

Edited October 3, 2013 by GrayEagle

[GreenBat]

It's comparing apples to oranges. The Los Angeles area has no professional football.

Until the all-star break LA had no professional baseball either. Thank god for the Dodgers for LA baseball fans.

[CMJ]

Having been to several games at both Dodger Stadium and Angel Stadium -- I actually think Anaheim has the more devoted fanbase. It's not nearly as large as the Dodgers, who mostly dominate LA and Ventura counties (and are probably pulling 30% or more of Orange County), but Angels fans tend to be more hardcore top to bottom. Most of their fans actually give a crap about the game, whereas Dodger Stadium has a ton of folks who barely seem to be watching at all (not to mention the infamous showing up late AND leaving early crowd).

[UNTLifer]

Yeah, this really proves nothing. Baseball plays 10x the number of games. Football plays simply once a week. This is the same in every market.

My big question is this -- what does he define as a "baseball town?" Because from where I observe things, Anaheim is even less supportive than Arlington. On top of that, does a city that loves its football team more than any other team in town make it any "less" of a "baseball town?"

I would consider Boston a "Football town." I'd also consider it a "baseball town." Furthermore, I'd consider it a "Basketball town" and a "Hockey town." My point is, they go all-out for all of their teams. The four teams are independent of each other and one can love them all.

Dallas-Fort Worth being a team that supports the Cowboys rabidly has no bearing on how much we support the Rangers.

What I saw was a team that most saw as "done" this weekend drawing a crowd that was roughly 80% of the ballpark's capacity for the final three games of the season and #163. What I saw was a team that topped 3,000,000 fans for the second straight year (and nearly the third -- 2,946,949 in 2011) and ranked fifth in the league in home attendance.

I'd say that's pretty dang good, and worthy at least of discussion as a "baseball town."

This, plus I don't think the Rangers window is closing. What Wash did this year with a patchwork outfield, a starting rotation that missed two starters all year and dealt with injuries to Ogando and Perez, lost Cruz for 50 years and played a large number of young players in Martin Perez, Profar, Leonis Martin, etc... I would think the future is bright. The Rangers need an everyday leftfielder, protection for Beltre in the line up and an injury free year from the starting rotation to be right back in the pennant race next year. Hamilton is done.

[JesseMartin]

It's funny when you look at the ratings and the number of games overall. Maybe the importance of a given game would weigh a bit more, but a lot of that depends on fans' perception of the team's overall value at that point in the season. But when you consider the rating (what did you say in the OP, the Cowboys were about 3X the Rangers' rating?) and the number of games...if held equal, you're looking at about triple the number of viewers (including repeat viewers) over the course of the long season in baseball.

But I also think you need to look at the psychology of spectatorship and how it has changed over the last generation or two. For instance, if my joints are feeling good, I can play baseball and soccer pretty much all afternoon. But as far as watching it, if it's on I'll casually keep an eye on it while doing other stuff but I'd much rather play than watch sports like those. I know some of you on here are pretty into watching them, and you probably have a lot more patience than I do, but even more so you have to consider the change in how people spend their free time. Kids used to grow up playing and watching baseball and other sports and dreaming of being like their favorite player. You still have some of that, but you have a lot more of the video games and other media encroaching upon leisure time, especially with younger folks but it affects just about every generation now. Combine the leisure time exchange with the lack of desire for numerous spectator sports, and basically what you have is a large number of people who either don't watch sports or only do if there's a regular "payoff" - so those with less movement or less scoring tend to seem tedious to some.

Simplifying it a bit...if you asked people 30 years ago and people today the same following questions, you'd get very different answers on average.

1) Would you rather watch baseball or play video games, etc?

2) Would you rather watch or play baseball if you had to pick only 1? (Back in the day it probably would have been a fairly even split. Now you'd probably get a lot of people answering "neither, I want to play video games" or something like that.)

[Green Mean]

I've never liked that term of being a "football town", "baseball town" etc. DFW is a huge market with millions of people. There is a share for every major professional sports team here.

[KRAM1]

I've never liked that term of being a "football town", "baseball town" etc. DFW is a huge market with millions of people. There is a share for every major professional sports team here.

Agree...it's a soccer town! Go FC Dallas!

Kidding aside...I think you have a very valid point! Well said!

[Green P1]

I'd say an entire metroplex worth of "non-baseball town" fans realizing how utterly worthless that douche bag was like months and months before the rest of the nation should be a feather in our cap.