• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

~~2013 MLB WORLD SERIES~~ Cardinals VS Red Sox

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

World Series Champion?

  • Boston Red Sox

  • St. Louis Cardinals

Results are only viewable after voting.
"first world series loss for the red sox since 1986"


well that's like saying the houston texans have never lost a superbowl. shutup buck.
 
lupi said:
terrible decision to throw to third and craptastic attempt at a throw.
Click to expand...

Probably a bad move to pull Lacky so quick, he still had pinpoint control and was only at 94 pitch count. Breslow walked his first batter then was behind in the other 2 he faced, now the series goes to St. Louis and we lose Ortiz (unless he plays first base for Napoli which I doubt will happen).
 
ElFenix said:
"first world series loss for the red sox since 1986"


well that's like saying the houston texans have never lost a superbowl. shutup buck.
Click to expand...

I think it's different.

Last time Boston was in the WS. They Swept. Before that? Swept again.

Then this WS, they win the first game. That's a really impressive streak to be honest.
 
TechBoyJK said:
I think it's different.

Last time Boston was in the WS. They Swept. Before that? Swept again.

Then this WS, they win the first game. That's a really impressive streak to be honest.
Click to expand...

Am I retarded? We swept both of them? I remember some tension in the game.. maybe 4-3 or even 4-2.

Both of them were 4-0 all along? wtf.
 
Zeze said:
Am I retarded? We swept both of them? I remember some tension in the game.. maybe 4-3 or even 4-2.

Both of them were 4-0 all along? wtf.
Click to expand...

Yes, Sox swept the Cards last time, and another stat is that in those 4 games, the Cards never held the lead. Last night's game was the first time in the past 6 WS games that the Cards held a lead, much less won the game.
 
"It's a game of inches." -- "It's a game of mistakes."

What are 'Baseball cliches', Alex?

=======================================

Game 1, Cardinals errors sunk them. Game 2, Boston puts on the error jersey and loses.

Go into Busch Stadium and play clean baseball, Sox!

Ortiz plays first base. Guaranteed. Nava plays left field. Guaranteed. Drew should sit. A pipe dream...?
 
TechBoyJK said:
Yes, Sox swept the Cards last time, and another stat is that in those 4 games, the Cards never held the lead. Last night's game was the first time in the past 6 WS games that the Cards held a lead, much less won the game.
Click to expand...

in 2004 the sox swept the cards.

but the cards have won 2 world series since then (and the sox 1) so your statement is grossly misleading.
 
When I heard this discussed earlier, the "official" report is that ortiz would start 2 of the 3 games.

As far as ratings, it was mentioned that last year was the lowest WS over the last 3 decades. Also this year is the first time the average baseball fans age is over 50 while NFL & NBA are both in the low 40's.
 
TechBoyJK said:
Yes, Sox swept the Cards last time, and another stat is that in those 4 games against the Boston Red Sox, the Cards never held the lead. Last night's game was the first time in the past 6 WS games against the Boston Red Sox that the Cards held a lead, much less won the game.
Click to expand...

ElFenix said:
in 2004 the sox swept the cards.

but the cards have won 2 world series since then (and the sox 1) so your statement is grossly misleading.
Click to expand...
Better?
 
lupi said:
When I heard this discussed earlier, the "official" report is that ortiz would start 2 of the 3 games.

As far as ratings, it was mentioned that last year was the lowest WS over the last 3 decades. Also this year is the first time the average baseball fans age is over 50 while NFL & NBA are both in the low 40's.
Click to expand...

I was reading over at Grantland that yes these are huge issues (national following and youth interest), but baseball has never been in a better state. This is due to a huge increase in regional following (i.e. your team). See the crazy TV deals that the Dodgers got (or the Yankees/Red Sox/Giants recently got). Attendance is at a all time high and revenue is growing at a good pace.

Nevertheless MLB needs to figure out how to fix the national ratings and youth problem. One start would be to make the games faster, they take forever especially in the playoffs.
 
HopJokey said:
I was reading over at Grantland that yes these are huge issues (national following and youth interest), but baseball has never been in a better state. This is due to a huge increase in regional following (i.e. your team). See the crazy TV deals that the Dodgers got (or the Yankees/Red Sox/Giants recently got). Attendance is at a all time high and revenue is growing at a good pace.

Nevertheless MLB needs to figure out how to fix the national ratings and youth problem. One start would be to make the games faster, they take forever especially in the playoffs.
Click to expand...

What's more important though? National ratings or local ratings combined with better ticket sales? Baseball averaged more than 30k tickets sold per game for 2,430 games and local ratings were insanely good this year. Averaging 30k per game for that many games is really impressive. I have to imagine there's more money in ticket sales combined with the merchandise and the like than the national broadcast games. It's obvious that there's so much money in the MLB now if you look at the ridiculous salaries being paid out.
 
ElFenix said:
in 2004 the sox swept the cards.

but the cards have won 2 world series since then (and the sox 1) so your statement is grossly misleading.
Click to expand...

Yes, you are right. I didn't included that it was in regards to their series against the Red Sox, not in general.
 
And attendance boost may be in part to a large part of their fan base being able to attend more games as they are in retired land, which will seems good would actually indicate a problem.

Seems ratings for the first game were also lower than that gripping MNF match between giants and vikings.
 
Smartazz said:
What's more important though? National ratings or local ratings combined with better ticket sales? Baseball averaged more than 30k tickets sold per game for 2,430 games and local ratings were insanely good this year. Averaging 30k per game for that many games is really impressive. I have to imagine there's more money in ticket sales combined with the merchandise and the like than the national broadcast games. It's obvious that there's so much money in the MLB now if you look at the ridiculous salaries being paid out.
Click to expand...

The $$$ is all that matters and thus at this point the local stuff/ticket sales is more important. The national ratings (and globalization stuff) however is more for the long term health of the game.
 
HopJokey said:
The $$$ is all that matters and thus at this point the local stuff/ticket sales is more important. The national ratings (and globalization stuff) however is more for the long term health of the game.
Click to expand...

I hope the next commissioner recognizes this problem. Replay is a step in the right direction though.
 
The air times for these postseason games re one of the first things they need to change. But short term $$$$$ has such a grasp on that sport it isn't funny.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top