Pro sports becoming unwatchable?

[jhansman]

Mark Twain famously said "golf is a good walk spoiled." I played a round of golf this morning. So, you see, Twain and I can differ. I also can really get into an NFL broadcast. I don't watch a ton of those. The 49ers are undefeated, so I am watching them now. I'm kind of a fair weather fan, and TBH I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing. Why should I root for losers?

I am much the same. I like to watch a team that knows how to play (and win), but all the rest of it is such garbage. These routines a dozen players do in the end zone after a score, the chest thumping every time a player does....(wait for it..wait) EXACTLY WHAT THEY ARE PAID FOR, the lousy reffing, all of it takes away from the sport. I'm just getting grumpy in my old age, is all. Go Niners!

 

[Muse]

I am much the same. I like to watch a team that knows how to play (and win), but all the rest of it is such garbage. These routines a dozen players do in the end zone after a score, the chest thumping every time a player does....(wait for it..wait) EXACTLY WHAT THEY ARE PAID FOR, the lousy reffing, all of it takes away from the sport. I'm just getting grumpy in my old age, is all. Go Niners!

Yeah, the Niners. People have been rooting for them to regain their prowess, swagger, dominance... but it has been frustrating for, well, I think over 20 years. This season it is happening so far, but may fall short. QB has to stay healthy, probably, and he has to get better. He's often really good/great, but has too many bad moments. A big thing is getting the fullback back from his injury. They are playing with great emotion, they are fun to watch and root for.

Now, I know about losing teams. I graduated from UC Berkeley, and their football team hasn't won the conference since 1959. 60 years! They started 4 and 0 this year. I tuned into the radio broadcast last night for exactly 3 seconds. What I heard before I turned off the radio and roared in laughter: "___ 28, Bears nothing." Rooting for the Golden Bears football team is a protracted lesson in frustration, you can count on them to disappoint!

 

[jhansman]

They are playing with great emotion, they are fun to watch and root for.

This. I have fallen away from the team since the blip that was Kaepernick & Co., so it is very refreshing to finally see a team that consistently plays with the spirit and talent that Montana/Young/Rice, etc. had again. And yes, Garappolo shows a good deal of promise as he gains experience. I'm just so sick of New England and their dominance; my 44 yr. old daughter walks around in a Brady jersey on game day, with a smug smile, practically swooning. I hear you about the Cal Bears. I remember when they were a force to be reckoned with, and you know they have influential alumni who must be leaning on the administration to finally get a winning team back on the field. The big Div.1 schools are expected to have contending teams that deliver. There's a lot of alumni $$ at stake, to say nothing of all the merch that brings in school revenue. Even at the college level, there is a lot of money at stake in all the sports.

 

[zinfamous]

This. I have fallen away from the team since the blip that was Kaepernick & Co., so it is very refreshing to finally see a team that consistently plays with the spirit and talent that Montana/Young/Rice, etc. had again. And yes, Garappolo shows a good deal of promise as he gains experience. I'm just so sick of New England and their dominance; my 44 yr. old daughter walks around in a Brady jersey on game day, with a smug smile, practically swooning. I hear you about the Cal Bears. I remember when they were a force to be reckoned with, and you know they have influential alumni who must be leaning on the administration to finally get a winning team back on the field. The big Div.1 schools are expected to have contending teams that deliver. There's a lot of alumni $$ at stake, to say nothing of all the merch that brings in school revenue. Even at the college level, there is a lot of money at stake in all the sports.

None of that brings in money to the school. It only ever goes to the AD to support the athletic programs. ....so the University doesn't really care all that much, but every one of them will still waste millions building godawful stupid "training facilities" for "recruiting" and crap like that; oh, and of course preposterously overpaid dunces like "head coaches"...and of course with University money. Not AD money. Athletics and all that it represents is something like 1% of actual money that big research schools bring in; especially one like Cal. Even at Penn State, football money is a mere pittance in comparison to grant money.

 

[Ackmed]

I've had this same conversation several times. Yes and no. The missed calls, the wrong calls, and everything in-between make games hard to watch. Its not "wonder what bad call is going to ruin this game is going to be" is the mindset that I go into watching games. To make matters worse, them not overturning OBVIOUS pass interference calls that are challenged is pathetic. Players, coaches, GM's etc can and have lost their jobs for a win or loss. The refs deciding terrible calls that contribute heavily to a win or loss, while never being held accountable is not right. It is not only the games, but almost as bad for me is the endless commercials in your face. When reviewing a play, or during a 30 second time out, often times they will show both the game and a commercial at the same time in two small windows. Instead of talking about the game, the controversial play that just happened, some add gets shoved in my face. Or they will cut to an actual commercial, and come back and play has already resumed and we didnt get the official making the call. Its really, really annoying.

College FB is getting the same way with targeting. Often times it is NOT the defensive players fault that helmets collide. They're already going for the tackle, and the offensive player lowers their head, or moves to make the contact. But according to the rules, the liability is 100% on the defensive players. Such BS. What do nearly all running backs to when going into a pile and trying to get more yards? Lower their head, and hit the defensive players. Yet its perfectly ok for them to do so. It needs to be the same both ways. The targeting calls are also not called the same in different games, or even the same game. Its very subjective, and they shouldnt be. College players only get so many games to play, most do not make the NFL. Losing a half, or more of a game is terrible.

Game 6 of the WS, had another terrible call. Its not just football. Ended up not costing the Nats the game, but certainly could have. Huge blown call, and backed up by the gutless NY crew who reviewed it. NBA has its fair share too. Its so annoying to see something on replay, that they show over and over, and nothing done about it. Obvious foul, out of bounds, etc. Reviewing tidbits of games, and not everything needs to go. And no, never watching soccer.

 

[zinfamous]

I've had this same conversation several times. Yes and no. The missed calls, the wrong calls, and everything in-between make games hard to watch. Its not "wonder what bad call is going to ruin this game is going to be" is the mindset that I go into watching games. To make matters worse, them not overturning OBVIOUS pass interference calls that are challenged is pathetic. Players, coaches, GM's etc can and have lost their jobs for a win or loss. The refs deciding terrible calls that contribute heavily to a win or loss, while never being held accountable is not right. It is not only the games, but almost as bad for me is the endless commercials in your face. When reviewing a play, or during a 30 second time out, often times they will show both the game and a commercial at the same time in two small windows. Instead of talking about the game, the controversial play that just happened, some add gets shoved in my face. Or they will cut to an actual commercial, and come back and play has already resumed and we didnt get the official making the call. Its really, really annoying.

College FB is getting the same way with targeting. Often times it is NOT the defensive players fault that helmets collide. They're already going for the tackle, and the offensive player lowers their head, or moves to make the contact. But according to the rules, the liability is 100% on the defensive players. Such BS. What do nearly all running backs to when going into a pile and trying to get more yards? Lower their head, and hit the defensive players. Yet its perfectly ok for them to do so. It needs to be the same both ways. The targeting calls are also not called the same in different games, or even the same game. Its very subjective, and they shouldnt be. College players only get so many games to play, most do not make the NFL. Losing a half, or more of a game is terrible.

Game 6 of the WS, had another terrible call. Its not just football. Ended up not costing the Nats the game, but certainly could have. Huge blown call, and backed up by the gutless NY crew who reviewed it. NBA has its fair share too. Its so annoying to see something on replay, that they show over and over, and nothing done about it. Obvious foul, out of bounds, etc. Reviewing tidbits of games, and not everything needs to go. And no, never watching soccer.

The reason I ended up not being bothered by that call in the end, was that Turner actually did knock the 1st base dude's glove out of his hand before the ball got there. I didn't notice it at first, and for whatever reason it was never mentioned by Joe or John during that review. None of it looked intentional, but the runner's body did knock the glove off of his hand. ...even though he was in the path. It looked like an awful call....but I think it's fair in the end. Plus it helps that the situation was more or less erased on the that 2 run homer from Rendon, I think it was?

 

[purbeast0]

The reason I ended up not being bothered by that call in the end, was that Turner actually did knock the 1st base dude's glove out of his hand before the ball got there. I didn't notice it at first, and for whatever reason it was never mentioned by Joe or John during that review. None of it looked intentional, but the runner's body did knock the glove off of his hand. ...even though he was in the path. It looked like an awful call....but I think it's fair in the end. Plus it helps that the situation was more or less erased on the that 2 run homer from Rendon, I think it was?

He "knocked it off" because it was a terrible throw and the first baseman had to reach his hand over there to try and make a play. The glove was there because he had to reach there to try and make a play. The Astro's were rewarded for a bad throw.

Where else was he supposed to run? He was on a straight line going at the bag.

Thankfully Rendon told the world to fuck off with his next at bat and it only cost them one run and the Nats ended up winning.

 

[zinfamous]

He "knocked it off" because it was a terrible throw and the first baseman had to reach his hand over there to try and make a play. The glove was there because he had to reach there to try and make a play. The Astro's were rewarded for a bad throw.

Where else was he supposed to run? He was on a straight line going at the bag.

I don't think it matters. Interference is interference and that's just the way it rolls sometimes. It's also why you are told to throw directly at the runner in situations like this, because you will get the interference call.

I don't think the situation was good for anyone--the ball had to be thrown where it was, Turner was running where he had to run, 1st base was positioned where he had to be. To me, I'm not looking at where Turner was running, because I still think it was fair the whole time. I think that would remain a terrible call if we get some confirmation that this is what the officials called. If it was interfernce on the glove, I think it's fair. Intent or inability to do it differently isn't very relevant, imo.

Also, maybe still lost in some of this is that the play was unreviewable...so the officials shouldn't have even convened. ...but I'm glad they did because that was such a huge situation to not get it right. It was the right call to review it, even though they were technically prevented from doing so...and hey, maybe that's what they were talking about all that time? "Heya Bob, you know we can't review this, right? Oh shit...uh, let's just talk about candles for 4 minutes and pretend we're looking at replays so everyone thinks we're doing something..."

 

[purbeast0]

They didn't review it. They said they gathered together because the Nats were protesting it and the umps didn't know if it was protestable. And it wasn't because it was considered a judgement call.

The ball did not have to be thrown there I'm not sure what you mean. It was a bad throw. It could have been thrown you know, at the first baseman, but it wasn't.

MLB should have just ponied up after the game and said they f'ed up and are thankful it did not change the outcome of the game. This is the Saints/Rams moment from the NFC championship game last year, but thankfully for the sport it did not change the outcome.

You have some of the biggest names in the sport saying how wrong the call was. It's just not a call you make at that stage in game 6 of the WS.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1189373857330806784

 

[zinfamous]

No, it clearly wasn't as egregious as the Saints/Rams interference no-call.

The runner knocked the glove off the first baseman's hand. it doesn't matter where the ball is thrown at that point. It just doesn't.

and lol--we already know what A-Rod's opinion is of runner interference.

(He likes it)

 

[sandorski]

Watch the Canucks, discover Life.

 

[BUTCH1]

No, it clearly wasn't as egregious as the Saints/Rams interference no-call.

The runner knocked the glove off the first baseman's hand. it doesn't matter where the ball is thrown at that point. It just doesn't.

and lol--we already know what A-Rod's opinion is of runner interference.

(He likes it)

That was a laughable attempt by A-Rod, I guess from his perspective he had zero to lose, but with a half dozen cameras trained on the play there was little chance of him not getting caught. Turner on the other had did nothing wrong IMO, by the time he crossed the base he was completely on line, it was a shit throw.

 

[purbeast0]

Comparing A-Rod's interference to Trea Turner is just dumb, come on now.

We'll just agree ... that you are wrong.

 

[darkswordsman17]

On the ARod one, so why the fuck would it not be offsetting interference on the Tampon Sox? The fucking pitcher didn't have the ball but ran and even stuck his fucking leg out forcing ARod to have to run around him. Yes, ARod clearly interfered, but why the fuck are the fielders not also equally culpable? Frankly, both situations seem completely fucking stupid, which is just one of the reasons why I find baseball to be near unwatchable.

If they want runners to have some set path to keep them from being able to interfere, then fucking design the goddamn field for that where it makes it so there can be no question that the runner interfered or not. On the flipside, make it so that the fielder can't interfere with the runner either because that's just an equally fucking stupid thing.

With regards to the question in the thread title, I don't think its because of changes to sports, its because people are less willing to put up with the nonsense while technology has made it impossible to ignore how much nonsense there is in sports. That nonsense has always been there though. Its just that now, why would you watch a game that has so much arbitrary nonsense in it when there's so many other things you could do?

 

[Muse]

This. I have fallen away from the team since the blip that was Kaepernick & Co., so it is very refreshing to finally see a team that consistently plays with the spirit and talent that Montana/Young/Rice, etc. had again. And yes, Garappolo shows a good deal of promise as he gains experience. I'm just so sick of New England and their dominance; my 44 yr. old daughter walks around in a Brady jersey on game day, with a smug smile, practically swooning. I hear you about the Cal Bears. I remember when they were a force to be reckoned with, and you know they have influential alumni who must be leaning on the administration to finally get a winning team back on the field. The big Div.1 schools are expected to have contending teams that deliver. There's a lot of alumni $$ at stake, to say nothing of all the merch that brings in school revenue. Even at the college level, there is a lot of money at stake in all the sports.

Garoppolo was fantastic last night. I've never seen him play better. I haven't watched all his games but I doubt he was ever as good as last night. Shanahan said he's been getting better week by week and I saw that last night. He made quite a few terrific passes. I still feel he holds the ball too long some times, but he got away with it last night. I don't have the numbers (hike to ball away average) but suspect that Brady is better (i.e. quicker to throw). But Garappolo's release is lightening fast, it's like a sling shot.

Cal! Well, TBH I've come to feel that there's a curse on them. That may sound crazy, and I hope it ISN'T true (curses suck). The Free Speech Movement and fallout and residual culture, which to some extent demonized the administration of the university, from the Regents to the campus admins make pursuit of anything other than what shall I call it? The TRUTH? Revolutionary science and aesthetics? Well, whatever it might be called, anything that detracts from it, is a distraction and is conceivably under a curse, and this would/could include athletic accomplishment. How else can you explain never winning the conference in football since 1959? The basketball program hasn't done much better. I'm not sure they've won the conference since 1959. With Jason Kidd they went to the Sweet Sixteen in his freshman year, IIRC, but I don't know that they won the conference that year.

 

[soulcougher73]

I mostly just watch the NFL anymore, or if i can catch a NHL game on TV. I used to love baseball but 182 game season is just to long to care anymore. I don't have that kind of time to commit to following it. They could cut that in half to like 90 or 100 games and it might still be too long.

 

[Muse]

I mostly just watch the NFL anymore, or if i can catch a NHL game on TV. I used to love baseball but 182 game season is just to long to care anymore. I don't have that kind of time to commit to following it. They could cut that in half to like 90 or 100 games and it might still be too long.

I used to watch baseball, but the only games I watched this year were 2-3 of the World Series. I found that tough, actually. Was rooting for the Astros, but the air leaked out of their balloon at the end. The Nationals just jelled at the end. One crazy series. John Smoltz said we'd never see that again, the road team winning every game. Pretty loony.

 

[bguile]

Yeah, the Niners. People have been rooting for them to regain their prowess, swagger, dominance... but it has been frustrating for, well, I think over 20 years. This season it is happening so far, but may fall short. QB has to stay healthy, probably, and he has to get better. He's often really good/great, but has too many bad moments. A big thing is getting the fullback back from his injury. They are playing with great emotion, they are fun to watch and root for.

Now, I know about losing teams. I graduated from UC Berkeley, and their football team hasn't won the conference since 1959. 60 years! They started 4 and 0 this year. I tuned into the radio broadcast last night for exactly 3 seconds. What I heard before I turned off the radio and roared in laughter: "___ 28, Bears nothing." Rooting for the Golden Bears football team is a protracted lesson in frustration, you can count on them to disappoint!

Why is Cal so bad average at football? They are one of the top public universities, in one of the richest states for recruiting, yet they seem to settle for just being meh every year.