posted
I watched a little of the game last night. I didn't see Dmitri Young. Does he still play for the Tigers? I helped him out in chem class in high school.
Posts: 399 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not over until it's over. We won three straight from the Yankees. No reason why we can't do it against the Cards.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
What was it? 1968 that we won the world series against the Cards? I think so. We ended up coming from behind by winning the last 3 games. One of the guys at work and I think it would be kinda funny if they did it again.
Posts: 2208 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Tigers are down three games to one. But that happened in the 1968 series with the Cards too, and the Tigers went on to win most gloriously. The announcers mentioned an interesting statistic--that the team that wins game four in a split series (any series that is not a sweep) always goes on to lose the series. I don't know why that should be. Coincidence, of course, does not make natural law. The Cards have been up 3-1 in the World Series twice before, and blown it--in 1968 against the Tigers, and in 1985 against the Royals. Of course, those Cards teams were different teams from the present one. So logically, how much should history matter?
The Tigers are a unique team--to be in the World Series a year after not even reaching .500, and three years after setting a record for most losses in the Ameridan League. Also, they have set a world series record for four errors (so far!) committed by their pitchers. Must be nerves. Most of the players are young and have never been in the playoffs, let alone the World Series.
It's all up to pitcher Justin Verlander for the Tigers tonight. My view is he is a better pitcher than the Cards' starter, Jeff Weaver. But there is no telling which pitcher will turn up with his best game, or less than best. And who next will commit a bone-head error?
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's official. God hates the cubs. What else could possibly explain both the White Sox and Cardinals winning the world series in a two year period.
Posts: 2437 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lyrhawn, actually Verlander did not pitch badly, after he got over his frightful case of nerves in the first inning. What did the Tigers in was eight errors in five games, allowing eight unearned runs. Do the math--that was the margin of loss in every game they lost. Five errors by pitchers set a new record for the World Series. And the series only went five games--thankfully! Sadly true was the taunting sign held up by a fan, "Hit it to the pitcher!"
Even as a life-long Tigers fan, I have to admit, a team that makes eight errors in five games does not really deserve to win the World Series.
Congrats to Tony LaRussa, who now has managed World Series Champions in both leagues, only the second manager to accomplish that after Sparky Anderson. Maybe next year Jim Leyland will join that list, too.
Come spring training, I bet the Tigers' pitchers pay closer attention to fielding practice for pitchers.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry Tigers fans ... but at least there's the consolation(?) that 3 of the 4 losses were close games; whereas the last 2 the Yankees lost to the Tigers were painfully lopsided...
Posts: 2911 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Seems the series ended with a 16-17 share, about 20% lower than last year's record low. Yikes.
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm trying to figure out the reasons for the low market share you mentioned, FlyingCow. The Detroit Tigers and St. Louis Cardinals may not have the the glamor of the New York Yankees or Boston Red Sox, but neither did the Chicago White Sox or Houston Astros, last year.
What probably affected viewership was the rain delays and even one rain postponement in this year's World Series.
Here is yet another case for having the World Series in a domed stadium, with the site selected like the Superbowl. The home teams would be out their gate receipts, though a sharing arrangement can be made with the chosen World Series site; but the preservation of good viewer market share might be worth it.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Last year was the lowest ratings share in the history of the world series. Now this year is the lowest (Edit: to add link showing a 10.1 rating and 17 share as final numbers)
I think a lot of it is that people watch baseball because of regionalism. It gives people something to talk about, even if they don't watch the games. How'd those Dodgers do last night? or Can you believe those damn Yanks beat us again?
Baseball's a great sport to check in every twenty minutes or so to see the score... before going back to whatever it is you were doing. It's not a sport people will just tune in to watch, regardless of the teams. It's either their own team or nothing - and even then, a lot of people don't have the patience to sit through a baseball game for their own team.
I saw some television station offering a "condensed" replay of games - taking out all the downtime and only including the important plays. You could condense baseball down to an hour that way, I swear. And even then it would be pretty dull if a viewer's team wasn't involved.
Baseball's problem is that the lion's share of the game is just a lot of tense standing or sitting around. The most physical activity you see at any one time is when the teams are running on or off the field between halves of innings.
Unless next year's series pits two well known teams from opposing major markets, the ratings will likely slip again. It's only a matter of time before the world series drops to second or third in the ratings on any given night, behind reruns of CSI or Survivor.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Party]](graemlins/party.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
... but at least there's the consolation(?) that 3 of the 4 losses were close games; whereas the last 2 the Yankees lost to the Tigers were painfully lopsided...
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
