MLB Attendance: Down For 2010

[bobby jr]

Last year, 2009, MLB showed a significant drop in attendance, compared with 2008. The biggest one year drop since Harry Truman was President, according to the USA Today headline. Some were of the opinion this was a one year occurrence which was due to the economic troubles, and that MLB would quickly rebound in 2010.

When spring training attendance showed an increase in 2010, some believed that this indicated MLB's attendance problems were over, that regular season attendance would increase in 2010, and there was nothing structurally wrong with the game which could be causing the attendance problems. The worst economic troubles were in 2009, and NFL attendance didn't show a big decrease, so the thinking was that MLB attendance would rebound in 2010.

So far, this has not been the case. MLB attendance is down by half a million compared with 2009. The season is now more than half over, and it is starting to look like this will be the second straight year of decreased attendance for MLB. Although the decrease won't be as dramatic as last year, this trend must be worrisome to MLB.

Here is a link to site which provides daily updates to 2010 VS 2009 MLB attendance.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/le...tendance.shtml

[Saxmania]

I take it the Orioles are losing again? (Admittedly, that's a pretty safe statement to make any time over the past decade or so.)

Be seeing you,

Saxmania

[Yankeeah]

First off, it's down 381 people per game, that's not too drastic.

Second, it's the Mets fault.

Seriously, they are averaging 6,480 less people per game, that's staggering.

Whats funnier is the Nationals, despite all Strasburg hoopla only average 15 more fans per game this year.

[False1]

Last year, 2009, MLB showed a significant drop in attendance, compared with 2008. The biggest one year drop since Harry Truman was President, according to the USA Today headline. Some were of the opinion this was a one year occurrence which was due to the economic troubles, and that MLB would quickly rebound in 2010.

When spring training attendance showed an increase in 2010, some believed that this indicated MLB's attendance problems were over, that regular season attendance would increase in 2010, and there was nothing structurally wrong with the game which could be causing the attendance problems. The worst economic troubles were in 2009, and NFL attendance didn't show a big decrease, so the thinking was that MLB attendance would rebound in 2010.

So far, this has not been the case. MLB attendance is down by half a million compared with 2009. The season is now more than half over, and it is starting to look like this will be the second straight year of decreased attendance for MLB. Although the decrease won't be as dramatic as last year, this trend must be worrisome to MLB.

Here is a link to site which provides daily updates to 2010 VS 2009 MLB attendance.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/le...tendance.shtml

It's down about 1%. Expecting a rebound while the unemployment rate is this high is pretty naive.

The half a million less attendees you quote could be made up of just the Blue Jays (~200k less than last year) and the Mets (~300k less than last year). Toronto was winning early in this season and the Mets are still in the playoff race. Kind of flies in the face of your theory, no?

[ny]

Last year, 2009, MLB showed a significant drop in attendance, compared with 2008. The biggest one year drop since Harry Truman was President, according to the USA Today headline.

The Yankees and Mets both drew the same % in 2009 that they did in 2008 but they lost 1.5mm seats due to less capacity in the new stadiums. Thats the main reason baseball attendance numbers were so down. Its understandable that you would try to ignore this simple fact to back up your ridiculous arguments. BTW I see the Nats have jumped ahead of the O's in attendance again. That will be a trend that will continue for years considering the Nats actually have a future.

[Mr. Mxylsplk]

It's unclear to me why this needed a new thread - I guess bobby is adding laziness to his repertoire. At any rate, his point is no less meaningful than it was before. Would mlb like to see increases in attendance instead of decreases? Sure, that's just common sense. Is the economy still negatively impacting consumer spending throughout the country? Of course it is. Is it silly to think that a fairly modest decline for 2010 is "worrisome" given what's going on throughout the economy? You bet. Would the high school debate masters send someone down to middle school for repeating the same tired and debunked points over and over? Well bobby's the high school debater, so he'd know better than I, but it's hard to think otherwise.

[bobby jr]

The Yankees and Mets both drew the same % in 2009 that they did in 2008 but they lost 1.5mm seats due to less capacity in the new stadiums. Thats the main reason baseball attendance numbers were so down. Its understandable that you would try to ignore this simple fact to back up your ridiculous arguments. BTW I see the Nats have jumped ahead of the O's in attendance again. That will be a trend that will continue for years considering the Nats actually have a future.

I don't know what "ridiculous arguments" you are talking about, as all I have posted on this thread so far is my initial post, that MLB attendance is down again this year.

However I don't think the 2009 attendance decrease was just due to the Mets and Yankees new stadiums.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseb...tendance_N.htm

"Major League Baseball is projected to suffer a 6.5% attendance drop, its biggest single-season loss since Harry Truman was president, excluding years involving a work stoppage.
Twenty teams have had an attendance decline entering the season's final week — including five teams by more than 20% — according to calculations by Baseball-reference.com. The Kansas City Royals and Texas Rangers are the only teams boasting 10% or greater increases."

[bobby jr]

It's unclear to me why this needed a new thread - I guess bobby is adding laziness to his repertoire. At any rate, his point is no less meaningful than it was before. Would mlb like to see increases in attendance instead of decreases? Sure, that's just common sense. Is the economy still negatively impacting consumer spending throughout the country? Of course it is. Is it silly to think that a fairly modest decline for 2010 is "worrisome" given what's going on throughout the economy? You bet. Would the high school debate masters send someone down to middle school for repeating the same tired and debunked points over and over? Well bobby's the high school debater, so he'd know better than I, but it's hard to think otherwise.

When there was a thread about spring training attendance increasing for 2010, I didn't hear you complaining about that lacking meaning. I also recall in previous years there were threads about MLB attendance setting records, and you didn't mind those threads. Perhaps it is only the threads about attendance decreasing which lack meaning for you?

When I posted in April or May that attendance was down, I was told it was way too early in the season to presume that MLB attendance would decrease for the year. Well it is now mid July, and MLB attendance has not rebounded from last year, and it looks like it will be a decrease at the end of the season. I'll bet that Commissioner Selig is concerned about this trend.

[pleasepassthesoup]

It's probably because successful season by financial powerhouses such as the San Diego Padres, Texas Rangers, Tampa Bay Rays, and Cincinnati Reds have left fans of other teams feeling like they have no chance.

[dpinzow]

What the hell? The economy was in the toilet in 2009 and is barely out of it (for many folks, still in it) as we speak.

I'm surprised attendance hasn't dropped a lot further due to the worst recession since the 1930s. MLB is actually holding up really well when you compare it to the NBA (losing hundreds of millions of dollars) and the NHL

NBA average season attendances per team dropped from 718,350 to 702,431 (when you do the math, that is a 2.2% decrease from 2008-09 to 2009-10).

The NHL's attendance drop is worse...Phoenix lost 2,886 fans per game from 2008-09 to 2009-10
The Ducks lost about 1,800 per game
The Islanders lost 1,038 fans per game, despite showing major signs of improvement (Tavares)
The Thrashers lost 1,019 fans per game
The Avalanche (good hockey market) lost about 1,500 per game
The Lightning lost about 1,000 fans a game
The Predators barely stayed level
The Devils lost about 400 fans a game
The Panthers lost about 500 fans a game

I'd bet the NHL suffered a 4-5% attendance drop league wide

So if MLB is only losing 400 fans a game, or 1% (most of the drop due to the Mets fans getting used to their new ballpark and expecting results, and the Blue Jays), then baseball is actually doing much better than the NBA (a sport with a soft salary cap) and the NHL (a sport with a hard salary cap)

[Casey at the Bat]

I already attended more games this year than I did all of last year. That article must be wrong.

[BroadwayBomber55]

But do we really, really know why attendances in any sport is dropping including MLB?

No.

It's a combination of tons of things like the economy, the home run affair is 'dropping' due to better pitching and drug testing, etc.

[Mr. Mxylsplk]

When there was a thread about spring training attendance increasing for 2010, I didn't hear you complaining about that lacking meaning. I also recall in previous years there were threads about MLB attendance setting records, and you didn't mind those threads. Perhaps it is only the threads about attendance decreasing which lack meaning for you?

You seem confused. It's not that I think the thread itself lacks meaning. The facts are what they are, and people should feel free to post facts. But you post these facts and then suggest they have meaning regarding the business of baseball. And that's silly, as has been shown by countless posters in responding to you. Conversely, the pattern of mlb's attendance increases and profitability increases over a prolonged period of time is indeed a meaningful indication of the state of the business of mlb. I don't really understand why you don't see the difference.

When I posted in April or May that attendance was down, I was told it was way too early in the season to presume that MLB attendance would decrease for the year.

And it was.

Well it is now mid July, and MLB attendance has not rebounded from last year, and it looks like it will be a decrease at the end of the season.

I agree.

I'll bet that Commissioner Selig is concerned about this trend.

You can bet about whatever you wish, but any reasonable observer sees no trend regarding the business of mlb. There's certainly a trend that fewer fans attend games when unemployment is high and the economy is sluggish, and I'm sure like anyone anywhere Selig is concerned that the economy will continue to struggle and negatively impact his business. I'm certainly concerned about the impact the economy is having on the company I work for, but I also don't think there's anything particularly wrong with the way we run our business. And I'm also sure that mlb executives aren't concerned that there are fundamental problems with mlb which are the cause of the attendance declines. So if you want to bet that Selig is concerned about when the economy will enter a full rebound, I won't take that bet, I'm sure he is. If you want to bet that Selig is concerned that the attendance drops are evidence of real problems with mlb itself, well I'd gladly take that bet. I don't have much respect for Bud Selig, but I think he's got enough sense to recognize what's going on.

[BronxYanks45]

the nation is still facing 9% unemployment, new stadiums cut down on overall numbers blah blah blah, MLB is still making money

[YankeePride1967]

the horse is beyond dead.

[bobby jr]

Sorry, but I'm not buying the theory that the economy is causing MLB attendance to decrease again in 2010. That was a valid excuse last year (although I don't believe it was the entire cause).

The economy was weaker last year and yet MLB attendance has not rebounded in 2010. Other areas of discretionary spending have increased, such as travel spending.

I believe that there are more serious problems facing MLB such as competitive imbalances, lack of an equal playing field, steroids, slowness of the game compared to the NFL, and the younger generation not like the game as much as older people.

Part of the solution may be in following a more successful model, the NFL, with a hard salary cap for all of MLB, and all teams, even the small market teams, having equality of opportunity.

Here is an example of what I meant about discretionary spending increasing, while MLB attendance is not.

http://www.pantagraph.com/entertainm...cc4c03286.html

Spending for travel increases

"A good sign for the economy came when figures were released recently showing that spending for travel and tourism increased at an annual rate of nearly 4 percent in the first quarter of this year. The boost followed a 1.5 percent decrease in the final quarter of last year.

Passenger air transportation spending increased 4.5 percent in the first quarter of this year after a drop of nearly 10 percent in the last quarter of 2009. Spending for accommodations rose 11.0 percent in the first quarter of 2010 after decreasing 7.9 percent in the last three months of 2009. "

[YankeePride1967]

Baseball has NEVER BEEN in a healthier state. The league is more profitable than ever before. More teams (well not Baltimore) are still very much in the pennant race than normal. Baseball is prospering greatly!

[YankeePride1967]

uh oh, Bobby is not buying the indeniable fact that the economy is bad.

[Miss Yvonne]

For those of us who are more stats-minded than others, bobby jr is the type we find ourselves confronted with when others bring up the "lies, damn lies and statistics" line.

Sigh.

[Mr. Mxylsplk]

Sorry, but I'm not buying the theory that the economy is causing MLB attendance to decrease again in 2010. That was a valid excuse last year (although I don't believe it was the entire cause).

The economy was weaker last year and yet MLB attendance has not rebounded in 2010. Other areas of discretionary spending have increased, such as travel spending.

That's really not true. Unemployment is higher now than at any point during 2009, and has been higher throughout 2010 than it was last year. Measures of consumer confidence are lower now than they were during 2009. It would certainly be incorrect to say that every single economic measure is worse now than it was last year, but it's also incorrect to say the economy was unequivocally weaker last year than it is now. That doesn't prove that the economy is the single solitary factor causing the decline in mlb attendance this year, but the evidence certainly suggests it is a negative factor, and given mlb's history of steadily increasing attendance over a prolonged period of time, the facts strongly suggest that macro factors, rather than something specific to mlb, are driving the sluggish attendance.

I believe that there are more serious problems facing MLB such as competitive imbalances, lack of an equal playing field, steroids, slowness of the game compared to the NFL, and the younger generation not like the game as much as older people.

Any or all of these could be problems facing mlb. Given that all of these were issues during a period of prolonged growth for mlb, the evidence doesn't support your belief that they're problems for the business of mlb.

Part of the solution may be in following a more successful model, the NFL, with a hard salary cap for all of MLB, and all teams, even the small market teams, having equality of opportunity.

Given that mlb's revenues and profits have increased more than the nfl's in recent years, it's unclear to me how that's a more successful model.

Here is an example of what I meant about discretionary spending increasing, while MLB attendance is not.

I'm not sure what your point is. As I said, it would be foolish to say that there are no areas of the economy which have shown improvement. That doesn't change the fact that many measures are as bad, or worse, than they were last year. Looking at the totality of economic data and reports, it would be foolish, based on the evidence, to think that the economy is anything but a negative factor on mlb attendance this year.

[Yankees Empire]

Absolutely unbelievable.

[bobby jr]

That's really not true. Unemployment is higher now than at any point during 2009, and has been higher throughout 2010 than it was last year. Measures of consumer confidence are lower now than they were during 2009. It would certainly be incorrect to say that every single economic measure is worse now than it was last year, but it's also incorrect to say the economy was unequivocally weaker last year than it is now. That doesn't prove that the economy is the single solitary factor causing the decline in mlb attendance this year, but the evidence certainly suggests it is a negative factor, and given mlb's history of steadily increasing attendance over a prolonged period of time, the facts strongly suggest that macro factors, rather than something specific to mlb, are driving the sluggish attendance.


Any or all of these could be problems facing mlb. Given that all of these were issues during a period of prolonged growth for mlb, the evidence doesn't support your belief that they're problems for the business of mlb.


Given that mlb's revenues and profits have increased more than the nfl's in recent years, it's unclear to me how that's a more successful model.


I'm not sure what your point is. As I said, it would be foolish to say that there are no areas of the economy which have shown improvement. That doesn't change the fact that many measures are as bad, or worse, than they were last year. Looking at the totality of economic data and reports, it would be foolish, based on the evidence, to think that the economy is anything but a negative factor on mlb attendance this year.

If you want to believe that MLB is doing as well as the NFL, that is your prerogative. I could easily provide links that show the NFL is far more popular than MLB these days.

For example: The Super Bowl ratings dwarf the World Series ratings. Even when a large market team like the Yankees is in the WS, comparatively few people watch it, compared to the Super Bowl, even when two smaller market teams like the Saints and Colts last year are fighting for the NFL crown.

I believe the main reason the NFL has gone so far ahead of MLB in popularity is because it has a hard salary cap. Every fan in the NFL can have confidence that their favorite team has a fair chance to win it all. Small market teams like the Vikings,Saints, and Packers, and Steelers, are not behind the 8 ball due to small market size and revenue.

With a hard salary cap, smaller market franchises like Baltimore and Toronto could once again rise to the top both in the standings and in terms of attendance. Baltimore and Toronto used lead the league in attendance! If they could approach those levels again, this would help MLB attendance as a whole.

MLB attendance is decreasing this year and it is likely that the decreases will continue. Or if there is an increase in the next few years it is likely to be a small one, say 1% or 2%. This will not bring attendance back to the levels it was in 2008.

The only thing that will bring MLB attendance up to much higher levels, is restructuring the game and repairing a broken system.

[Miss Yvonne]

The only thing that will bring MLB attendance up to much higher levels, is restructuring the game and repairing a broken system.

I agree.

Let's start with setting up rules for instant replay on everything but ball & strike calls and getting rid of flat out bad owners like Angelos.

[BaylorBearYankeeFan]

I click on this thread thinking..."hmm, this looks like it could be an interesting discussion." Instead, I get a debate about a hard salary cap.

Football is more popular than baseball by almost any metric. That has to do with the fact that there are only 16 regular season games per year...fewer games mean more hype. Does anyone honestly think though that from year to year a team like the Detroit Lions have a chance to win it all? They are the Orioles of the NFL.

[bobby jr]

I click on this thread thinking..."hmm, this looks like it could be an interesting discussion." Instead, I get a debate about a hard salary cap.

Football is more popular than baseball by almost any metric. That has to do with the fact that there are only 16 regular season games per year...fewer games mean more hype. Does anyone honestly think though that from year to year a team like the Detroit Lions have a chance to win it all? They are the Orioles of the NFL.

Well when a discussion occurs about decreased attendance, it naturally follows that remarks will follow about the possible causes.

Your point about there being fewer NFL games is a valid one. However there were also fewer NFL games than MLB games in 1968 and 1978. Since those years, the World Series ratings have gone down the tubes while the Super Bowl ratings have not. Also the NFL is far more popular overall now than it was 30 or 40 years ago. MLB is not more popular.

As for the Detroit Lions, they have nobody to blame except themselves for ineptitude and years of losing. They have made poor draft picks, poor trades, and have hired below average coaches. They are not losing because of the deck being stacked against them due to small market size and revenue. Yes if they got their act straight they could win it all in a few years. They have as much chance of domination as any other NFL team. Indy is a small market team and they've made the playoffs pretty much every year recently.

[dpinzow]

If I take the Detroit Lions out of that last paragraph I read and put in the Baltimore Orioles, it would still make perfect sense. For example:

As for the Baltimore Orioles, they have nobody to blame except themselves for ineptitude and years of losing. They have made poor draft picks, poor trades, and have hired below average coaches. They are not losing because of the deck being stacked against them due to small market size and revenue. Yes if they got their act straight they could win it all in a few years. They have as much chance of domination as most other teams in baseball. Minnesota is a small market team and they've made the playoffs pretty much every year recently.

See how easy this is!

[bobby jr]

If I take the Detroit Lions out of that last paragraph I read and put in the Baltimore Orioles, it would still make perfect sense. For example:

As for the Baltimore Orioles, they have nobody to blame except themselves for ineptitude and years of losing. They have made poor draft picks, poor trades, and have hired below average coaches. They are not losing because of the deck being stacked against them due to small market size and revenue. Yes if they got their act straight they could win it all in a few years. They have as much chance of domination as most other teams in baseball. Minnesota is a small market team and they've made the playoffs pretty much every year recently.

See how easy this is!

Partially true. However the Orioles have close to zero chance of dominating the AL East for years, because that would be impossible facing a 200 million payroll. No team is going to dominate the AL East for years, except for the Yankees, under the current system. The Detroit Lions, on the other hand could dominate their division and the NFL just as the small market Colts have done for years.

[BronxYanks45]

bobby jr you can't compare the NFL to MLB. They play 16 games a year and we play 162.

[YankeePride1967]

Bobby don't care about facts.

[Mr. Mxylsplk]

If you want to believe that MLB is doing as well as the NFL, that is your prerogative. I could easily provide links that show the NFL is far more popular than MLB these days.

You seem confused. I didn't say anything about the popularity of the two sports, and I wouldn't say that mlb is more popular than the nfl. You mentioned the business models of the two sports, and the business results of the two sports, results which have greater revenue and profit increases in mlb than in the nfl, provide evidence that the nfl's "model" is not superior to that of mlb.

For example: The Super Bowl ratings dwarf the World Series ratings. Even when a large market team like the Yankees is in the WS, comparatively few people watch it, compared to the Super Bowl, even when two smaller market teams like the Saints and Colts last year are fighting for the NFL crown.

That's an interesting example bobby, I don't think that's been discussed on these forums before.

I believe the main reason the NFL has gone so far ahead of MLB in popularity is because it has a hard salary cap. Every fan in the NFL can have confidence that their favorite team has a fair chance to win it all. Small market teams like the Vikings,Saints, and Packers, and Steelers, are not behind the 8 ball due to small market size and revenue.

One's beliefs are one's own, but it really makes you look foolish to stick to beliefs that are contradicted by the evidence. And the evidence is pretty clear that the nfl's rise to the prime league in US sports occurred not only during a time when there was no salary cap in the nfl, but when there wasn't payroll disparity in mlb. We might just as well pin it on the bp oil spill.

With a hard salary cap, smaller market franchises like Baltimore and Toronto could once again rise to the top both in the standings and in terms of attendance. Baltimore and Toronto used lead the league in attendance! If they could approach those levels again, this would help MLB attendance as a whole.

Given that mlb attendance has reached record levels during a period of payroll disparity, there's certainly no evidence to suggest that a cap would lead to increased league-wide attendance.

MLB attendance is decreasing this year and it is likely that the decreases will continue. Or if there is an increase in the next few years it is likely to be a small one, say 1% or 2%. This will not bring attendance back to the levels it was in 2008.

What evidence do you have that suggests the decrease will continue? There's a pretty prolonged period of time suggesting attendance will increase. That doesn't mean it will, things can certainly change, but the evidence is what it is. I know, the fans you talk with on internet bulletin boards are just as fed up as you are, and that's all the evidence you need. But let's be real, attendance has been going up for a long time prior to the last few years - if all you're hanging your hat on is a slump during a severe economic downturn, and the unhappiness of some internet posters, well that's not much to support your prediction.

The only thing that will bring MLB attendance up to much higher levels, is restructuring the game and repairing a broken system.

You've said this before, and as before, provide no evidence to support your assertion. Why do you shy away from facts with such severity? The system in mlb is certainly nothing new, yet in spite of this "broken" system, attendance, revenues and profits have all reached record highs. If that's broken, I'm not sure I'd want to be fixed. I realize that you're unhappy with this "broken system", and I don't doubt the existence of the tens of fans you've found on the internet who share your views, but if you're going to make a straightforward assertion like this, you really should present some evidence that shows how the system is broken. The evidence I see suggests pretty clearly, and strongly, otherwise.

[Dave B]

What are we even arguing about?

The NFL is more popular and is less affected by the economy because of scarcity - they have only 8 home dates per year and lines thousands (if not tens of thousands) long for season tickets, even in tiny markets like Green Bay. It's more interesting (to many), entertaining, is better run, better marketed, and has a better TV contract. Add in the whole scarcity thing, the fact that the Super Bowl is a one-game party in a time of year (February) with nothing else going on, and of course they'll be doing a lot better and buck the trends.

The comparison simply isn't valid.

It doesn't matter anyway. The economy being how it is obviously affects the other sports. They're still raking in great revenues and making decent money anyway, and if/when things pick up nationwide they'll pick up for baseball too. This isn't that hard to understand.

I guess I'm not sure why we're even having this conversation. It's not like this is some dire situation for all of baseball, or the start of some giant trend with teams about to go under. Sadly, Bud the clown's legacy won't be tarnished at all. He'll still get to retire and claim he presided over astronomical increases in revenue and popularity, even though it had absolutely nothing to do with him.

Despite the economy and the figures, things are looking pretty good for baseball.

[False1]

As for the Detroit Lions, they have nobody to blame except themselves for ineptitude and years of losing. They have made poor draft picks, poor trades, and have hired below average coaches.

Yet the Orioles have blazed trails in the draft, made highway robbery style trades and have baseball gurus coaching their young stallions.

[awy]

the nfl is marketed better. it's a more tv reliant league, and has no pretense to be a tradition rather than a business.

[DaPip1998]

the nfl is marketed better. it's a more tv reliant league, and has no pretense to be a tradition rather than a business.

The dirty little secret about the NFL's success vs. MLB-

G-A-M-B-L-I-N-G

Even casual sports fans pay attention to the spread and the injury report. The once a week build up lends itself much better to people getting in on a litte action.....

Oh, and another reason for MLB's attendance (slight) drop? How about this weather we're having folks?

I wouldn't dare take my kid to a game in 95+ heat, and it seems like every weekend has been like that.

[NelsonMuntz]

Sorry, but I'm not buying the theory that the economy is causing MLB attendance to decrease again in 2010.

And with this statement I stopped reading further. This thread is just another excuse for bobbyjr to bore us with his "please pity the poor Orioles" routine. His arguments for a salary cap habe been refuted countless times already in the Orioles thread. Time to stop feeding the troll.

[bobby jr]

One's beliefs are one's own, but it really makes you look foolish to stick to beliefs that are contradicted by the evidence. And the evidence is pretty clear that the nfl's rise to the prime league in US sports occurred not only during a time when there was no salary cap in the nfl, but when there wasn't payroll disparity in mlb. We might just as well pin it on the bp oil spill.


Given that mlb attendance has reached record levels during a period of payroll disparity, there's certainly no evidence to suggest that a cap would lead to increased league-wide attendance.

The NFL has not, at least in my lifetime, had a period where big market teams dominated due to their market size and payroll. The Yankees, on the other hand, do dominate MLB for that very reason.

As has been discussed several times before, smaller market teams fans would not immediately abandon their team.


A KC fan told me that after years of disappointment, his father stopped going to the Royals games. And he had been a diehard Royals fans for many years. Only after years of not making the playoffs and seeing other teams win based upon market size and payroll will a lot of small market fans give up and stop going.

Therefore there will not be an exact time line correlation between payroll disparity, competitive imbalances, and attendance. The frustration builds up for years, then there is a reaction. You have to look at general trends. and use common sense and intuition. to discern the reasons for decreased MLB attendance.

As for the "record levels", what evidence do you have that MLB attendance would not have reached higher levels with a hard salary cap like the NFL has? With growing population and (until 3 years ago) greater disposable income, one would expect MLB attendance to rise, all other factors being equal. That certainly does not prove that the existing system (big market teams dominating based upon payroll and market size) was the best system to achieve the highest possible MLB attendance. Common sense and intuition tells me that MLB would have had higher attendance with a cap in place.

For example, look at the AL East. Baltimore and Toronto used to lead the league in attendance, now they are nowhere near that level. If the system allowed an equal playing field, and Baltimore and Toronto were in the playoffs some years, it follows to reason that attendance in Baltimore and Toronto would increase dramatically. Both both cities have proven they support winning teams quite well. The increase in Baltimore and Toronto's attendance with a cap would likely more than make up for any decreased attendance in NYY and Boston games, should they be brought back to the field.

[YankeePride1967]

Baseball has never had a healthier system, more teams in the pennant race (fact) and most profitable of all time (fact). The Orioles are just clueless (fact).

[BronxYanks45]

If the system allowed an equal playing field

karl marx would be proud.

In the end you can't compare the NFL or NHL or NBA or MLS or PGA etc.. to MLB

[Mr. Mxylsplk]

The NFL has not, at least in my lifetime, had a period where big market teams dominated due to their market size and payroll. The Yankees, on the other hand, do dominate MLB for that very reason.

I'm not sure what your point is. The NFL's increase in popularity relative to mlb was not the result of a salary cap, nor was it a result of payroll disparity in mlb, as it occurred largely before those things were in existence.

As has been discussed several times before, smaller market teams fans would not immediately abandon their team.

I'm not sure what this is in response to.

A KC fan told me that after years of disappointment, his father stopped going to the Royals games. And he had been a diehard Royals fans for many years.

Interesting anecdote, thanks for sharing.

Only after years of not making the playoffs and seeing other teams win based upon market size and payroll will a lot of small market fans give up and stop going.

As I've said, one can believe what one wishes, but if you're going to make assertions you should support them with evidence (and you know, real evidence, not stories about your friends on the Royals' fan forum). I'm sure you believe this to be true, but you really need support if you're going to state it as a reality. I don't know why you consistently refuse to do that, but it certainly doesn't help your case.

Therefore there will not be an exact time line correlation between payroll disparity, competitive imbalances, and attendance. The frustration builds up for years, then there is a reaction.

You never fail to top yourself bobby. You consistently rail against payroll disparity and complain about the incredible length of time over which the yankees have used outsized payrolls to dominate mlb. Now apparently, it's not that long a period of time after all? C'mon, this is comical.

You have to look at general trends. and use common sense and intuition. to discern the reasons for decreased MLB attendance.

We seem to agree. I can only assume from this sentence that you no longer think payroll disparity has hurt mlb attendance.

As for the "record levels", what evidence do you have that MLB attendance would not have reached higher levels with a hard salary cap like the NFL has?

Well, mlb attendance has increased more than attendance for sports which do have salary caps, so that's some evidence. But I certainly don't know that attendance wouldn't have increased more than it has with a salary cap, I don't think I've ever suggested otherwise. Similarly, we also don't know that the NFL wouldn't be even more popular without a salary cap.

With growing population and (until 3 years ago) greater disposable income, one would expect MLB attendance to rise, all other factors being equal.

I think there would always be flucuations from year to year, as there have been in the past, but in general, I agree that you'd expect attendance to rise over time.

That certainly does not prove that the existing system (big market teams dominating based upon payroll and market size) was the best system to achieve the highest possible MLB attendance.

Agreed. Just as the NFL's popularity certainly does not prove that its existing system was the best system to achieve the highest possible popularity.

Common sense and intuition tells me that MLB would have had higher attendance with a cap in place.

Well, I can't speak to your intuition, but you don't seem to be employing much common sense in reviewing the evidence, since the evidence shows that mlb increased its attendance more than other leagues which do have salary caps.

For example, look at the AL East. Baltimore and Toronto used to lead the league in attendance, now they are nowhere near that level. If the system allowed an equal playing field, and Baltimore and Toronto were in the playoffs some years, it follows to reason that attendance in Baltimore and Toronto would increase dramatically.

I agree that if Baltimore and Toronto were more successful on the field, they would have higher attendance. And I think a salary cap would increase the likelihood that they would be more successful on the field.

Both both cities have proven they support winning teams quite well. The increase in Baltimore and Toronto's attendance with a cap would likely more than make up for any decreased attendance in NYY and Boston games, should they be brought back to the field.

Well first of all, there might or might not be an increase in their attendance with a cap. I think success is what would drive significant changes in attendance, and while I agree that a cap would make them more likely to be successful, it's certainly not a sufficient condition. Assuming though that they were more successful and did have increased attendance as a result, I don't think it's necessarily true that they'd offset any declines from other teams to lead to a net increase. Because I think that's inconsistent with the evidence of actual aggregate attendance, which hasn't been hurt by payroll disparity, and which has outperformed attendance in leagues which do have a cap. That doesn't prove anything, but it provides what I consider to be a pretty strong indication.

[awy]

salary cap makes something popular? tell that to real madrid. gee.

[mjdlight]

As for the Detroit Lions, they have nobody to blame except themselves for ineptitude and years of losing. They have made poor draft picks, poor trades, and have hired below average coaches.

Can't...stand...the...irony.

SYSTEM FAILURE! SYSTEM FAILURE!!

[YankeePride1967]

Can't...stand...the...irony.

SYSTEM FAILURE! SYSTEM FAILURE!!

The Lions sound an awful lot like the Orioles.

[Sixty one]

I would have to think that with today's economy being down that this along with the increase number of games that are available on TV, that this is a major factor for a decline in attendance.......also the price of tickets is still high and unreachable for many fans.

[bobby jr]

Conclusion.
10 Reasons for MLB attendance decline for last two years.

1. Lack of salary cap and resulting continued competitive imbalances
2. Bad economy including high unemployment rate
3. High Ticket prices and concession prices.
4. Younger generation prefers fast moving sport like NFL.
5. Steroid scandal has diminished reputation of MLB as sport.
6. MLB refusal to adopt modern technology such as instant replay for close calls at first base.
7. Flawed playoff system which allow mediocre teams to make playoffs and win World Series. Too many divisions, wild card, have damaged the majesty of pennant races and have devalued the World Series.
8. Poor choice of location for last expansion teams.
9. Players salary structure too high, makes people not want to contribute to their salary by attending games.
10. Unfair add-ons to ticket prices such as added prices for day of game purchases.

[YankeePride1967]

Hilarious.

[pleasepassthesoup]

Conclusion.
10 Reasons for MLB attendance decline for last two years.

...

2 Reasons for MLB attendance decline for last two years.

1. Bad economy including high unemployment rate
2. See above

[Mr. Mxylsplk]

Conclusion.
10 Reasons for MLB attendance decline for last two years.

1. Lack of salary cap and resulting continued competitive imbalances
2. Bad economy including high unemployment rate
3. High Ticket prices and concession prices.
4. Younger generation prefers fast moving sport like NFL.
5. Steroid scandal has diminished reputation of MLB as sport.
6. MLB refusal to adopt modern technology such as instant replay for close calls at first base.
7. Flawed playoff system which allow mediocre teams to make playoffs and win World Series. Too many divisions, wild card, have damaged the majesty of pennant races and have devalued the World Series.
8. Poor choice of location for last expansion teams.
9. Players salary structure too high, makes people not want to contribute to their salary by attending games.
10. Unfair add-ons to ticket prices such as added prices for day of game purchases.

Whose conclusion is this? And on what evidence is this conclusion based. (Please note, posts on Royalsfanshatebigmarketteams.com or other internet fan forums will not be considered reliable evidence).

[DontHateOnNumber2]

This thread is titled as being about attendance being down, but is just a lame segue for the salary cap "discussion." People don't go to the ballpark due to competitive imbalances? Ridiculous seeing as how certain teams make their money off of fans going to see the visiting ballclub. Can SNY purchase the rights to certain usernames? Geez.

[BRNXBMRS]

Conclusion.
10 Reasons for MLB attendance decline for last two years.

1. Lack of salary cap and resulting continued competitive imbalances
2. Bad economy including high unemployment rate
3. High Ticket prices and concession prices.
4. Younger generation prefers fast moving sport like NFL.
5. Steroid scandal has diminished reputation of MLB as sport.
6. MLB refusal to adopt modern technology such as instant replay for close calls at first base.
7. Flawed playoff system which allow mediocre teams to make playoffs and win World Series. Too many divisions, wild card, have damaged the majesty of pennant races and have devalued the World Series.
8. Poor choice of location for last expansion teams.
9. Players salary structure too high, makes people not want to contribute to their salary by attending games.
10. Unfair add-ons to ticket prices such as added prices for day of game purchases.

[BronxYanks45]

Conclusion.
10 Reasons for MLB attendance decline for last two years.

1. Lack of salary cap and resulting continued competitive imbalances
2. Bad economy including high unemployment rate
3. High Ticket prices and concession prices.
4. Younger generation prefers fast moving sport like NFL.
5. Steroid scandal has diminished reputation of MLB as sport.
6. MLB refusal to adopt modern technology such as instant replay for close calls at first base.
7. Flawed playoff system which allow mediocre teams to make playoffs and win World Series. Too many divisions, wild card, have damaged the majesty of pennant races and have devalued the World Series.
8. Poor choice of location for last expansion teams.
9. Players salary structure too high, makes people not want to contribute to their salary by attending games.
10. Unfair add-ons to ticket prices such as added prices for day of game purchases.

doesn't number #7 counter number #1. Ok so if the same 3 teams win the division, doesnt adding a wildcard balance that out by giving another team that had a decent year?