Boston Celtics sold for $6.1 billion to group led by private equity executive Bill Chisholm, a record for a U.S. sports team.
~CNBC.COM
After finishing with a league-worst 3-14 record last season, the Browns have increased the prices of their season ticket packages by an average of about seven percent.
~Crain’s Cleveland Business
There’s something quite ludicrous about someone who already has, say, $5.1 billion running off to his city with his fedora in hand. Yet this is what sports team owners do on a regular basis.
~Inc. Magazine
Forget the days when ownership of a sports franchise was a wealthy person’s “give back” to the community. Owners now see it as among the most lucrative investments in their portfolio. Just ask the previous Celtic’s owner, the Grousbeck family, who purchased the franchise in 2002 for $360 million, a 1,694 percent ROI in 23 years. And how will the new owners recoup their $6.1 billion investment? As noted above, raising ticket prices or threatening to move the team if its current home city does not pony up taxpayer dollars to subsidize a new, state-of-the-art stadium or arena. The final piece of this three-legged stool is media revenue, which like ticket sales, depends on the size of the audience.
To increase fan interest in any number of sports, owners and league management have proposed or implemented changes which they believe will attract more fans to attend games or watch on television. Some changes make sense, perhaps, the best example being baseball’s pitch clock to do away with the egomaniacal histrionics of those who thought the mound was akin to the Globe Theater. Sadly, Major League Baseball (MLB) refused to quit while it was ahead. They created the “runner on second” rule for extra innings where the team starts with a player at second base. But it only applies in the regular season. The lifelong memory of sitting in the stadium until the wee hours of the next day is no longer a possibility. And why was it a “lifelong” memory? Because it happened so rarely, few fans ever had a similar experience.
And then came this “brilliant” concept. MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred recently floated the idea of a “Golden At-Bat” rule that “would allow teams to choose one at-bat in a game to send any hitter to the plate, regardless of the batting order.” (ESPN) Fortunately, negative feedback forced Manfred to back off, saying, “To go from the conversation stage to this actually showing up in MLB is a very long road.” Hey Rob, did you forget you’re the genius who started the conversation?
Though baseball is a piker when compared to the National Football League. Consider the following.
- More than doubling the length of the half-time intermission during the Super Bowl to accommodate musical extravagances. On more than one occasion, this extended break completely changed a team’s momentum and the outcome of the game.
- Creating a kick-off scenario which challenges the time/space continuum in the name of player safety while proposing to add an 18th regular season game to the schedule.
- Knowing an additional game would be detrimental to players’ health, one version of the 18-game season would require players to sit out two of those contests. Too bad if you paid top dollar for seats to watch your favorite player on the sidelines in street clothes.
- Imposing a penalty on an offensive lineman whose head does not line up with the center’s behind.
- Thursday night football. Forcing teams to prepare for a game without the prerequisite time to recover from the previous one.
- Spreading telecasts across two broadcast networks, two cable networks and two streaming services so viewers never know where to look for games or have to subscribe to additional platforms. Is pay-per-view far away?
Not to mention fútbol/soccer. A sport that uses technology called “Video Assistant Replay” (VAR), a fancy name for instant replay, for every offside violation cannot figure out how to operate a game clock. I can only imagine the outcry if the World Cup champion is determined by a goal scored after the announced stoppage time in the second half has lapsed.
But let me close with my own sport of choice–golf. The beauty of the game sportswriter Rick Reilly dubbed “A Good Walk Spoiled” is the environment in which it is played. Recently, Tiger Woods, Rory McIlroy and the PGA Tour decided that the challenge of uphill, downhill and sidehill lies further complicated by the weather du jour could be moved from its natural home to an indoor arena with fake grass mats, projected holes and an undulating green with hydraulic lifts that change throughout the contest. The extent to which this setup resembles little that is associated with real golf was proved when the best player of this generation Woods confused a simulated 190 yard shot with a 90 yard attempt. It produced a good laugh, but not golf. Hopefully, it will go the way of World Team Tennis.
What do all these sports have in common? The guardians of each do not have enough faith in what makes their respective domains special. So they do things that bastardize the original concept in search of new audiences. Why? Because it takes time to educate the next generation about the challenges, strategies and nuances that makes one appreciate what is happening on the field, gridiron or course. Because a parent cannot afford to take his or her children to a ballgame and share “inside information” about the game. For example, the first time I took my daughter to a Royals game in Kansas City, I explained why walking the lead-off batter was a mistake. One out of three times, the walked batter eventually reaches home base. Twenty-five years later she reminded me of that statistic while watching an Orioles game at Camden Yards. Instead of constantly looking for gimmicks to grow an audience, maybe owners and commissioners should figure out how to increase these interactions among long-time and potential new fans of their sports.
Grandpa has to go now. It’s time for his seventh-inning nap.
For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP