THE BOOK cover
The Unwritten Book is Finally Written!
An in-depth analysis of: The sacrifice bunt, batter/pitcher matchups, the intentional base on balls, optimizing a batting lineup, hot and cold streaks, clutch performance, platooning strategies, and much more.
Read Excerpts & Customer Reviews
If you are a media member and would like a review copy of The Book, please contact Kevin Cuddihy of Potomac Books.

Buy The Book from Amazon

MOST RECENT ARTICLES
MAIL : You ask | We say

Advanced


THE BOOK--Playing The Percentages In Baseball

<< Back to main

Friday, January 25, 2008

More Phony Outrage

By Tangotiger, 11:00 AM

Are you going to bark all day, little doggie, or are you going to bite?

—Mr. Blond to Mr. White

There’s an issue, you are mildly perturbed—a feeling that will soon pass like indigestion—yet our new information world in the meantime transforms this issue into an explosion before the feeling will go away.  Phony Outrage.  Repeat something loud enough and it’s the truth.  Some people have built their lives around this: Lou Dobbs, Bill O’Reilly, and Plankton.  No less an expert than Stephen Colbert said so to Papa Bear himself.

Today, it’s advertisements on baseball uniforms, as they play in Japan.

Here’s my summary opinion:


Everything is for sale, even the person reading this post. If the Sox offered you free season tickets in exchange for not complaining about logos, you’d put your name on the wait list, no questions asked. There’s no line to be drawn. It’s business pure and simple, just as it would be for you, to exchange phony outrage for free season tickets. The problem is that you as the fan aren’t getting anything for this plastering of commercials. If plastering of the commercials meant that the money would go toward trading for Santana without giving up a prospect, you’d be all for it. 

As someone said: “To place the baseline starting point on either side is just to assert your preference”.  This is all about opportunity cost. I was at the Game 5 Stanley Cup game when the Canadiens beat the Kings. After the game was over, some random guy came up to our group and offered us 20$ for our tickets. A couple of us (including me) said yes, and a couple said no. One who said no asserted that he keeps all of his event tickets, and will not sell it “for any price” (though I’m sure that was hyperbole). However, what if at the point of sale, he was asked: “30$ for entrance, 50$ for entrance with ticket as memento”? What would he do? I can’t believe that he would choose the 50$ option. I know I wouldn’t. However, it’s the exact same thing. He paid 50$ at the point of sale, and was offered 20$ back after the game. But, he said no.

It’s the same thing here with the “right to no advertising”.  Is the name and goodwill of the Fenway name an intangible, or simply non-existant? I’ll put up the name of Fenway, MSG, and Yankee Stadium against the Montreal Forum, and Maple Leaf Gardens. Those two names are gone, and it don’t matter one bit. It helped that new buildings took their place (and new names), but that’s just an easy pretext. What if everyone gets a surcharge of 10$ per ticket to not have Fenway Park renamed to EMC Park? Would you do it? There’s a point where you won’t accept the surcharge, and will accept a rename of the park, or advertising on uniform, or even a cobweb on a base.

Saying that you are not for sale on this issue at any price is basically not true. We are all part of the oldest profession in the world. Now, we are just negotiating a price.

There is only one thing that the fans will not stand for, and will doom MLB (or NFL, NHL, NBA): if it becomes like the WWE, that is, the outcome of events is known or manipulated.  Anything else is negotiable, tolerable, or willing to turn a blind eye. Murder, torture, abuse, drugs, even strikes, lockouts, and price gouging… all the vices outside of gambling that have happened, are happening, and will continue to happen will not doom a major sport. Gambling will. Italy punished its most prized team by kicking them out of their premier league because of gambling.

The line is gambling, and nothing else. Any other line you draw you will eventually be erased and redrawn.

The outrage I hear is more akin to a father realizing that his daughter has hit puberty, and he’s got to do alot more barking. 

#1          (see all posts) 2008/01/25 (Fri) @ 11:35

You were at the game where your team won the Stanley Cup?

I am SO jealous.


#2    Tangotiger      (see all posts) 2008/01/25 (Fri) @ 11:44

I was there at Game 2 (the McSorely game) and Game 5.  We had SRO (general admission) tickets, which was fantastic.  We managed to get into the building 2 minutes before everyone else, because a friend of ours had a cast on.  The usher at the door spotted us, and let us go in to beat the rush.  We planted ourselves at center ice, behind the white seats.  Most thrilling game ever.

The people who work for the Montreal Canadiens are topnotch, super professional, and very friendly.  Of any company in any service-oriented industry that I’ve ever interacted with, they easily outclass them all.  They’re like Wayne Gretzky and Roger Federer: they are the best, but still treat everyone around them with humility and courtesy.


#3    Phil Birnbaum      (see all posts) 2008/01/25 (Fri) @ 11:47

Awesome.

Montreal has pretty classy fans too ... I remember they applauded the Flames when they won in ‘89.  They’re spoiled, but classy.

Someday I’ll tell you where I was when the Leafs win their next Cup.  Probably in some cemetery somewhere.


#4    Peter Jensen      (see all posts) 2008/01/25 (Fri) @ 12:00

I see a whole new wave of lawyers getting richer over this.  Does the uniform as advertising space belong to the team, the player, or mlb.com?  What if the team wants to advertise a product that a player is morally opposed to?  Or a team wants to advertise a product that mlb either doesn’t approve of or already has contracts in place with a competitor?  What about players who might already have endorsement deals with competitors? 
And I am sure that this is just the tip of the iceberg.  Any aggressive lawyer will be able to find 20 other things to litigate.


#5    Tangotiger      (see all posts) 2008/01/25 (Fri) @ 12:53

This happened to Michael Jordan in the Olympics.  His sponsor, Nike, objected to him wearing apparel whereby his team was sponsored by a competitor.  IIRC, he covered up the logo with a towel.


#6    Dan      (see all posts) 2008/01/25 (Fri) @ 13:23

Most of those conflicts have already arisen in the numerous other sports with advertising.  Look at Beckham’s time at ManU, when the player was under contract with adidas and the team with Nike.  Or all of last year’s (still unresolved?  I forget) legal fights between AT&T and Nextel over the former’s car sponsorship in the latter’s NASCAR series.  Or Jerry Jones switching the Cowboys to Pepsi from under Coca-Cola’s NFL sponsorship.

I doubt baseball can come up with anything that hasn’t happened already.


Page 1 of 1 pages


Name (required)
E-Mail (optional)
Website (optional)

<< Back to main


Latest...

COMMENTS

Jan 08 04:25
Sabermetric Moves of the 2009 Pre-Season

Jan 09 02:33
Cheers

Jan 08 23:45
The first Hardball Times Annual available for download!

Jan 08 21:16
Line Drives

Jan 08 20:23
(recent) Historical WAR on Fangraphs

Jan 08 16:07
Clint Eastwood is Archie Bunker

Jan 08 16:06
Hardball Times Annual 2008, starring…

Jan 08 15:58
Madoff’s Ponzi

Jan 08 03:41
Valuing relievers

Jan 07 17:41
The latest in park factors