Rob Manfred apparently got tired of being "Commissioner Vanilla" and decided to call out Mike Trout for not putting in the effort required to "build his brand". He should have just taken the gun, placed it in his pants..and fired. But even this "Wonder Dog" likely would have screwed that up.
In the early 80's when the NBA was dogmeat, David Stern took one charismatic star and one plain jane and revolutionized the sport. Sure, he manipulated everything to insure that Magic and Bird would be on good teams, etc. But he didn't hammer Larry Legend over being dull and not building his brand like Magic did. Instead, he created this unbelievable rivalry that catapulted the Association into arguably the most popular worldwide league. He saw the Assocoation as a WHOLE - and built a monster.
Stern was exceptional...we all get that. But it doesn't take more than an intern's experience in marketing to understand that you don't put the responsibility of marketing on a guy that doesn't enjoy it. Instead you craft a STRATEGY that includes the best player(s) in the game. But with MLB, there is no unified strategy. It's obvious from the too long season to the antiquated rules to the plodding coverage to the lack of coordination between the Commissioner and the leagues and the teams (evidenced by the Wonder Dog's idiotic statement!) that baseball has no clue as to how to promote their sport in a comprehensive, cohesive and SMART manner.
One small thing could be a start.....Bryce Harper and Mike Trout better go to contenders - and soon. And hopefully build a rivalry. And don't say it can't be done that easily. It would be VERY easy if the Wonder Dog only had some vision and some balls. Unfortunately, he neutered himself by doing stupid things like dinging one of his top assets.
Rob Manfred apparently got tired of being "Commissioner Vanilla" and decided to call out Mike Trout for not putting in the effort required to "build his brand". He should have just taken the gun, placed it in his pants..and fired. But even this "Wonder Dog" likely would have screwed that up.
In the early 80's when the NBA was dogmeat, David Stern took one charismatic star and one plain jane and revolutionized the sport. Sure, he manipulated everything to insure that Magic and Bird would be on good teams, etc. But he didn't hammer Larry Legend over being dull and not building his brand like Magic did. Instead, he created this unbelievable rivalry that catapulted the Association into arguably the most popular worldwide league. He saw the Assocoation as a WHOLE - and built a monster.
Stern was exceptional...we all get that. But it doesn't take more than an intern's experience in marketing to understand that you don't put the responsibility of marketing on a guy that doesn't enjoy it. Instead you craft a STRATEGY that includes the best player(s) in the game. But with MLB, there is no unified strategy. It's obvious from the too long season to the antiquated rules to the plodding coverage to the lack of coordination between the Commissioner and the leagues and the teams (evidenced by the Wonder Dog's idiotic statement!) that baseball has no clue as to how to promote their sport in a comprehensive, cohesive and SMART manner.
One small thing could be a start.....Bryce Harper and Mike Trout better go to contenders - and soon. And hopefully build a rivalry. And don't say it can't be done that easily. It would be VERY easy if the Wonder Dog only had some vision and some balls. Unfortunately, he neutered himself by doing stupid things like dinging one of his top assets.
Trout plays in LA, the long coveted market of fan apathy. Harper plays for the nation's capital, another bastion of fair weather fans. But due to the extensive corporate sponsorships of these mega markets, they should both be contenders.
Trout plays in LA, the long coveted market of fan apathy. Harper plays for the nation's capital, another bastion of fair weather fans. But due to the extensive corporate sponsorships of these mega markets, they should both be contenders.
Trout plays in LA, the long coveted market of fan apathy. Harper plays for the nation's capital, another bastion of fair weather fans. But due to the extensive corporate sponsorships of these mega markets, they should both be contenders.
Exactly. This is why they need to be in the right place in order to maximize their value for MLB. But alas, there is no strategy, just a belief that every team can do as they wish. Money can do a lot of things, but it can't overcome stupidity. While the cash is there, MLB needs to act.
Trout plays in LA, the long coveted market of fan apathy. Harper plays for the nation's capital, another bastion of fair weather fans. But due to the extensive corporate sponsorships of these mega markets, they should both be contenders.
Exactly. This is why they need to be in the right place in order to maximize their value for MLB. But alas, there is no strategy, just a belief that every team can do as they wish. Money can do a lot of things, but it can't overcome stupidity. While the cash is there, MLB needs to act.
Sounds like you want an nba like formation of mega teams.
There are differences of course. One player has a more disproportionate effect in the NBA. But in terms of marketing, it's not too far off.
Selig - as much of a buffoon as he came off as - tried to do this a little. But the technology wasn't advanced enough to make up for baseball's refusal to come into the 21st century.
It's no secret that MLB prospers "more" when the Yankees and Dodgers (The Celtics and Lakers of MLB) are winning titles. You can throw in the Cubs and Red Sox as other "national" teams that pull in interest from outside their local areas.
Sounds like you want an nba like formation of mega teams.
There are differences of course. One player has a more disproportionate effect in the NBA. But in terms of marketing, it's not too far off.
Selig - as much of a buffoon as he came off as - tried to do this a little. But the technology wasn't advanced enough to make up for baseball's refusal to come into the 21st century.
It's no secret that MLB prospers "more" when the Yankees and Dodgers (The Celtics and Lakers of MLB) are winning titles. You can throw in the Cubs and Red Sox as other "national" teams that pull in interest from outside their local areas.
In the last 35 years, the SF Giants have won 3 World Series but they were all in the bottom 5 of TV ratings. In fact their 2012 sweep of the Tigers was rock bottom. Even the 2008 Phillies/Rays WS drew better. The Giants are like the Spurs of the NBA. Well respected, but nobody wants to see them play.
The most watched WS in the past 35 years? Mets/Red Sox 1986. In the last 10 years it was 2016 with the Cubs and Indians.
In the last 35 years, the SF Giants have won 3 World Series but they were all in the bottom 5 of TV ratings. In fact their 2012 sweep of the Tigers was rock bottom. Even the 2008 Phillies/Rays WS drew better. The Giants are like the Spurs of the NBA. Well respected, but nobody wants to see them play.
The most watched WS in the past 35 years? Mets/Red Sox 1986. In the last 10 years it was 2016 with the Cubs and Indians.
The Angels just came out with a statement of public support of Trout in light of the Wonder Dog's comments. Which was the right thing to do, besides having no choice.
Everyone is just groaning over the Wonder Dog. All of this should have been behind closed doors. But then again, there is no strategy - which when properly executed, is done quietly without fanfare. The results happen years later.
The Angels just came out with a statement of public support of Trout in light of the Wonder Dog's comments. Which was the right thing to do, besides having no choice.
Everyone is just groaning over the Wonder Dog. All of this should have been behind closed doors. But then again, there is no strategy - which when properly executed, is done quietly without fanfare. The results happen years later.
To each is own...gimme the next Royals team to come out of nowhere and win a title.That's what makes baseball great.
It needs to happen periodically. There is no sense in a sporting league in which only 10 of 30 teams ever have a chance to win the title. But even in the EPL soccer league, the bottom half seem to be more content with avoiding relegation than they do actually competing for the title. The NBA is a marketing joke for anyone who wishes to open their eyes. The NFL continues to be the most interesting sport when it comes to real parity on a year to year basis.
To each is own...gimme the next Royals team to come out of nowhere and win a title.That's what makes baseball great.
It needs to happen periodically. There is no sense in a sporting league in which only 10 of 30 teams ever have a chance to win the title. But even in the EPL soccer league, the bottom half seem to be more content with avoiding relegation than they do actually competing for the title. The NBA is a marketing joke for anyone who wishes to open their eyes. The NFL continues to be the most interesting sport when it comes to real parity on a year to year basis.
To each is own...gimme the next Royals team to come out of nowhere and win a title.That's what makes baseball great.
It needs to happen periodically. There is no sense in a sporting league in which only 10 of 30 teams ever have a chance to win the title. But even in the EPL soccer league, the bottom half seem to be more content with avoiding relegation than they do actually competing for the title. The NBA is a marketing joke for anyone who wishes to open their eyes. The NFL continues to be the most interesting sport when it comes to real parity on a year to year basis.
In the past 35 years (since they decided to have a coherent marketing strategy), the NBA has had 7 teams win 31 titles. It has NEVER been more popular (and profitable) than it is today. If that is a "joke", then you must be judging based on something other than results.
Parity in the NFL? Are you kidding? In the past 7 years, either New England or Denver has been in the Super Bowl. Who has won the NFC North for forever other than Green Bay besides Minny rarely? Who's tops in the AFC this year again? Yep, NE and Pittsburgh.
Listen, the subject here is "marketing"...not what "feels good". Your 2 most successful leagues have eras of dominance by a handful of teams. MLB better wake up.
To each is own...gimme the next Royals team to come out of nowhere and win a title.That's what makes baseball great.
It needs to happen periodically. There is no sense in a sporting league in which only 10 of 30 teams ever have a chance to win the title. But even in the EPL soccer league, the bottom half seem to be more content with avoiding relegation than they do actually competing for the title. The NBA is a marketing joke for anyone who wishes to open their eyes. The NFL continues to be the most interesting sport when it comes to real parity on a year to year basis.
In the past 35 years (since they decided to have a coherent marketing strategy), the NBA has had 7 teams win 31 titles. It has NEVER been more popular (and profitable) than it is today. If that is a "joke", then you must be judging based on something other than results.
Parity in the NFL? Are you kidding? In the past 7 years, either New England or Denver has been in the Super Bowl. Who has won the NFC North for forever other than Green Bay besides Minny rarely? Who's tops in the AFC this year again? Yep, NE and Pittsburgh.
Listen, the subject here is "marketing"...not what "feels good". Your 2 most successful leagues have eras of dominance by a handful of teams. MLB better wake up.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so. It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly. Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality. Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it. As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.