Thursday, March 09, 2006

Perspective on the WBC.

"If Mexico defeats Canada by a score of 1-0, 2-0 or 2-1, then both Mexico and Canada will secure berths in the second round, ending Team USA's run. Tomorrow's game against South Africa would become a meaningless exhibition."

Okay, you've got pitch counts, mercy rules, silly player substitutions, and rules like "if Mexico defeats Canada by a score of 1-0, 2-0 or 2-1, then USA is eliminated."

Under any circumstances, when Team USA plays Team South Africa, that game is a meaningless exhibition.

The entire tournament is a meaningless exhibition.

2 comments:

Feynman and Coulter's Love Child said...

The thing you have to remember about the WBC is that it will have early growing pains and create some animosity over fans of the league rather than the sport (the NHL has had the same problem with the Olympics, and there's talk of 2010 being the last year of the NHL letting players head for the five ringed circus).

The benefit of it is that its a stage in the evolution of the sport. The asian leagues have been slowly gaining legitimacy for years now. Central America is developing a big baseball culture that is producing stars. The more countries baseball is in, the better the sport.

In the long-term, as the U.S. population remains constant with more and more draws on the entertainment dollar (and hour, and channel), baseball in general and the MLB in particular needs to get fans from the rest of the world in order to keep its revenue stream going.

The reality of American sports is that fan support requires a large proportion of American-born players (either white or black). MLB, the NHL, Formula 1, and the NBA have all suffered from this. Only football in its pro and college forms has been immune, and naturally it explains the rise of NASCAR. However, every success by a foreign country in the baseball field gives a boost to baseball in that location. Team U.S.A. in the WBC is like Iron Shiek in the old WWF: the big unstoppable international badguy who is a near guarantee to win match after match after match after match. And any wrestling promoter knows that whenever the "heel" loses against a young good-guy longshot, it brings the hope that the Evil Empire's reign is coming near to a close. Baseball might not be able to choose the times that those losses happen like Vince McMahon can, but the net effect is the same: Team South Korea dreams of beating the U.S. and Dominican Republic in baseball, and if they don't this year but come close then it just builds excitement for next year. If they win, and then fall short next year its a taste of victory.

The end result is good for baseball. Maybe not in 2006, but in 2016 for sure (even if the WBC doesn't last in the current format for more than 4 or 5 years).

Darren Felzenberg said...

It's very fair for the Yankees and their fans to ask what's in it for them. Not in 2016, but in 2006. Selig is renting $250 million worth of Yankee assets and using these assets to generate revenue. The Yankees are not getting paid a dime as far as I know. (I actually don't know where the WBC profits go. Good of the game, I imagine.)

Let's assume the risk of injury is small. What's the reward? A potential Australian draft pick in 2016? No sale.

Selig absolutely should promote baeball worldwide. A round-robin baseball tournament is instantly illegitimate. A round-robin tournament in early March with pitch counts and mercy rules ... well, you get the idea.