The recession has hit baseball pretty hard. Attendance is down, people are not paying the ridiculous prices for hotdogs and beer at the concessions, and team apparel is not being purchased at the stadium. Who wants to pay $10 for parking, about $100 for tickets for a family of four, and another $70 on food and drinks? An average family pays about a couple hundred dollars to go to a baseball game. Another factor that hurts attendance is the limited number of playoff teams. Major League Baseball consists of 30 teams, and only 8 make the playoffs. A majority of the teams are out of the playoff hunt with three months left to play in the season, but the hefty prices never change. People are not going to pay a large amount of money to watch a team 25 games back from the first place team. Baseball is eventually going to have to expand the playoffs to at least 12 to 16 teams. But could baseball get a quick fix by boosting the excitement of the game.
Dare I say baseball needs steroids? Steroids in the baseball community are viewed as one of the only unforgiveable sins. So why did baseball turn its back on the steroid issue when Barry Bonds, Mark McGwire, and Sammy Sosa were hitting fifty, sixty, and seventy home runs a year? The answer is revenue. Major League Baseball was extremely popular in 1998 when McGwire and Sosa were chasing Roger Maris’ 61 home run record. Baseball popularity was so high because of these two players, it filled up stadiums across the nation. McGwire eventually ended up with 70 that season, and then was taken over by Bonds when he hit 73 years later. Bonds eventually ended up with the career record of homeruns with 762, beating Hank Aaron’s long standing record of 755.
Steroids made baseball so much more interesting by achieving huge offensive numbers, and by making villians out of players. McGwire, Sosa, and Bonds never tested positive for steroids, it was just assumed by testimony of other players. McGwire eventually admitted to using just last year. These three players were humiliated and heavily scrutinized by the baseball media. Most fans despised them for their "perceived" cheating ways. However, having the bad guys in baseball made it more relevant. Fans will root harder for players they hate to fail, than players they like to succeed.
The casual fan doesn’t want to see a 1-0 pitcher’s duel, even though an old school baseball fan might prefer this scenario. The battle of attaining the most revenue is won by winning the casual fan. Steroids boost the offensive numbers that most people want to see. Baseball’s halfhearted policing of steroids was even addressed in Congress, but Congress should really have no opinion of the issue. I believe they have enough to worry about then steroids in baseball. Some people believe it is the player's body, he can do with it what he wants to. It is extremely unrealistic to think baseball would ever lift its ban on steroids. But would it be better off by doing so?
This blog is prepared by a paralegal student as a class project, without compensation. The content of this blog contains my opinion, and is offered for personal interest without warranty of any kind. Comments posted by others on this blog are the responsibility of the posters of those messages. The reader is solely responsible for verifying the content of this blog and any linked information. Content, sources, information, and links will most likely change over time. The content of this blog may not be construed as legal, medical, business, or personal advice.
Would baseball be better off with steroids? Well, what would happen when every player took steroids? Eventually, thei skill and amped-up bodies would peak and baseball would hit a recession again. Then what? More steroids? Bans on steroids put all players on the same level and their success then hinges on their talent, skill, and hard work. In my opinion, steroids won't make a difference beyond a brief increase in fan interest. Then, we would be back to square one.
ReplyDelete