Dan Patrick Show – Jim Stafford's BlogOKC

MLB’s brightest star, Shohei Ohtani of the Los Angeles Dodgers

As a longtime listener to the Dan Patrick radio show, I was incensed a couple years ago when I heard Dan say that Major League Baseball is no longer a national sport.

“It’s more of a regional sport today,” he said.

Dan followed up by saying that certain cities — St. Louis, Los Angeles, New York come to mind — have large fanbases, but that doesn’t translate into national interest in the game.

Plus, at that time baseball had no one player that had a national or global presence like, say, a LeBron James or Patrick Mahomes.

After I got over my initial righteous indignation, I came around to what Dan was saying about MLB. National ratings have slumped badly over the past couple of decades as young fans have put their focus on the NFL and NBA.

I couldn’t think of a single player that could command the attention of fans nationwide like LeBron or Mahomes. Shohei Ohtani may be the closest baseball player to a true global superstar.

I’ve written about this before, but my sports passion has always been with baseball, first as a Little Leaguer and later as a fan of the St. Louis Cardinals and Texas Rangers.

Still, it’s clear that baseball, with its slow pace and not-made-for-TV presence — you can’t see all the players at once — has clearly been surpassed by the NFL and NBA.

So, when ESPN announced it would opt out of its MLB rights deal after the 2025 season, I was disappointed by not surprised. ESPN has been struggling with its viewership, too, and it is much more focused on NFL and NBA.

I was puzzled at how MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred planned to replace the ESPN revenue shared by all teams. What network would want to pay hundreds of millions to broadcast baseball and create surrounding programming?

Turns out, Manfred DOES have a plan, according to the Wall Street Journal article. In a lengthy and comprehensive article, the WSJ outlined the commissioners proposed scenario that appears to be a long shot.

Said the Journal:

“Manfred’s model would require teams to cede control of their local rights to the league office so that MLB could sell them collectively as a unified streaming package. Viewers would be able to purchase the games of teams they want to see without the blackouts that have long vexed devotees who actually live near where their favorite team plays.

“No cable subscription would be required. Revenue would be distributed among all teams, like it already is for national deals with Fox and Warner Bros. Discovery.

“The change that we’re talking about,” Manfred said in an interview, “is the only rational response to where the media market is today.”

There’s a huge problem with that plan.

MLB teams don’t share their local revenue with their baseball counterparts. Teams in Los Angeles, New York, Boston and Chicago all generate massive amounts of revenue through their local TV rights and are reluctant to give up any of that revenue for the Greater Good.

According to the WSJ, MLB teams lean on their local broadcast revenue more heavily than their NFL and NBA counterparts. Those sports have much larger national TV deals, and share the revenue across the league.

More from the WSJ:

“Cubs president Crane Kenney said in a recent interview at the team’s spring training facility last week in Mesa, Ariz., that his team would be willing to go along with a new TV model — as long as it accounts for his organization’s status as one of baseball’s highest-revenue teams.

“Treat us fairly,” Kenney said, “and we’re in.”

There’s little incentive for the big players to share their local broadcast revenue with their MLB brothers, unless they truly are concerned with the overall national decline of interest in the game. If a few teams folded, that might get their attention.

However, I can’t see the big market teams sharing their wealth with their small market counterparts — even if it helps sustain the sport.

This is 2025 America. Who does anything for the Greater Good?

Screenshot — A ‘Golden At-Bat’ in future for New York Yankees star Aaron Judge?

When I was a young would-be sports writer just out of college working for the Southwest Times Record newspaper in Fort Smith, Ark., my editor sent me out to cover the state small school baseball tournament.

I had not seen much high school baseball through the years, so I was caught by surprise by one particular rule the small schools played by.

It was called the “Courtesy Runner.”

That rule allowed coaches to sub in a faster runner when a slower player got on base. But the player who was substituted for could remain in the game. Usually, the coach subbed in his fastest guy for the big, slow catcher.

I was offended by the Courtesy Runner, because I grew up following Major League Baseball and knew that once a player was substituted for, he was out of the game. No coming back in.

But the Courtesy Runner seemed popular with high school coaches in back in 1979, even if it messed up my boxscore at the end of the game. It remains in play for high schools, softball and even Little League Baseball.

And now the Courtesy Runner has been joined by other earthshaking changes infiltrating Major League Baseball itself as the game seeks a younger demographic. The pitch clock. Bigger bases. Fewer mount visits.

More is coming.

Recently, MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred discussed the possibility of baseball using what he called a “Golden At-Bat.”

“You put your best player out there out of order at a particular point in the game,” Manfred said. “That rule and things like that are only in the conversational stage right now.”

Here’s a scenario:

Let’s say the Yankees are down two runs in the 9th inning vs. the hated Red Sox with two men on base and two outs. The Golden At-Bat rule would allow them to bring Aaron Judge — their best hitter — to the plate even if his place in the batting order was six at-bats away.

I’m offended by the Golden At-Bat idea, just like I was offended by the Courtesy Runner all those years ago.

Call me a Geezer shouting GET OFF MY LAWN, but the Golden At-Bat concept seemed to come right out of left field, so to speak. It’s goofy. It’s unneeded. It’s a terrible idea.

Baseball already places a runner on second base to start the inning in extra innings. Now this?

Like me, much of the world of MLB fans reacted with horror to a rule that would skew baseball’s beloved statistics, which have withstood the test of time for more than 100 years.

There has been a chorus of boos across the nation from baseball fans, among them radio talk show host Dan Patrick. I listen to the podcast version of the DP Show daily, and heard Patrick’s reaction last week.

“I hate it,” he said. “Hate it. I hate the runner at second base to start extra innings. Don’t go too gimmicky. Does baseball need that? It felt like baseball had a good year, a great year.”

In the spirit of the Golden At-Bat, Dan asked his entourage of co-hosts, collectively known as the Danettes, to come up with some “even dumber” ideas for baseball. The guys were happy to oblige.

“Count the Golden At-Bat as two outs if the batter fails to get a hit.”

“if your team is up by 10 runs or more you have to pitch blindfolded.”

“If you throw a pitch 100 mph or more, it’s not a strike, it’s a ball.”

“One time a game, you can require the opposing team to remove one outfielder during an at-bat.”

The Danettes struck Dumb and Dumber gold with their ideas.

But, you know what? They didn’t mention the Courtesy Runner.

And I’m still offended by the Courtesy Runner after all these years.

So GET OFF MY LAWN.

Tag: Dan Patrick Show

MLB’s existential dilemma — why sharing the wealth for the Greater Good can save the game

Major League Baseball’s terrible, horrible, no good, very bad idea