2005 MLB Playoffs Thread - Page 15

**Joey Slugs** · 10-28-2005, 02:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BCWWF

That is pretty sweet. I've heard that when they actually got fans out there the games had a better atmosphere then just about any stadium in baseball.

as a former season ticket holder (had to put off a few year because of money issues but i might re-up my seats for next year), when the sox draw a sellout crowd the place is amazing (especially since they rebuilt about 85% of the building). i've been to about 12 different stadiums so far and outside of St. Louis, i've never been to a place that the crowd made so alive.

**VonErich Lives** · 10-28-2005, 12:41 PM

Slugs, this isn't a shot at you.

Hero went on a rant how Sox/Yanks fans think everyone cares about our team, a claim he never backed up.

Much like you, we care about our team and could careless who else cares about them.

That being said, gotta piggy back on LC's article.

Quote:

White Sox-Astros World Series lowest-rated ever

Associated Press

NEW YORK -- The Chicago White Sox's first world championship in 88 years was also the lowest-rated World Series ever.

Chicago's four-game sweep of the Houston Astros averaged an 11.1 national rating with a 19 share on Fox. That's down about 7 percent from the previous low, an 11.9 with a 20 share for the 2002 World Series between the Anaheim Angels and the San Francisco Giants.

While the 2002 World Series, which went seven games, rated higher overall, it was only averaging an 11.0 through four games.

This year was a drop of almost 30 percent from last year's series, in which the Boston Red Sox swept the St. Louis Cardinals for their first title in 86 years. That had a 15.8 rating with a 25 share.

Wednesday night's 1-0 Chicago win had a 13.0 preliminary national rating with a 21 share. It was the highest-rated prime-time show on Fox since the final of "American Idol" in May, but still not enough to save the series from being the lowest-rated.

Despite rating so low in comparison to other World Series, the four games of this series were each the highest rated prime-time network programs on their respective nights.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/playof...ory?id=2206044

That did suprise me, I figured one teams first apperance, bagwell longest with a WS at-bat, Biggio not far behined, Clemens, a few X-New Yorkers on both sides, White Sox 88yrs... I figured it would have done better.

**Joey Slugs** · 10-28-2005, 03:32 PM

VEL... it is sad about the ratings. you had the 3rd & 4th biggest US cities, the first time Texas hosted a WS, the first time for the sox since '59. there were plenty of story lines for people to get into. oh well. the end result is all that matters to me.

at least it was the number one watched show each night.

WE BEAT DESPERATE HOUSEWIVES!!!!!! :LOL:

**VonErich Lives** · 10-28-2005, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joey Slugs

VEL... it is sad about the ratings. you had the 3rd & 4th biggest US cities, the first time Texas hosted a WS, the first time for the sox since '59. there were plenty of story lines for people to get into. oh well. the end result is all that matters to me.

at least it was the number one watched show each night.

WE BEAT DESPERATE HOUSEWIVES!!!!!! :LOL:

I agree, I wonder (Miz??) if someone has a list of ratings by year for the last 20yrs, curious to see if I lot of it has to do with the general "decline" of baseball.

I admit, I only watched game #1, the others I watched a little but not much, I get up to early to stay up for them. There's been a call on the east coast, to see games started at 7pm (which means 4pm west coast) to allow more people to watch/stay up. Also a call for weekends game not to be "prime time" which typically doesn't do well for most sports, because people tend to go out and do things on a Saturday night... on the flipside, a 1pm Sunday game goes head to head with the NFL.

**Joey Slugs** · 10-28-2005, 05:30 PM

1.7 million people (including myself, my gf, & my dad) came out to cheer on the sox throughout the southside & downtown.

chicago made me proud today.

**Joey Slugs** · 10-28-2005, 05:32 PM

For more White Sox parade pictures Click Here

**BCWWF** · 10-28-2005, 11:43 PM

With the ratings, you have to understand that on average they will continue to go down. Last years World Series may have drawn quite a bit, but with all of the channels on TV now the ratings for everything will be more depleted.

**RoXer** · 10-29-2005, 12:55 AM

FYI

The Oakland Athletics beat the Chicago White Sox 5 out of 6 times.

Which makes the A's>Chisox. Case closed.

**Joey Slugs** · 10-29-2005, 03:30 PM

The White Sox beat the Angels in the ALCS, and the Angels beat the A's for the West Division title.

So White Sox>Angels>A's>everyone else

**BCWWF** · 10-29-2005, 09:32 PM

The Twins swept the White Sox late in the season

**Joey Slugs** · 10-29-2005, 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BCWWF

The Twins swept the White Sox late in the season

Who didn't beat us in August/September?

**BCWWF** · 10-30-2005, 12:03 AM

One of the columnists in the Star Tribune (one I am growing to dislike lately) had one in todays paper saying that the Twins don't have the talent to compete with the White Sox and Indians for the next few years, and it says we should trade Nathan, Hunter, Radke, and Stewart...There are reason's to believe the Twins are out for a couple of years, but I think there are reasons why the Twins could win the Central again next year.

I have been wrong about the White Sox before this year, but I really don't see them having the same type of year next year. Konerko (if he stays) is bound to get injured, Podsednik won't surprise people so much, and the rest of the guys who had career years just won't live up. I think they will be the same as the Marlins of 2003, everybody expected them to come back and be amazing, but they are the kind of team that is one and done. As for the Indians, I think their players are beginning to plateau. Some guys, for example Sizemore, are still on track to being amazing, but Ronnie Belliard, Ben Broussard, Aaron Boone, Victor Martinez, Casey Blake, Coco Crisp, I mean these guys aren't on the bottom of the pole anymore, they aren't going to get too much better.

I may have rambled on there, but I don't think Cleveland is on track to be a World Series contender next season, MEAT

**YOUR Hero** · 10-31-2005, 10:18 PM

I'm going to unstick this thread now. I'll stick the off season - Trade talk baseball topic.

**VonErich Lives** · 11-06-2005, 06:32 AM

Just to add on to the whole "not everyone cares about the sox/yanks" thing.

The week after the White Sox win the World Series.

Check out the cover of SI.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/si_...2005/1107.html

I know football is more popular then baseball, and there's this whole "can the colts get over the hump", but shouldn't the white sox have gotten the cover and the pats/colts in the corner?

**VonErich Lives** · 11-11-2005, 04:02 AM

Sorry, giving this one last little bump.

I find it funny Hero went on this rant about how "you boston fans don't understand not everyone cares about your team".

yet, never explained how/why he thinks that boston fans assume everyone cares about our team, how it's a decision the fans make, not the marketing people at places like ESPN based on hard facts (viewing numbers, merchandise sales).

Especially, after seeing the horrible raiting this years WS got and even the lack of a full cover on Sports Illustrated being give to a MNF game, a game that win or lose, probably would make little difference in the standings/playoff position when the season is over.

yet still, no comment from our Hero....

10-28-2005, 03:32 PM	#3
Joey Slugs Second City Saint Posts: 5,806	VEL... it is sad about the ratings. you had the 3rd & 4th biggest US cities, the first time Texas hosted a WS, the first time for the sox since '59. there were plenty of story lines for people to get into. oh well. the end result is all that matters to me. at least it was the number one watched show each night. WE BEAT DESPERATE HOUSEWIVES!!!!!! :LOL:

10-28-2005, 05:30 PM	#5
Joey Slugs Second City Saint Posts: 5,806	1.7 million people (including myself, my gf, & my dad) came out to cheer on the sox throughout the southside & downtown. chicago made me proud today.

10-28-2005, 05:32 PM	#6
Joey Slugs Second City Saint Posts: 5,806	For more White Sox parade pictures Click Here

10-28-2005, 11:43 PM	#7
BCWWF The People's Member Posts: 18,092	With the ratings, you have to understand that on average they will continue to go down. Last years World Series may have drawn quite a bit, but with all of the channels on TV now the ratings for everything will be more depleted.

10-29-2005, 12:55 AM	#8
RoXer History's Greatest, Mr. E Posts: 42,425	FYI The Oakland Athletics beat the Chicago White Sox 5 out of 6 times. Which makes the A's>Chisox. Case closed.

10-29-2005, 03:30 PM	#9
Joey Slugs Second City Saint Posts: 5,806	The White Sox beat the Angels in the ALCS, and the Angels beat the A's for the West Division title. So White Sox>Angels>A's>everyone else

10-29-2005, 09:32 PM	#10
BCWWF The People's Member Posts: 18,092	The Twins swept the White Sox late in the season

10-30-2005, 12:03 AM	#12
BCWWF The People's Member Posts: 18,092	One of the columnists in the Star Tribune (one I am growing to dislike lately) had one in todays paper saying that the Twins don't have the talent to compete with the White Sox and Indians for the next few years, and it says we should trade Nathan, Hunter, Radke, and Stewart...There are reason's to believe the Twins are out for a couple of years, but I think there are reasons why the Twins could win the Central again next year. I have been wrong about the White Sox before this year, but I really don't see them having the same type of year next year. Konerko (if he stays) is bound to get injured, Podsednik won't surprise people so much, and the rest of the guys who had career years just won't live up. I think they will be the same as the Marlins of 2003, everybody expected them to come back and be amazing, but they are the kind of team that is one and done. As for the Indians, I think their players are beginning to plateau. Some guys, for example Sizemore, are still on track to being amazing, but Ronnie Belliard, Ben Broussard, Aaron Boone, Victor Martinez, Casey Blake, Coco Crisp, I mean these guys aren't on the bottom of the pole anymore, they aren't going to get too much better. I may have rambled on there, but I don't think Cleveland is on track to be a World Series contender next season, MEAT

10-31-2005, 10:18 PM	#13
YOUR Hero Adminstigator Posts: 102,491	I'm going to unstick this thread now. I'll stick the off season - Trade talk baseball topic.

11-06-2005, 06:32 AM	#14
VonErich Lives WTF do you want? Posts: 14,760	Just to add on to the whole "not everyone cares about the sox/yanks" thing. The week after the White Sox win the World Series. Check out the cover of SI. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/si_...2005/1107.html I know football is more popular then baseball, and there's this whole "can the colts get over the hump", but shouldn't the white sox have gotten the cover and the pats/colts in the corner?

11-11-2005, 04:02 AM	#15
VonErich Lives WTF do you want? Posts: 14,760	Sorry, giving this one last little bump. I find it funny Hero went on this rant about how "you boston fans don't understand not everyone cares about your team". yet, never explained how/why he thinks that boston fans assume everyone cares about our team, how it's a decision the fans make, not the marketing people at places like ESPN based on hard facts (viewing numbers, merchandise sales). Especially, after seeing the horrible raiting this years WS got and even the lack of a full cover on Sports Illustrated being give to a MNF game, a game that win or lose, probably would make little difference in the standings/playoff position when the season is over. yet still, no comment from our Hero....