[Josh Tarble]

With yet another "will something, something, something save golf?" post on the front page, it made me think of this article on the decline of baseball:

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/the-dead-ball-century-mlb-baseball-playoffs-john-thorn-mlb-historian-baseball-decline-articles/

I know there is a difference in the two sports, but a lot in the article made me think of golf as well.  Besides, it's a good article and worth the read.

[Rich Goodale]

Thanka for that, Josh.  Baseball was my life from age 5 or so until I discovered other pastimes in my teens.  Even so, from 13 onwards in my spare time I played organized BB through American Legion, and then some semi-serious fast pitch softball well into my 20's.  Then I quit.  Game too hard for old men.  Too many other things to do.  But, I have never thought that there was a better game designed by human beings.  I'll chip in later, as this thread develops, as it should

Rich

[Jason Topp]

I thought about posting the same sort of topic.  The game of golf will be fine. 

Most of the angst related to the future of the game relates to the business side of the game - will courses remain open?  Will equipment companies be able to make profits by jacking up the prices for premium items?  Will architects, professionals, writers and others employed in the industry be able to make a living? 

I do not mean to belittle any of the business concerns but I do not think those concerns should be confused with worry over the future of the game.  The game is fun for a certain percentage of the population and I do not see that fact changing any time soon.

[BHoover]

Excellent article, Josh. I always roll my eyes when I see someone proclaiming that baseball is dying. It certainly goes through cycles (as does any sport, including golf) but the game has endured for 150+ years and has weathered crises much more serious than declining television ratings or the length of games. It may not be THE national sport as it once was, but the game will endure as it always has. Same with golf--it may not be a widely popular sport, but the game as we know know will not die.

I'm wondering when the articles about the death of football will start to come out. It's trending that way, but football too will survive. Although, if I had to put money on which sport will survive over another, I would bet on it being baseball more than football. Baseball to many of us, even casual fans, is the sentimental favorite, whereas football is about the event more than the sport, if that makes sense (it's hard to articulate). But if I had to choose between my favorite baseball team and my favorite football team, I go baseball. As Rich said, baseball is the most perfect game there is--it has everything, whether team play, individual battles, strategy, tactics, good luck/bad luck. Other sports have some of that but not really all of those at the same time.

Getting back to golf, yes the business of the game will change (as it has in other sports), but the fundamental qualities of the game will be just fine.

[Dan Kelly]

When I was a boy, my father accused me (often, and accurately, if not particularly kindly) of having a "one-track mind."

The one track was sports. Baseball always had the inside track of that one track. From the day the Twins beat the Yankees 6-0 in their first game as the Twins, at Yankee Stadium, in 1961, I was obsessive about baseball -- playing it, watching it, thinking about it, reading about it (my first two subscriptions: Sports Illustrated and The Sporting News, which kept me over-informed about baseball through the long winters here).

I lost that obsession as a grown man -- when the *business* of the "game" got in the way for me. I liked it better when players stuck around, even as I knew that they shouldn't be forced to. I liked it better when players had wintertime jobs, even as I knew that they should have been paid better all along.

But, even as I've mostly stopped caring about the players and their lives, I still LOVE the game on the field. I don't think the business of baseball will ever kill that. Nor will all of the nonsense at the stadiums, all designed for the marginal "fan."

And as for golf, which nowadays has the inside track of what's left of my one-track mind, I agree with Mr. Topp: "The game is fun for a certain percentage of the population and I do not see that fact changing any time soon."

[JMEvensky]

Thanka for that, Josh.  Baseball was my life from age 5 or so until I discovered other pastimes in my teens.  Even so, from 13 onwards in my spare time I played organized BB through American Legion, and then some semi-serious fast pitch softball well into my 20's.  Then I quit.  Game too hard for old men.  Too many other things to do.  But, I have never thought that there was a better game designed by human beings.  I'll chip in later, as this thread develops, as it should

Rich

Exact same background for me. And +1000 on the best game designed by human beings.

To me,what always set baseball apart was its veneration of its past. Even with the changes of the last ~25 years,the game would still be recognizable to players from 100 years ago. The same used to be true of golf. I'm not sure that's the case anymore (Bobby Jones' comment to Jack Nicklaus notwithstanding).

[Charlie Ray]

One big difference between the two.
Assuming that you agree that our modern culture is becoming more isolated (we spend hours a day staring at screens alone, allthewhile our loved ones are in the next rooms staring into their own screens)   then golf has a tremendous advantage over baseball.  It can be done in isolation,  that is I can show up at the course on a whim and play.  Maybe with others maybe alone.  Baseball has no ability to match this quality.  I can't show up at the ball field unannounced and there be a bunch of other players willing to play.  ( I am sure in Grant Park in Chicago or some other place there might be a possibility but outside the megacity I think it highly unlikely).   In other words, golf has an ability to satisfy our instant demand, unlike baseball.  And that is a great strength of the game.

[Peter Pallotta]

Good article, good thread.

It reminded me of something I like to be reminded of, i.e. that there's no one here but us. Meaning: whether it be the different sports or various kinds of arts or the many religious denominations etc, nothing exists except that it serves us, or at least serves someone (i.e. at least one of us). Whether or not this or that sport or denomination serves us well is another question, and in a sense not important in the least. What continues to exists so continues because it is serving a purpose, real or imagined, and serving it for at least one of us. When it no longer serves that purpose, real or imagine, for anyone it will cease to exist; but then it won't matter, as there won't be anyone around who cares enough to mourn its demise. Golf and baseball will be around until there is no one left around to care whether golf and baseball are still around. Until then, the ups and downs and good times and bad (the riding high in April, shot down in May phenomenon) for skiing or Methodists or Keynesians or golfers or Dadaists will, inevitably, continue.

Peter

[Dan Kelly]

Golf and baseball will be around until there is no one left around to care whether golf and baseball are still around.

Or, in other words: Forever!

[Matthew Lloyd]

Great thread.  As mostly summer sports played outdoors and at a leisurely pace, there are a lot of parallels. You factor in the reliance both sports have on tradition and history and the parallels become even stronger.  Like some other posters, I find it comical when baseball's obituary gets written. In fact, I think some of the best attendance figures in history have been in the last decade if I'm not mistaken. But I understand why these articles continue to appear -- the sport as a business doesn't carry the same sledgehammer that the NFL does in terms of dominating the media, and I think the salary cap rules make it harder for every fan base to invest the same amount as a fan, as compared to the NFL for instance.

I do think baseball is trending (very slowly) towards becoming more of a niche sport, but it's not in any danger of losing its foothold in the pecking order of American sports for one major reason: it has the summer completely to itself. The NBA ends by mid-june, the NFL doesn't start until after labor day, there are no college sports going on. Its only real competition is the golf majors, which are only 4 day affairs anyway. The article mentions how the "baseball obits" are generally written during the postseason -- this makes perfect sense because that's probably when baseball writers are feeling that the game is being completely overshadowed by the NFL.

Another factor that can't be underestimated: as America's latino population continues to grow, baseball could very well reclaim its status as the most popular pro sport again (I think we have to assume the NFL holds that title right now).

One final note: a parallel trend between baseball and golf that I find interesting is that Camden Yards was built in the early 1990s, starting a much-needed renaissance of traditional style ballparks, and that seems like the same era that Sand Hills et al began the minimalist "back to the future" golf course design renaissance as well.  Just as we're seeing fewer and fewer Mickey Mouse golf courses, we're almost rid of the generic one-stadium-fits-all design of the 60s-70s in baseball.

Now, with steroids gone (hopefully), maybe we can get rid of all the new golf club equipment and go back to hickory shafts only to allow everything to come full circle in both sports...

[Rick Shefchik]

I base my life expectancy on reaching the point where I've actually seen the oldest living baseball player play. Anything after that is gravy.

[Josh Tarble]

Thanka for that, Josh.  Baseball was my life from age 5 or so until I discovered other pastimes in my teens.  Even so, from 13 onwards in my spare time I played organized BB through American Legion, and then some semi-serious fast pitch softball well into my 20's.  Then I quit.  Game too hard for old men.  Too many other things to do.  But, I have never thought that there was a better game designed by human beings.  I'll chip in later, as this thread develops, as it should

Rich

Exact same background for me. And +1000 on the best game designed by human beings.

To me,what always set baseball apart was its veneration of its past. Even with the changes of the last ~25 years,the game would still be recognizable to players from 100 years ago. The same used to be true of golf. I'm not sure that's the case anymore (Bobby Jones' comment to Jack Nicklaus notwithstanding).

This is where I'll have to disagree with you. I think the game today, with pitchers routinely hitting 100mph, specialized gloves for positions, aluminum bats in the lower levels... I would say that's as much difference as golf.

[Josh Tarble]

And thanks for your thoughts, everyone. I just found it a good read and thought it related to the current state of golf.  I'm sure in some form or another golf has "been in decline" throughout its existence.  Previously though, it didn't have the weight of manufacturers worried about monetizing the game.

[Doug Siebert]

The people who claim golf is "dying" mostly don't mean that the game will literally disappear.  They mean it is in decline rather than growing.  Same is true for baseball - and baseball certainly isn't what it used to be.  It is no longer the king of sports, football clearly is.

Look at boxing.  Used to be very popular, now most of its fans are old men.  It isn't dead, but it sure ain't what it used to be.  Sometimes things don't go away when they die, they just fade away.

Not that I think golf is going to fade away, it just went from a period of unreasonable growth and now is in a correction.  That's painful for those in the industry, but isn't exactly a surprise to a lot of people who saw all the projections for new golfers and the "we need to build a course a day for the next decade to keep up with this increased demand" and laughed.

[BCrosby]

All sports go through their ups and downs. Baseball had serious attendance problems in the 50's and 60's. Typical was Ted William's last game (in which he hit his last home run). Attendance at Fenway was very sparse that day (September, 1960). Which - notwithstanding Ted's strained relationship with Boston fans - is shocking in hindsight. The decline in attendance was a part of the reason why so many teams moved during the era. The creation of the DH was an attempt to create more offense as a way to increase gates. When did they lower the pitcher's mound?   

Golf is going through a bad patch too. I'd guess it will come out of it at some point, probably for reasons as mysterious as those that caused the current malaise.

Bob 

   

[Dan Kelly]

All sports go through their ups and downs. Baseball had serious attendance problems in the 50's and 60's. Typical was Ted William's last game (in which he hit his last home run). Attendance at Fenway was very sparse that day (September, 1960). Which - notwithstanding Ted's strained relationship with Boston fans - is shocking in hindsight. The decline in attendance was a part of the reason why so many teams moved during the era. The creation of the DH was an attempt to create more offense as a way to increase gates. When did they lower the pitcher's mound?  

Golf is going through a bad patch too. I'd guess it will come out of it at some point, probably for reasons as mysterious as those that caused the current malaise.

Bob  

They lowered the mound from 15 inches to 10 after 1968 -- when Denny McLain won 31 games and Bob Gibson had an E.R.A. of 1.12.

Attendance at Ted Williams's last game at Fenway: 10,454, according to John Updike's famous "Hub Fans Bid Kid Adieu" (http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1960/10/22/hub-fans-bid-kid-adieu).

Fenway Park attendance figures, 1961-1966:

1961: 850,589
1962: 733,080
1963: 942,642
1964: 883,276
1965: 652,201
1966: 811,172

These were not atypical attendance figures for the not-good teams. See, e.g., http://www.ballparksofbaseball.com/1960-69attendance.htm.

Attendance totals for all of Major League Baseball, 1945-1970:

1945   10,841,123
1946   18,523,289
1947   19,874,539
1948   20,920,842
1949   20,215,365
1950   17,462,977
1951   16,126,676
1952   14,633,044
1953   14,383,797
1954   15,935,883
1955   16,617,383
1956   16,543,250
1957   17,015,819
1958   17,460,630
1959   19,143,979
1960   19,911,489
1961   18,894,518
1962   21,375,215
1963   20,477,074
1964   21,280,341
1965   22,441,900
1966   25,182,209
1967   24,308,353
1968   23,102,745
1969   27,229,666
1970   28,747,333

[Rick Shefchik]

Interesting site. I knew the Yankees were also subject to lagging attendance before Steinbrenner bought the club, but I didn't realize the Minnesota Twins outdrew the Yankees in 1963, 1965, 1966, 1967 and 1969.

Of course, the Twins were a much better team than the Yankees during that era.

[Chris Clouser]

As a kid in Indiana, the warm weather months were spent on baseball, the cold weather months on basketball.  Football was barely on the radar at the time.  Those are still my two favorite sports to this day.  Unlike basketball, which has morphed into some weird amalgamation with rugby in the last 20 years where fouls and other violations are subject to the whims of the referee instead of the black and white rulebook of my youth, baseball has changed only slightly in my mind.  I think the decline of baseball is much more indicative of the "want it now" and lack of patience attitude of today's world than anything being wrong with the game.  I'll still never understand the fascination of the NFL where you have maybe 7 to 8 minutes of real action in the game that has 60 minutes on the clock and why that is better than a baseball game.  Truthfully there is nothing wrong with the sport of baseball that the contraction of a 2 to 4 teams and enforcing that pitchers and batters actually be at the ready cannot fix at the major league level.  That would stop diluting the talent pool and speed up the game. 

I just wish I could convince my wife or kids that a day at the ballpark was better than sitting at home on their electronic devices or going shopping. 

[Tom_Doak]

Dan / Rick:

Thanks for providing the attendance figures.  The "glory days" were not so glorious for a lot of clubs. 

The Twins were also outdrawing the Yankees in that period because they were a new thing for a sports-starved town, while the Yankees were old news.  In fact, the Dodgers and Giants left, in large part, because they were struggling to get people to go to the games, and there wasn't much TV money to make up for it.

[BCrosby]

In my deeply slanted way, I've always attributed the upturn in baseball attendance in the late '60's to the amazing Yaz and the '67 BoSox pennant run.

Bob

[Dan Kelly]

In my deeply slanted way, I've always attributed the upturn in baseball attendance in the late '60's to the amazing Yaz and the '67 BoSox pennant run.

Bob

Bob --

I will contend, to my dying day, that if Jim Kaat had not been injured in the third inning of the penultimate game of that '67 season, the Impossible Dream would have been just that.

And Kaat might be in the Hall of Fame, instead of relying on the damned fools of the Veterans Committee.

Dan

[BCrosby]

I will contend, to my dying day, that if Jim Kaat had not been injured in the third inning of the penultimate game of that '67 season, the Impossible Dream would have been just that.

Dan

You are probably right. One of the best curve balls in the history of baseball. But Kaat was up against divine intervention. A tough out. Hence the improbable, magical sweep.

Bob 

[Rick Shefchik]

Though I was rooting for the Twins back then, I have to side with Bob on this one. Somehow, some way, the Sox were going to find a way to win that pennant. Kind of like the Royals this year -- a team of destiny, until they ran into the game's best pitcher in W.S. game 7.

[Dan Kelly]

Rick --

Just noticed something.

You're talking about your life expectancy.

I'm talking about my dying day.

It must be winter in Minnesota.

Dan

P.S. This is Day 43, for me. Only, what, maybe 110 to go?

[Brandon Urban]

Great article and thread. I played baseball in central Kansas from the time I could walk. I still play in a Friday night softball league (to drink beer with the buddies) as well as an over-30 baseball league. I love the game, the strategy, the people, and the history.

A couple of years ago we took the kids to Chicago. I had never been to Wrigley and a friend hooked me up with tickets to an afternoon game. I was in heaven. My wife, the 12 year old boy, and 10 year old girl were not. They were bored out of their minds by the first pitch. Asking to leave by the 2nd inning. I left that living museum that day (after making them stay for all 9 glorious innings) thinking there was no hope. But then a funny thing happened.

Our Kansas City Royals had a magical year... after 29 awful ones. They captured the heart of the entire community. My family was not spared. We watched every playoff and World Series game together (except for Game 1 which I was fortunate enough to attend while checking an item off of my bucket list). My 11 year old daughter cried at the end of Game 7. She was fully invested. Now she constantly asks when pitchers and catchers report. The 13 year old boy has a renewed interest in playing catch in the backyard. They love it.

I guess all I'm saying, in a round about way, is that sometimes you just need a kick in the pants. Something to flip the switch. I think that happens in cycles. Sure, neither game is necessarily growing right now, but there will always be something that pours new fans/players back into the game. There will always be a reason for a boy to walk 9 with his dad or for his daughter to help him finish off a bag of peanuts on a summer night at the ballpark.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()