I do think that the new rules added to the MILB is a good idea. It is no doubt that baseball can be a pretty slow and boring sport. I think that these new rules will definitely build a bigger appreciation for the game. As a result of making the game faster paced, I do strongly believe that the MILB will be able to generate more revenue and achieve long term success. Everybody hates changing tradition, especially when it has existed for such a long time. However, i think that there are mostly positive outcomes with the implementation of these rules. Baseball will regain attention that it has clearly lost to other sports in the past decade. The only negative thing that may result from this change is the performance level of the players. I Think that by playing at a faster pace, the amount of errors on the field may increase. And while this is not necessarily a bad thing, it is inevitable that baseball as we know it will not look exactly the same.
I think the new rules are a good idea. I feel like making changes to MLB baseball would be good to change it up a bit and make it more interesting and perhaps get more people to watch. This is double sided though because many people who have watched baseball all their lives are not going to like the changes. No one likes to change tradition and this might also cause the MILB to lose some long term viewers and fans. I don't think this will have a huge impact on how the game is played, but some of the players might not like the changes and baseball might lose some of their top players due to these changes.
I believe some rules such as the pitch timer are necessary. However, other rules like starting with a baserunner in extra innings, are not needed. This is because the game is very boring so speeding it up may make people more interested. However, there is a certain point where too much change is bad and people may lose interest. I feel this is where we draw the line. To build off of what I said, I think that yes it will hurt the tradition of the game but, I think some change is needed. I think some rules, such as the pitching clock will have a big impact on the game. This is because players will have to adjust to not having longer breaks in between pitches which can bring a new skill into the game.
In todays game of baseball, there is a big issue with pace of play with numerous mound visits, and each pitch taking a while. This has major league administrators, including the commissioner Rob Manfred seriously considering changes to the way baseball operates during the game. It is right of the league officials to consider many changes to the game, to shorten it to close to the other major sports which last about two and a half hours. This outcome will not happen though because of a few simple changes. The game of baseball is notorious for being one of the longest sports to play, and having these rules done will minimally change the timing per game. I do agree with some of the steps, including a pitch clock, and less mound visits, but altering what the game is in extra innings would ruin a part of the game. Some of the most classic games in baseball’s history have taken place in extra innings, and putting in place this rule would rule out many future classic games that can take place. Even if they just implant the extra inning rule into the regular season games, there would be a sense of loss for many fans of baseball. Baseball fans who have watched the game all their lives will strongly disapprove of what alterations this would do. Many baseball fans look forward to the classic 19 inning games, or that walk off home run after a long fought pitching duel, and this new tradition would limit this from happening. If the MLB is really looking for a way to shorten the amount of time in a MLB game, they should take a look at the length of break in between innings. While the MLB will likely never forfeit all the money they produce inside each 2 minute break, this is a serious reason of why the game lasts so long. If the MLB really is committed to shortening the amount of time in baseball, it will take more than just less mound visits, and quicker time between pitches.
I personally feel that some of the rule changes are good, and some of them are not needed. I like the pitch clock and the amount of mound visits because these two things can really add up, increasing the time of the game dramatically. However I do not agree with putting a man on first during extra innings. This would change how the whole game would have to be managed, and this is not needed. I think implementing some of these rules (limiting mound visits, pitching timers) will not ruin the quality of the game, however if there are too many changes that are being made, it could end up hurting the game. Part of baseball is that there is no timer, and this makes it different than any other sport. They need to realize this, and try not to alter the game too much. These rule changes will impact the game because it will speed them up. This would hopefully bring back some people who stopped watching the game because of length of it.
I feel that the new rules are a good idea. Baseball has stayed pretty much the same since 1839, so doing something new wouldn’t be the worst thing. It can make the game more interesting and potentially get a larger crowd due to a quicker game. However, many people oppose this because of tradition. This could deter fans from wanting to participate in watching the games and also the players from trying. Players performance levels will drop because errors will increase on the field. I feel that by decreasing the time of the game, the number of errors will increase. Change is a necessary thing, and in this case, the players and the fans will need to adjust to it.
I think as a fan I wouldn't be opposed to seeing limited mound visits or a pitch clock for pitcher, but as a player I know i would absolutely hate it. I do think the length of a baseball game is definitely something the MLB should look into speeding up, but if the solutions they come up with to speed the game up ultimately effects the way players perform, then I'm not sure if I would support it. I think limiting mound visits is certainly something that would speed the game up but I also know that those mound visits are also a crucial way for teams to communicate and ultimately can determine the outcome of the game, especially in close games. I know as a fan during a regular season game I would want to see limited visits if the game was a blowout, but in a meaningful postseason game I would want my team to have all the time they need to make sure they are on the same page for the entire game. As for the extra innings rule, I think it completely changes the game and is unnecessary. Anyone who appreciates the game of baseball will never have a problem with the length of a game and if the MLB thinks any differently I think they need to reconsider their target audience, and prioritize game tradition and player satisfaction over fan preference.
I believe from some aspects of the game of baseball, these rules are necessary. They can be essential for keeping viewers tuned in and not bored. A lot of these rule changes are being made due to continuous stoppages in play and potential boredom for fans. I think if all of these rules are applied- as some already are in effect- the pace of play will increase keeping people intrigued. However, I could see the argument that from a players perspective, these rule changed interrupt the flow of a game. A team could get into a rhythm and an increase in pace could throw it off and make them commit sloppy errors that would not be normal in the game of baseball. I think overall, these rules are going to have to take some getting used to, but I think it is good overall to have these proposed. Players will get used to it and find ways to adapt to new styles of play that will not only improve their game, but the game of baseball itself.
I think that these rules are beneficial to the fans and the players. Having a pitch clock would regulate the length of the game and how well the pitcher can really pitch. The shorten game would help the fans stay into the game and make more people go. A reason I don't go to baseball games is because everything takes too much time. Shortening all the times that everything is too long will help draw more fans in. I do not think that putting a man on first during extra innings is fair though. I think that the main aspects of the games should be kept the same and not moved around but the timing should. Eliminating extra innings changes the games and history can be made in overtime. Like any sport overtime is where you see the best in teams and which team is better so I don't think those rules should be changed for baseball either.
I do not agree with these rules. I believe that part of the game is the one at which it is played. Some pitchers take a long time before their delivery, and I believe that that is part of their strategy, and let of the game. I think it hurts the tradition we are so used to. I don't believe that they will attract more fans by saying that there will be less time in between pitches. I believe it may have small changes for pitches and batters who like to take a little more time in between their pitches whic may be very annoying for them.
I believe some rules need to be placed. Rules such as beginning with a baserunner are not necessary. The game already moves at a slower pace so adding anything to make it slower would cause fans to lose interest. The game needs to sped up so people stay interested in the full game. Changing the game a little would make major changes to the game and industry but if there is too much change within the league, it will lose the original, tradition of play. New rules and regulations like adding a pitching clock could be very beneficial to the game. This will speed up the game and add new skills with the sped up play throughout the league.
I agree with these rule changes because it will make the game go quicker which I think will make the game more entertaining, however, I think it will make the actual players unhappy. With limited mound visits and a pitch clock for the pitcher, this will put more pressure on the pitcher and players. I don't think these changes will hurt the tradition of the game because I think it will have a minor impact on the game as a whole. limiting the amount of Mound visits and shortening the pitchers clock aren't major changes so I don't think it will affect the tradition of the game. Although it won't change the tradition of the game, I think it will impact how the game is played because the games will be shorter
I do not agree with the new added rules. I feel that everything being changed should stay with the rules that have stayed part of the game for years. I believe that changing these rules will change MILB forever. I feel that these changes will definitely hurt the tradition of the game because the rules that are being changed have been part of baseball for the entirety of the sport. I feel that in the long run the new rules that have been put in place will completely change how the game will play.
I believe that to some extent rule changes are necessary, however if they change the tradition of baseball they should not be added. Pace of play has long been an issue within baseball with younger fans opting to watch faster paced sports instead. It is vital to baseball to regain the interest of these fans, but it is also important maintain the "old-timers," you still have. I do not feel it will majorly impact the tradition of the game, because the tradition of baseball has long been change. From not allowing black players to not allowing the use of PED's, baseball has always been open to change and I believe even the oldest of fans will agree some change is needed. Strategically, I do not believe there will be a major change in how the game is played. At the most, it could negatively impact a few pitchers who prefer to throw at a slower pace, but in general I believe almost all players will agree that a faster game wouldn't hurt. Some rules seem a little overblown, like the potential for a runner on second in extra-innings seems a little over the top, but just general rules to speed up the game should be encouraged.
I agree with these rule changes because baseball is a very slow game to begin with and can take hours long to finish, so I think these rules can be very helpful with speeding up the game a bit. Baseball is a very traditional game, but I do not believe these rules will take that away from the sport. Baseball will always be baseball, you're still pitching, hitting, and running bases just speeding up the pace of the game which can potentially make the game more fun to watch for fans. I do not think that these rules will have a big impact on how the game is played because no physical baseball rules are being changed, just the pace of play is being sped up. I know I can get very bored watching a long baseball game, so personally I support these rules and hope they go into effect.
I think some of these rules could be good for the game such as the pitch clock but others could perhaps hurt the game more then in would help such as starting a runner on base in extra innings. I think the pitch clock would be beneficial because it would speed up the pace of a baseball game and make in more interesting for the people that are currently not fans of baseball. But there is no way to know for sure until these rules are actually used in an actual game. It wouldn't hurt for the MLB to try these rules out for a season and if it is working well they can keep the rules but if not they can go back to normal baseball
I believe that the new rules added are a terrific idea. Baseball is no doubt a pretty slow and boring sport, but with these new rules I believe it will pick up the pase a little bit. However, with this making the game faster and less boring, it will definitly hurt the tradition. A lot of people might take the tradition to passion, and this might cause some tension. I believe this might make a small impact not a large one. One small issue that may happen is the fact that some of the players might not like the changes, and by having this issue baseball might lose some of their top players.
I believe certain rules would be a good idea. I do not believe adding a baserunner during extra innings is fair to the integrity of the game, because it completely ruins the idea of overtime play in the MLB, which is typically the more exciting part of the game. I do think pitch clocks are necessary. As TV ratings continue to plummet, it is necessary that the league takes action to create more engagement with viewers and fans. While this may impact pace of play for players on the field, America's pastime may once again be able to regain its popularity that has significantly fell in the past decades.
1. Do you agree with these rules changes? Are they necessary? I agree that a change in the rules is necessary, im not sure if these specific rules will accomplish what they want to accomplish, but i dont watch baseball so i wouldn't know. 2. Do you think these rule changes hurt the tradition of the game? No, its a game, rules change, styles of play change, stuff changes 3. Do you think these rule changes will have a big impact on how the game is played? not really, other than the fact it will be faster
I do agree with these changes. These rules are intended to make the game quicker like it originally was. I think these rules only improve the play of game and do not take away from the true goal of the game. Like I said before, these rules would help the tradition. Baseball started as a more fast pace game and over time it became slower. I think these rules should be made in order to bring back some of the original intents of baseball. This would also help with viewership because some fans complain about how long a game takes. I don't think this will have the big of an impact on the overall game other than speed up the process of it. I think if the game itself was being altered there be more things to discuss but since the pace is the only thing being changed I see no reason to refute it.
I think that rule changes are good for the sport. One of the biggest reasons baseball is not as well heralded anymore is because of how slow moving the game is when compared to other games. By implementing these rule changes it allows for a faster played game which increases the interest from fans. It was also smart to not implement these in the Major Leagues yet so that they can gauge how the rules affect the game before they do. I do not think that is is hurting the tradition of the game. I also do not think that changing these rules will affect the game very much and we may be seeing these rule implementations in the major leagues soon enough.
I agree with the rule changes completely because statistics have shown the ratings have shown that the ratings for the mlb have gone down in the past decade. This is mainly because the games are so long and there are rarely time violations. This does not hurt the tradition of the game it would just make the game faster, the baseball itself wouldn't be changing. If the mlb enforce these rule changes it would improve the ratings dramatically
I do think that the new rules added to the MILB is a good idea. It is no doubt that baseball can be a pretty slow and boring sport. I think that these new rules will definitely build a bigger appreciation for the game. As a result of making the game faster paced, I do strongly believe that the MILB will be able to generate more revenue and achieve long term success. Everybody hates changing tradition, especially when it has existed for such a long time. However, i think that there are mostly positive outcomes with the implementation of these rules. Baseball will regain attention that it has clearly lost to other sports in the past decade. The only negative thing that may result from this change is the performance level of the players. I Think that by playing at a faster pace, the amount of errors on the field may increase. And while this is not necessarily a bad thing, it is inevitable that baseball as we know it will not look exactly the same.
ReplyDeleteI think the new rules are a good idea. I feel like making changes to MLB baseball would be good to change it up a bit and make it more interesting and perhaps get more people to watch. This is double sided though because many people who have watched baseball all their lives are not going to like the changes. No one likes to change tradition and this might also cause the MILB to lose some long term viewers and fans. I don't think this will have a huge impact on how the game is played, but some of the players might not like the changes and baseball might lose some of their top players due to these changes.
ReplyDeleteI believe some rules such as the pitch timer are necessary. However, other rules like starting with a baserunner in extra innings, are not needed. This is because the game is very boring so speeding it up may make people more interested. However, there is a certain point where too much change is bad and people may lose interest. I feel this is where we draw the line. To build off of what I said, I think that yes it will hurt the tradition of the game but, I think some change is needed. I think some rules, such as the pitching clock will have a big impact on the game. This is because players will have to adjust to not having longer breaks in between pitches which can bring a new skill into the game.
ReplyDeleteIn todays game of baseball, there is a big issue with pace of play with numerous mound visits, and each pitch taking a while. This has major league administrators, including the commissioner Rob Manfred seriously considering changes to the way baseball operates during the game. It is right of the league officials to consider many changes to the game, to shorten it to close to the other major sports which last about two and a half hours. This outcome will not happen though because of a few simple changes. The game of baseball is notorious for being one of the longest sports to play, and having these rules done will minimally change the timing per game. I do agree with some of the steps, including a pitch clock, and less mound visits, but altering what the game is in extra innings would ruin a part of the game. Some of the most classic games in baseball’s history have taken place in extra innings, and putting in place this rule would rule out many future classic games that can take place. Even if they just implant the extra inning rule into the regular season games, there would be a sense of loss for many fans of baseball. Baseball fans who have watched the game all their lives will strongly disapprove of what alterations this would do. Many baseball fans look forward to the classic 19 inning games, or that walk off home run after a long fought pitching duel, and this new tradition would limit this from happening. If the MLB is really looking for a way to shorten the amount of time in a MLB game, they should take a look at the length of break in between innings. While the MLB will likely never forfeit all the money they produce inside each 2 minute break, this is a serious reason of why the game lasts so long. If the MLB really is committed to shortening the amount of time in baseball, it will take more than just less mound visits, and quicker time between pitches.
ReplyDeleteI personally feel that some of the rule changes are good, and some of them are not needed. I like the pitch clock and the amount of mound visits because these two things can really add up, increasing the time of the game dramatically. However I do not agree with putting a man on first during extra innings. This would change how the whole game would have to be managed, and this is not needed. I think implementing some of these rules (limiting mound visits, pitching timers) will not ruin the quality of the game, however if there are too many changes that are being made, it could end up hurting the game. Part of baseball is that there is no timer, and this makes it different than any other sport. They need to realize this, and try not to alter the game too much. These rule changes will impact the game because it will speed them up. This would hopefully bring back some people who stopped watching the game because of length of it.
ReplyDeleteI feel that the new rules are a good idea. Baseball has stayed pretty much the same since 1839, so doing something new wouldn’t be the worst thing. It can make the game more interesting and potentially get a larger crowd due to a quicker game. However, many people oppose this because of tradition. This could deter fans from wanting to participate in watching the games and also the players from trying. Players performance levels will drop because errors will increase on the field. I feel that by decreasing the time of the game, the number of errors will increase. Change is a necessary thing, and in this case, the players and the fans will need to adjust to it.
ReplyDeleteI think as a fan I wouldn't be opposed to seeing limited mound visits or a pitch clock for pitcher, but as a player I know i would absolutely hate it. I do think the length of a baseball game is definitely something the MLB should look into speeding up, but if the solutions they come up with to speed the game up ultimately effects the way players perform, then I'm not sure if I would support it. I think limiting mound visits is certainly something that would speed the game up but I also know that those mound visits are also a crucial way for teams to communicate and ultimately can determine the outcome of the game, especially in close games. I know as a fan during a regular season game I would want to see limited visits if the game was a blowout, but in a meaningful postseason game I would want my team to have all the time they need to make sure they are on the same page for the entire game. As for the extra innings rule, I think it completely changes the game and is unnecessary. Anyone who appreciates the game of baseball will never have a problem with the length of a game and if the MLB thinks any differently I think they need to reconsider their target audience, and prioritize game tradition and player satisfaction over fan preference.
ReplyDeleteI believe from some aspects of the game of baseball, these rules are necessary. They can be essential for keeping viewers tuned in and not bored. A lot of these rule changes are being made due to continuous stoppages in play and potential boredom for fans. I think if all of these rules are applied- as some already are in effect- the pace of play will increase keeping people intrigued. However, I could see the argument that from a players perspective, these rule changed interrupt the flow of a game. A team could get into a rhythm and an increase in pace could throw it off and make them commit sloppy errors that would not be normal in the game of baseball. I think overall, these rules are going to have to take some getting used to, but I think it is good overall to have these proposed. Players will get used to it and find ways to adapt to new styles of play that will not only improve their game, but the game of baseball itself.
ReplyDeleteI think that these rules are beneficial to the fans and the players. Having a pitch clock would regulate the length of the game and how well the pitcher can really pitch. The shorten game would help the fans stay into the game and make more people go. A reason I don't go to baseball games is because everything takes too much time. Shortening all the times that everything is too long will help draw more fans in. I do not think that putting a man on first during extra innings is fair though. I think that the main aspects of the games should be kept the same and not moved around but the timing should. Eliminating extra innings changes the games and history can be made in overtime. Like any sport overtime is where you see the best in teams and which team is better so I don't think those rules should be changed for baseball either.
ReplyDeleteI do not agree with these rules. I believe that part of the game is the one at which it is played. Some pitchers take a long time before their delivery, and I believe that that is part of their strategy, and let of the game. I think it hurts the tradition we are so used to. I don't believe that they will attract more fans by saying that there will be less time in between pitches. I believe it may have small changes for pitches and batters who like to take a little more time in between their pitches whic may be very annoying for them.
ReplyDeleteI believe some rules need to be placed. Rules such as beginning with a baserunner are not necessary. The game already moves at a slower pace so adding anything to make it slower would cause fans to lose interest. The game needs to sped up so people stay interested in the full game. Changing the game a little would make major changes to the game and industry but if there is too much change within the league, it will lose the original, tradition of play. New rules and regulations like adding a pitching clock could be very beneficial to the game. This will speed up the game and add new skills with the sped up play throughout the league.
ReplyDeleteI agree with these rule changes because it will make the game go quicker which I think will make the game more entertaining, however, I think it will make the actual players unhappy. With limited mound visits and a pitch clock for the pitcher, this will put more pressure on the pitcher and players. I don't think these changes will hurt the tradition of the game because I think it will have a minor impact on the game as a whole. limiting the amount of Mound visits and shortening the pitchers clock aren't major changes so I don't think it will affect the tradition of the game. Although it won't change the tradition of the game, I think it will impact how the game is played because the games will be shorter
ReplyDeleteI do not agree with the new added rules. I feel that everything being changed should stay with the rules that have stayed part of the game for years. I believe that changing these rules will change MILB forever. I feel that these changes will definitely hurt the tradition of the game because the rules that are being changed have been part of baseball for the entirety of the sport. I feel that in the long run the new rules that have been put in place will completely change how the game will play.
ReplyDeleteI believe that to some extent rule changes are necessary, however if they change the tradition of baseball they should not be added. Pace of play has long been an issue within baseball with younger fans opting to watch faster paced sports instead. It is vital to baseball to regain the interest of these fans, but it is also important maintain the "old-timers," you still have.
ReplyDeleteI do not feel it will majorly impact the tradition of the game, because the tradition of baseball has long been change.
From not allowing black players to not allowing the use of PED's, baseball has always been open to change and I believe even the oldest of fans will agree some change is needed.
Strategically, I do not believe there will be a major change in how the game is played. At the most, it could negatively impact a few pitchers who prefer to throw at a slower pace, but in general I believe almost all players will agree that a faster game wouldn't hurt. Some rules seem a little overblown, like the potential for a runner on second in extra-innings seems a little over the top, but just general rules to speed up the game should be encouraged.
I agree with these rule changes because baseball is a very slow game to begin with and can take hours long to finish, so I think these rules can be very helpful with speeding up the game a bit. Baseball is a very traditional game, but I do not believe these rules will take that away from the sport. Baseball will always be baseball, you're still pitching, hitting, and running bases just speeding up the pace of the game which can potentially make the game more fun to watch for fans. I do not think that these rules will have a big impact on how the game is played because no physical baseball rules are being changed, just the pace of play is being sped up. I know I can get very bored watching a long baseball game, so personally I support these rules and hope they go into effect.
ReplyDeleteI think some of these rules could be good for the game such as the pitch clock but others could perhaps hurt the game more then in would help such as starting a runner on base in extra innings. I think the pitch clock would be beneficial because it would speed up the pace of a baseball game and make in more interesting for the people that are currently not fans of baseball. But there is no way to know for sure until these rules are actually used in an actual game. It wouldn't hurt for the MLB to try these rules out for a season and if it is working well they can keep the rules but if not they can go back to normal baseball
ReplyDeleteI believe that the new rules added are a terrific idea. Baseball is no doubt a pretty slow and boring sport, but with these new rules I believe it will pick up the pase a little bit. However, with this making the game faster and less boring, it will definitly hurt the tradition. A lot of people might take the tradition to passion, and this might cause some tension. I believe this might make a small impact not a large one. One small issue that may happen is the fact that some of the players might not like the changes, and by having this issue baseball might lose some of their top players.
ReplyDeleteI believe certain rules would be a good idea. I do not believe adding a baserunner during extra innings is fair to the integrity of the game, because it completely ruins the idea of overtime play in the MLB, which is typically the more exciting part of the game. I do think pitch clocks are necessary. As TV ratings continue to plummet, it is necessary that the league takes action to create more engagement with viewers and fans. While this may impact pace of play for players on the field, America's pastime may once again be able to regain its popularity that has significantly fell in the past decades.
ReplyDelete1. Do you agree with these rules changes? Are they necessary?
ReplyDeleteI agree that a change in the rules is necessary, im not sure if these specific rules will accomplish what they want to accomplish, but i dont watch baseball so i wouldn't know.
2. Do you think these rule changes hurt the tradition of the game?
No, its a game, rules change, styles of play change, stuff changes
3. Do you think these rule changes will have a big impact on how the game is played?
not really, other than the fact it will be faster
I do agree with these changes. These rules are intended to make the game quicker like it originally was. I think these rules only improve the play of game and do not take away from the true goal of the game. Like I said before, these rules would help the tradition. Baseball started as a more fast pace game and over time it became slower. I think these rules should be made in order to bring back some of the original intents of baseball. This would also help with viewership because some fans complain about how long a game takes. I don't think this will have the big of an impact on the overall game other than speed up the process of it. I think if the game itself was being altered there be more things to discuss but since the pace is the only thing being changed I see no reason to refute it.
ReplyDeleteI think that rule changes are good for the sport. One of the biggest reasons baseball is not as well heralded anymore is because of how slow moving the game is when compared to other games. By implementing these rule changes it allows for a faster played game which increases the interest from fans. It was also smart to not implement these in the Major Leagues yet so that they can gauge how the rules affect the game before they do. I do not think that is is hurting the tradition of the game. I also do not think that changing these rules will affect the game very much and we may be seeing these rule implementations in the major leagues soon enough.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the rule changes completely because statistics have shown the ratings have shown that the ratings for the mlb have gone down in the past decade. This is mainly because the games are so long and there are rarely time violations. This does not hurt the tradition of the game it would just make the game faster, the baseball itself wouldn't be changing. If the mlb enforce these rule changes it would improve the ratings dramatically
ReplyDelete