Speeding up the game a bit . . .

[Tskware]

First, let’s be realistic. College pitchers do not have the control of pros, the infielders and outfielders do not have the same range and make more errors, and generally the ballparks are smaller. Therefore, it is always going to be a higher scoring and longer game than the version played at the major league level.

However, a steady diet of 3 ½ hour games will test anyone’s patience, and hurts the popularity of the sport.

So . . . how about prohibiting the batter from stepping in and out of the box constantly. The umpire should be directed to tell every batter to get back in the box immediately and get ready to hit. After one warning, he would have the authority to call a strike. There’s no reason step out after every single pitch to adjust your glove and look to the coach for instructions. (At one point the other night, Riley Mahan was up with men on first and second and two outs but had to stop after every pitch to look to the third base coach. What could he be possibly telling him other than get a good pitch and knock the crap out of it?)

Second, institute the automatic intentional walk as they have done in the major leagues.

Third, limit the number of trips to the mound by catchers, infielders, and coaches. After the second trip to the mound by any of the above, the pitcher has to be taken out.

Any other thoughts and suggestions?

 

[Comebakatz3]

I think speeding up the game is a catch 22 of sorts. I think that people at baseball games don't mind the slow pace. However, it is really the tv audience that is the push behind it. Still, I don't understand the big need for that considering that baseball is one of the most well attended sports in the world, especially for the number of teams and games that they have. I think if you speed the game up too much you lose the experience that is attending baseball. I personally don't think that baseball is going to get much more popular regardless of what you do. I think that people will either find it boring or will find it enjoyable and many will find it very boring on tv, but enjoyable to go to. So, I don't think speeding it up nominally and cutting 30 minutes off the game is going to flock people to it.

However, for the spirit of the post, I'll reply. haha

1. I am not sure about this one. In terms of the Mahan reference, part of the reason that you do that is so you don't telegraph your punches. You often do the same routine so the opposing team doesn't know when you might be putting on some sort of play. Further, with runners on 1st and 2nd you could still do a hit and run in an attempt to score your runner from first base. It isn't as likely, but it is possible. Further, UK is known for stealing, even in those situations, so you want the opposing team to still be wary of that even if you aren't going to do it. So, I think it is important for the batter to get out and get the signs. You also have to be careful here because the powers that be in baseball have been constantly trying to make the game more exciting with the, "chick love the long ball," movement. So, if you start to force hitters into the box faster and before they are ready to hit then you may shorten the game, but make it less exciting because of the reduction of hits, runs, and home runs.

2. I am only okay with this rule if the pitcher is intentionally walking a batter with no one on base. I think if there is someone on base then the risk and possibility of a wild pitch or a passed ball is still entirely possible and the pitcher should have to throw the four pitches to ensure that there isn't a passed ball. This sort of thing can change the game entirely. Further, changing the game like this for an extremely minimal change in the amount of time consumed over the course of a game is not worth it.

3. I think this one would help to cut down on the game some, but I think it would have a huge impact if you did this. I assume you mean the second trip in an inning? If so, I think I might be okay with it.

I think that one of the best things that can be done is to cut out the amount of time between innings. I don't think this is talked about as much, and I think the reason for that is because a lot of fans try to use the break between innings to purchase things, and baseball big whigs don't want to discourage fans from overpaying for cokes and hot dogs, plus they want to use this time for commercials when the games are on tv. Still, this is the best time and the time that would least effect the actual game. If they really wanted to speed up games they'd cut time out of this and do very quick inning turnarounds. However, the interest in shortening games for baseball is really just all about making them more tv fan friendly. Still, as I said, I don't think that even shorter games is really going to attract more baseball fans.

 

[Tskware]

3. I think this one would help to cut down on the game some, but I think it would have a huge impact if you did this. I assume you mean the second trip in an inning? If so, I think I might be okay with it.

Yes, 2nd trip in the same inning. We will have to respectfully disagree on the length of games affecting fan interest. This is the 21st century, the era of the smart phone and I Pad. Sports has to adapt to the times. And it is not just baseball, I love college football best of all, but many fans (including myself) have complained for a long time about the ever lengthening amount of time it takes to play a game. Way too many TV timeouts, and stops in the action, it really is affecting fan interest.

 

[jgodek]

Yes, 2nd trip in the same inning. We will have to respectfully disagree on the length of games affecting fan interest. This is the 21st century, the era of the smart phone and I Pad. Sports has to adapt to the times. And it is not just baseball, I love college football best of all, but many fans (including myself) have complained for a long time about the ever lengthening amount of time it takes to play a game. Way too many TV timeouts, and stops in the action, it really is affecting fan interest.

The thing is, hasn't MLB taken some measures to speed up the game? But it hasn't really changed anything regarding fan interest (by what I've noticed). Why would it change fan interest in college if it doesn't in the pros?

 

[CatsFanGG24]

I dont think there are many more ways to speed up the game without hurting the game/gamesmanship.

As a hitter, I wanted to step out after each pitch, take a cut, check the coach out and get back in. One of the biggest pet peeves I had was a "one foot in the box" rule some umps tried. (didnt wear batting gloves - have to admit the guys that adjust those for a while in between each pitch are a pain)

Coaching trips to the mound can be restricted - fine with that.

Fine with auto intentional walk.

An on the field/off the field clock between each half inning is about all the more you can do without messing with the actual game.

 

[Gabewcat]

MLB games routinely take 3-3.5 hours to finish. There are a couple of things that can speed up the college games. Limit the number of throws to a base in trying to pick off the runner. After the third unsuccessful throw the runner is awarded a base. Wave the batter on when he is intentionally walked. MLB has installed this into their game. Frankly, I enjoy a drama fill game, I find that the people that do the most complaining are just casual fans and don'tb take the full measure of a game. Most of the people that played the game as a child and went on to higher levels like pony league, pony grad, high school or even college players understand the importance of the counts and the advantage that a pitcher or batter have when the count is in their favor have an appreciation of the game whether it is a 2 hour game or a 4 hour game.

 

[Comebakatz3]

Yes, 2nd trip in the same inning. We will have to respectfully disagree on the length of games affecting fan interest. This is the 21st century, the era of the smart phone and I Pad. Sports has to adapt to the times. And it is not just baseball, I love college football best of all, but many fans (including myself) have complained for a long time about the ever lengthening amount of time it takes to play a game. Way too many TV timeouts, and stops in the action, it really is affecting fan interest.

I think the issue there is that you have competing interests in many ways. Football in terms of attendance at events suffers because of these TV timeouts and constant commercials, but the TV audiences continue to grow as TV broadcasts become better, more accessible, and a better economic option. For baseball, I think they face a lot of obstacles with attracting more TV fans, and one of those is moreso the length of the season rather than the length of the games themselves. I like baseball, love it in fact, but with MLB, it is extremely hard to follow a team for most of the year because it is just too many games. Even if you cut the games down to around 2 hours and 30-40 minutes, it is simply too many games for me to to be able to watch on a regular or daily basis. However, what that number of games does is it allows more fans to actually access and go to games as casual fans. I think that is what baseball needs to continue to focus on. They talk it up as a mini-vacation and that is what it should be. 3 hours of a getaway to relax at a game in a fun, family friendly environment. Focus on making games affordable and making access to games easy. No need to focus as much, IMO, at gaining a bigger tv audience, because I just don't think that shorter games are going to get more people interested in what those already uninterested consider a slow game anyway.

 

[Tskware]

MLB games routinely take 3-3.5 hours to finish. There are a couple of things that can speed up the college games. Limit the number of throws to a base in trying to pick off the runner. After the third unsuccessful throw the runner is awarded a base. Wave the batter on when he is intentionally walked. MLB has installed this into their game. Frankly, I enjoy a drama fill game, I find that the people that do the most complaining are just casual fans and don'tb take the full measure of a game. Most of the people that played the game as a child and went on to higher levels like pony league, pony grad, high school or even college players understand the importance of the counts and the advantage that a pitcher or batter have when the count is in their favor have an appreciation of the game whether it is a 2 hour game or a 4 hour game.

Average MLB is about 2:40 or so, I think. Hope you are not referring to me as a casual fan . . . I am still sleep deprived after Monday's game.

 

[Big_Blue_1018]

SEC games, outside of the tournament, generally last around 3 hours. There is a clock between innings and it lasts 1:20. They also have a pitch clock of 20 seconds. The issue during the regionals were the home plate umpires allowed the pitcher to warm up way too long. I counted in the Indiana game and at one time, the Hoosier pitcher threw 19 warm up pitches. 5 or 6 is all you need with the exception of the first inning.

 

[Tskware]

well, that is one way to speed up the game . . . get very few hits/runs and lose in 8 1/2.

 

[lakercat]

I think speeding up the game is a catch 22 of sorts. I think that people at baseball games don't mind the slow pace. However, it is really the tv audience that is the push behind it. Still, I don't understand the big need for that considering that baseball is one of the most well attended sports in the world, especially for the number of teams and games that they have. I think if you speed the game up too much you lose the experience that is attending baseball. I personally don't think that baseball is going to get much more popular regardless of what you do. I think that people will either find it boring or will find it enjoyable and many will find it very boring on tv, but enjoyable to go to. So, I don't think speeding it up nominally and cutting 30 minutes off the game is going to flock people to it.

However, for the spirit of the post, I'll reply. haha

1. I am not sure about this one. In terms of the Mahan reference, part of the reason that you do that is so you don't telegraph your punches. You often do the same routine so the opposing team doesn't know when you might be putting on some sort of play. Further, with runners on 1st and 2nd you could still do a hit and run in an attempt to score your runner from first base. It isn't as likely, but it is possible. Further, UK is known for stealing, even in those situations, so you want the opposing team to still be wary of that even if you aren't going to do it. So, I think it is important for the batter to get out and get the signs. You also have to be careful here because the powers that be in baseball have been constantly trying to make the game more exciting with the, "chick love the long ball," movement. So, if you start to force hitters into the box faster and before they are ready to hit then you may shorten the game, but make it less exciting because of the reduction of hits, runs, and home runs.

2. I am only okay with this rule if the pitcher is intentionally walking a batter with no one on base. I think if there is someone on base then the risk and possibility of a wild pitch or a passed ball is still entirely possible and the pitcher should have to throw the four pitches to ensure that there isn't a passed ball. This sort of thing can change the game entirely. Further, changing the game like this for an extremely minimal change in the amount of time consumed over the course of a game is not worth it.

3. I think this one would help to cut down on the game some, but I think it would have a huge impact if you did this. I assume you mean the second trip in an inning? If so, I think I might be okay with it.

I think that one of the best things that can be done is to cut out the amount of time between innings. I don't think this is talked about as much, and I think the reason for that is because a lot of fans try to use the break between innings to purchase things, and baseball big whigs don't want to discourage fans from overpaying for cokes and hot dogs, plus they want to use this time for commercials when the games are on tv. Still, this is the best time and the time that would least effect the actual game. If they really wanted to speed up games they'd cut time out of this and do very quick inning turnarounds. However, the interest in shortening games for baseball is really just all about making them more tv fan friendly. Still, as I said, I don't think that even shorter games is really going to attract more baseball fans.

I went to the Ohio game, and the last NC-State games; both teams took forever to get through their routines. NC-State had a visit to the mound after every other at-bat. I love baseball; however, I know very few who want to talk about it. I began to get a little bit frustrated in the Ohio game with the pace. In this microwave society, unless we have 15 second pitch clocks, and completely bastardize the game, it would be tough to gain fans. I have stopped watching most sporting events, only tuning in late.

1. I really do hope that baseball does not change rules to try and speed things up. I would like to somewhat limit visits to the mound if they are deemed excessive (no hard limit, but a judgement call). Maybe penalize the offending team with a ball. Penalizing them with a balk (every runner gains a base) seems excessive. I fear that the powers that be might cave and force pitchers to throw certain pitches, or shrink the strike-zone. Part of baseball is strategy, and using tactics to keep the other team guessing. If a batter is purposely using stall tactics, penalize him with a strike. Even a warning that the next move deemed to be a stall tactic will result in a penalty would suffice. I don't think 15-12 games are going to attract more fans when you consider some fans who may leave the game due to the complete bastardization of the game. I do like the replay; umps are not perfect (remember the Gallarraga "28-out" perfect game?).

2. I agree with this one completely. I see an intentional walk as similar to an extra point; the likelihood of a bad pitch is miniscule, but is there nonetheless. With no one on, there is no penalty for a wild pitch/passed ball; therefore, I feel that it is appropriate to allow the intentional walk. However, I have seen pitchers throw too far inside, and the batter elects to swing, and gets extra bases.

3. See #1.

 

[Dore95]

This thread reminds me of the threads you see around World Cup time where people who don't watch the sport come up with ideas to improve the game.

College baseball is already a great sport due to its unpredictability. MLB pitchers and fielders are too good which leads to few mistakes and some boring stretches. College baseball is all about small ball strategy, advancing runners to put pressure on pitchers, fielders, etc. if you like baseball strategy you will enjoy it. If you don't, you will complain about the length of games.