Do Minnesotans Love the Twins?

[JensenGregory]

1 hour ago, ashbury said:

The Twins seem to try to market their stars, and when those stars get injured or don't perform to their ceiling they are left with little.  I'd term the Twins' marketing as "transactional," meaning "you give us your money, we'll give you this."  And when expectations fall short, the Twin Cities behave a bit passive-aggressively and starve the franchise of revenue.  I feel sure the Brewers and probably the Cardinals market the overall experience more effectively than the Twins can.

The Brewers and the Cardinals don't have to behave in a "transactional" manner because their priority is usually in putting a truly competitive product on the field. The Twins have to market the hell out of their players and whatever ticket offers they've got going on because they won't just invest a little bit more into the roster to show fans they care about wins, not just showing up at the ballpark.

I love the Twins more than any other sports team I follow, and I invest countless hours into watching games every year, and I am beyond frustrated with the Pohlads this year because there really is no secret sauce to getting people to buy into your product. Make it clear you're there to win more than a wild card round at best -- take risks in your roster construction (like they did by trading for Pablo) if you think it'll make a real impact in your competitiveness. Even if your plans don't work out by season's end, fans show up in droves just because they want to feel the hope that this year could be the year, and they want to hang onto that feeling for as long as possible during the fleeting days of summer.

"If you build it, they will come."

[JensenGregory]

17 minutes ago, TheLeviathan said:

You get the trust and devotion you earn.

There is more that goes into that than merely won or lost games.

I agree with your initial sentiment but disagree with the second part of your statement wholeheartedly. Time and again, it's been shown that winning fixes everything.

[Craig Arko]

9 minutes ago, JensenGregory said:

Time and again, it's been shown that winning fixes everything.

Until it doesn’t. That’s how bandwagons work.

[Craig Arko]

21 minutes ago, Jocko87 said:

I think the real question is are Minnesotans capable of love?

Love includes the hard times and we've seen much harder than this.

Last time I checked, we were human beings too.

[JensenGregory]

2 minutes ago, Craig Arko said:

Until it doesn’t. That’s how bandwagons work.

Are you under the impression that people get tired of watching their sports teams win?

[Craig Arko]

5 minutes ago, JensenGregory said:

Are you under the impression that people get tired of watching their sports teams win?

And when the winning dries up, which it always does?

[JensenGregory]

2 minutes ago, Craig Arko said:

And when the winning dries up, which it always does?

I don't understand what point you're trying to make. Competitive windows stay open for a while and then they close for a while for rebuilding. Depending on how smart a team's ownership/front office is, those windows can stay open for a long time, or they can stay closed for a long time.

Literally no team in any sport is immune to the disengagement that happens to fans when the team isn't winning at any given time. Even the Yankees and Red Sox face lower attendance and TV viewership when their teams aren't championship-bound. And if those ownership groups want fans to buy in again, they do everything they can to put a more compelling product on the field.

Again, winning fixes everything.

[ziggy]

Apathy is worse.

I'm a homer fan, I love that we have a professional baseball team in Minnesota. 

I watched almost every game on TV this year, and last, and the year before that and the year before that.....My TV package was chosen because it can get the Twins telecast.

I attended 2 games this year, with my wife and a couple grandkids in tow. It cost more than $500 each game. I have receipts.

 

I can't justify more games than that when ownership purposely made this years team worse than last years team. 

If they left town I would miss them but would easily find something else to do.

[TheLeviathan]

30 minutes ago, JensenGregory said:

I agree with your initial sentiment but disagree with the second part of your statement wholeheartedly. Time and again, it's been shown that winning fixes everything.

Winning solves when winning happens, but all teams go through non-winning stretches.

These other franchises with more consistent attendance are doing things beyond game results to encourage and retain fan investment.

Winning certainly helps, but it doesn't explain everything.

[LewFordLives]

54 minutes ago, NYCTK said:

Baltimore got a new ownership group, right? How are they viewed? 

Too early to say. Although I think everyone is just happy to be rid of the Angelos clan

Rubenstein strikes me as a guy who's not afraid to set money on fire just because he can.

[JensenGregory]

1 minute ago, TheLeviathan said:

Winning solves when winning happens, but all teams go through non-winning stretches.

These other franchises with more consistent attendance are doing things beyond game results to encourage and retain fan investment.

Winning certainly helps, but it doesn't explain everything.

Again, I just don't agree with that at all. There are no teams I can think of that consistently pack the ballpark and draw good viewership numbers unless they're legitimately competitive. Yes, every single team has rebuilding years that see fan engagement dip, but you sustain longer-term interest in teams when you show that, time and again, you're trying to win.

It's why the Minnesota Vikings have one of the most passionate fan bases in the country, especially in Minnesota. They can fall short on their championship goals time and again, but it's so incredibly obvious that the Wilfs want to win football games. It's also why teams like the Tampa Bay Rays, bad in-person attendance notwithstanding (which can be attributed to a bad ballpark in a bad location), consistently have high TV viewership ratings.

[D.C Twins]

I'll always be a Twins Fan, but I'll be on a hiatus from 'loving' the Twins again until the Rocco Era eventually comes to an unceremonious conclusion

(oh... and it will...and to keep repeating the repeatable.... he will never manage another MLB team... trust me that nobody else out there is clamoring for his 'services' )

The Vikings on the other hand have TWO elite coaches.... I don't know how well their season will ultimately end up, but I know the coaches will have maxed out the talent of the team!

[TheLeviathan]

20 minutes ago, JensenGregory said:

Again, I just don't agree with that at all. There are no teams I can think of that consistently pack the ballpark and draw good viewership numbers unless they're legitimately competitive. Yes, every single team has rebuilding years that see fan engagement dip, but you sustain longer-term interest in teams when you show that, time and again, you're trying to win.

It's why the Minnesota Vikings have one of the most passionate fan bases in the country, especially in Minnesota. They can fall short on their championship goals time and again, but it's so incredibly obvious that the Wilfs want to win football games. It's also why teams like the Tampa Bay Rays, bad in-person attendance notwithstanding (which can be attributed to a bad ballpark in a bad location), consistently have high TV viewership ratings.

Evidence has been posted that in two comparable markets: St. Louis and Milwaukee, this simply isnt true.  They draw well regardless.  There may be a myriad of reasons, but winning isnt the exclusive reason. (especially in Milwaukee's case) 

[Western SD Fan]

I live on the very frontiers of what is considered Twins Territory (western Dakotas).  With that being said, I am not able to make it to Target Field very often, typically only one weekend per year as it is an over 8-hour drive.  I've always lived in this region and have been a fan since I could remember.  Until this year, my entire adult life I have spent purchasing cable packages to include the Twins as that is one of the few ways I can support the team from here.  I finally was able to get Fubo to watch this year and it was a good thing I did as the other cable providers in the area had the same blackout as Comcast did earlier this summer 

My frustrations have been over the years, the team has not invested in Twins Territory like they expect us to invest in them in order to create a team that we can support.  Years ago, the winter caravan used to go all over the Dakotas and now they barely make it to Fargo or Sioux Falls.  Another item has been the lack of inviting successful Twins Territory youth programs to Target Field for a game or a weekend.  I point to this year's LLWS participant Sioux Falls, SD team.   I don't remember seeing an invite to Target Field after their finish.  How do you expect to foster the next wave of fans (income) if you don't take the effort to reward those players (and parents) to the game?  When watching the LLWS and they focus on their favorite players, very few from the Sioux Falls team listed Twins players as their favorites.  When I was their age and had a favorite team, I always wanted to be like my favorite player on that team.

All of this rambling seems to point to a systemic failure of the organization to properly market the team they have, settling for mediocrity as other posters have stated, and willing to sign oft injured or DFA type players that no fan can really get behind as they change from year to year.  When you have what is consistently voted among the best venues in baseball as well as in sports in general, it's criminal to not properly market that to the fan base.  Compound that with the analytics that keep pushing the 3 true outcomes and you consistently get people like Joey Gallo batting 5th in your lineup.  Why was it exciting to watch Nelson Cruz come up to bat or equally frustrating with Miguel Cabrera.  Because they didn't care about the 3-run homerun.  They just wanted the single to the other side to score that one run and keep the line moving.

I wanted to address the comparison to Colorado.  I do believe it is a reasonable comparison as there are plenty of things to do around Denver.  Taking in games last year at Coors Field, I would agree that many of the attendees are transient.  I would also argue that many of the fans at Target Field are transient as well.  The game I attended this year was against St. Louis and it seemed like up to half the fans there were from St. Louis, even with the Correa jersey giveaway.  The most attended games at Target Field seem to be against the Yankees, Red Sox, and Blue Jays and I don't believe it is because the locals all of a sudden decide to come out.  I've heard from fans, especially Yankee fans, that it's cheaper to fly to MN and purchase the good club seats than it is to watch a game at Yankee Stadium.  With Blue Jay fans, it's like they closed the city of Winnipeg, and all moved to the Cities for the weekend.  Lastly, comparing to the Vikings.  I've seen a lot of purple and gold hoodies with a Viking helmet that says: "This team makes me drink."  I don't see that as much with Twins fans.  My observation with the Vikings (thankfully not a fan of them, I can't handle that much negativity in my life😉) has been their performance on the field that has frustrated fans and not how they have not connected to the community or the team construction by the front office or ownership.  I apologize for this being so long as there just seemed to be more to say as I fleshed out my thoughts.  As a fan, I hope for a better next year and will continue to support them how I can.

[JensenGregory]

12 minutes ago, TheLeviathan said:

Evidence has been posted that in two comparable markets: St. Louis and Milwaukee, this simply isnt true.  They draw well regardless.  There may be a myriad of reasons, but winning isnt the exclusive reason. (especially in Milwaukee's case) 

What evidence has been posted and where?

[Platoon]

The Pohlads treat the team as a business, just like any of their other businesses. It’s true the Twins and MLB are businesses, but they are not like running a bank or an airline, or any of the other multitude of things the family has its fingers into. 
 

Owning a major league sports team is a highly visible occupation.  While you want it to be financially successful and sustainable, it’s also a publicly competitive situation. Not every decision can be made based on ones P&L sheet. 
 

For years the Pohlads have seemed to be content with being competitive in the division, a relatively weak division at that,  but had no interest in competing in the league. This concept wore thin after several years of division success followed by the inevitable wipeout in the playoffs, 

Then when along comes a somewhat interesting team, one who actually wins a playoff game or several and their is a spark of interest simmering along comes one of the Pohlad kids to squeeze the joy out of Mudville with the heriditary Pohlad tight fist, thereby cementing the long held belief that the Pohlads Twins franchise is simply another tax return to file at the end of the year.

 

 

[TheLeviathan]

38 minutes ago, JensenGregory said:

What evidence has been posted and where?

The article references Colorado, which also directly contradicts your assumption.

Here is Milwaukee from another, similar thread:

https://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/MIL/attend.shtml

[Vanimal46]

I don’t think the Minnesota fan base is different from any other market. The Twins doused the fire of last year’s playoff success immediately after the WS was over. They’re giving people reasons not to care anymore with the right sizing comments and blacking out the region from watching their content. 

Seems weird to dissect the fan base when the Twins have failed spectacularly over the last 11 months. 

[Mike Sixel]

4 hours ago, Craig Arko said:

Thinking about that, things were more fun in the Met Stadium days, for both the Twins and the Vikings. Moving them downtown was an error.

The met was awful for football. Truly. 

[LewFordLives]

As a point of comparison, the Washington football team used to have a multi-year waiting list for season tickets. It wasn't just a football team, it was a religion.  Two decades of the prior ownership group completely alienated the fans. Nothing but greed and overall mediocrity. Now they have to block out the upper deck so they can say they have a sellout.  Winning matters.

[Craig Arko]

Just now, Mike Sixel said:

The met was awful for football. Truly. 

But great for tailgating, which was also a huge attraction. 

[nicksaviking]

4 hours ago, Craig Arko said:

Thinking about that, things were more fun in the Met Stadium days, for both the Twins and the Vikings. Moving them downtown was an error.

I loathe the suburban stadiums where there are only strip mall restaurants and nothing else to do.

But I completely agree with your first post. This team continually markets to the outstate markets, which largely contain older fans that travel less and less. They do this despite the stadium sitting in the sitting in the trendiest and most populated square mile im the whole dang state. So a few more of your fans have neck tattoos and drink craft beer; sell them on your product. 

[Mike Sixel]

I hope people don't love the Twins. It's a baseball team. If they are entertaining and winning, people will go. This team was worse than bad the decade before this FO arrived. Truly. Awful. 

[Craig Arko]

1 minute ago, Mike Sixel said:

I hope people don't love the Twins. It's a baseball team. If they are entertaining and winning, people will go. This team was worse than bad the decade before this FO arrived. Truly. Awful. 

Yeah, I’ve never ‘loved’ any professional sports franchise. Anymore than I love Apple, Comcast, or Delta. They’re big business, and I purchase their wares as it suits me. I do love live theater, though, and don’t get to it as much as I’d like to.

[Squirrel]

3 hours ago, JensenGregory said:

Are you under the impression that people get tired of watching their sports teams win?

Yes. The Braves fans in the 90s did.

[Jim wyllie]

The key problem is that the pohlads are still running the team like they did in the metrodome.   They should be open to spending more,  although I will say that isn't getting any easier as players are getting more and more overpaid and mlb is the only major tean sports league in North without a salary cap, making it easier for big markets to outstanding smaller markets to the point the some teams pay more to 26 mlb players than nfl teams pay 53 players, which is mathematically illogical.   Yes minnesotans love the twins but the pohlads and league wide lack of a salary cap and possibly a salary floor for teams make it difficult for the fans

[JensenGregory]

1 hour ago, TheLeviathan said:

The article references Colorado, which also directly contradicts your assumption.

Here is Milwaukee from another, similar thread:

https://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/MIL/attend.shtml

These numbers mean absolutely nothing without capacity percentages and compared with wins/losses on a per-season basis. You'll see that Milwaukee's attendance ebbs and flows like the rest of the league based on how well the team is doing. 

[JensenGregory]

8 minutes ago, Squirrel said:

Yes. The Braves fans in the 90s did.

Where's the attendance and viewership data to support that notion?

[Squirrel]

5 minutes ago, JensenGregory said:

Where's the attendance and viewership data to support that notion?

🙄

[TheLeviathan]

8 minutes ago, JensenGregory said:

These numbers mean absolutely nothing without capacity percentages and compared with wins/losses on a per-season basis. You'll see that Milwaukee's attendance ebbs and flows like the rest of the league based on how well the team is doing. 

No one said it was static, just consistently higher than this:  https://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/MIN/attend.shtml

By sizable margins too.  That's the point, as it was in the article with the Rockies who outdraw the Twins by a ton and have only been good 4 times this century.