The Field of Dreams Game Exposed MLB’s Biggest Broadcasting Problem

There's something special about Major League Baseball returning to the Field of Dreams site in Dyersville, Iowa. The setting is unique, the backdrop is recognizable, and the league has repeatedly shown that these games can become major events. The latest installment, however, didn't quite reach the audience MLB had hoped for. The Phillies defeated the Twins 7-1 last Thursday, behind two home runs from Kyle Schwarber. The game averaged 1.66 million viewers on Netflix, according to Nielsen.

That number isn't necessarily a disaster, but it represents a noticeable drop from some of MLB's previous special-event broadcasts. It also raises a larger question for the league: How does baseball continue to make these games feel like must-see events, when fans have to search for them and even wonder where to watch them?

This year's audience fell well short of the 2.5 million who watched the 2024 matchup between the San Francisco Giants and St. Louis Cardinals at Rickwood Field in Birmingham, Alabama. That game aired on Fox. Last year's Speedway Classic between the Atlanta Braves and Cincinnati Reds averaged roughly 1.6 million viewers on Fox. That game was heavily impacted by rain, eventually stretching from Saturday night into Sunday.

The Field of Dreams Game also has a much stronger history. More than 3.1 million viewers watched the 2022 game in Dyersville, the last time MLB played there before this year's return. The inaugural Field of Dreams Game in 2021 was an even bigger television success, attracting approximately 5.9 million viewers and becoming the most-watched regular-season baseball game on any network since 2005.

Those numbers create a difficult comparison for MLB. The Field of Dreams concept clearly has the ability to attract casual viewers. The challenge is getting those people to actually find the game.

It would be easy to blame Netflix, because of the way they've produced baseball events and marketed it and/or because the platform is less accessible than network TV. That probably isn't fair. Netflix produced another polished broadcast and has quickly demonstrated that it can make live sports feel like major entertainment events. They probably did too much to distract from the action, but the product itself also didn't live up to the hype. A 7-1 Phillies victory over the Twins isn't exactly the ideal recipe for keeping casual viewers glued to their televisions.

This was Netflix's third major MLB broadcast of 202,6 after carrying Opening Night and the Home Run Derby. Netflix reported an estimated average of 3 million U.S. viewers for Opening Night, according to Nielsen. The company's MLB experiment has produced mixed results, though. The Home Run Derby reportedly drew the event's lowest audience in more than two decades. That doesn't mean Netflix can't become an important part of MLB's future. It does mean the league still has work to do when it comes to building an audience on streaming platforms.

That itself might be the biggest issue facing baseball's television product. For years, a fan could have a pretty good idea of where to find a nationally-televised baseball game. Turn on ESPN, Fox, TBS or MLB Network, and there was a reasonable chance you'd find what you were looking for.

That isn't always the case anymore. Want to watch a particular MLB game? It might be on Netflix. Another could be on Apple TV+. Another might be on Peacock. A national game could be on ESPN, Fox or TBS. Regional broadcasts remain split among different networks and streaming services. None of those platforms are inherently bad places to watch baseball. In fact, many of them provide excellent viewing experiences.

The problem is discoverability. Fans shouldn't have to remember which streaming service has which game every night. Casual fans certainly aren't going to spend several minutes searching through apps to figure out where a special-event game is being broadcast.

MLB wants these games to become cultural events. That becomes much more difficult when the first question for a potential viewer is, "Where can I watch it?"

The league's media landscape is changing quickly, and MLB is clearly willing to experiment. Last November, MLB formally announced new media-rights agreements involving Netflix, NBC and ESPN. That means streaming will play an increasingly important role in how fans consume baseball. It's not going away. The question is whether MLB can make the transition without losing the casual viewers who might otherwise stumble upon a game while flipping through the channels.

Netflix has until at least 2028 to continue developing its MLB audience, but the Field of Dreams Game won't be part of that equation next year. NBC Sports will broadcast the 2027 Field of Dreams Game between the Boston Red Sox and Kansas City Royals. That game has plenty going for it, including two historic franchises and another opportunity to showcase one of baseball's most recognizable concepts. Recently, NBC Sports has restored some of its previously fading glory. There's every reason to expect next year's game to be better-produced and better-presented than this year's, and fans will be able to find the game on over-the-air TV. That will provide a great test case for the staying power of this particular spectacle. Are fans now bored of the Field of Dreams? Or did Netflix just fail to deliver? And how important is it that viewers simply be able to view the game, rather than that their interest in that game be built up over weeks of anticipation?