Foul Territory — Increasing MLB Scoring
It is no doubt that baseball is less exciting now than it was 20 years ago. Since the year 2000, runs per game has dropped from 10.3 to 9.1. It isn’t just runs. Hits, doubles, triples, steals, sacrifices, and double plays are all down. Homeruns (by a minimal amount), hit by pitches, and strikeouts are the winners over the last two decades.
We wrote before about how to increase speed in the game. What about another slight change that could increase scoring as well as revenue? Foul territory has been shrinking in newer stadiums. It makes a lot of sense. Foul territory is generally a bad thing.
Why is all of that foul territory there anyway? At one point, it kept fans a safer distance from the action. But now, we have nets to protect them. For the most part, we have done a smart thing and removed bullpens from foul territory, as they can be terrible for outfielders to navigate. Some stadiums needed larger playing surfaces to play multiple sports, but that is rarely the case now. So what do we need all of this foul territory for?
Very little. Derek Jeter made a memorable catch in foul territory, but that sort of play would still be possible with less foul territory. There might be a few less passed balls or wild pitches if the space behind home plate is reduced. Errors might also be reduced as overthrows are less likely to result in an extra base.
One aspect that can be overlooked is how foul territory affects offense and foul outs. The Oakland Coliseum has over 40,000 square feet of foul territory and regularly leads the league in foul outs, depressing offense. Dodgers Stadium has just 19,300 sf and generally has around 50% of the foul outs compared to Oakland.
That square footage is costly — not just in terms of offense, but also dollars. The seats that sit that close to the action bring in the most revenue and they bring fans closer to the game.
Altogether, it seems like a no-brainer to bring fans closer to the game while also increasing offense and revenue.
