Rachel O’Brien10/30/13PL SC 427Reaction Paper #2

What Sports Can Tell Us About Politics

Abstract

By examining the decline of baseball turnout and in turn the rise of football as America’s

new favorite past time, several fundamental elements are noted for this change. It is found that

Americans prefer larger impacts in little time, desire competitiveness, and encourage the

“Cinderella” phenomenon. These same factors could also be used to increase motivation among

voters and thus increase turnout in elections.

Large Impacts in Little Time

The season of Cracker Jacks and seventh inning last call for beers are coming to a close

with the World Series winding down. However, the temporary finale of this nostalgia can barely

compete with the fast-action pace of football. Game 1 of this year’s World Series, St. Louis

Cardinals versus Boston Red Sox drew 14.4 million viewers. During that same night, the

Monday Night Football game of 0-6 New York Giants versus 1-4 Minnesota Vikings came in a

close second with 13.2 million viewers (Gregory). How could the top two teams in baseball only

surpass the two worst teams in football by a miniscule one million viewers?

The issue is that baseball’s slow pace does not match with society’s desire of instant

gratification. Baseball’s amusement power lies in the appreciation of moments like the leisurely

atmosphere at games compared to the intense environment of football. Too much down time is

spent during a pitching change and in between pitches, leaving viewers to flip channels, lacking

the entertainment provided by beer vendors from those at the stadium. Thus, casual fans are no

longer enthusiastic to dedicate the mental energy demanded by baseball. Although football also

depends on extensive strategy, the outcome is quick, big plays that appeal to a broader audience

(Spitz).

Not just in single games does football provide more action in less time, but also within

the season. Baseball players perform upwards of six games per week for seven months,

compared to only one game a week for five months with football. Therefore, this is why Game 1

in the World Series barely surpassed an ugly Monday Night Football game; the first game of the

series is not pivotal, as more are surely to come.

This same perspective is portrayed in the world of politics. Americans are asked to vote

in primary, local, state and national elections every two years. Seemingly, after one election

ends, another campaign begins, leaving no off-season in politics. These frequent elections have

lead to voter fatigue; why vote in this election when more are to come? (McDonald) Perhaps the

laws of elections need to set a schedule comparable to football. The current election schedule

leaves many wondering when the governor and other local branches are up for re-election.

Similar to baseball, fans may not know when their team is playing, but they know games are

always occurring. Furthermore, it does not matter if some games are missed, because more are

just around the corner. Instead, the presidency could remain up for grabs every four years and

change all other elected officials to two-year terms. Just as pro-football fans always know games

occur on Thursdays, Sundays and Mondays, voters will know the election years. In addition, the

off years would serve as off-season within the sports realm, giving voters a chance to appreciate

the election process.

Another problem politics is learning the hard way is this culture of instant gratification.

Just as the costs of mental energy outweigh the slim benefits in baseball, the same is true in

politics. There is no instant gratification from waiting in line to register and then waiting in line

months later to finally cast a vote. Not to mention the multitude of potential variables that could

inhibit one from the ability to vote: sick, long lines, faulty ID, etc. Rather, same day registration

eliminates these obstructing factors and also provides instant gratification. Thus, substantial

increases in voter turnout are witnessed in states with Election Day registration (McDonald).

Competitiveness

Although football has surpassed baseball in terms of popularity, it too has its weaknesses.

Many of the complaints stem from strength of schedules. Just last week, University of Alabama

head coach, Nick Saban, challenged his fans to stay the entire length of a game. Fans are not

leaving early to avoid traffic however, but to avoid the boredom of Alabama destroying their

opponents. In the last seven games, the Crimson Tide has won by an average of 31 points

(Fornelli). Fans desire to be kept on their toes, meaning the games need to be competitive.

Therefore, many teams have upgraded to aggressive conferences, providing not only a packed

stadium, but also credibility in strength. Most recently, the West Virginia Mountaineers made the

switch from the Big East, a basketball dominated conference, to the Big 12, a football conference

(Adelson). Even though West Virginia is nearly 900 miles away from their closest conference

member, Iowa State, the change provides more TV coverage, meaning more money, more

recruits and of course more competitive games.

Voters are no different than sports fans in their desire for competition. People are more

likely to vote in close elections, when their vote actually makes a difference. This is not the fault

of voters, as they are acting rational (McDonald, “Competitive Problem”). Just as only hardcore

Alabama fans stay the entire game to watch a blowout. So, perhaps politicians have the idea of

redistricting backwards. Instead of re-arranging district lines to gain the most votes for a

particular party, the districts should be re-drawn to elicit opposition among candidates. Not only

will this motivate voters to turnout, but also will establish credibility in a political environment

currently overtaken with cynicism and distrust. Competition has the power to bring out the best

or the worst in people. Therefore, voters will have a plethora of information to be sure the

candidate they vote for truly deserves to win, rather than settling for the only candidate available.

The “Cinderella” Phenomenon

Due to the immense weight placed on conferences, many times winning teams in smaller

conferences, known as “Cinderella” teams, are overlooked in the BCS poll. Take the University

of Central Florida for example. So far the Knights have played two ranked opponents in the top

ten of the BCS poll. They lost by a field goal to ranked South Carolina and beat Louisville, who

was also ranked. Despite these influential wins, UCF is only ranked #23. Yet, the #2 Oregon

Ducks have only played one ranked opponent, UCLA who was ranked at #12 in the BCS polls.

Although the Ducks had a much larger victory than three points, UCF has played opponents from

much stronger conferences, only giving the Knights even more credibility. But, since UCF is not

in a strong conference and has not won by large margins, the polls often overlook them. This

makes it difficult for any “Cinderella” team to reach the top. While often times the BCS

standings are correct, they do not take into account schedule strength, (not to be confused with

conferences) rather focusing on the just the numbers, causing crucial details to be overlooked.

Voters also sense this frustration of not seeing “Cinderella” candidates make it through

the primaries. With such a dominant two-party system, any candidate who does not align with a

party on every issue does not stand a chance in winning the election. However, this is not

representative of many Americans today, who hold conservative economic views and liberal

social stances. So, even though polls like Gallup are often correct in predicting the outcome of

the election, they do not capture the voter’s desired moderate stance (Freeman). Instead, a system

set up to better favor “Cinderella” candidates would help to capture the ideology of more voters

and also provide a more competitive election. This scenario in turn would elicit higher voter

turnout, with voters knowing their preferred candidate actually stands a chance.

Conclusion

From sports we can learn how to encourage voter motivation and thus voter turnout.

However, many of these theories involve not only the government’s influence, but also

government’s motivation. Quite frankly, if the government is unwilling to change Election Day

from Tuesday to Saturday, they are not going to embrace factors associated with competitive

elections. After all, the goal of politics is not to increase turnout, but to win elections through the

support of parties’ own partisans (Goldstein & Ridout). Candidates are not interested in creating

a level playing field, as that could inadvertently motivate opponents. Therefore, parties are left

with enticing voters with t-shirts, bobble-heads (stickers are just boring) and selling $1 dogs and

half price beer at voting stations. But, do you really want the vote of someone who is only

interested in cheap mementos and beer? So, politicians and researchers then have no room to

blame the public for poor motivation to exercise their free will, as long as the government is

unwilling to lower the costs associated with voting.

Bibliography

Adelson, Andrea. "WVU Settles Suit, to Join Big 12 In July." ESPN. N.p., 15 Feb. 2012. Web.

Fornelli, Tom. "Nick Saban Wants Fans to Stop Leaving Early." CBS. N.p., 24 Oct. 2013. Web.

Freeman, Steven F. Thesis. University of Pennsylvania, 2004. 10 Nov. 2004. Web.

Goldstein, Kenneth M., and Travis N. Ridout. "The Politics of Participation: Mobilization and Turnout Over Time." Political Behavior 24.1 (2002): n. pag. Web.

Gregory, Sean. "Why More Fans Aren't Watching The World Series." TIME. N.p., 26 Oct. 2013. Web.

McDonald, Michael. "5 Myths About Turning Out the Vote." The Washington Post. N.p., 29 Oct. 2006. Web.

McDonald, Michael P. "The Competitive Problem of Voter Turnout." Washington Post. N.p., 31 Oct. 2006. Web.

Spitz, Joey. "Is America's Pastime Dying a Slow Death?" The Huffington Post. N.p., 01 Aug. 2013. Web.