Why did the 2000 World Series get such low ratings?

[redban]

At the time, the 2000 World Series had the lowest World Series ratings all time (before 2002, 2008, and 2010 did worse).

Why did it fail so bad?

It was a series between two big-market teams, and it was loaded with star power. You had Mike Piazza, Derek Jeter, Bernie Williams, Mariano Rivera, and Roger Clemens, etc.

There was a nice back-story, with the two being cross-town NY rivals, and there was Piazza vs Clemens.

Every game was close, decided by either 1-2 runs.

Again -why were the ratings poor?

[Seels]

The Mets weren't a serious threat to the Yankees, and people were tired of seeing the Yankees in the World Series.

Honestly those two teams are probably the worst two teams in the World Series in a long time.

[JessePopHaines16]

The Mets weren't a serious threat to the Yankees, and people were tired of seeing the Yankees in the World Series.

Honestly those two teams are probably the worst two teams in the World Series in a long time.

This person said it best.

[ian2813]

Well, for starters, the two big-market teams were from the same big market, so it wasn't able to pick up two regions worth of viewers.

Second, the Yankees had already won three of the last four World Series, and I think general viewers were getting tired of the big event always revolving around New York.

Third, despite the games being close, it was over in five, so it didn't feel like some sort of epic battle. If the Mets had pushed it to seven, or even to six, it might have generated more interest.

[willshad]

The Mets are my favorite team, but I have to admit they were not a great team, and honestly neither were the Yankees at this point. Both teams were carried by 2 or 3 star players. The Mets had all-universe players at catcher and second, and really not much else. The Yankees had Jeter, Bernie, and Posada and that's about it. Clemens was no longer an elite pitcher and the rest of the staff was just plain bad. Even Rivera had an off year by his standards.

[Joe33]

Anti-East Coast bias?

I thought it was an extremely intriguing series, two New York teams, the whole Clemens-Piazza story, and that Yankees club (1996-2000) being one of the greatest of all-time.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

The Mets weren't a serious threat to the Yankees, and people were tired of seeing the Yankees in the World Series.

Honestly those two teams are probably the worst two teams in the World Series in a long time.

The 2000 Yankees were one of the worst teams in the WS in a long time?

I can buy some of the other reasons posted, tired of the Yanks in post season, also the fact that both teams were from NY, for sure a turn off to a number of other cities.

Maybe it the pinstripes clouding your judgement. Maybe istead of the nonsense about them being one of the worst teams in the WS, how about you just don't like them.

As for the Mets, they were better than some give them credit for. Maybe beat 4 games to 1 game but a WS closer than the 4 to 1 makes it appear.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

The Mets are my favorite team, but I have to admit they were not a great team, and honestly neither were the Yankees at this point. Both teams were carried by 2 or 3 star players. The Mets had all-universe players at catcher and second, and really not much else. The Yankees had Jeter, Bernie, and Posada and that's about it. Clemens was no longer an elite pitcher and the rest of the staff was just plain bad. Even Rivera had an off year by his standards.

I guess that would have to mean the Yanks were luckiest team in the AL. Not much going for them but I guess the rest of the league sucked, how else could the Yanks make it to the WS.

You don't have to blow away the competition, just play better than the other teams.

[ipitch]

Honestly those two teams are probably the worst two teams in the World Series in a long time.

If you're basing it on regular season records, then it was no worse than 1997.

[dgarza]

Well, for starters, the two big-market teams were from the same big market, so it wasn't able to pick up two regions worth of viewers.

Second, the Yankees had already won three of the last four World Series, and I think general viewers were getting tired of the big event always revolving around New York.

I think this is probably it.

But concerning the 2000 Yankees being a weak WS team, there may be validity to that. Their total WAR hadn't been that low since 1992.

Total WAR:
2000 Mets - 34.2
2000 Yanks - 35.3
1999 Yanks - 47.9
1998 Yanks - 58.4
1997 Yanks - 51.5
1996 Yanks - 41.1
1995 Yanks - 33.5 (37.7 ~ 162)
1994 Yanks - 35.8 (51.3 ~ 162)
1993 Yanks - 39.5
1992 Yanks - 31.2

[EdTarbusz]

A Subway Series? What's to like about it outside of New York?

[Seels]

The 2000 Yankees had a team ops+ of 103 and team era+ of 102. That is one weak World Series team.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

The 2000 Yankees had a team ops+ of 103 and team era+ of 102. That is one weak World Series team.

The real problem it it was the Yankees................again. It wasn't about a weak Yankee team. There are some who won't watch a Yankee World Series no matter what the strength of the Yankee team.
And guess what, I'm a Yankee fan and I could easily understand "some" non Yankee fans not watching a WS with the Yankees in it. No problem with that, if I wasn't a Yankee fan I "might" feel the same way.

Think it over, to fans from other cities......what could be worse than the Yanks in another WS...............Oh no, both NY teams, forget it. This one is easy to come to a big reason for low ratings...........both teams from NY.

[dgarza]

Think it over, to fans from other cities......what could be worse than the Yanks in another WS...............Oh no, both NY teams, forget it. This one is easy to come to a big reason for low ratings...........both teams from NY.

Yeah, we already know which city is going to win.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Yeah, we already know which city is going to win.

Got that, make it even less appealing.