EPQ presentation Which was the most important factor

EPQ presentation Which was the most important factor leading to the decline in popularity of baseball in the 1990 s to 2000 s: the 1994 strike, the steroids scandal or the rise in popularity of other sports?

“The Nation’s Past Time”

Did the steroids scandal decrease baseball’s popularity?

The Start of the Steroids Scandal

Mitchell Report

The Impact of the Mitchell Report

Barry Bonds “The Entertainer”

Distortion of records

Do steroids even matter?

Summary Points • Did PEDs matter to fans? Yes • Did the distortion of records matter to fans? Yes • Did steroids increase performance? Yes • Was the Mitchell Report enough to regain popularity? Probably not • Was this negative popularity national and long term? Yes

Did the 1994 strike decrease baseball’s popularity?

1994 Strike Events Summary

Selig’s diplomacy

The Death of the Expos

Short term vs long term

Summary points • Did the strike have a negative regional impact in the long run? Yes • Did the strike have a negative national short term impact? Yes • Did the strike have a long term positive impact? Yes • Did the strike have a long term negative impact? No • Therefore the strike could not have been more important than the steroids scandal.

Did the popularity of other sports decrease the popularity of baseball?

What did NFL do differently?

Anti trust exemption

Is Baseball a monopoly • If baseball is a monopoly, then surely it will not be affected by the popularity of other sports

Summary Points • Did football’s popularity directly decrease baseball’s popularity? No • Did baseball’s anti trust exemption help it to gain an advantage over football? Yes, to a very small extent • Do these advantages help to stave off the popularity of football? No • Therefore since being a fan of baseball and football is not mutually exclusive, the popularity of other sports does not matter.

Conclusion • The biggest factor was steroids: • • Led to a lack of trust between fans Led to a lack of children/ young talent wanting to play baseball Distorted the records of the game Lack of transparency means a lack of closure

The EPQ Process How did I accomplish my goals?

Choosing a topic • I chose baseball because it was: • • • Interesting to me Enough academia written about it Related to the degree I wanted to do

Choosing a title • I first decided on “To what extent was Barry Bonds the best player to play baseball? ” • • This would require statistics, but there would not be much economics behind it Hard to answer quantitatively Not enough degree level resources about it Not an evaluation because the answer can only be “Yes” or “No”

Choosing a title • I then opted for “Was steroids the biggest factor in the decline of baseball 1990 s t 0 2000 s” • • While this was better, it was still not an evaluative question. I had an idea of what the other arguments were, such as the 1994 strike as being a bigger factor, but I did not put that into the title

Choosing a title • Eventually I managed to come up with the title “What was the biggest factor that had led to the decline in popularity of baseball during the 1990 s – 2000 s: steroids scandal, the 1994 strike or the rise in popularity of other sports? ” • This was after I had looked at some example titles, and saw that there had to be a value judgement.

Planning review • At the start, I had a few books but they were centred around Barry Bonds. • These were all biographical in nature and not academic. I made the mistake of reading all of it, and I wasted time. • I also made notes for these books, but the research questions were too broad and did not really help me to narrow down what I wanted.

Mid Project Review • At the start of the Mid Project Review, I had judged that my books were not relevant, and I had obtained some other books. • During this period, I changed my title from version 2 to version 3. This meant that my books became relevant again, but I had to redo my notes. • This significant alteration meant that I fell behind heavily in my work, since I changed my research questions

End of Mid Project Review • I devised a time saving method of making notes • I caught up on the work, just about. • I was in a good position to continue.

Devising a plan • I made a table listing all three factors and having “Yes/No” columns on either side. • I then listed the factors, and rated them in terms of strength • I then added a brief conclusion

Writing the draft • Since my plan was so clearly described, I found writing the draft easiest. • I left the introduction and conclusion to last because it was the hardest. • I made sure that I was referencing as I went along to save me work at the end.

Reflection Successes Failures All deadlines met (draft and production log) Took time to get a title Lessons learnt throughout the course meaning that Some of my sources were not as academic towards the end I was efficient Too ambitious in my planning at first Disorganised notes

What would I do differently next time? • I would err on the side of caution when making plans, leaving plenty of contingency time. • Focus on the title at the very start more, which would make finding resources quicker. • Make notes as I read them, not afterwards.