The Miami Marlins are not playing in the NLCS this year. Once again, the “fish” missed the postseason and have made baseball’s second season just twice since winning the 2003 World Series. However, the bigger story surrounding the Marlins isn’t their lack of success on the baseball field. It’s the amount of turnover of broadcasters in the television and radio booth.
Over the past 10 years, the Marlins have replaced their lead television play-by-play voice three times. Their latest broadcast shuffle also included the dismissal of analyst Jeff Nelson, studio host Craig Minervini and analyst Rod Allen. In the days following the broadcast bloodbath in South Florida, some interesting details emerged about the cuts.
While Nelson, Allen and former play-by-play voice Kyle are relatively new names in the organization’s broadcast history, Minervini is a grizzled veteran. He spent 25 years covering Miami Marlins baseball as the lead studio host across multiple versions of regional sports networks.
Yet, just one year after the Marlins and several other teams left FanDuel Sports Network to come under Major League Baseball’s production umbrella, Minervini is out. But why?
According to the Miami Herald, Minervini wasn’t effective at selling Marlins.TV on social media. Barry Jackson of the Herald reported that the team values broadcasters who have a significant social media presence and use it to promote the product.
So, is this the new norm? Are studio hosts, whose primary responsibility is to guide engaging discussions with expert analysts, now also expected to market their team’s television product? Let’s look at the numbers.
Minervini has an inactive account on X, more than 6,000 followers on Facebook and just under 3,200 followers on Instagram. Craig Mish, who is expected to replace Minervini, has more than 43,000 followers on X. But no official Instagram account or Facebook page.
Did the Marlins value Mish’s active X account over Minervini’s combined following on Instagram and Facebook? More importantly, why should follower counts matter when determining the value of an employee working for a Major League Baseball team?
Consider the Marlins’ in-state rivals, the Tampa Bay Rays, who are also playing in the American League Championship Series. Like the Marlins, the Rays left FanDuel Sports Network and moved under MLB’s production umbrella.
Rich Hollenberg and Doug Waechter serve as the team’s studio hosts. Hollenberg has fewer than 1,800 followers on X, while Waechter has just over 3,400. Combined, their following is smaller than Minervini’s inactive X account.
Should Rich and Doug, who do a hell of a job, be worried that they aren’t selling enough team subscriptions? Waechter posted just 12 times on X all season. He’s been inactive for a month despite the Rays’ impressive postseason run.
I understand the value of an all-in approach to social media when you work for a company. The more employees who share messaging about a product, the greater the potential to attract customers. Spreading your message through your employees can expand your reach.
However, reach alone doesn’t tell the whole story. Brand credibility matters. Engagement matters. Converting interest into paying customers matters, too. Turning your social media accounts into a running advertisement for your employer might generate exposure. But exposure doesn’t automatically translate into subscriptions.
Social media success also isn’t determined by how often you post or how frequently you share company messaging. Engagement depends on several factors, including the content, the audience and how platforms distribute posts. A large following doesn’t guarantee meaningful interaction, and frequent posting doesn’t guarantee results.
Links can create additional challenges. A broadcaster could have a massive following, include a link in a post and still struggle to generate clicks or engagement. You can buy followers, but you can’t buy genuine engagement. You can pay for reach, but you still have to earn trust.
If social media activity and follower counts are becoming important factors in a broadcaster’s job security with a Major League Baseball team, are organizations focusing on the right metrics of value?
Hell, why stop with broadcasters? Teams employ entire rosters of professional athletes who have their own social media followings, many of which likely dwarf those of their broadcast colleagues. If the goal is to sell subscriptions, why not make those players responsible for driving sales, too?
Of course, there’s a difference between asking employees to help market a product and making them accountable for results they may not control. Broadcasters can contribute to a marketing effort. But their social media followings don’t necessarily reflect their effectiveness behind a microphone or their value to a broadcast.
Simply put, the Miami Marlins are setting a dangerous precedent by suggesting that a broadcaster’s social media following should help determine their value as an employee.
There is a difference between asking employees to help promote a product and using follower counts to justify who deserves to keep a job. Experience, preparation, credibility and the ability to connect with an audience should carry far more weight than an algorithm or the number next to someone’s name on a social media profile.
If this is the direction Major League Baseball teams are heading, the Marlins are taking a terrible step toward redefining employee value for all the wrong reasons. A broadcaster’s job is to inform, entertain and connect with viewers. Social media can support that mission, but it shouldn’t become a substitute for evaluating the skills that make someone good at the job.
It should never be reduced to how many people they can get to click a link.
Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. Sign up for our newsletters to stay updated and get the latest information right in your inbox.
