completely agree. I've found myself for the most part simply putting these ESPN EPL and La Liga games on the DVR and then just zipping through them to see the goals. for the most part a top4 v non-top4 match has a fairly predetermined outcome and there really isn't much drama to a lot of those matches, imo. (I also found myself doing the same thing with the La Liga matches from a few seasons ago when Dish still carried WorldSportHD. so in a way these La Liga matches in HD aren't really anything new for me as a viewer.) as for MLS, I tend to watch those games for the most part in their entirety (although depending on the day of the week or match time I also will may put the MLS broadcasts on the DVR and just zip through to the goals). parity doesn't necessarily make great soccer, but it tends to create some fairly close (if not suspenseful) matches -- that I at least find value and enjoyment in viewing across the 90 minutes. certainly the production (and investment in the production with multiple multiple cameras and angles for replays) value of the matches is superior in Europe (the domestic league is like each other country's NFL), but I do think/hope that ESPN may be learning from their new carriage of leagues by foreign production, and perhaps the tv presentation of MLS will continue to improve in the future. then again, since I'm not in a Nielsen home, my viewing doesn't really affect MLS tv rating vs. EPL tv rating. Nielsen randomly selects their snowflakes to represent the full television audience.
This will hurt MLS. The tv presentation of EPL is so much better. Most EPL games have full stands with people singing and most MLS games have empty seats with soccer moms. That Sunday game in Colorado where there were like 5 K in the stands and you could see the Colorado spelled on the seats is a horrible advertisement for the league. If its a choice between that or a game at Ansfield. No brainer. Thats before we even get into the difference in quality on the field.
Well, you help the cause if you have Direct Kick. A lot plays into this obviously. Yes, like many fans I've had access to the EPL on FSC and Setanta, but when traveling -- even just visiting relatives -- ESPN 2 is a lot more accessible, which again probably will prompt me to watch more EPL and La Liga just because it's more readily available. Even in the last four years my MLS viewing habits have also changed. Before the current wave of expansion, it wasn't too hard for an MLS fan to watch virtually every game each week if they wanted to, and I consciously tried to watch a lot of it. With more teams and more games, that's not really realistic (at least for me) and I personally find I'm getting more selective which MLS games I watch as a result. These days, I'm more likely to watch teams that draw decently and have good stadium atmosphere, especially when they play a rival or a team that's playing well at the time. Preferences vary and obviously the proof will be in the data, but again what he's saying rings true to me. The EPL on ESPN is a better broadcast than what I had before on FSC or Setanta, it's easier to get when I'm away from home and because of those two factors I suspect I will watch more of these games as a result. Sure, I'll still watch MLS too, but speaking only for myself I'm less and less inclined to watch average teams play in sparsely filled stadiums where the quality of the telecast isn't particularly good either.
What? Your eyes weren't glued to the tv in this weeks mega classic Barcelona vs sporting gijon? But the best team in the world was playing!
If BigSoccer was built on facts and not rantings the board would have folded before either one of us joined.
Anyone remember "Road to Wembley"? They were deep into soccer in 1983. Then they went on a little 20 year hiatus.
But the problem is that there are more bloggers out there who are savvy enough to buy the right domain and present themselves as legitimate sources who then are picked up by legitimate blogs who don't realize that some guy saying MLS is "doomed" because he likes the EPL better isn't the best souorce for accurate and reasonable information.
In all likelihood, it also overestimates the importance of non-league markets to MLS viewership numbers currently.
Yea, I don't know why they even show the action on the field. They should focus on the real interesting action.. everyone knows where its at... the fans in the stands. Anyone who chooses which game to watch on TV based on the fan support is a moron. There I said it.
Unfortunately for your viewpoint, that would put a whole lot of morons on the planet. And moron money is still green.
So you are saying an empty stadium with no atmosphere makes for an appealing of a tv product as a full stadium with great atmosphere?
I've always been of the belief that the more quality soccer people see the more they get interested in the sport as a whole. Sort of a rising tide lifts all ships. While it may be hard for MLS to beat EPL in ratings, showing EPL may help grow the sport in other ways that MLS can benefit from(attendance at their live matches, awareness, more kids wanting to play the sport professionally, etc.)
That is a .uk site. So I would imagine it is for the English ESPN. Which I also believe is backed up by the 80 Scottish Premier League games and the use of "US MLS"
Not bad either. The EPL is arguably the biggest soccer league on the planet with fans in every corner of every country on Earth. The MLS is a 5th tier sports league in the US and has fans only in a few select markets in the US. The fact the disparity isn't bigger bodes well for MLS.