Lurko is right. The networks tried to get the old North American Soccer League to actually change soccer's rules (TV has changed the rules of all other American tv sports). And the networkds wanted big, formal timeouts for advertising. The television people won't give up. The pressure to change the rules will be constant. The best solution is to boycott espn and abc and watch the games on the Dish Network package.
I posted my idea about a year or so ago. Why not "TiVo" the broadcast? Start the broadcast live, then pause it at a stoppage to insert a commercial, then resume the broadcast from the same point it left off, the remainder of the game now on a 15-second delay (and then 30-second delay after the second commercial, and so on). alansl
After the first couple, I found it easy to ignore them by hitting the mute button and just watching the game screen. The combination of the commercial's being on the larger screen, and the volume seeming to jump, waws very distracting. But with no sound, you can concentrate on the game shot and take mute off when the screen reverts to normal.
I haven't seen the split screen yet, but it sounds like its annoying. Why can't it be more like Telemundo, incorporate the ad into the screen for a ten second - 15 second spot (like the Tecate cans kciking a soccer ball thru the screen), it happens about three times a half.
Pssssssssssssssssssst. SUM is doing this, not the network. But why ruin a perfectly good hissy fit with facts? The thing can work in certain situations. I too would prefer the telemundo/Univision on-screen ads. Or the split-screen with 10-20 second ads with no intro and no logo at the bottom. But this is one week. One game. Let's unbunch our panties before we point fingers, especially when they are pointed at the wrong people.
this is pathetic! i swear soccer fans in the US have a worse sense of entitelment than people of welfare. Look, if u want to watch games on TV, for free mind you, it has to be profitable for the people who bring the game to you. If these commercials help make broadcasts more rewarding for the parites involved, then Im all for it. For those of u who say "oh its all about the allmighty dollar," well ur damn right it is! And thats the way the wrold works. This helps the league, it brings money into the league which it can use to buy more TV time. Hell, it opens the possibility that ABC might actually BUY the rights from MLS instead of the league paying for it because, low and behold, w/ split screen they might actually make some freaking money. I hope they take it a step further and super impose ads somewhere on the field, a la baseball broadcasts on the backstop behind the plate. Anything that makes money for broadcasters should be welcome with open arms. Can i put up w/ 2 minutes, or even four minutes of split screen commercials if it means i can watch 88 or 86 minutes of soccer I otherwise wouldnt? U bet ur ass I can.
There may actually be more points of agreement here than disagreement. (1) This was the first week. We all hope they will learn and get smarter about how they do things. There's been good suggestions already: make the soccer window larger, cut down on the distracting graphics, get rid of the soccer graphic at the end of the ad, and time the ad break better. (2) If the $$ they from the ads means there are more games for us to watch on TV then we are all happy. [NOTE: That's the conventional widsom around here and it may be a reasonable assumption for now... so far the deep-pocket MLS investors have earned their fan goodwill. But, do you feel the same about NFL/NBA/MLB/NHL owners? At what point do we take MLS at its word that it is here to stay and treat it like the grown-up league it wants to be treated as?] (3) More advertising intrusion during the game telecast is, seemingly inevitable, especially as (a) jaded consumers are saturated by ads, (b) we all have remote controls and (c) some of our remote controls are on "TIVOs" that let us skip any ads altogether. Still, there are some major points of disagreement. What is a reasonable intrusion on the game in the name of increased advertising revenue? (1) Anything that SUM wants, as often as it wants, including full video, sound, etc., as long as there is some small window with soccer action showing? (2) Same as above but only X times a half (now twice; later, who knows)? Hopefully timed to occur during breaks in the action such as injuries and GKs. (3) Video, sound, etc. but only during breaks in action (as in 10-15 second ads at GKs)? (4) Video only, so you can still hear play-by-play; more like an animation filling the bottom third of the screen animations, like what other networks use today? (5) More logos projected onto the screen, perhaps filling up all of the "dead" space around the field, esp. around the goal area. Maybe even a "watermark" on the field? (6) NASCAR-like soccer uniforms with more sponsor logos on player (and referee) uniforms? I fully recognize that marketers are looking for innovative ways to increase revenues. I wish them the best of luck in that. As loyal MLS consumers we need to give them feedback on what does and does not detract from the core product. For me, the side-by-side ads crossed my personal tolerance level for what is acceptable. Items 4-6 from my list above wouldn't bother me a bit. I might even be able to tolerate #3. But, a full 30 second ad is just too much for me. Your tolerance level might be quite a bit different. Final food for thought. Whatever your tolerance level is, if no one effectively complains about these 2x a half side-by-side's, if there is $$ to be made in it then we'll see something even more intrusive in the future.
food for thought, but soccer adds may actually be worth more to companies because of this. Basketball, football, anyting else goes to comercial, people flip the station. Soccer goes to commercial and still shows the game, so I doubt anyone actualy changes the channell. Using this logic, hopefully MLS is able to charge more for these 30 second spots than their ratings would otherwise warrant, again making them more money which blah blah blah (read up for my opinion on that, lol).
I have a feeling most of 'em complain about the 50 cents a newspaper costs and they don't realize without the ads in it the paper would cost about $8. Ads on a broadcast network you can pick up for free...what a weird thing to do.
TO: BigTimeBuck and mtbuckelew Many of the purists here are ONLY ASKING that MLS follow the advertising strategies other great soccer leagues. There are simply BETTER WAYS to advertise in soccer. and by the way: --MLS is getting bigger and bigger every years (before split screen started! Adu is making a record salary) --We are humble lovers of the game (entitlement? we've "sat bitch" in the world of prime time sports for decades now)