Rating: Columbus v LA, ABC

[HalaMadrid]

MLS: Galaxy-Crew 4/5 ABC 4:00-6:00pm 1.0/2

[astabooty]

is that good?

[HalaMadrid]

About par for the course.

2 share means 2 percent of the country's tvs were watching at least part of the game.

[Roehl Sybing]

The US Curling Nationals (one hour tape delay) got a 1.4, if I remember correctly.

I think a 1.0 is better than previous ABC telecasts, though. It nearly rivals Arena Football on NBC.

[Brrca Fan redded]

It is better then 0.25 or 0.35 that MLS gets on ESPN2

[kenntomasch]

Originally posted by Brrca Fan
It is better then 0.25 or 0.35 that MLS gets on ESPN2

Apple, meet the orange.

1.0 is about what MLS does when it's on ABC (http://www.kenn.com/soccer/mlstv.html), though it's slightly up from last year's opener.

If, indeed, that's the final national rating. Usually the first number we get is the overnight, and the final national number is usually, but not always, slightly lower.

And, just for comparison, Arena Football numbers:


DATE...........Rating....Audience
02/02/03........1.6.....1,743,000
02/09/03........1.6.....1,671,000
02/16/03........1.7.....1,798,000
02/23/03........1.4.....1,281,000
FEBRUARY AVG....1.6.....1,623,250

03/02/03........1.2.....1,247,000
03/09/03........1.0.....1,062,000
03/16/03........1.1.....1,189,000
MARCH AVG.......1.1.....1,166,000

OVERALL AVG.....1.3.....1,593,857


The AFL benefits from (a) a ton of promotion from NBC and (b) the fact that people actually kinda like it (in person and it makes for pretty good TV).

NBC has been jacking its time slot around now, though - whenever they have golf on, they move the AFL to noon ET, which, apparently, has an effect (as does the novelty wearing off, I'd reckon).

[MD_05]

yeah, that's the best in a few years

[astabooty]

j/w how do they know who is watching what? i believe ppl used to get Neilson boxes or somethign so it was only a select group. is it still like that?

is this rating relatively good for the MLS?
and do you think the ratings should be taken lightly since it was opening day?

[HalaMadrid]

Originally posted by kenntomasch
If, indeed, that's the final national rating. Usually the first number we get is the overnight, and the final national number is usually, but not always, slightly lower. It's the final national rating. Overnights were just a bit higher.

[HalaMadrid]

Originally posted by HalaMadrid
It's the final national rating. Overnights were just a bit higher. Nevermind, i take that back.

The rest of the ratings listed were final, MLS' is an overnight.

My fault for misreading.

[elephantstone]

Originally posted by kenntomasch
NBC has been jacking its time slot around now, though - whenever they have golf on, they move the AFL to noon ET, which, apparently, has an effect (as does the novelty wearing off, I'd reckon).

Also, there's college basketball on CBS on March Sundays, which would cut into the audience.

[kenntomasch]

And there's some other big news story going on, though I can't quite recall what it is...but it's having an effect on ratings across the board.

[MD_05]

where do you get this info from? the overnight ratings, etc.?
it is pretty amazing that soccer's (dismal) rating is up from previous years considering the NCAA tourney and the war to compete with.

[monster]

Originally posted by kenntomasch
Apple, meet the orange.

1.0 is about what MLS does when it's on ABC (http://www.kenn.com/soccer/mlstv.html), though it's slightly up from last year's opener.

If, indeed, that's the final national rating. Usually the first number we get is the overnight, and the final national number is usually, but not always, slightly lower.

And, just for comparison, Arena Football numbers:


DATE...........Rating....Audience
02/02/03........1.6.....1,743,000
02/09/03........1.6.....1,671,000
02/16/03........1.7.....1,798,000
02/23/03........1.4.....1,281,000
FEBRUARY AVG....1.6.....1,623,250

03/02/03........1.2.....1,247,000
03/09/03........1.0.....1,062,000
03/16/03........1.1.....1,189,000
MARCH AVG.......1.1.....1,166,000

OVERALL AVG.....1.3.....1,593,857


The AFL benefits from (a) a ton of promotion from NBC and (b) the fact that people actually kinda like it (in person and it makes for pretty good TV).

NBC has been jacking its time slot around now, though - whenever they have golf on, they move the AFL to noon ET, which, apparently, has an effect (as does the novelty wearing off, I'd reckon).

Also, I bet regionalizing the games helps a tad.

[kenntomasch]

Noted. Good call. Though here in Chicago yesterday we got Dallas/San Jose. Good game.

[DennisM]

The US Curling Nationals (one hour tape delay) got a 1.4, if I remember correctly.


One week delay, I believe. But anyway, that's good. The USCA is telling people to write to NBC about their thoughts on the coverage. I hope to see more on the way.

[Andy_B]

This is the overnight number.

The final number will come around Thursday.

MLS consistently drops from the overnights to the final ratings.

Look for this to come in around a .8 which would place it in its normal bottom of the sports ratings barrel.

Shame, after so many good feel stories this winter, this one number makes it very clear that MLS is a long long long way aways from getting out from under the ultra niche status in terms national broadcast OTA events.

Until we can start pulling numbers in the mid 1's, I don't even consider MLS to be at the level of the other niche sports in terms national broadcast OTA events.

It is pretty sobering to see Curling doing better than MLS.

I don't understand why we do so well in comparison to other niche sports on ESPN and yet we continue to suck wind as soon as we move to ABC.

The first person that mentions promotions should stop and look at the curling number before typing out that long overused excuse.

Andy

[kenntomasch]

Originally posted by Andy_B
Shame, after so many good feel stories this winter, this one number makes it very clear that MLS is a long long long way aways from getting out from under the ultra niche status in terms national broadcast OTA events.

While I agree with the second part of that (and have long believed that), I wouldn't have expected the opener to have garnered a substantially higher rating than it did, no matter how many feel good stories we had this winter (or in the last two weeks), not on a weekend in March with a bunch of other sporting events and a war going on.

Oh, and then there's the fact that soccer's not usually a ratings-grabber outside of really big events. Which, though this might have been to us, it wasn't perceived as such to the "rest" of America, and they weren't about to tune in in numbers big enough to make a big difference in the ratings.

Unfortunately, MLS only gets two more shots at ABC, so it's not like it has a chance to build an audience on that outlet from week to week.

[Roehl Sybing]

Originally posted by Andy_B
Look for this to come in around a .8 which would place it in its normal bottom of the sports ratings barrel.

Shame, after so many good feel stories this winter, this one number makes it very clear that MLS is a long long long way aways from getting out from under the ultra niche status in terms national broadcast OTA events.
Cheer up. We ARE a grassroots movement. We can't be an overnight sensation at the same time.

[Andy_B]

I wouldn't have expected the opener to have garnered a substantially higher rating than it did

I guess I was just looking for any sort of up tick, say even just a simple 1.1 final rating instead of the sub 1.0 we are most likely going to get.

My question to the group still stands though:

Why does MLS stack up better to other niche sports ratings wise on ESPN vs OTA networks?

Andy