Join Now
Share
In Defense of Domestic Soccer Broadcasts...or at least accepting them...
Posted 18 Apr 2008 at 02:49 PM by Jeff Bull
(OK, last one of these “questions/concepts” thingies (see the preamble here if you don’t know what the hell I’m talking about). I’ll kick out something later today, probably looking ahead to the weekend’s actions....again, I’m finding my feet, people...you haven’t seen them, have you?)
Fans of Major League Soccer (MLS), who sometimes can’t agree on the color of the sky, generally agree on one thing: the poor quality of the broadcasts here in the States, which can get so bad it borders on insulting. Now, part of this is down to the talent - e.g. Harkes and Dellacamera or Bretos and Sullivan - and there’s only so much that can done with that. (For the record, I like both those teams - the latter, especially; the only guy I can’t abide is Christian Miles...but I enjoy even him on one level...the level that embraces others’ pain and embarrassment). At the same time, when have you known sportscasters who aren’t total twits? I spent five years following the NFL (late 80s early 90s) and, at least 15 times per game, could not believe the river of idiocy pouring from those dudes’ mouths. Call it par for the course and move on.
But the broadcasts themselves also come in for a lot of abuse and these are more easily explained. We all know about the in-game breaks in ESPN’s broadcasts and we grumble a little when the game we’re watching gets reduced to a third of the screen. There’s also the large chunks of the half-time shows spent talking about everything but soccer and, no, neither are favorites of mine.
But here’s the thing: we just need to deal with it, people. Just suck it up and stop with the griping. Why? Because soccer has no leverage left with ESPN at least MLS doesn’t - and they (they being SUM) did really well to leverage World Cup rights into steady coverage of MLS in any case. If there comes a time when the game regularly picks up something over a 1.0 share - and I’m pretty sure it’d have to go higher - then we can start pushing demands on the networks - or just ESPN - that broadcast soccer. Till then, we’re just whining - and that gives those with the airwaves that little extra disincentive to cater to us. For now, in-game breaks are simply the price of getting on TV, as are plugs for non-soccer events.
The point is, there’s a time for negotiation: generally, when you have something to offer the other side. They’re not going to get anymore until soccer in this country gets there....wherever “there” is.
Fans of Major League Soccer (MLS), who sometimes can’t agree on the color of the sky, generally agree on one thing: the poor quality of the broadcasts here in the States, which can get so bad it borders on insulting. Now, part of this is down to the talent - e.g. Harkes and Dellacamera or Bretos and Sullivan - and there’s only so much that can done with that. (For the record, I like both those teams - the latter, especially; the only guy I can’t abide is Christian Miles...but I enjoy even him on one level...the level that embraces others’ pain and embarrassment). At the same time, when have you known sportscasters who aren’t total twits? I spent five years following the NFL (late 80s early 90s) and, at least 15 times per game, could not believe the river of idiocy pouring from those dudes’ mouths. Call it par for the course and move on.
But the broadcasts themselves also come in for a lot of abuse and these are more easily explained. We all know about the in-game breaks in ESPN’s broadcasts and we grumble a little when the game we’re watching gets reduced to a third of the screen. There’s also the large chunks of the half-time shows spent talking about everything but soccer and, no, neither are favorites of mine.
But here’s the thing: we just need to deal with it, people. Just suck it up and stop with the griping. Why? Because soccer has no leverage left with ESPN at least MLS doesn’t - and they (they being SUM) did really well to leverage World Cup rights into steady coverage of MLS in any case. If there comes a time when the game regularly picks up something over a 1.0 share - and I’m pretty sure it’d have to go higher - then we can start pushing demands on the networks - or just ESPN - that broadcast soccer. Till then, we’re just whining - and that gives those with the airwaves that little extra disincentive to cater to us. For now, in-game breaks are simply the price of getting on TV, as are plugs for non-soccer events.
The point is, there’s a time for negotiation: generally, when you have something to offer the other side. They’re not going to get anymore until soccer in this country gets there....wherever “there” is.
Share
Post a Comment
Total Comments 4
Comments
-
Two simple things
would be a great improvement. They should talk less. And utilize the European camera views, and not all the close-ups where you can't tell what's going on. And more crowd noise. Ok....three things.Posted 18 Apr 2008 at 05:15 PM by TheGodofSoccer 
-
This is partially an example of what I call "illusory consensus." I use that term because people will often insult the current standard without being specific and think they agree, but if you look at the thing carefully, they really don't agree on what acceptable standards are.Quote:Fans of Major League Soccer (MLS), who sometimes can’t agree on the color of the sky, generally agree on one thing: the poor quality of the broadcasts here in the States, which can get so bad it borders on insulting.
In this case, I think you could probably find some common ground:
* Pull the cameras back a bit so you can see more of what's going on.
* Get cameramen who have been around the game a while and have a better chance of anticipating where the ball will go next.
But I think there are also many points where people believe that other folks "agree" with them mostly because they haven't actually asked.Posted 18 Apr 2008 at 05:28 PM by Stan Collins
-
I've never polled anyone and, to get a little self-critical, I live in a world where everyone seems to be bitching about everything. The only evidence I have for my belief that U.S. fans hate the broadcasts (mainly ESPN's) is, 1) anecdotal, drawn mainly from comments and posts I've seen around, and 2) based on my recollection of said anecdotes. Pretty weak timber for building a house, I know.
Coming as I do from a decade or so when there were no soccer broadcasts, I can be placated by damn near any broadcast. So, yeah, I'm easy.
That said, I wholly second the motion for pulling back the cameras, but will table the motion on the cameramen, pending further study as to whether they can be trained.Posted 18 Apr 2008 at 06:01 PM by Jeff Bull
-
FSC or ESPN needs to go and get Ray Hudsons intern/gopher/slave and give them a job. I know for a fact that whoever that person is will do a 100% better job.
Oh and Max Bretos suxPosted 18 Apr 2008 at 08:32 PM by 3VIL L33T
|
Post a Comment
|
Total Trackbacks 0
