To me, that makes sense. If KONG's broadcast deal with the Sounders involved them paying for the rights, I don't think MLS/SUM or anyone can legally say "Sorry, but we're taking this game for the national network. You can't broadcast it. Sucks to be you." Not without compensating them in some way. ------RM
The game turned out to be on MLS Live after all. Talk about full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
Some news that affects DirecTV customers but also has an effect on the exposure for MLS: http://fangsbites.com/2012/11/directv-moves-nbc-sports-network-to-basic-from-the-sports-pack/
Now that the network has year-round programming (assuming the NHL ever comes back, but I'm not bitter or anything), NBCSN's distribution was the last impediment to really competing with ESPN.
That article is not quite correct. NBCSN has been available in numerous Direct TV packages outside of the Sports Pack. I believe any package at Choice XTra or higher included the channel. I don't know if the move today adds it to the lowest tier packages but it is not listed in those low packs on the Direct TV web site.
Great to hear. Granted, I dropped DirectTV in July for Comcast, but the move should help MLS ratings next season.
In other words, roughly 99.97% of homes that get ESPN also get ESPN2. Isn't that good enough to stop talking about them as though they were networks with different audiences? ------RM
You definitely need to talk about them as different networks because the general populace still treats them differently even if they are available in the same number of homes. You could have the identical programming on ESPN2 and ESPN and almost 100% of the time, ESPN will draw better ratings than ESPN2.
I understand that ESPN gets better ratings than ESPN2, but I always figured that was due to ESPN placing the best programming and spending the most marketing on its flagship network. I don't see where the difference comes from otherwise. The two networks are always right beside each other in the lineup. I've always thought of ESPN2 as "just another ESPN channel". Is there really some segment of the viewing population that looks at the cable listings and says "Ooh, soccer! I shall watch-- WAIT! ESPN...2??? Pshaw! No pedestrian B-list network shall sully my TV!" ------RM
Well, the thing is, this last sentence is actually different in a subtle but important way from the rest of your description. The difference is habituation. If ESPN put the same quality of programming on the two channels, the ratings would not meet in the middle over night because people who have always thought of ESPN2 as "just another ESPN channel" (emphasis on the just is mine) don't change that conception right away. It could also be argued that they never get 100% equal ratings that way, because the mere sticking of the '2' on the end is just slightly diminutive. (They aren't actually always right next to each other, though ESPN carry charges go up if you put them apart, so it's an incentive not to do that.) No. . .there's a segment that never looks at what's on ESPN2 in the first place, because ESPN has trained them not to. MLS falls through that net; time and time again, basically the same type of game has been shown on ESPN as one that's on ESPN2 and it will get 2 or 3 times the viewership on the former as the latter.
There's a cultivated mindset that if there's nothing worth watching on ESPN, then switching to espn2 isn't going to help. To be honest, I'm surprised that ESPNU continues to survive in a land where ESPN is pushing more and more college content to the web (aka ESPN3).
Just saw this article: http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2012/12/nbc-sports-network-tv-ratings-extremely-low/ NBCSN is hurting pretty bad now ratings-wise without hockey.
women's soccer always seems to get decent ratings on NBCSN. Higher than MLS ratings. Maybe they should air a few women's league games. EPL will definitely help them next year.
GolTV, which has the rights to 2013 & 2014, will have to want to give it up, presuming they remain in business that long. But yes.
GolTV has it for that long? Bummer. No one actually has GolTV, as far as I can gather. Just a step up from BeIN Sports...
GolTV is not a step up from beIN Sport in terms of household penetration. beIN Sport is in significantly more homes now than Gol TV. A combination of Gol TV being dropped by some carriers and beIN Sport being added. In order of household penetration for English language soccer related programming, it goes like this NBC, ESPN, ESPN2, NBCSN, FSC, beIN Sport, Gol TV.
Ain't that the truth. FSC seems like a dead man walking unless they can come up with some programming soon. No MLS, Laliga, Serie A, EPL. What's left? US open cup, SPL and college soccer aren't going to keep the lights on. I'm surprised FSP is still around. Surely that will be gone unless there is a bigger rugby demand than I think there is. Rebrand back to FSW?
Such is the case with DirecTV in my area (San Antonio). When it was installed the pamphlet channel guide still had GolTV listed, but the channel is in fact beIN Sports NOT GolTV.