Kinda wish NBC would televise one of the two MLS games tonight. MLS should have a game on broadcast whenever there is game like tonight.
A lot of the fishing and hunting stuff get consistent, relatively high ratings for them. Which is more than they can say for their sports programming to this point... basically, it's all they've got besides live sports.
The Portland game was a great advertisement for MLS and would of stood up well to most EPL games in terms of competitiveness, pace, attractive soccer and atmosphere (a naturally generated, in to the game, atmosphere along with the generic anthems), and for excitement and drama it was right up there with the best. If anything was lacking compared to the EPL it was the world class talent and prestige but you don't/shouldn't miss those when a game of this quality can stand up on its own merit.
I liked "Manchester Monday" as I was on vacation and wasn't able to catch the weekend games. I was in the hotel on monday night and managed to catch their "manchester monday" broadcast which put a compact version of both the Man U game AND the Man Citeh game. If they keep this up throughout the season it will make it easier for more fans to keep up with these 2 big clubs throughout the season.
Good point. It's not only the quality disparity between the two leagues but also accessibility. Most weeks the top 1-2 MLS games are not on NBCSN/ESPN/2. They're on MLSLive/DK. That costs extra money. Money that I fork over but I'd think many casuals and neutrals don't. The EPL however costs nothing extra. Most MLS fans already get NBCSN, so they aren't having to pay anything more for all 380 EPL games. I don't get all the games currently with Dish(screw Dish), but that changes in a couple weeks when I get Direct TV. Not a great position for MLS this season IMO. If an MLS fan wants to watch the good games, such as RSL/Por last night, or either of Dempsey's first two games, it'll cost you. Of course a flex schedule is a cheaper alternative to highlight the top games(which is a must for MLS) but they appear against a flex schedule at this time. Maybe that changes going forward.
That's where MLS needs to go IMO, and it'll be an investment in quality coaching which gets it there. Yes big name DP's matter, but that's the more expensive route and makes it tough on many markets. LAG can't even bring in a DP at this time. Had to settle for Omar. But without the big name DP's, RSL and Por are two of the more exciting teams in MLS. Tactically superior to most and free flowing, attack minded footy. And, it's mostly due to coaching. Kries/Porter are simply doing more with their wage bills than most MLS teams and coaches. Problem is there's so few American coaches near the Kries/Porter level. Need to look outside the American pyramid. I'd look to South America and Eastern Europe. That's what Japan has done and it's paid huge dividends.
This is a key part to me, talked about on other BS forums. Not only relating to MLS but the NT as well. And, it's really why I prefer British announcers at this point, along with more substance. Far too much mindless blabbering from American announcers. It's why Arlo was great for MLS.
I agree with your main point, but that statement might be a little oversimplified. Signing a new DP, in the Galaxy's situation, means losing one of Omar, Donovan, or Keane (and I think even Keane is theoretically out because he's got a guaranteed and probably no-trade contract). It's awful hard to find a player, DP or no, who has more impact on winning titles than those three. If you add the precondition that he also has to be relatively famous, it gets even harder. Then you have to consider that on top of the money you'd be paying that guy, you're also giving up a possiblysignificant transfer value for Omar to let him walk. Also there's the factor that Tim Leiweke left the organization between the time they were talking up that strategy and the actual decision moment. I don't know what the knew guy thinks strategically, but I feel pretty confident about what Bruce Arena thinks, and I doubt anyone is left in that organization that's really going to tell him no (at least not if he himself isn't asking for a ridiculous amount of money).
I understand everything you just said, and it was not an easy decision for LAG. But I have a few thoughts on it. One, Omar as a DP was clearly not their first option. Don't think he was second or third either. Not with the heavy Lampard rumors, as well as Dos Santos and Kaka. So while Omar is important to them, and he really is important to their defense, I don't think LAG themselves consider him so important they wouldn't have let him go without blinking if one of the other DP targets or another big name signed for them. So how important Omar is is relative. It's not like they rushed to offer him a DP contract and lock him up as soon as he was eligible for an extension. Even in early Aug Bruce was saying they hadn't decided on extending him a DP contract. That tells he he was a fallback option. Almost a last resort. I don't think they look at him as improving the squad, and I think they fully intended to improve the squad by signing an attacking DP. But after striking out for two consecutive windows they were backed into a corner and decided if we can't get better, make Omar a DP so at least we don't get worse. And yes, it is tough to get big name DP's who can still produce. But LAG set that standard and it fully appears they intend to follow that standard going forward, signing bigger name, attacking DP's. Of course that will be put on hold for now, either unless Landon bolts, Omar is bought post WC or MLS adds a 4th DP. I'd also argue while Omar, Keane and Landon are very important to winning an MLS Cup, LAG have yet to do it with those three as DP's. Before they had Becks and a non-DP Omar. We don't know yet if that trio can win it all. And I don't think LAG are confident they can either, and that's why they've gone hard after attacking DP's. I'm also of the opinion and think LAG are as well, having Omar take up that third DP slots really limits their ceiling compared to having a free DP slot. They can't add much talent to what they have now. Adding a Lampard or Dos Santos to Keane/Landon gives them a considerably higher ceiling imo, or at least having that option going forward. And while I'm high on Omar, I think LAG could solidify their backline without spending what they did on him. One thing America is good at is producing CB's. Reading LAG forums here a number feel the same way. Many don't think this makes sense(making Omar a DP)unless there's a 4th DP slot coming this off season. I wish there was a way to keep young American talent without taking up vital DP slots. The fund which allows a team like SKC to keep Besler without making him a DP doesn't appear to be enough.
Lol Kyle Martino -/token American on EPL coverage today. Guess the suites were reading this board. Its a tiny little change. But it matters ...
Late to this thread, but NBC's coverage of the BPL is outstanding so far. With DirecTV and NBC Sports as part of my "cable" package, I'm not missing any game. My "cable" package is relatively inexpensive so this is great deal for me. Thank you NBC!
Contains possible spoiler of Man United V Chelsea. Oh boy what a stinker that game was, one of the worse I have seen for many a year involving the big clubs although they are often tactical, tight affairs. Any newcomers will have wondered what they were watching and in this instance soccer truly was boring. Poor NBC.
I personally know many people that think that soccer even at its highest levels is a dull affair. You and I both know how great it can be, but unfortunately when two teams decide to play negative football and not go for the win the result can be an antidote for insomnia. It's unfortunate that these two great teams put on such a poor showing, but the coaches are paid to worry about points not about whether or not they played an entertaining style for the masses. Since the EPL is a round robin we know that Man U and Chelsea will meet again. Let's hope the second time is a better game for NBC's sake. It would be interesting to see the ratings info on how the EPL broadcasts are doing on NBC/NBC Sports Net after 5 weeks have gone by. They paid an incredible amount for the rights.
And yet, countless millions of Eurosnobs watched with rapt attention for no other reason than it was Chelsea and ManU, secure in their belief that MLS games aren't worth their time. They're connoisseurs of a high quality of play, don't you know.
This reminds me of the NPR report on Dempsey from yesterday, where he said that he felt that the pressure to not make mistakes in the EPL limited creative play. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=215838752 The whole story is interesting, the specific quote is at 1:40.
Schadenfreude at low EPL ratings on NBCSN isn't going to help MLS. The league should hope for elevated ratings across the board for everyone. EPL will also be forever handicapped with poor time slots for US viewers but they also fill up a lot of NBCSN programming hours.
I for one wont be happy if the ratings are low, so no schadenfreude here--however I do wonder at how well it is doing. Better than under FSC/ESPN? lower? about the same? I'm also curious as to how the ratings wil stack up to MLS on NBC.
All of your questions have been talked about in detail in the tv ratings thread if you want to read there. Else here are a few articles on the topic http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...u-s-history-for-premier-league-opener/198140/ http://www.sbnation.com/2013/8/18/4633606/premier-league-improved-ratings-on-nbc-nbcsn http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-08-19/on-american-tvs-english-soccer-scores-on-empty-nets
I've been very impressed with all of NBC's coverage of soccer over the last year. I really like their approach to MLS and what I've seen of their coverage of the EPL is quite slick. I hope they stick around, and cover both, for a while.
http://sonofthebronx.blogspot.com/2013/08/mlb-network-golf-channel-nbc-sports_23.html Week 1: Liverpool vs. Stoke City (Sat. 7:38AM- 9:43AM): 287k Arsenal vs. Aston Villa (Sat. 9:57AM-12:02PM): 450k Crystal Palace vs. Tottenham (Sun. 8:28AM-10:27AM): 238k Chelsea vs. Hull City (Sun. 10:57AM- 1:00PM): 443k Manchester City vs. Newcastle (Monday 3PM ET): 189k Week 2: Aug. 21 2:30 p.m. ET Chelsea vs. Aston Villa NBCSN Aug. 24 7:45 a.m. ET Fulham vs. Arsenal NBCSN Aug. 2410 a.m. ETTBDNBCSN Aug. 2511 a.m. ETTBDNBCSN Aug. 263 p.m. ETManchester United vs. ChelseaNBCSN - 536k