I wonder if ESPN+ will ask MLS to black out the rest of the Fire games until ESPN+ kicks off? 'cause they lost at least one potential subscriber last night. I'm sure as hell not paying 5 bucks a month to watch Pawno switch to a 5-4-1 at home to protect a tie.
Exactly especially in World Cup year. There will be alot of potential to expose new people to the sport. But, when people find out they need to pay for a stream that may or may not go to shit with the more views it gets and probably not as good as broadcast quality then forget it. Feels like the dying of an empire where all the people in power grasp to hold onto whatever they can while everyone else can ******** themselves. There are teams in the world that could probably pull this off but the fire aren't really one of them. This might have worked if ESPN was offering all their programming via streaming like hbo but they aren't
You said it "CHEAP" this is why it was done. Andi either forks over $1,000,000 (or whatever it was) to get the games on NBC Chicago or get a few bucks to put them on ESPN+. It's a no brainer free (a few bucks) > forking over $1,000,000 #Cheapass
This reminds me of the discussion a few years back where I was told that I was too old because I didn't want to get a pair of rabbit ears to watch the Fire on some bizarre NBC 5.2 over the air and not available on cable/sattelite channel. The Bears might be able to pull viewers into a new platform. The Fire? Not so much. This is a disastorous move, if they are interested in my opinion (and I am sure that they are not). Although it is ridiculous to think that the Fire still needs to be building a brand and a base at this point, that is where they are at. Do they think that some huge pool of people who will get ESPN + for some other purposes will stumble upon the Fire and fall in love with the club? All aboard. The next stop is obscurity, or maybe it would be more accurate to say, "deeper obscurity." I wasn't in Chicago back in the late 70s early 80s, but I did start watching the Cubs as a kid living in KC on the superstation. My understanding is that the two teams were pretty equal in popularity at the time. The Sox went to pay-per-view tv, and the Cubs went to over the air superstation that spread their brand nation wide. How did that work out for the Sox? And that was the Chicago friggin White Sox. A team that was already firmly entrenched in the local sports scene.
Like someone said earlier(I think it was @bunge) WGN could have been huge for the Fire. Since WGN lost the CW and is just playing reruns of 2 and Half Men and Last Man Standing.
Yes, I know. I was talking about the choices two teams made 35 years ago and the results. I think Bunge was saying that WGN could be huge for the Fire because they have big viewership numbers in Chicago. More legitimacy than smaller over the air channels.
Let's also not forget loss of sponsors. Think Valspar intended not to have their brand on TV? Would you fork over money to sponsor a team that isn't televised? Who is going to be blamed when attendance is under 10,000 and sponsors don't renew? I heard a rumor that Nelson is a shit negotiator and makes unreasonable demands and that's why we can't close players and probably why a TV deal couldn't get done.
Not having the CW has actually meant airing more Sox/Hawks/Bulls/Cubs games, instead of having to buy air time on WPWR (and previously WCIU).
Yuuuuuuup. I even suggested giving the jersey rights to WGN in return for a TV deal. Big game on ESPN? WGN still wins. MLS Cup? No worries. WGN gets promotion. Nationwide coverage? Spread that Fire brand far and wide.
The Fire are a team less popular in Chicagoland than the Cubs, Bears, Bulls, Blackhawks, Sox, and Wolves. This deal helps improve this how?
Also less popular than the Chicago Fire TV show and the Chicago Fire Department. Seriously - anything the organization can do to raise the team's profile works in its favor and making it cost money for even the people that know they exist where it didn't before is not a win, no matter how people want to look at it.
I'm thinking that too, it's just too stupid and reckless that you can't believe someone would do this and not see the negative consequences. I also think it's possible that Hauptman is trying to force the league to buy him out. I know he's had offers and is rumored to not be interested in selling but maybe he gets a better deal if the league buys him out. Maybe the whole All Star game and league assistance is the league trying to avoid buying him out. It's possible that he uses loopholes to destroy the brand and damage MLS without breaking rules and leaving MLS with no choice but to buy him out. He covers himself so they can't make him sell and he puts them in a desperate situation and holds all the cards. He asks some thing insane and after enough damage the league caves and he gets paid top dollar.
I didn't want to bring this up but this is close to what Precourt did with Columbus. He signed a crappy TV deal a few years back in which no one could watch the Crew on local TV. The big difference is that Precourt blacked out MLS Direct Kick. http://awfulannouncing.com/2014/columbus-crew-fans-revolt-against-team-s-new-television-deal.html Also, I read somewhere that Vegas is hot for an MLS team and relocation is a strong possibility,
So I’m actually buying a roku today. Anything I should know? Like is there a better model? Will the stick one work just fine and will be compatible for mlslive and ESPN +. Thanks.
I bought a new TV to get the games. Funny thing is last night I noticed the game was on my DVR, it was on MLS Direct Kick and recorded for me, not sure if the rest of the games before ESPN+ will be available on MLS Direct Kick, I hope so. If not I can screen share my phone to T.V.