http://sports.espn.go.com/chat/sportsnation/story?page=2002/team Sorry if this has been posted already (maybe it belongs in the US Men's National Team area?). But I thought it looks like this poll needs to have the BS treatment administered quickly.
With the exception of Champions' League or UEFA Cup, how many European soccer media outlets pay much attention to any teams outside their own borders? 442 has great coverage of the UK and Ireland, but it's pretty spotty in its coverage of the rest of Europe and especially lacking in its coverage of the MLS. La Gazzetta Dello Sport does a great job on Italian Serie A, B, C1, C2, etc., but doesn't pay much attention to any soccer outside Italy. Kicker is nearly 100% Bundesliga and Regionaligen. Etc, etc, etc. The world of sports seems to end at the borders for most Italians, Germans, English, Canadians, Australians, Japanese, ad infinitum. I know it's difficult for people like us, American fans of soccer, to admit, but face it, soccer is still pretty much a fringe sport in the USA. It's getting better, but the amount of media attention given to soccer in this country is pretty much in line with the amount of media attention it deserves given game attendance and tv ratings.
voted, 12.5% of 17400 votes. That's abour 2100 votes I think, how many of those are from bigsoccer poll stuffing? maybe a third?
Re: Re: Yahoo Poll: You know what to do... Your reference to soccer media seems more or less accurate. However this statement... ...couldn't be further from the truth. I've seen regular season NBA highlights in numerous different countries, same with the NHL and MLB, though to a much lesser extent. I've even seen NFL highlights, though generally only post season, in numerous countries as well. I once had channels from 15 or so countries and while the world championships of any number of sports would go on, I'd flip around and see highlights on most channels, regardles of whether or not the country was involved. The way the US sports media shuts out foreign sports almost entirely is uniquely American. Well you're right, but anyone who has a problem with TV ratings and attendance being the sole determinant of how "newsworthy" an event is are still going to have problems with the way the sports media works here.
Re: Re: Re: Yahoo Poll: You know what to do... From my personal observations, I think you're wrong. I've lived in Europe, and I don't recall seeing much coverage at all of American sports except for what was shown on US Armed Forces TV. I've also traveled a lot in Europe since I've lived there, and I've purchased sports newspapers. When in Italy I buy La Gazzetta every day, and well over 80% of the coverage in that paper is of sports in Italy. When in Germany, I try to buy Sports Bild and Kicker magazine, and I'd also say that over 80% of the coverage is of sports in Germany. Here in the USA, I've seen lots and lots of "foreign" sports on tv, be it European, South American or Mexican soccer, Aussie rules football, Irish hurling, Gaelic games, Alpine skiing, etc. As far as I'm concerned, we have much better coverage of "foreign" sports here in the USA than most other countries have outside their own borders. Most places in Europe have a choice of maybe 15 or so channels on cable. Here in the US, there are literally hundreds. If you want better coverege in Europe, satellite is the only way to go, and that is NOT all that common outside of bars. My wife and I were in Venice on 9-11-2001, and before we found out about the attacks we were walking around trying to find a place to watch the Roma v Real Madrid CL game. It wasn't on the cable tv we had in the apartment we rented. We had to go out to a sports bar with satellite tv (I think it was Stream) to see it. I'm not sure what other determinant there can be. I really do think that if the MLS started selling out games in major markets week in and week out, the sports coverage would come. I also think that if the Neilsen ratings for MLS games got close to those of other sports on a consistent basis, the sports coverage would come. But when the MLS Cup gets less than a 2 share, it's easy to understand why soccer is barely a blip on the radar here in the USA. I don't like it either. I'd love to see more and better coverage of my favorite sport. But I know that for at least the next decade or so, soccer will still be on the fringes of the mainstream sports media. I still think coverage is improving, and it's improving as a result of the fact that more people are paying attention to the sport. Oh, and getting back to the original point of this thread, I did vote for US Soccer in the poll.
still in 3rd almost 12% 3. Rivalry weekend football riots For one weekend, college football fans looked just a bit like soccer fans in England from Ugliest moments in 2002.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Yahoo Poll: You know what to do... Bump. And while I'm at it... As for print media, all I really know is the Russian Sport Express which, once you get past 6 or so pages of soccer has adequate coverage of "world sports". I was amazed to even find WNBA scores in it. Otherwise I'll defer to you on print media because I've had little access to it overseas and know little about it. But I did flip through the numerous channels I had when I've had satellite TV in places I've lived overseas and the difference was striking. (Yes I really was geeky and bored enough to flip around comparing sports reports.) Swimming world championships? An event dominated by Americans and Australians but the top or second story everywhere. Volleyball world championships? Same thing. Gymnastics, skiing, weightlifting, all the same, though maybe not as prominantly featured as swimming and volleyball. There was certainly a local flavor to each country's reporting but there was also a basic agreement that certain events were of enough global significance to at least warrant some reporting. The concepts of the postive "worldly" and negative "provincial" seem to turn into the negative "foreign" and positive "American" in this country, even when, paradoxically, many of the ignored athletes are actually Americans (swimmers, track folks, skiers). OK well, that last comment was me going off on a not completely related tangent that I probably can't entirely substantiate, but you get the idea. So in my comment I was comparing the mainstream TV sports media in the country's I observed to the more mainstream TV sports media sources here (At least I meant to.) I don't think any of the sports you mention really frequent any equivalent sports news shows here, not even ESPNEWS which is 24 hours and would presumably have time to go beyond Sportscenter's offerings. I should say that I remember growing up in the late 70's and early 80's and watching Dick Schapp on the weekend ABC news. He really did seem to offer a more global look at sports. Where he to have had a full hour it might have looked more like an American version of what I've seen overseas. But the US is, based on my observations, the only country that places such tremendous significance on these criteria. (I don't know about Canada.) When my local Azerbaijani sports reports led with the swimming world championships, I'm sure there was no discussion of local TV ratings, especially since they weren't on TV. I doubt it was the primary concern with the European stations I had either. By any standard, swimming has been a major sport that has existed internationally for decades. The "newsworthiness" of such a traditional and fundamental sport is probably considered self evident. Obviously as you get more obscure the definition of what is and isn't considered "significant" is going to differ from country to country and from broadcat to broadcast. I'm not saying sports broadcasts from country to country are identical. Nonetheless, there are enough commonalities to show that there is some consensus on a lot of events. In the US, a new world record in the high jump or a record haul of weightlifting medals will not make the cut based entirely on the fact that they don't have TV ratings, period. Other considerations be damned. One final thing, there is really good argument for everything I'm saying, against which I'm not really sure I have a good rebutal. You get bonus points if you make it. Agreed. Unfortunately, it not only has to gain a wider audience, it has to establish itself as part of the sports news producer's routine. If MLS gets ratings and attendance equal to the NHL next year it will not get equal coverage, not even at the end of the year. In my opinion, it will have to consistantly do so for a few years before it becomes part of the routine. Likewise if an established league, say the NHL, sees the bottom fall out of its ratings next year, it's coverage will not immediately drop off in a proportional manner as it's firmly established in sportsnews producer's routine. That could be interpreted as a contradiction to what I've said above but I guess what I'm saying is, I don't think the TV ratings effect I blabber about above is instantaneous nor is it immune to the personal biases of those making the decisions. OK, I'm tired. Good night.