The 2023 MLS TV thread

Discussion in 'MLS: News & Analysis' started by NFLPatriot, Jan 6, 2023.

  1. ThreeApples

    ThreeApples Member+

    Jul 28, 1999
    Smurf Village
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I suspect that the fixed times are intended to create predictability and uniformity for both the viewing audience and the stadium audience. My guess is that there are some in team FOs that are disappointed to lose flexibility to set times based on local market factors, such as some teams that tended to schedule daytime games in the February/March timeframe before the weather warms up. With the fixed times, the TV audience knows that almost everything is going to be within a five-hour block on Saturday nights, and the Season Pass programmers are going to bookend that with 30-minute pre and post shows. Stadium attendees get a very predictable schedule as well, though the Fox games create some variety there.

    What they aren't going to do is stagger games to appeal to a viewer who wants to watch MLS 10-12 hours straight. The number of people who want to do that must be vanishingly small, and they shouldn't outweigh the more typical viewers and the in-person considerations. If you want to watch that much MLS, watch replays. As it is, you can get 7 hours with a Fox game and the 5-hour block.
     
  2. Ismitje

    Ismitje Super Moderator

    Dec 30, 2000
    The Palouse
    Club:
    Real Salt Lake
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Those were the days though. Those were the days. How am I supposed to get my Serie A nap in on summer weekends now? Watched taped Serie A games I suppose.
     
    Chesco United, jaykoz3 and Egbert Sousé repped this.
  3. Ball Chucking Hack

    Jan 21, 2005
    Raleigh, NC
    There aren't great apples-to-apples comparisons (pun not intended, well maybe kinda intended), but the package seems really pricey to me. The monthly cost is more than the price I pay for ESPN+/Disney/Hulu, where I get Bundesliga/la liga/eredivisie and other sports and programming. And the discount for apple subscribers is meager.

    Again, not an apples-to-apples, b/c the products are slightly different, but they are charging comparable prices for this product as MLB and NBA season passes. NHL I think is only 70$ per season and you can get it w/ espn+.

    Stuff like this may be the wave of the future for sports fans, but for now, it doesn't seem like a model designed to grow new fans. It's more like how drug dealers treat addicts.
     
    NorthBank repped this.
  4. TheRealBilbo

    TheRealBilbo Member+

    Apr 5, 2016
    I think the locals could easily get used to primary local kickoff times of 6:30 PM central time, 8 PM mountain time or 7 PM Pacific. It’s not like pretty much every other national entertainment product has the same issue.

    The way things are now, each game is a stand alone event. Overlapping games makes it worse… watch half a game waiting for the one you want?!?

    That 1/2 hour show between games provides an opportunity to tie the league together and talk about each game in terms of the league as a whole. You also get better knowledge of other teams… next weeks opponent…

    These are the things that NFL and EPL coverage do really well. It makes the league much more compelling.
     
  5. NorthBank

    NorthBank Member+

    Arsenal; NYRB
    United States
    Mar 29, 2006
    Connecticut
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    This X10
     
    crookeddy repped this.
  6. morrissey

    morrissey Moderator
    Staff Member

    Feb 18, 2000
    West Los Angeles, Calif
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    #331 morrissey, Feb 5, 2023
    Last edited: Feb 5, 2023
    You don’t grow soccer fans from a broadcast package.

    I don’t think soccer on TV in the US has ever been more than a supplement to existing fandom. That is true for domestic and non domestic leagues.

    In fact, I can’t think of sports other than American Football and Basketball where the broadcast is the ultimate viewing experience.

    All other sports are made for a live in-person experience. At least in the US.
     
  7. canammj

    canammj Member+

    Aug 25, 2004
    CHINO, CA
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    --------------
    I would expect and hope all of that in the future. I give a pass for this year as they are rushing to the deadline for start of season.
    I would hope we have some new content all year, pre-season next year gets a build up and coverage, steady coverage of MLS-next and MLS-Next Pro, nightly news, talk show, any other games that MLS teams are involved in- either coverage of the games themselves- or at least good new type/highlight coverage=. US Open Cup , CCL, WCC, friendlies, exhibitions etc.

    In other words.......copy the NFL channel, only better ! :D
     
    Egbert Sousé repped this.
  8. canammj

    canammj Member+

    Aug 25, 2004
    CHINO, CA
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    ------
    Remember, this is streaming, so as long as the games are all archived, my plan for Saturday is watch my teams live. Then on Sunday-Monday-Tuesday, I can watch all the other games at my leisure. Then assuming games on Wednesday, I can spend Thursday and Friday watching what I didn't watch on Wednesday.

    I guess I would have to avoid the wrap around or news shows if I don't want to know the scores

    On the other hand, if the Columbus- New England game was 0-0, maybe no need to watch more than the highlights. Or conversely, that Charlotte at Montreal game finished 6-4, that one I would want to watch in full.

    I wonder if the wrap around, highlight or talk shows will be archived as well?
    You could watch most of the games first, then watch the talk show/wrap show to find out what everyone thought of the games.

    I think everyone will find a way to watch all this stuff the way they want to when they want to.
     
  9. canammj

    canammj Member+

    Aug 25, 2004
    CHINO, CA
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    ============
    Sorry :oops:
    I am now better informed !
    The weather in that picture sure looks better than when I was in Denver for the USA- Costa Rica Snowclassico. Could have used some of those oars (or paddles) to clear the field !!
     
    JasonMa repped this.
  10. canammj

    canammj Member+

    Aug 25, 2004
    CHINO, CA
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    ------------------------------
    Well, going forward, none of that for MLS games this year.
    I always hatted setting my Tivo to find the game move to another channel and I ended up with frekin softball or basketball. No more cutting into OUR game by other sports. Awful.
    I will really not miss Fox (and Lalas) :eek:
     
  11. Westside Cosmo

    Westside Cosmo Member+

    Oct 4, 2007
    H-Town
    Club:
    Houston Dynamo
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    OK, so then how are teams supposed to grow their fanbase if folks can't see the product as easily on TV? And I suppose if you follow the same logic, the EPL would have grown in the US at the same rate in the last 10 years even if it was on the same limited game Fox Soccer Channel package from 20 years ago, correct?

    Under that logic, we should go back to local blackouts to incentivize folks to buy tickets to see the game in person.
     
  12. jaykoz3

    jaykoz3 Member+

    Dec 25, 2010
    Conshohocken, PA
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Part of the reason they went to Apple was because not enough people were watching on easy to find TV to begin with....

    Most teams in the league weren't making money from their local broadcast deals. Which speaks to the local broadcaster not being able to sell enough ads, or a few ads at a good price for those broadcasts.

    What's the definition of insanity? Oh yeah....doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting different results....

    So, MLS is taking a big chance. Will it pay off? Well, they'll at least be getting a minimum of $250M every year for the next decade. That's more than double what they were previously getting per anum.
     
    eddygee and JasonMa repped this.
  13. Goodsport

    Goodsport Moderator
    Staff Member

    May 18, 1999
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
  14. NorthBank

    NorthBank Member+

    Arsenal; NYRB
    United States
    Mar 29, 2006
    Connecticut
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I would argue that in the last 20-30 years that Sky/Fox & NBC did just that for the EPL in the USA and thus the beautiful game in general.

    Anyway my liking the prior post was WAY more to do with the drug-dealer-to-addict analogy of their business model than with the fan growth argument.
     
    mbar and Westside Cosmo repped this.
  15. Westside Cosmo

    Westside Cosmo Member+

    Oct 4, 2007
    H-Town
    Club:
    Houston Dynamo
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    OK, but they are making their product arguably harder to find/get (or at least requires a supplemental payment beyond a normal cable or satellite subscription) and that is going to grow the local fanbase how exactly? I mean you can use the definition of insanity logic for a reason to do something different but the alternative has to have some logic. Apple has a halo effect for sure and that will help, but its hard to see this helping the fanbase grow in probably half of the MLS markets and that might be generous.

    If no one watched before, then . . . . . fewer people will watch now?

    Look, I get ratings stunk and local TV deals were generally sparse - although you do need to account for the league absorbing all production costs out of the $250 million - it nets to something a lot closer to $200 million. And that is now for global, not just US (which is what everyone leaves out of the comparison - comparing global numbers to prior US only numbers).
     
  16. JasonMa

    JasonMa Member+

    Mar 20, 2000
    Arvada, CO
    Club:
    Colorado Rapids
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    And? How was taking a significantly lower number from FOX and ESPN, letting the RSN's that cover 6 teams in the league go bankrupt and leave them with no local deal, and leaving clubs like the Rapids stuck with essentially no local tv supposed to improve things when they haven't up to this point.

    I get it, you don't like the Apple deal, but I don't see a better option for the league at this moment. If you do, what is it?
     
    jaykoz3, PTFC in KCMO and eddygee repped this.
  17. MLSfan66

    MLSfan66 Member

    NYCFC
    United States
    Feb 3, 2023
    Apple TV is also available on most Smart TVs, Amazon, Firestick, Android boxes/streamers. The Apple deal is great for the league, realistically there weren't many other options. For the price of a video game, I'll get to watch every league match without blackouts. The amount of content at launch is impressive, it will only get better once the season kicks off.
     
    canammj repped this.
  18. jaykoz3

    jaykoz3 Member+

    Dec 25, 2010
    Conshohocken, PA
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Again...the league was ALREADY paying for and producing their local broadcasts to begin with. Thos "gotcha point" isn't nearly as big as some want to make it out to be.
     
    eddygee and JasonMa repped this.
  19. Ball Chucking Hack

    Jan 21, 2005
    Raleigh, NC
    #344 Ball Chucking Hack, Feb 6, 2023
    Last edited: Feb 6, 2023
    I don't think the gamble is that big, really. The league has set a floor above what they had previously. I just think they're pricing it in a way that seems really excessive compared to other streaming services.

    Hulu and Disney and Espn+ (which has lots of soccer) is less per month than this. Peacock for one year costs about as much as 2 months of the mls package. For that, you get the premier league and other stuff, too.

    The same price as mlb and nba packages. I like MLS, but it's not the nba, and I'm guessing way fewer games? The are differences in the details of these plans, but I think most people will look and the top price and think, "wow, that's a lot to pay."
     
    FoxBoro 143 repped this.
  20. Ball Chucking Hack

    Jan 21, 2005
    Raleigh, NC
    Sounds like you're writing ad copy.
     
  21. JasonMa

    JasonMa Member+

    Mar 20, 2000
    Arvada, CO
    Club:
    Colorado Rapids
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    This is the wrong comparison, yet its the one everyone is going to. MLS Season Pass isn't the equivalent of Peacock or Disney+ or Netflix. Its closest to ESPN+ but its not that either. The problem with comparing the MLS package to ESPN+ or Peacock or whatever is scale. Those exist at a much lower price point because they are marketing across the board. They aren't just going after soccer fans.

    MLS Season Pass is NHL Center Ice, NBA League Pass, MLB.TV, or NFL Sunday Ticket

    NHL - $70/season (or $10/month, $100/season if you go with ESPN+)
    NBA - $15 or $20 a month
    MLB - $140 a season
    NFL - $300 a season

    Seen with their actual comparables, the MLS Season Pass is right in line. And unlike all of those there are no blackouts and every single game is in the package. Also the pricing on the MLs package is right in line with what the MLS package cost historically before the last 5(?) years MLS games were part of ESPN+.
     
    jaykoz3, Ismitje, eddygee and 2 others repped this.
  22. MLSfan66

    MLSfan66 Member

    NYCFC
    United States
    Feb 3, 2023
    :laugh:
     
  23. Ball Chucking Hack

    Jan 21, 2005
    Raleigh, NC
    As you say, none of these are exact comparisons. but they are what people are paying for streaming services now. And on some level, people are only going to add so many services on top of what they pay already. I could be wrong. Maybe they'll do fine at this price. But it looks like a service just for diehards.
     
  24. JasonMa

    JasonMa Member+

    Mar 20, 2000
    Arvada, CO
    Club:
    Colorado Rapids
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Yes, it largely is. Why is this so hard for people to grasp? MLS tried the "lets get as many games on as many channels as often as possible" for 25 years. It. Didn't. Work. The only offers they had in this media rights negotiation were to continue to do that, at a lower number than they were happy about, or try something new with Apple at a reasonably large number. How are people still surprised that given those two options they went with Apple? Why should they have stuck with the old way?
     
    mbar, jaykoz3, FoxBoro 143 and 2 others repped this.
  25. Ball Chucking Hack

    Jan 21, 2005
    Raleigh, NC
    #350 Ball Chucking Hack, Feb 6, 2023
    Last edited: Feb 6, 2023
    It's. not. hard. to. grasp. It's disappointing. I haven't done all the math, but from first look, I don't think that there is another sports league airing games (using these terms loosely) in the US (soccer or otherwise) that will have so much of its schedule behind a paywall for so high a price. Other leagues will have more games available or ask for less money, or both.
     
    Westside Cosmo repped this.

Share This Page