Today, my TV guide shows ESPN2 covering Madrid vs. Besiktas for Champs League. Now, please don't get me wrong. I'll be taping that game, but my gosh, it sure seems like there are at least two far more compelling games for the USA audience. 1. Gers/Man Utd. should have an incredible atmosphere, plus Rangers are unexpectedly top of the group. All around a great game to cover. 2. Lazio/Chelsea has Juan Veron up against his old mates and if Chelsea lose, getting out of the 1st group stage will be looking unlikely. Which would not please Mr. Abramovich. I assume there is some clause in the contract, or is this just ESPN shooting itself in the foot again. I would bet: option 1 above could get double or triple the TV audience of another Real Madrid bore fest. And option 2, while not having the broad appeal of United to bank on, at least has a more interesting plotline than what we are being offered. Does anyone know why this decision has been made? And, finally my apologies if there is already a thread on this somewhere else. I couldn't find it. Its decisions like these that make soccer fans like us here at Bigsoccer say things like, "Hey, I could do a better job with soccer coverage than whoever's in charge of it at ESPN."