How does ESPN/MLS decide which games to televise?

They set at least the first half of the TV schedule before the season starts. This is no different from any other sports TV contract. Even the NFL has just started to use flex scheduling on what games air on Monday nights. All other game times are still set before the season but the local affiliates may change which game is shown (especially if blackout rules apply).

So basically it happens everywhere in pro sports. College football is the one exception I can think of. Ah yes, don't we wish MLS had those ratings.

 

They actually set ALL of the regular season schedule on ESPN before the season starts. I think you may have mized this up with HDNet. Then, come playoff time, ESPN has the crappy afternoon slots reserved with teams TBD.

 

The league should only broadcast games played in SSSs on ESPN, ABC or other national broadcasts. Having games played on fields with football lines hurts our sport when a national audience sees them. It makes us look bush league.

 

I wasn't 100% sure of this which is why I think I put I think.

But locked TV slots are pretty much the norm in pro sports. They can't always show the best matchups because nobody would ever want to see the Red Bulls play. (ouch!)

If you don't like what's on, shell out $69 for DirectKick.

 

admit it. we are. and there's nothing wrong with that.

 

They pick the game most likely to finish with a thrilling 0-0 draw, naw, it just seems that way.

 

I believe they have only one golden rule when it comes to determining the TV schedule:

Don't show Kansas City more than once per season.

 

Well, every game has a determined time slot, and ESPN typically takes whatever the afternoon game is; most other games seem to be at night. So it would really be smart of MLS to schedule what they believe to be their premier matchups at the times that are convenient for ESPN.

 

They try to do that already for the most part. That's why you won't see many KC/COL games in the afternoon. RSL has good fans, so they deserve to be on ahead of those two teams. I don't think there's anything worth complaining about here. They didn't even have lines today.

 

Easy solution: Just become a DC United fan and move to the mid atlantic. Thanks to Comcast Sports Net (which is covering todays game), only one game hasnt been televised on regular cable, the Dynamo game. 4 out of 5 aint bad. Hope it continues the rest of the season.

 

I think ESPN just looks for whenever they can show LA and Landon.
That is how they determine their schedule.

 

Yeah, this is why they attempt to show KC or the Rapids on the road most of the time. Get to see some good soccer, with a good crowd.

 

And Freddy Adu too. And that makes sense. Just like you always see the San Antonio Spurs, Lakers, Cleveland Cavs and Detroit Pistons on TNT and ESPN basketball, as opposed to the riveting Atlanta/Portland matchup, you should get used to seeing the marquee players of MLS on ESPN2 games.

 

You are correct and that is a valid reason, however I think ESPN would be wise to find other players who could be marketable as well. Having LA and DCU on every week can also become a detriment to the other MLS fans who want to see their team as well.

 

Just for reference:

LA 3 RSL 2

DC 1 FCD 1

That was certainly a bad choice

 

Your point is valid, however, I'm not sure that the target market that you are referring to (MLS fans) is the same target market that MLS/ESPN are trying to reach (sports fans who do not currently watch MLS).

 

They need to show players who are going to the World Cup i.e. Eddie Pope and Landon Donovan.

 

The fact that for about 20 bucks, you can see virtually every MLS game online, or buy DirectKick for a little more, it's kind of unbelievable that it's really much of a complaint. The ESPN2 games are the primary sellers to potentially new fans (of all the places MLS is broadcast through, this is the only national TV channel where someone could feasibly stumble upon a game without planning on it).

 

I know what you are saying. Of course I do question showing Landon every week, sure he has some talent, but at the same time that whining he does on almost every call distracts from the game.

On another note, it was nice watching the MISL title game on ESPN2 today. I won't spoil it, but St. Louis and Baltimore played a good game.

 

What difference does that make? So what if I can buy the games online or on Direct, the point is that I feel if ESPN2 is going to be showing matches for MLS as the only non-subscription (that is not Direct or online) then some diversity in the teams they show would be nice. I understand what Kebzach is saying and he is right, I am not disagreeing with him at all, I just am pointing out that perhaps showing just one or two teams every week isn't the best way to win over new fans.

 

The point is that:

a) Freddy Adu and Landon Donovan are probably the only two MLS players who have any significant name recognition outside the league itself.

b) If it was very hard to come by games outside of ESPN2, you would have a better point. But since almost every MLS game is viewable for a very small fee, there's really no prestige in being on that channel. It's personally my least favorite channel on which to watch a game; the commentators suck, and they do all this gimmicky shit like sideline reporters to bring you "closer to the action."

So if ESPN2 is the only channel on which a non-soccer fan would possibly stumble upon a game, it's smart to make sure that the team's playing are ones that will give the viewer a reason to stick around.

EDIT: And ESPN2 is not the only non-subscription service. FSC is shown nationally, and every team most likely has a local TV contract. Hell, the last Dynamo game was shown on FSN in San Antonio.

 

I think the only games they are making an effort of showing and adjusting the schedulre for are the LA v chivas. The atmosphere and intensity of the games makes it a great calling card

 

This has some incorrect points. ESPN2 does have prestige, as it is the only national station that can be broadcast on basic cable. That's why it's so important. Most people do not get FSC. And if you don't follow MLS, the only way to discover it on television is through ESPN2.

 

And local games on your Fox Sports Net affiliate aren't? Besides, FSC is available on most sattelite and digital cable packages, which are becoming increasingly common.

What do you think my point was in the previous post?