Interesting. Though since I don't pay as much attention to the ratings over the years, the thing that always strikes me about the ESPN2 ratings is how much higher they are than the NBCSN ratings, even considering the small difference in distribution of the network. What makes the difference, the lead in (or rather, usual lack of one for NBCSN), or do people find the ESPN2 stuff via channel surfing and they don't check NBCSN?
Honestly, outside of hockey fans and MLS fans, most folks likely don't even know what channel NBCSN is.
I think part of the problem is that a lot of key MLS markets have been regressing. The newer and more successful MLS teams unfortunately carry a lot less weight population wise. Whatever gain you get from Kansas is easily canceled out many times over by losses in DC, Chicago, LA, etc... Fix DC, NE, Chicago, etc... and I think ratings will go up.
Good point. The small market success if great for the league, particularly SKC and Por. Only helps to make a stronger league. But it has to be in addition to successful large markets. When the small markets do well but the large markets(DC/NE/Chi) and could also throw (Chivas/Philly) into this, aren't doing well, it's a problem. The large markets have to be stronger without a doubt. NE and Chi with better ownership could be on the same level as LA/NY/Sea, probably should be.
I think NBCSN pulled very strong ratings for the Olympics last year in sports other than soccer if memory serves but in general, yeah the channel has very little mindshare for the average viewer.
Three main reasons: 1) ESPN2 is still in roughly 19 million more homes than NBCSN. That is a fairly significant number 2) NBCSN is also a brand new channel when compared to ESPN2. The fact that the network has changed names numerous times hurts their ability to get a long term affect on the mind share of viewers like the ESPNs. 3) ESPN2 typically has a much better channel placement than NBCSN in the various cable and satellite packages (although this is slowly changing).
Yet: DC United Chicago Fire New England Revolution New York Redbulls can't even fill their stadiums fully unlike small market teams.
That's on the ownership, not the fans. The DCU fans are merely sick and tired of the bullshit, and the last straw in showing that is not showing up. That fan base is loyal as hell ... but I don't blame them for staying home at this point.
THANK YOU. There has hardly been a game on national TV this year that was likely to grab the attention of anyone who happened onto it.
Well yes...but you had a novelty factor then, and the last bit of buzz from the 1994 World Cup to boot. It is my opinion that the level of play is a more important factor in low TV ratings than not having enough New York teams, but maybe I am wrong.
Two things. MLS was shiny and new in 1996. Second, MLS is not a sports league it is a company whose product resembles professional soccer. Huge difference.
I would love to see what the MLS Live numbers are. I get this gut feeling a lot of viewers are not showing up in the ratings. Also, I think a lot of the National TV matchups this year have kind of sucked. Why the hell wasn't Sporting KC and Houston on TV last weekend?
Indeed. I watch as much as I can on MLS Live and many of the juiciest games are Internet only... inexplicably...
It seems at times they are just blindly drawing games out of a hat with no regard to the matchup, the location, and the popularity of the club. of course, as soon as I say that, I look on MLS.com and see the next three national tv games are New York - LA, Kansas City - Houston, and LA - Seattle. LOL
Sure but it is not like the ratting fell off 1 year since 2006, it has been a downward trend, that is not good. I know they are lower than 2006, do you have ratings info from 1996 and 1997? we would love to add then in the historical data.
From John Ourand on Twitter: "Source email: Same-day encore of FA Cup Final on Fox Soccer Sat had more viewers (55K) than NBCSN’s live MLS match CHI-PHI (51K) that day."
This game was originally scheduled to be the first ESPN game of the year at 4:00pm but the game was rescheduled (I am unsure why) http://www.mlssoccer.com/news/artic...l-tv-schedule-includes-87-matches-us-networks
I don't think this is true. It has been more of an up and down pattern, not just down. ESPN2 2006: 263k 2007: 289k 2008: 253k 2009: 284k 2010: 249k After 2010, ESPN came back into play so you can't just look at the ESPN2 numbers alone. Combined ESPN/ESPN2 2011: 288k 2012: 318k I think it is very fair to say ratings are stagnant on the ESPN's but to say they are on a continual downward trend since 2006 is not supported by the data imo.
The game was moved to Sunday evening to avoid a conflict with the Houston Astros (we share parking). Once it was moved apparently ESPN was no longer interested.
Yes I was mostly talking about ESPN2, the numbers are down from 2007 (yes some yeas up, some down) but the trend is down. Now we could argue that the other English package is up with the move from FSC to NBCSN. Also ESPN showing more games is a good trend (reversal from the trend of them showing less MLS games). Spanish language has also been down but that is mostly to MLS games being sent to Galavision, now back in Unimas the ratting should be up by a lot, the question is how they will look vs the ratings the last time they were on telefutura.