Thanks to Hristo and his flying tackle. Page 26 of the latest SI has the story with a couple of pictures.
So all MLS has to do to get some ink is for someone to break anotehr guys leg. How about a team by team season preview?
Northside Rovers, a team preview won't happen in this century. SI seems to only cover soccer tragedies: the Andres Escobar incident in 94, and more recently the stadiums tragedies in Africa. Congratulations to all the Burn fans on their new stadium. Where's the roof?
So true. So very true. Those two WC covers last summer were certainly tragic. You people are never happy unless you're miserable.
That is so completely false, it's barely worth refuting. Do you actually read SI? Did you see the wonderful article on George Weah last year? Or the ones on the US World Cup team?
SI occasionally covers soccer. A few years ago they had a long article on Reyna at Rangers. The George Weah article. It was great to see the 2 WC covers. I have been an SI subscriber for several years but each year it is a major decision to re-up for another year. 3 things would make it much easier: 1. Someone on the cover in an MLS uniform. 2. An Inside Soccer / MLS every week while MLS is in season. 3. And a serious team by team preview that goes longer than one page. I am a subscriber - so I can bitch. Until that happens - outside of WC, MLS is treated on par with the WNBA, Arena Football and less than women's tennis. Though I think the worm is going to turn this year.
How often does a superstar in any sport lose his cool and break another guys leg in a meaningless game? Of course its going to get coverage. As to why SI doesnt cover MLS. I agree with Northside. But hey, someday they'll be forced to cover it, so I'll just wait.
No. It is what sets our status in the American sports landscape. Our status is not a reflection of how many soccer stadiums we get built, how many people attend our games, what sort of television contract we have (although that does help), or how much we pay our players. Those things all reflect on the long term health of the league, and its ability to operate as a going concern, but they don't have anything to do with its status. Our status is directly determined by the quantity and tone of the media coverage we get. Our status does not form the basis of our coverage, our coverage forms the basis of our status.
I canceled my SI subscription because of their aweful soccer coverage. They don't even get one of those little sections in the back on a regular basis. I suggest other people cancel with the same reason and see if they do anything. Afterall, it's not like you can't find all the same news and boring editorials online these days. Screw SI.
Yes. But soccer coverage or lack therof is what drives my subscription renewal more and more. I skip over the NASCAR, baseball, tennis stuff. Maybe I read the NBA stuff - maybe not. NFL - sure, I'm all over it. But if they don't pick it (soccer coverage) soon, I am going to walk. I know they don't care and I know the place of MLS in this sports landscape. Its just what I would like to see - soon.
But how often do you let them know? As a small publisher, I see the same issues where folks ask me how much I cover of things like the A-League or womens soccer and such. I ask, are you planning on subscribing? I tend to devote a page or three per issue to WUSA, but I definitely don't get any subscribers from it. Every issue I put out kicks off a new round of subs - every issue except ECG#15 (which has plenty of non-WUSA content) which featured Mia Hamm and Hege Riise on the cover. When that cover hit BigSoccer, I was inundated on the women's boards with questions asking how to subscribe or get a copy, and promises to subscribe. At the end of the day, one woman in Raleigh sent me a check for three copies of that issue. I got no subscriptions whatsoever. As much as I'd like to throw the occasional cover to the women's game, I've learned my lesson. Talk is cheap, and toner is expensive. I follow the $$$ when it comes to covers. Inside content is trickier. The WUSA and WNT fans complain about lack of coverage just like MLS and MNT fans do, but I'm definitely not being rewarded by my efforts to cover the women's game. I'm sure SI tracks new subscriptions per issue, as well as newsstand buys and such. If soccer fans voted with their dollars last summer, I would expect to see more soccer stories this season. If you do subscribe, and you do want more soccer coverage, send them a monthly email asking for it. Be polite, and definitely thank them when they do run a story. And do contact the advertisers on pages in/around the soccer story and let them know you're thankful, too.
That`s all very true and a good point it makes, however one or two articles on soccer during a lifetime of ignoring it isn`t going to make anyone want to subscribe to SI. If SI were really checking that kind of thing, they`d put an Inside MLS section in the magazine for 1 YEAR and THEN see how many subscribtion were gained. If readers expected that there would be more, they might subscribe, it they see one article, what`s to make them think there will be more regularly appearing articles on soccer?
SI can do whatever they wish, and I can buy or not if I choose. Them not covering soccer on a regular basis in no way effects my love of the game, nor is it hurting MLS in the eyes of American soccer fans. However, as someone interested by this thread, some good points have been made. I look at it like this: how can SI be certain that there is no interest in MLS coverage? Sure, not enough voices complaining against it have been heard, but the majority of fans tend to ignore the magazine rather then bother writing. If SI were to put out a weekly MLS column (as they do for other sports in the back of the issues) for five months and subscriptions decreased, they could point to there being no interest and have some solid proof. If they put out two MLS covers in one season and both turned out to be the worst selling of the year, they could again have proof. From what I recall reading this summer, neither the SI covers nor the ESPN cover for WC soccer sold poorly. In fact, I think it was Jeff Bradley who said that ESPN bigwigs were surprised by how well it did (this would have been back in August maybe, so no link; sorry). HOw many soccer covers has ESPn the mag done since then? The biggest selling issue each year is probably the swimsuit one. Do they should more swimsuit coverage? Would SI readers really quit reading the magazine if there was a one page weekly column on MLS? Or if there was, say two or three longer stories per season? Are there any numbers to back up that they would? My point is this: we often read or hear that soccer gets as much coverage as is warranted. How many magazines or papers have given MLS expanded coverage for a lengthy period of time and seen numbers fall off? NHL gets poor ratings also and seems to be hurting right now, yet you still get a full page just about everyday in USA Today and many other papers across the country. SI still covers the league in far more depth then MLS. MLS gets a decent sized article about two times a week, sometimes three (in USA Today). This gap in coverage does not equal out to what we often hear, that MLS gets coverage in comparison to its popularity. SI can do whatever they want. If I want good soccer coverage, I go to the net or to Soccer America, FourFourTwo, World Soccer, etc. But until they have given MLS a true opportunity to either bring in new readers or turn off current ones, the arguments against them covering soccer are somewhat weak. But hey, who really cares. The league is getting stronger almost every day now. In the end, that is all that matters.
Good post. A strong league with a growing base of dedicated fans will do better in the long run than a shaky league with tons of media coverage (Think NASCAR in the first case and XFL in the second case).
i was pissed when I saw this. The only way we can get in is if some Bulgarian kills someone. I was expecting an MLS Preview in it. Even if it is just a page or two, MLS deserves that. No one wants to read about that injury besides soccer bashers. Everyone who likes soccer would have already known about it; it's no new news.
Yes, less than women's tennis. What do you expect? (and why do you single out women's tennis) Tennis, whether mens or womens, is arguably the second most popular sport on Earth. It certainly has more worldwide appel than the NFL, MLB or NHL. Anyway, I rarely read SI so I'm not really in a position to critique its soccer coverage. I will buy it if I know there's a soccer article worth checking out. Recently they've had articles on Adu and Friedel. This actually led me to ponder whether or not soccer was being given more print than in years past. Maybe next year if they move opening day to a time when Grant isn't up to his ear lobes in the NCAA Tournament they'll let him write some kind of MLS preview. Also - kudos to the American U. guy for taking one for the team and getting at least something in SI!
F*** SI I cancelled and I told them why, the customer service person said that she had heard that before many times. I told her the soccer coverage was non existent and she said she understood, I asked her if alot of people had cancelled because of the soccer coverage and she told me it happens all the time. I think the whole mag sucks, the pictures are great, which I guess is why they call it sports illustrated, but I think the rest of it is complete shite. They are big three whores who will only step on the toes of the NFL MLB NBA if they think it can sell magazines. Their predictions are a joke, their writers are either pompous idiots or boring hacks and the swimsuit issue just might be the most overhyped f***ing thing on the planet. They should just print the pictures and shut the f*** up.
It's a shame that some so-called soccer fans read SI. SI is the biggest soccer' enemy on earth. They try to make soccer look boring anyway or how even though they write some soccer articles from time to time. Why dont you folks buy soccer america or 90 minutes magazine instead of buying SI. I don't know how you call yourselves soccer fans.
There's something wrong here though: The world's most popular sport is soccer. If worldwide appeal and popularity made a real difference to SI, wouldn't soccer get the lion's share of coverage?
Soccer hates SI? This is the second post of yours I've read. The other was one of the most misogonystic posts I've read in a long time. This post is another one of those as "soccer is the one true sport" pseudo religious posts. One theory is that you're yet another hormone fed teenager who has discovered the internet and is having trouble sublimating the anger that comes with the job. You've latched onto a hatred for women and anyone who likes sports other than soccer (regardless of their feelings for soccer). Another theory is that you've been around BigSoccer for a very long time, and have just decided to create a sockpuppet to wind people up for your own amusement. Using the sterotypical tortured phrasing and jingoistic calls. The only thing I haven't seen yet is the use of "MSL" instead of "MLS".