Now...before anyone unreps me, I know this has been debated ad nausea...but... Why is it ESPN feels the need to televise US Women v Ukraine International Friendly which will probably draw a crowd of...lets be generous and say 45, yet the US Men's Gold Cup group matches (Cuba, Costa Rica and Canada) will be on Telefutura? It's just adding more fuel to the anti-footy argument in the USA
The rights to games are sold in deals - WC qualifying is different than the Gold Cup, which is different from friendlies, and women's soccer is different then men's. ESPN does not own the rights to the Gold Cup games. Telfutura does. A women's international friendly is a deal with the US Soccer Federation, which probably cares more about the exposure than the money involved. Does it suck for fans?! Sure. Do what I am doing. Convince your wife to allow you to use some frequent flyer miles you've been saving and go to Seattle. See you there tomorrow!
also, I believe espn is televising iceland and the usa women the following weekend... all the little pth must add up to a decent rating... i wonder if ussf realizes the negative pr amongst usmnt supporters seeing meaningless friendlies shown so easily... but given espn comprehension of the game, no wonder they blunder so repeatedly... these are the guys who give us tommy smith, whose eurosnob attitudes disgust many usmnt fans
I believe usa-ukraine is in portland... I wonder which match has the higher attendance... usa-cuba or usa-ukraine??
I'll pick . . . money. ESPN won't shell out the bucks for the rights that Univision holds. Not surprising, since I'm sure they got the Women's games for a song. Now . . . why FSC won't shell out the bucks necessary to actually become "America's soccer channel", that's another matter all together.
This has been debated thoroughly on other threads. The Gold Cup belongs to CONCACAF, not USSF. USSF doesn't control the TV rights to that tournament. They were sold long ago, 1997 IIRC. I'll try to find the old threads and post a link. There were excellent descriptions of the intracacies of the different governing bodies and the television networks, etc. The USSF does own the rights to USWMT and USMNT friendlies. So they can be sold to ESPN or FSC or whoever wants to make a deal with USSF. It's not USSF's fault the Gold Cup games are not available. ESPN could try to purchase English language rights to the games, but it probably isn't a worthwhile deal for them. They would likely have to purchase the whole tournament, not just the US games. Soccer ratings are low already, how low do you think they would be for Cuba v Canada?
Looked, can't find the old thread, got to get back to work. Geohiller posted some wonderful stuff explaining the whole situation. Possibly someone who is better at this computer stuff than I am can find it and post a link or a quote. It is required reading for anyone who is frustrated by the Gold Cup TV situation.
From SoccerTV.com: CONCACAF Gold Cup/Copa Oro June 2, 2005 Univision Communications holds exclusive US TV rights in ALL LANGUAGE to CONCACAF Gold Cup (Copa Oro). Matches will air on Univision, TeleFutura, and Galavision. In Canada, Rogers Sportsnet will air matches involving Team Canada ONLY. It's not stupid for ESPN not to have the games, they don't have the rights and I bet they couldnt make enough money off the advertising from the broadcast to justify paying for the rights.
The bottom line.....the Gold Cup rights are sold as a package. You get the rights to the entire tournament in a given country. It is much more lucrative for Televisa to buy the rights to the Gold Cup in the US so that they can show the games, primarily the ones involving the Mexican national team, to their audience then it is for ESPN to buy the rights to show the games, primarily the ones involving the US national team, to theirs. Therefore, Televisa, knowing how much they can charge for ads when the Mexican National team is willing to shell out more cash then ESPN is knowing what they can charge advertisers for ads. Its basic business...not stupidity.....not conspiracy.....not hatred of soccer....basic business. Now, if anyone can tell me why Televisa can't subliscense the USMNT group stage matches to ESPN I would be very appreciative.
The attacks on male soccer by the media are subtle and are loosing their effectivity but soccer haters still alive ...
No...the television rights for the Gold Cup are owned by CONCACAF. If you're unhappy with the television coverage of the tournament in the US, don't blame ESPN, the USSF, or even Telefutura. Blame CONCACAF for negotiating this deal, rather then going to ESPN to accept a low base, if any, and look for a share of the advertising deal on the back-end....... Poor television coverage in the host nation isn't going to help attendance, nor is it going to help build interest in the Gold Cup as an important championship....
They can. ESPN won't buy them because they can't make any money off of the games. MLS and USSF games are time buys.
but . . . but . . . but . . . but . . . I WANT THE GAMES ON WHERE I WANT THEM!!!!!!!!!!!! AND I'LL USE THIS AS A CHANCE TO TAKE A CHEAP SHOT AT WOMEN, TOO!!!!!!!!!! WWWWWWWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Okay.....then why doesn't USSF or SUM subliscence the USMNT group stage matches and put them on ESPN???
Why can't ESPN show all the soccer games and spare us from Texas Hold 'Em or some lumberjack contest? I was all hyped about the game ... and then I realized they weren't showing it in Green Bay, Wisconsin. Shock. I'd have to drive to Chicago to watch any soccer game in a sport's bar. This is so ridiculous. Some entrepreneurial spirit should start up a soccer/footie pub here. I guarantee I'll bring drinking friends.
I agree. I feel your pain as a footy fan in general. Even though I was in the viewing area for the game. Funny thing is even though the commentary was in Spanish... when I had to mute for a phone call the CC was in ENGLISH! Never saw that coming. Though it lagged behind the Spanish live commentary. Oh and thank God for the result I was worried for a bit there.
I am willing to lay some of this at the feet of USSF. Why have a surplus AT A NON-PROFIT if you are never going to use it? This seems as legitimate expense as there is. They could easily have bought the rights to televise in English--same as an earlier poster said Canada did. Then they could have arranged some deal with FSC or ESPN. These need to be available to the public if for no other reason than to show fans soccer is no longer minor league and every game within our power to show will be shown over the public airwaves. (This, of course, excludes money grabs by relatives of presidents in foreign lands who have exclusive liscensing deals). I think it is important that we tell the good folks at USSF to start treating this like a big time sport and not a hobby. Fire off e-mails, letters, telephone them. It's time to stop thinking small time. Have some vision!
George here: The thread HogDaddy is referring to is in the U.S. Men News and Analysis forum: https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=211861 Simply put, the reason Univision owns the English rights is because when they bought them back in the 1990's, no one else was willing to pay Inter-Forever's (CONCACAF's marketing partner at the time) price for the English language rights. Since then, Univision has decided to use this to help build the ratings for TeleFutura. By not re-selling the rights, we English speakers will be forced to watch TeleFutura, thus increasing the ratings for that fledgling network in the battle against Telemundo. USSF, FSC, SUM, ESPN, etc. have no leverage here, as Univision sees no advantage to sub-licensing the English rights. George