New NBC coverage of BPL and what it means for MLS

Problem is, which American would you want on NBC instead? I have seen nothing wrong with the analysis thus far. Kyle Martino I think has done a pretty decent job. But looking around at American analysts on tv, guys like Twellman, Lalas, Wynalda, Cobi Jones, Harkes previously, Dunseth, etc, I would say no thank you to having any of them touch the EPL. They're terrible. They're also incredibly bias. If I'm watching a poor MLS or NT match, I don't want it sugarcoated and multiple mistakes ignored. That happens far more often IMO with American analysts compared to British. But I'm from NY and tend to prefer honesty. I can tell if a match is good or not, if the play is quality or not, if the tempo is high or not, if the quality and touches/movement of the players is good or not. I don't need announcers propping up poor performances.

It's great in theory to say we should have more American voices, whether PBP or analysts. But looking deeper, most are completely unqualified. Fox is a disaster. ESPN is pretty poor unless it's Darke/Maca or Healey. Twellman and Lalas come across and chest thumping frat boys. NBCSN had Arlo for MLS and now Arlo for the EPL, and he's pretty good.


I just don't see who these American alternatives are. I personally don't care about accent, I care about substance, and frankly American announcers and PBP guys offer little substance. Although again, I'm pleased with Martino. Keller has potential, but IMO is too blue at this point and even he, and I enjoy his analysis at times, struggles to hide is bias. Pretty clear when I've heard him announcing Sea games.

When I see guys like Lalas, Twellman, Gus Johnson, Dunseth, etc, on air covering games and then see fans complaining about the lack of American voices, I actually think there's too many American voices and guys like the ones I mentioned above show why there shouldn't be as many American voices involved. Darke/Healey/Arlo are the best announcers on tv here. If that rubs Americans the wrong way, so be it. It's up to Americans to improve and approach their level, not lower standards just because you prefer a certain accent. Don't really understand how an accent affects viewing habits so much anyway.

 

I'd be pretty annoyed if they had dudes whose pro soccer experience consists of MLS 1.0 and a few throwaway caps with the national side in friendlies as the lead analysts for the EPL. It'd be pretty inauthentic. And Harkes is barely better as far as alternatives go. You could replace Lowe with like Michelle Beadle or something, but that'd just be a case of trading someone who knows the sport and the personalities involved for a vapid know-nothing

 

Gus Johnson and Dellecamera are a huge step down doing NT PBP compared to Darke and Healey. If there was an American PBP guy who could come close to those two I'd be all for putting him in the booth. But until then.....

As far as analysts go, I though the UK ESPN feed for GC games was clearly superior to what we had to watch here. Fans should be more concerned that analysts in the UK do a better job analyzing our NT than former USNT players like Twellman or Lalas.

 

A wonderfully condescending bit from the Independent:

"Yet the US coverage of the English league proceeded without many transatlantic mistranslations, not least because its New York studio is staffed exclusively by English pundits."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...e-kicks-off-with-familiar-lineup-8773432.html

 

Well, if that's the standard -- substance -- as I said earlier NBC should just take the International feed for the PBP (as it did for Spurs/Palace today) and see if it can cut a deal to get Gary Neville to do some work for them.

If you haven't seen Neville on Sky's Monday Night Football, well, what they are offering on NBC is nowhere close.4

Here's Neville on Barca/Madrid:



Why Michael Carrick is so important to ManU:



And his "master class" on diving, which is just brilliant:



There's nothing like that from the "exclusively English pundits" on NBC.

 

Why does an analyst have to have a stacked pro resume?

 

Perception.

And, triplet1, there's a strong chance that Neville's following remains at a cult level around here. Analysis in America is overwhelmingly the kind of basic level stuff that makes our brains melt from watching too much TV, something ESPNFC is proving as I type.

 

Yes and no. For Euro 2012, ESPN had several commentary teams in the Bristol Broom Closet, but had the Darke/McManamanamanamanamanamanaman team on-site for their games. NBC is doing the same thing with Arlo White/Guy Next to Arlo White for their spotlight games, then taking the international feed for undercard matches like Spurs at Crystal Palace. Studio and analysis segments are all based in Connecticut.

The answer you're looking for: Keller rarely leaves the country for national commentary or analyst work.

Match of the Day is still fresh in my mind from this morning, and it's nothing short of outstanding. I'd love to see NBC take that formula and apply it to all sports, especially with the NFL, where games can be easily compressed to the highlight moments. It would be perfect for Monday mornings, just like MotD is great for Sunday mornings.

 

I think the quoted post was implying that Keller would have studio duty only, just like Martino's current gig.

 

turned it off at 'countries like italy.' the english are always the same. they're still the only ones in the world that use soap, i guess. and they're forced to spend all their time trying to make sure nobody cheats them. poor things.
in any case, imo you shouldn't put that accent on american tv because it's simply too hard to understand.

 

Point taken, but if the argument is only the English accented pundits are capable of understanding and conveying the nuance of the EPL -- the Independent's point -- I'm not sure NBCSN is giving us much nuance or "deeper" analysis and certainly nothing comparable to what Sky is doing in England on MNF.

This is coming full circle. Again, if this crew is the best they could find on the merits, fine. But I remain skeptical that's what the motive was here.

 

I thought I heard her say in the opening that they were in CT? But I might have heard wrong.

 

Overnight Ratings
0.8 NBC:Swansea City-Man. United(English Premier League)
0.7 NBC: Philadelphia Union-New York Red Bulls(MLS)


http://www.socceramerica.com/article/53273/nbcs-epl-opener-draws-08-overnight-rating.html

 

Surely we can avoid the descent into the dark empty cavern that is xenophobia?

It seems to me most of the complaints are not about the people who were actually crewing NBCS's coverage but about those, who remain unnamed, who were not.
So, it does seem to be about simply having someone from the US involved simply because NBC are a US broadcaster.
I guess time will tell how many Americans are put off by that lack of representation but I can't imagine it to be a big deal for the vast majority of viewers.

When US sports are broadcast here it never even occurs to me when the commentary team are all Americans but if it did I wouldn't have any complaints so long as they were good, in fact I would prefer to hear an American commentating on a US based sport than some Brit wannabe.
Maybe soccer is different in that it is a world sport so it could be argued that authenticity is not important but I must admit I don't really understand the mind set behind the complaints. That doesn't mean I think they are wrong, I just don't get it or believe it will have negative impact on viewers.

Anyhow, if there is something to it won't that play right into the hands of MLS, by driving US centric viewers there, where NBC does have US commentators and analysts?

 

Ok assume its all on merits and American color guys are all idiots... Fine. Then bring in Alejandro Moreno when his contract expires. He's basically just a rookie in the broadcast booth but he's genuinely a good color guy and already better than Martino, Dunseth, Sullivan and all the others in the motley crew....

 

more likely that I'm wrong. I thought they were in the UK.

 

just to clarify, that number posted is not the Phi-NY game that was on NBCSN yesterday, but a Phi-NY matchup that was on NBC earlier this year.

Gold Cup games - that was some serious bang for buck on ratings there. Fox has to be pleased with what they got for those US games, I foresee more competitive bidding on the Gold Cup in the future given those numbers.

 

The problem with the gold cup is that the ratings are entirely dependent on USA winning. Not sure networks are going to gamble huge amounts of money on this tournament. World cup is different since it would get high ratings even if USA never qualified.

 

OK, NBCSN has retained Rebecca Lowe as the host of the program. On ESPN, Max Bretos usually fills that role, FOX was Rob Stone and BeIn is using Canadian Jeremy St. Louis.

NBCSN's in - studio pundits are Robbie Earle and Robbie Mustoe, both with EPL credentials as a player, with some role for Martino (he's not mentioned in the press releases). FOX used Eric Wynalda, Warren Barton and Brian McBride, while ESPN had Lalas and Mustoe as regulars (among others). If you want former pros in big leagues with broadcast experience, Keller is doing Sounders games.

Play by play and game analyst, I'd just take the International feed. Peter Drury is already as good as they get for EPL.

Here's the point: I don't know who NBC talked to, but I can tell you that other networks have had a blend of voices, both English and domestic. Unless Martino's role expands, NBCSN has chosen not to do that.

 

The US has made the GC final 5 times in a row. Mexico has made it to the final 3 of the last 5 times. While it's not guaranteed, it's pretty dang close to guaranteed that the championship match will involve the US, Mexico or both. And a US-Mexico tournament final is as good as it gets on tv in this country for non-WC or WCQ international soccer.

I would also say predicting the US's QF match is a pretty sure thing to bank on. All it requires is the US finishing either first or second - first or second place would have sent the US to the same fixture date and place, regardless. If you remember, the US game of the Baltimore QF DH was switched to the early game to accomodate network television. Fox would have missed out only if the US placed third, which would be unfathomable.

So a Gold Cup package guarantees a tv network one US group play match on the weekend (possibly two, but it's probably in CONCACAF's interest to have Mexico get two weekend group games as happened this year), a near certain QF game involving the US, a probable mid-week US semifinal game (on the cable sports channel affiliated with the network) and a good chance for a US-Mexico final. The only risk to the network is the US losing in the mid-week semis, but even if that happened, the likelihood of the US -and- Mexico missing the final is next to nothing. Not a bad package to roll the dice on (not for WC money, but for low seven figures, sure why not?

 

Ideally, an analyst should have some experience with the thing they're analyzing. Otherwise, there's a credibility gap. Kyle Martino knows a lot about the game of soccer in a general sense, but how can I believe anything he says specific to the EPL when he never even came close to sniffing that level? Robbie Mustoe played 8 years in the league, he's experienced promotion, he's experienced relegation, he's experienced mid-table, he's experienced long cup campaigns and Wembley finals, he's played against teams coached by 5 current EPL managers (and played against several more before they retired). Which one has more credibility in your eyes?

 

Not disputing whether or not Mustoe or whomever is better, but your reasoning is weak. Why should experience in that particular league matter? Robbie Earle is a professional soccer player, but has never played in MLS. Does he have a credibility gap if he works an MLS game? Marcelo Balboa is one of the most capped USNT players of all time, but I wouldn't want him a country mile from doing color for US games.

Gus Johnson has a (soccer) credibility problem. Martino was a soccer player, who has a decent ability to gab, is smart, and provides pretty good analysis of what he's watching. So effing what if he didn't play in the EPL? Again, not disputing that there aren't better people - but Martino for a US audience would not be an insult to anybody watching the EPL from the stateside.

 

Are there numbers for how many people were viewing the streams? For me (and I assume many others), that's more important than TV.

 

"More than four million minutes."
http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...u-s-history-for-premier-league-opener/198140/

 

I just told you why I feel this way... let's put another spin on it, do you think NBC should replace Chris Collinsworth on their NFL coverage with, say, Kirk Herbstreit, who never even attended an NFL training camp? What if they replaced Martino and Twellman with some dude who'd played soccer in college but never in MLS? I think Earle has a credibility issue, but to a lesser degree because he was working for a single team and that's often much easier (you get to know the players, become familiar with the staff, etc.). So there's not the weirdness of hearing a guy who as much experience playing against Arsenal as I do talk about the thrill in beating a club that big or whatever.