@Paul Berry I just looked it up briefly and went off the AI response, but the prem was bragging about it on their social media which is why I thought of it. BTW the article you linked is old. Jurgen is still there.
Yes, that's a very sketchy figure. The Premier League estimated that its total reach was 1.45 billion people who watched at least one game in the 24/25 season. Now USA Network is going to tell us that more than half of those people watched this one particular match?
How would they even known? They made it up. As announcers always do when they give you attendance or TV data they can't possibly know. Example: "Over 80k here at the Maracana" for the Olympics football final must have been said 20+ times during the final. 54k official attendance.
I want to know how many people watched Manchester - Liverpool today 🇨🇺 There's a huge local rivalry between Manchester and Liverpool taking place today...in Cuba!!!This local league for the province of Pinar del Río also has clubs named Aston Villa, Atalanta and Napoli! pic.twitter.com/u6oZzkmzmi— The Sweeper (@SweeperPod) March 5, 2026
I actually think they will go with AI commercials while the game is in restarts. Let's scroll over to the goaltender and there is a guy eating a bag of Lays potato chips standing next to the goal when he suddenly realizes he walked onto the field. Lays, so good you lose track of where you're at. Now, back to the action.
In the restaurant business we have a term called, papering the room. You have $2 drinks and a hundred people in the room, but that doesn't mean you're making money. 700-750 million might have been watching but how much did media partner make from that? Chances are the Super Bowl made a boat load more as advertisers go out of their way creating ads. Meanwhile the 700-750 million might have seen how many commercials and what was the rate?
This is the MLS TV thread. If that's correct it explains MLS dumped Apple (probably not the other way around).
Hasn’t Peacock been screen-shrinking during subs and long injury breaks this year, or is that Apple? Thx, Jay!
I think he's a soccer purist that can't stand change. The reason they go to the break and a commercial is because players want to make lots of money. It's the reason the stadium is a constant commercial though out the game... Revenue.
If I wouldn't know any better I'd suspect you're a Russian bot sent here to flood the his are with low quality bs posts.
MLS should go back to cable TV and the local RSN's!!! The NBA has informed teams that it may launch a streaming hub for local broadcasts as soon as next season as a result of Main Street Sports Group’s impending demise, per sources. The league is in talks with YouTube TV, DAZN, Amazon and ESPN about housing local games for an… pic.twitter.com/cg3Ic9sMyE— Sports Business Journal (@SBJ) March 6, 2026
It is kind of ironic that the Americans (USA26) finally achieved turning soccer into a quarters sport to sell more commercials. you know that is not going to go away once the $$$$ rolls in. Would expect MLS to be the first domestic league to dive in asap.
Your kind of making my point. I get why the leagues like this idea. It allows them to make more money. And you may be right that the superbowl is a bigger money maker than the Liv - MCI match. But that doesn't make the game better. My fear is that they will adopt "Hydration Breaks" across the game allowing leagues which I think is going to make the game worse. Another poster said it might make the game better and more popular as evidenced by the NFL being more popular than the prem. Hence my response with the numbers. Pointing out that the NFL is not nearly as popular as the prem. How long until AI matches? I'm only half joking. With so much of sports being off the field now, between the celebrity culture, social media, things like that. I mean I'm guessing you could make a pretty penny for an AI match between and all time South America XI vs Europe XI. Pele vs Puskas.
I wrote an article for a fanzine in the 1990s predicting the future of soccer. It included TV companies only showing one team because the other teams jersey sponsor conflicted with an advertizer. I wonder if I can dig it out. Anyhoo, scheduled water breaks would solve the Ramadan problem, so there's always a plus side.
Got this from my John Ourand Puck subscriber account. It's a email newsletter. Seems like at least from this media executive the outlook on MLS seems more positive than in 2021 where it seemed like Sports Media had soured on MLS media rights prospects. Appears some of the bigger Apple TV numbers ex. 2025 MLS Cup 4.6m viewers across plat along with 3.7m live viewers last season which rose to 9.7m live viewers on Opening week may have intrigued some media execs(at least this one). I wonder which network or company media exec this was. Puck reported last fall that Comcast & Paramount would likely be bidders. Paramount intrigues me, could have matches on CBS to cover broadcast as well as matches on Turner. You have free streaming options if they went that route with Golazo Network and Pluto TV.
Problem with the big ota channels is that MLS disappears from the schedules when other things are happening. I'd rather have a dedicated streaming channel.
Maybe it's just because I am old but I still like having at least one match on an OTA a week, at as consistent time as possible. The ratings boost for being OTA are huge. That's obviously hard in the US but CBS might be the best option. They have less sports inventory than the other big networks. Their main products are NFL, College Football, and College Basketball. But they normally only have one game a week for College football, and normally don't have games Saturday night.
Paramount is intriguing, however MLS' stretch run will now be March/April..... which is March Madness. Saturday and Sunday afternoons are out starting in late August through December due to College and NFL Football. So, where and when exactly does MLS fit into CBS OTA? They'll get more viewers showing NCIS reruns on Saturday Night than Live MLS games. Plus by 2029, the TV landscape is going to be entirely different. We also don't know how the Proposed Paramount takeover of Warner Brothers is going to impact them. They're going to take on a lot of debt, also money losing assets (cable TV networks). The major plus with Paramount is the Golazo Network, and all of the shoulder programming and conversations about the league that that network would provide. Comcast is kind of interesting, although they just shelled out a truckload of money for the NBA rights, and MLB rights. So with Comcast, Sunday Nights are out year round. Saturdays in the Fall are out (Notre Dame and B1G Football). Let's also not forget that they no longer solely own USA Network either. They spun that and the rest of their cable network channels off as a seperate entity. One match on OTA isn't going to drive eyeballs to the league either. There's nearly 30 years of data that points to the contrary. IMO, MLS should look for a one MAIN broadcast home for ALL of their games. Then look for partners who are okay with simulcasting their games on a traditional OTA network and/or cable network. At the end of the day, MLS currently has complete control over when and how their games are presented. The other providers are not going to give them that. Going back to the fragmented model is just going to piss fans off. Fans were already bitching that had to pay one price for every game. How are they going to feel if MLS goes to a model similar to the NBA's? MLS currently has consistency for their broadcasts. With ESPN/Fox they never had that. Going with Paramount and/or Comcast..... it's difficult see MLS having the same level of consistency.
Going back to some kind of blackout model after years of knowing exactly where to find the games without looking anything up would be... disappointing.