Anyone else have a problem with this game being shown on ESPN 2 tape delayed? I enjoy baseball (that is what I am assuming is being played live) but what early season game is believed to have a better audience than this game? Didn't ABC and US Soccer enter into a partnership to help bring more exposure to soccer? How is ABC holding up on its end of the bargain? More importantly, why did US Soccer agree to allow this game to be shown delayed? If US Soccer can't get this game shown live, .........@#$%##!!!!!!!!! Maybe I just don't get it.
It's a meaningless Friendly. The equivalent of a pre-season baseball game. How quickly we forget that this wouldn't have even been on English-speaking TV 4 or 5 years ago. If this was a WCQ or even a Gold Cup game I might be able to agree... But it's not. Chill.
Really, blame hockey. There is an NHL playoff game on Monday, which pre-empts baseball. I bet the MLB contract makes them move that game. So it's Dodgers-Mets on Thursday, since Tuesday and Wednesday have hockey too. And the big ESPN has hoops, so that's out. You ask why did they allow the game to be shown on tape-delay? The answer is obvious - that was the only way it was getting on widespread English language TV. If you want it live, most people aren't going to see it. We have to crawl before we can walk.
I disagree with the "meaningless" tag. There is a tournament in France the following month that is not so meaningless and this game will decide who are the frontrunners to play in that tournament for the US. I did forget that NBA and hockey playoffs will be playing during that time. That said, I do not think it is too much to ask the USSF to work out the timing of a game with Mexico that could and should be shown live on tv in English. Someone dropped the ball.
ESPN 2 doesn't care about soccer ratings, they try very hard to prove to us that NO ONE IS WATCHING. . they are right no one watches soccer, i'll be watching the live telecast on Telemundo Case in point ESPN2 aired live a UEFA Champions League game between Man U and Boavista on Tuesday, a game that was totaly meaningles, neither team had anything to fight for Man U fielded their reserves, and no one cared either
I still say ESPN has something to do with it! ___________________________________________ "ESPN ratings for soccer suck because they don't do a decent job of presenting the sport" - quinella box, on 2/17/03
Re: Re: US Mexico shown tape delay No one watches soccer but you ARE going to watch it on Telemundo? So am I. That is the problem. Telemundo's ratings will be helped by the US soccer fans who won't care to wait for ESPN.
Get over yourself. The game is going to be on. It's a totally meaningless friendly going up against NHL playoff and regular season MLB games. It's an improvement over last year. Remember, the USA/Mexico game in Denver wasn't broadcast in english at all.
Andy I understand what you are saying, the problem is ESPN does this a lot, it isn't a one time thing. Their actions defeat the purpose and they whine about low ratings. Personaly I don't care what channel has it as long as I see it live. The production of the telecasts , camera work,replays, angles is one of the worst I have seen done for US nat game and MLS by this people. I belive if they would put a little more effort in choosing the right matches and learning from the british broadcasts they could easily double the ratings. But I don't care about the ratings, THEY DO
For all we know this match is being shown tape-delayed on espn because is has to be. USSF has a contract with Telemundo. I have no idea what is stipulated in that contract but it might give Telemundo the only live broadcast rights to US soccer friedlies with Mexico. Who knows.
Re: Re: US Mexico shown tape delay Yup, it was so meaningless that you even got the opponents wrong, it was Manchester U. against Deportivo de la Coruña, not Boavista.
Jesus Christ. What does it take to please you folks. Do you have no comprehension of the economics of sports television? It's not chicken and egg. Soccer ratings suck regardless of when or who is on. Soccer has been given 30 years to prove itself. Of course we're not going to get any favors. At this point it is time for soccer fans in the US to put up or shut up. Either watch the games when their on, or get use to buying plane tickets. Of course we get the "B" crews. NHL is a much more valuable property to ESPN - because they have a much higher vested interest in it, and they sell a boatload more advertising dollars for Stanley Cup games. "Yeah, but they don't give soccer a chance arguements" are both tired and disingenuous. We, the American soccer fan, have made our own bed. The onus, frankly, is on us to start watching. Other than World Cup games, we have never shown decent ratings regardless of any other factors. Until we do, we need to consider ourselves lucky the games are on at all - Look at all the niche sports like lacrosse and rugby that get no play whatsoever in this country. Their followings are just as ardent and committed as soccers. Soccer continues to get "chances" because it is so wildly popular worldwide. But after being the "next big thing" for the last 30-40 years, dollar driven broadcasters are only willing to keep there finger in the pie checking to see if it warms up. We can't expect handouts from them to actually heat things up. Soccer on TV has had 30 years to prove itself. It sucks, but it's economic reality. There are no demons, no conspiracies. We have second class status because that's what we deserve. Suck it up, and watch the damn game, and get your friends and relatives to watch the damn game. Call the few companies that actually advertise during the game and let them know you appreciate their support. When the broadcasters start seeing $$$s attached to soccer properties, then you'll start seeing live friendlies with A level production and booth talent. But not before.
This argument about "meaningless friendly" would have a lot more merit if ESPN had acquired the rights to the games that aren't meaningless - the Confederations Cup and the Gold Cup. Or are the World Cup and the qualifiers the only games that fit your definition of meaningful? I don't have all that much of a problem with the situation (knowing what time slot was available, U.S. Soccer could've put the game on the West Coast and it would've been live in PT), but I just thought I'd make that point. The truth is that ESPN doesn't owe us any favors, but U.S. Soccer got a pretty crappy set of TV times in 2003.
If you don't have a problem, then why are you bitching about it? Not having the Confed Cup is something to bitch about. Not having a ************ing Friendly on is not that bigga deal. Period. There are economics @ work here. Until US Soccer becomes a money-maker, we should all be happy these games are on TV at all. The fact that folks on this board don't get that is the supreme testament to the lunatic fringe/soccer idiot mentality that has become so tiresome over the last few years.
I guess I just find it too bad that the USSF is able to schedule a game against Venezuela (formerly known as Japan) and organize it to be shown live. Why couldn't that be done for Mexico? Will the NBA and NHL playoffs be going on all day? The schedule of competition looks good heading into confed cup with the last warm up against a solid rival. I just wish it could get the tv time in english that it deserves.
ESPN's decision, sadly, makes sense to me. When ESPN and a Spanish-language network simultaneously show a match, many of the target audience frequently choose to watch Spanish-language broadcasts. This includes many viewers for whom Spanish is not their primary language. I believe there were stories in the media during the Cup about this. (Does anyone have access to viewing data from the WC?) If ESPN had no competition, showing a US-Mexico friendly live likely would make sense since it would appeal to US soccer fans and the many fans in the Mexican-American/ Mexican immigrant community. However, with Telemundo showing the match, many of the former group and a majority of the latter likely will watch Telemundo's coverage. Even if the the US faced a different opponent, too few people in the soccer viewing community will watch a friendly because, the significance of the match related to Confed Cup notwithstanding, it is not meaningful to them. Of the hardcore folks who will watch these matches, many (rightly or wrongly) dismiss the quality of ESPN's coverage and will choose to watch Telemundo. So, why try to go head-to-head with Telemundo (affiliated with rival NBC, by the way)? Why not show tape delay? You may even get more viewers than if you showed live, since some hardcore folks will rewatch (esp. if match proves exciting) and you pick up the ones who want to watch but don't get Telemundo. And you give your production crew a chance to cover and gain some familiarity with a sport they don't often cover, with the added advantage that you can work out some bugs before it hits the air (instead of having all mistakes go out live).
Well Venezuela vs USA won't be shown Live or on tape delay by Telemundo they think America vs FAS March 8th Concacaf Champions League match is more important than A US friendly. I can wait for this Freddy Adu kid to be the U.S. Soccer Tiger Woods then al te networks wil be dying to show the national team.
I will also be watching it live on Telemundooo or whatever at a bar with the music on, and then I will watch it again in English with the sound on. Who wants to listen to a bunch of horns blowing in the first place, as everybody knows that the US Supporters will be outnumbered again anyway. Is there a TV that can change from Spanish to English out there or a convereter box? I know it can be done the other way around. Its racist man!