Netherlands-Spain Championship Match Earns 8.1 Rating and 15.5 Million Viewers ESPN Networks...

Netherlands-Spain Championship Match Earns 8.1 Rating and 15.5 Million Viewers
ESPN Networks Finish 2010 World Cup +31% in Ratings, +41% in Viewers Thru 64 Matches

later

The top 10 metered markets for Sunday’s four-hour telecast (including pre- and post-match programming) were: San Francisco (14.7), San Diego (13.6), New York (13.1), Miami-Ft. Lauderdale (12.0), Washington, D.C. (11.9), Los Angeles (11.3), Austin, Texas (10.4), Seattle-Tacoma (10.0), Cincinnati (9.5), and Boston (9.1).

TV by the Numbers

Oh, and that doesn't count Univision. They had 8.8 Million more viewers.

Yeah, but Americans don't understand the game. They aren't accepting of it. Blah, blah, blah.

over 1 year ago Dave Clark 7 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Interesting that half of those markets don’t have an MLS team. I don’t really count the Quakes as “SF’s team”.

I think I’d move Chivas to San Diego and look at making the Aztex the next MLS ‘upgrade’.

by Kohflot on Jul 12, 2010 8:34 PM PDT reply actions

The 'Quakes are certainly in the SF Bay Area (which is how that market is defined)

Just as the Sharks are, the Raiders are, the Warriors are and the Athletics are.

I like that Austin made the list, because Jeremiah once suggested that it would be a great MLS market.

I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart

by Dave Clark on Jul 12, 2010 8:39 PM PDT up reply actions

But how many people really travel from SF or Oakland to SJ to watch Quakes matches? I suppose enough if they brought the team back and they’re going to put a shiny shovel in the dirt down by the airport soon. As long as they don’t give ExTenz or Blue Blockers naming rights.. we already have Amway and Herbalife..=/

An Austin team would make for a nice three-way rivalry like we’ll have here. Can’t say I’m so thrilled about the name ‘Aztex’ tho.

Speaking (in a roundabout way) of MLS expansion.. theoretically, what’s stopping the league from luring away a Mexican team or two like Atlas or Monterrey? I know it sounds crazy, but it might actually be an interesting marketing strategy for the Mexicans.. joining a league where they can see some international stars and play on the same (or better) level as US and Canadian teams.

by Kohflot on Jul 12, 2010 8:56 PM PDT up reply actions

Ignoring the fact that FIFA and the Mexican federation would not allow this to happen, there’s also the reality that, for Monterrey, Atlas, or any Mexican club, the level of US and Canadian teams you’re talking about is demonstrably (CCL) lower than the league they’re already in.

Add to that the salary cap (which would require either cutting most of their players or somehow convincing all of them to take massive pay cuts) and MLS’s revenue sharing (Mexican clubs don’t engage in this, at least to my knowledge), and what you get is a situation where no existing Mexican club would have any good reason to want to do this.

Black and Red United

by ChestRockwell on Jul 13, 2010 1:17 AM PDT up reply actions

how do the numbers compare...

How do these numbers compare with traditional American sports aka Superbowl, World series, NBA final etc.

What do these numbers represent to ESPN in terms of of its massive coverage and future domestic coverage and develpoment of the MLS. Hoepfully more TV exposure, more revenue… better talent???

"Kia Kaha" -be strong

by Ravengreen on Jul 13, 2010 9:55 AM PDT reply actions

Compares well

I read somewhere that it was higher then the deciding game of the world series and the Stanley Cup, it was just a bit lower then the last game of the NBA Finals. I’ll try and link the article.

by DarthGreedo on Jul 14, 2010 9:24 AM PDT up reply actions