Major League Soccer TV Ratings With Positive Local/National Trends

by Dave Clark on Oct 25, 2011 8:46 AM PDT in Major League Soccer: News & Analysis

With surging national attendance numbers (strongly supported here in Seattle) the indication would be that at least one aspect of Major League Soccer's business model is strong. Positive signs go deeper as the rivalries in Cascadia and elsewhere help build relevance of the local teams in their markets local TV ratings are up as well. The strongest of these is again Seattle (a 3.0 Nielsen Rating) with markets like Los Angeles, Philadelphia and Portland also doing well.

Some of this may just be good fortune as Adrian Hanauer indicated Monday after practice, but he also recognized that people with the league and its various national and local partners know what it takes to create compelling television.

I think we've done we some things well; we have a great partner in BELO. We've done in our choice of broadcasters. I think we do well in our production on the games. So there are some tactical things. I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to know that good production and good people provide a good broadcast.

The Philadelphia Union have used a similar approach to the Sounders. They have a well-known broadcast partnership (JP Dellacamera and Taylor Twellman) and several of their games are available on the local network affiliate. They saw ratings this season double to a 1.0 average in the early season.

Positive signs aren't limited to just local TV. National ratings in the first half of the season saw a positive trend as well. While the Nielsen number didn't move the total viewers nationally is up. One can only figure that had a large part to do with the new MLS on NBC deal that starts in 2012 and runs through 2014.

Many fans are worried about what they see as a low ratings number. ESPN2 broadcasts hover around a 0.2. While viewership is in a positive trend that tiny number when compared to the big multi-digit headline grabbing ratings for the NFL and MLB there is a certain disappointment.

As Phil Schoen (GolTV announcer) pointed out on twitter. The national number isn't so bad. The NHL and NCAA basketball on ESPN and Versus range between 0.2 and a 0.4. MLS is within the range of a few "mainstream" sports when they are on the same scale of network.

Leaders within the league aren't satisfied though. They know they have strong competition with their being a globe full of options for soccer and a half-dozen famous high-quality leagues also attracting eyeballs. Hanauer sets forth the path to improvement;

The biggest challenge for MLS is to continuing to build relevance in markets, building rivalries will also help. Everyone in the league knows that. The quality of the product overall has to continue to grow and improve. Because, let's face it we're competing against the EPL, La Liga, the Bundesliga, Ligue 1, European Champions League and the Euros in the Summer. There's a lot of football on television.

So while the potential profile match of New York v Los Angeles in the upcoming MLS Cup Playoffs maybe a network exec is going to be quite pleased with teams that have proven local relevance like Seattle v Salt Lake, or Kansas City v Philadelphia.

With such a young league, and the way that the NASL ended, MLS fans probably pay more attention on average to business concerns than other sports fans do. They probably don't need to worry as much as they have in previous years. There are positive trends by most measures.

Tweet Comment 13 comments | 1 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Are neilson ratings proportional?

in other words is a 3 in seattle require the same percentage of people watching as a 3 in LA?

by lysander on Oct 25, 2011 11:19 AM PDT reply actions

Pretty sure that's the way it works.

So a 3 in LA is a lot more people than a 3 in Seattle. The number represents a share of the total viewing audience.

by jamesington on Oct 25, 2011 12:30 PM PDT up reply actions

Is it just me or are the local broadcasts generally of much higher quality than the national broadcasts?

I realize that the national broadcasts have to appeal to a wider audience, but man some of the announcing is BAD (you hear me Harkes?). It really makes you appreciate the knowledge and good analysis that Arlo White brings to the game. Former players are so typically used for broadcasting, but more often than not I don’t find them to be all that great.

by Zakuani11Fan on Oct 25, 2011 12:50 PM PDT reply actions

Ex-players tend to be

of the bro-ey douche variety.

(hey, that rhymes!)

by Samuelson on Oct 25, 2011 1:17 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

I would disagree

There are about 3-4 teams that have good broadcasts, Seattle and Philly being a couple. Most of the others are still exceptionally terrible. The national broadcasts aren’t great… but they are still MUCH MUCH better than some (San Jose, New York, New England) because at least one person in the pair of commentators is usually good. Most of the local broadcasts neither commentator is any good.

by majora999 on Oct 25, 2011 1:47 PM PDT up reply actions

Your typical broadcasting team

for basically all sports is one professional announcer paired with an ex-player/ex-coach who acts as the color commentator.

Arlo works alone which is unusual. Recall that Calabro paired with former USMNTer Greg Vanney in 2009.

That Arlo works alone is unusual in all sports as no other Seattle sport (and few in any sport anywhere) uses a solo broadcaster.

Bob Rondeau pairs with Damon Huard (football) and Jason Hamilton (basketball). Rick Rizzs and Dave Sims team up with a bevy of former players such as Mike Blowers, Ron Fairly, Dan Wilson, Dave Henderson and Dave Valley for M’s broadcasts. The Sonics used to pair Calabro with Marcus Johnson.

The Seahawks have an unusual situation in that they have former players in both seats with Steve Raible and Warren Moon. Though Steve Raible is sort on unusual in that most people would think of him as a broadcaster first and a former player second.

by Jack Brando on Oct 25, 2011 3:45 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs

Did arlo insist on working alone

or did that come about some other way? I love it cause i hate the color commentators but have been curious why we only have arlo.

by lysander on Oct 26, 2011 7:54 AM PDT up reply actions

I'm not sure.

I recall seeing an interview (which I can’t find at the moment) where he talked about preferring to work alone, but I don’t know if he said whether he insisted on it or not.

Not many guys do both play by play and commentating. Arlo does. It’s rare.

He’s awesome, but I would also like seeing a guy like Keller comment on a few games as well.

The Sounders didn’t come to terms with Calabro but they also dumped Greg Vanney. I don’t know if Arlo didn’t want to work with Greg or what. Arlo certainly knows enough about the game to comment, but there is insight from a good color commentator that you simply can’t get from a broadcaster.

Imagine the insight Keller has about the players and tactics in MLS.

Arlo on the play by play with input from Keller would be tremendous.

Of course, I’m sure Keller has other plans.

by Jack Brando on Oct 26, 2011 9:35 AM PDT up reply actions

The problem is that no one cares for anyone outside their local team

It seems to me that MLS is a very local interest operation. IE, do you tune into a DCU vs Philly game? Local numbers are improving, but that doesn’t seem to be translating to general interest in seeing games that don’t involve your local team.

I don’t think this has much to do with broadcasters (but your not off the hook Harkes). I think it has to do with a lack of “Americas team” type entities that could draw in fans from cities that are not near enough to root for a team of their own.

The NFL is the kings of creating these sorts of marketing monsters. Teams and match ups that are worth watching even if you have no rooting interest in either team. The NBA rode up from tv obscurity to 3rd place in the sports landscape on the back of marketing two teams (Boston and LA) in the 80’s.

I know we fear the NASL, but lets be honest, the most recognizable casual fan soccer brand in America is still the Cosmos. The second is probably the Galaxy…because of Beckham. Big stars aren’t the only way to drive interest, but it’s probably the quickest.

Efforts like what we are trying to build in Seattle and Portland with the rivalry, will take years to enter the popular zietgiest to the point that it drives ratings. And for every “derby” game that looks like a ton of fun on TV, there is a game in Dallas, where fun goes to die in the stands…probably so it can be alone. Those types of pictures, especially in big media markets like Boston and Dallas are really dragging down the perception of the league.

I think MLS 3.0 will win in the end and will drive interest on TV, but that will take time. We have to win the revolution first and drag the underperforming teams up. We also need to keep developing the rivalries and out of market recognition of the teams. And it wouldn’t hurt for two or three super teams to emerge and give casual fans an easy road into fandom in the league.

by blakec on Oct 25, 2011 1:55 PM PDT reply actions