MLS National TV First Kick Disappointing, Lacks Sounders
In a season with high TV expectations from North American soccer fans due MLS on NBC, three Canadian teams and a huge local TV rights deal for the Los Angeles Galaxy the league will start with a lackluster lineup of games. Instead of Major League Soccer's television partners (NBC, ESPN, Galavision in USA; TSN in Canada) launching with the most popular teams in the nation thereby starting with a foot forward there will be some disappointment as the Galaxy nor the Seattle Sounders will be in the opener.
Instead Arlo White and NBC Sports Network (currently versus) will start with FC Dallas hosting New York Red Bulls while Galavision grabs the other Sunday game between Chivas USA and the Houston Dynamo. ESPN does get to head to Portland where the Timbers host the Philadelphia Union. Canada does get a stellar opener between the Vancouver Whitecaps and the Montreal Impact on TSN, even if the teams aren't MLS Cup contenders it will have national appeal.
While some will like that the league and its partners are being more diverse, the sacrifice in ratings negates any esoteric bonus of fairness. For the league's quality to improve as quickly as Don Garber wants (top league by 2022) there needs to be higher quality soccer, that takes money that only high television ratings can offer. If atmosphere matters it is rather surprising that two teams that are assured of sell-outs with over 25,000 people, who draw in eyeballs and with a handful of the better players in the region and all the American trophies of 2011 is a miss.
New production will still draw plenty of interest from MLS diehards, and maybe there will be a bump since the majority of fans won't be at their Saturday home games when all three US national broadcasts take place. Though very early, only one MLS Cup contender (FCD) is on the docket. Every match-up is between an Eastern Conference and Western Conference team, which is trend that should continue for the other teams playing opening weekend. If Toronto FC doesn't have a bye, or play LA they will have brutal travel to start the season.
League Press Release Follows;
MLS Announces the Four National Broadcasts of First Kick 2012First Kick presented by Dick’s Sporting Goods begins Saturday, March 10NEW YORK (Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2011) – MLS today announced details of the four nationally televised matches during the opening week of the 2012 MLS season, known as First Kick presented by Dick’s Sporting Goods.The matchups, times and broadcast information are below, including storylines for each game.Home teams listed first, all times EasternSat., March 10 – Vancouver Whitecaps FC vs. Montreal Impact6 p.m. ET on TSN and in French on RDS or RDS2 from BC Place (PREVIEW VIDEO)· The MLS debut for Montreal Impact, the League’s 19th team.· Launches a new chapter in a 20-year-old rivalry between these two Canadian clubs, who had many spirited encounters in lower divisions. Later this night, the cities’ respective NHL teams also square off in Vancouver.· The Whitecaps are unbeaten in home openers since 2001 and their first MLS home game was a 4-2 win against Toronto FC.Sun., March 11 – FC Dallas vs. New York Red Bulls3 p.m. ET on NBC Sports Network, from Pizza Hut Park (PREVIEW VIDEO)· The first MLS game to be broadcast as part of the new, three-year partnership with NBC.· FC Dallas will look to avenge their elimination from the 2011 MLS Cup Playoffs by the Red Bulls on Oct. 26 at Pizza Hut Park.· Two of the League’s hottest stars are likely to factor prominently – FC Dallas’ Brek Shea and New York’s Thierry Henry – both named to the 2011 MLS Best XI.Sun., March 11 – Chivas USA vs. Houston Dynamo7 p.m. ET on Galavisión, from The Home Depot Center (PREVIEW VIDEO)· Just 113 days after their 1-0 loss in the championship, the Dynamo return to the site of MLS Cup.· Two of the largest Hispanic fan bases in MLS have a vested interest in the first Spanish-language broadcast of the new season.· Chivas USA defeated Houston 3-0 in Carson last July, their first win against the Dynamo since their inaugural season (2006).Mon., March 12 – Portland Timbers vs. Philadelphia Union9:30 p.m. ET on ESPN2, ESPN Deportes & ESPN3 from Jeld-Wen Field (PREVIEW VIDEO)· Timbers Army and the always-boisterous Jeld-Wen Field await the Union in the 11th Monday game in MLS history.· Two of the most exciting rookies in 2011 – Portland’s Darlington Nagbe and Philly’s Michael Farfan – will look to provide a spark for their team.· Portland sold out every league game in 2011, while Philadelphia’s PPL Park was filled to about 99 percent capacity and the Sons of Ben traveled well.Each club will play 34 games in the 2012 MLS Regular Season; CLICK HERE for details on the format.For the dates of the 2012 home openers for all 19 MLS clubs CLICK HERE.
93 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Really a game hosted in Dallas for the first NBC game?
That doesn’t seem like a wise decision… I realize it’s on the NBC sports channel, but still doesn’t seem like a game I’d want if I was NBC for the very first game of the season, even if it is against NY.
FCD fans seem to show up for special games so i think the staidum will be near full.
FCD average attendance for 2011 was 11954 but 20145 showed up to the opener vs Chicago. And 17019 for the NY game. Highest attendance was 21867 vs LA.
How the TV ratings will be i dont know.
Wow.
Is this How ESPN is going to get back at NBC for taking all the best NFL games for Sunday Night Football and making Monday Night Football suck? They make sure NBC gets stuck with that as their opening game?
"The fans are excited. And the stadium, well, it ignites with explosion."
I'm okay with this
I know that in the long-run, MLS needs better national ratings, but in the short-term, I’m happy to have the Sounders on local TV for their home opener. Given that the options were KING/KONG, TSN, Galavision, and ESPN2, I like the KING/KONG option best, because I generally don’t like cable-only broadcasts.
IMO, MLS needs to put their primary focus on drumming up local ratings for the local teams. I definitely wouldn’t downplay the impact that having Sounders games on local broadcast TV has had. I was not a season ticket holder in the inagural season, and as someone who didn’t have cable, I probably would not have become so attached to the team if I couldn’t see as many games as I did on television.
The national ratings will come along after the local interest is established.
It’s not impossible that the Sounders will be playing several reserves in their first MLS game.
Probably a tough decision between wanting to do everything you can for your season ticketholders, making the opening kick as special as possible, and actually giving themselves a chance in CCL. It’s possible this played a factor in deciding whether to have Sounders on national tv.
Intereting choices, for sure
But considering our fixture congestion to start the season I’m a bit relieved we dont have the pressure of another First Kick. IMO, playing our best guys for Santos is more important. Obviously LA is the defending champs and league needs to showcase them but if it were truly about having the best teams play to start the season RSL would have a match also. At this point its common knowledge that Seattle is an amazing atmosphere so it would be in the best interest of the league to show that there are other areas of the country that have a significant interest in the game.
I just hope Pizza Hut Park has more than 20k for the opener.
Go banana!
They probably will, but not by much
The capacity is 21,193.
Interesting
Weird that MLS would put out a press release that basically says, we are not going to nationally televise the first game (TSN only ).
If I remember right, and I don’t always, last years first game was very good for ratings.
This is what happens when
The sooner we ignore the idiots on the east coast the better off we’ll be. We keep drawing 40,000+, and poor ol Arlo White (remember him?) can get left to trying to defend his new employers’ decisions to lead off with Who Cares versus I dont give a.
If MLS wants eyeballs they know where to look.
And if we want layer upon layer of byzantine politics having little to nothing to do with the Sounders, we can keep following this mess. I for one would prefer we don’t.
As a league, MLS needs to create a broad base of fans
If their primary focus was national ratings, then sure, they could get higher ratings next year by airing more Cascadia games, and overall more games where attendance is high. But their primary focus should be on the overall league fanbase, and they’re not going to grow that fanbase if they concentrate on near-term ratings and showing the 3-4 most popular teams all the time.
Dallas-NY is a worthy first kick matchup. FCD should have Ferriera back, and if he stays healthy all season and they keep Brek Shea healthy all season, they could easily be an MLS Cup contender. And personally, I think that NYRB are generally an interesting team to watch, even if Henry is one of the most patronizing players in the league. If NYRB find a way to add any depth to their team, they could also be an MLS Cup contender.
how does other lesser teams help things
How many people are not following MLS because they have not seen their local team or some other team with bad support on national tv?
because believe it or not
Teams that were good last year will be bad this year and vice versa. No point in putting all your marketing eggs in one basket. To the casual fan the quality amongst all the teams not named the LA Galaxy isn’t different enough to notice. These games make sense- new Canadian rivalry, Spanish speaking demographic, two playoff teams from huge media markets and the sons of Ben vs the TA, the leagues newest fun supporters groups.
by ledjom on Dec 6, 2011 8:46 PM PST via iPhone app up reply actions
teams that have support
one year are generally the same the next year.
But you did not answer my question.
How many are not MLS fans because they have not seen a particular team on national TV?
FC Dallas and Chivas USA will probably have larger than norm crowd
Home openers draw more people. So why not get some national attention to help convince you and others the league is bigger than just a few teams?
Nos audietis in somniis, Nos audietis in altum: You will hear us!
by chrisso on Dec 7, 2011 7:15 AM PST via iPhone app up reply actions
I'm not claiming that they shouldn't be on TV
I’m saying that the First Kick lineup of game isn’t all that great. And that there are teams that sell the league better that aren’t going to be on First Kick.
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
by Dave Clark on Dec 7, 2011 8:01 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Sure, but it's good business to throw those other teams a bone here and there
If you keep featuring the teams with high attendance figures, eventually the hard-core fans of FCD, CUSA, etc., are going to get a stick up their butt about the league’s pro-Sounders/pro-LA/pro-Timbers, etc. bias, just like other people on this thread clearly already have a stick up their butt about east coast bias. It’s not all about selling the league to new fans, you have to cater to the existing fans as well.
I'm not focused on attendance, but on national tv appeal
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
Let's have our best teams on national television the same week that March Madness starts!
That way we put all our eggs into the basket we’re most likely to win with! Right, guys?
If you schedule the good games towards the beginning of the season the games start to get really boring down the road.
I met a possum.
by s0merand0mdude on Dec 7, 2011 3:01 PM PST up reply actions
It isn't the same week as March Madness
It’s the week before
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
Selection Sunday is the same day as First Kick.
I met a possum.
by s0merand0mdude on Dec 7, 2011 3:16 PM PST up reply actions
Man, you've got some pretty impressive hatred for the east coast
by Aaron Campeau on Dec 6, 2011 12:20 PM PST up reply actions
They do claim to dominate EVERY OTHER FREAKIN' SPORT
I met a possum.
by s0merand0mdude on Dec 6, 2011 1:00 PM PST up reply actions
And every rule in every league is built around giving those teams an advantage
(the most egregious of which is the kickoff time for NFL teams, where it’s okay for west coast teams to play 10am kickoffs on the east coast (1pm body clock time for opponents) but GOD FORBID easterners have to come out to the west for an early game (again, post-noon for them).
Every sports network covers the east coast teams incessantly, and even their worst teams get more coverage than our best.
Yeah I don't remember the last time I heard anything about the Lakers
by Aaron Campeau on Dec 6, 2011 2:28 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
But when was the last time you heard about the Portland Trailblazers?
Catering to the largest metropolitan area ≠ covering the west coast.
I met a possum.
by s0merand0mdude on Dec 6, 2011 3:24 PM PST up reply actions
Why it's almost like there's greater media coverage of bigger markets.
by Aaron Campeau on Dec 6, 2011 4:00 PM PST up reply actions
Population of Los Angeles Metropolitan area = 12,828,837
Population of the entire West Coast (California, Nevada, Oregon, Idaho, Washington): 51,640,402
Read as: Los Angeles makes up 25% of the West Coast market, but gets 99.9% of the coverage.
I met a possum.
by s0merand0mdude on Dec 6, 2011 4:09 PM PST up reply actions
That's just not true, and you know it.
The whole east coast/large market media bias is so ridiculously blown out of proportion it’s not even funny.
People running television networks aren’t partisan idiots. They’re looking to make money.
by Aaron Campeau on Dec 6, 2011 4:13 PM PST up reply actions
Well, yes.
But when teams are doing well on the West Coast they get highlights shown on SportsCenter, whereas when East coast teams are doing average ESPN has a special on why the team isn’t what it used to be.
Let’s look at the 49ers. What’s their record? An impressive 10-2. That’s second in the entire NFL. DO you hear about them on Sportscenter? No, you hear about the Eagles blowing up.
I met a possum.
by s0merand0mdude on Dec 6, 2011 4:18 PM PST up reply actions
Actually I hear about Tim Tebow.
All the flipping time. When the Mariners won 116 games in 2001 they were one of the biggest stories in sports. The 49ers dynasty teams were massively popular. The mid-90s Sonics teams were also a big deal.
by Aaron Campeau on Dec 6, 2011 4:24 PM PST up reply actions
You hear about Tim Tebow because of what he did in Florida and nothing more.
I do agree, some people blow the east coast bias out of proportion, but it’s still there.
I met a possum.
by s0merand0mdude on Dec 6, 2011 4:26 PM PST up reply actions
No, we hear about Tebow because he's an insanely popular story.
And there is bias, but it’s bias towards what makes money and gets ratings. That’s why the Sounders and Timbers are the big stories in MLS. If there was some genuine systemic geographical bias, we’d never hear about Cascadia at all.
by Aaron Campeau on Dec 6, 2011 4:30 PM PST up reply actions
He's a popular story for being a quarterback at Florida.
He hasn’t done anything of note in Denver other than being Tim Tebow. But now we’re arguing about something different.
Your Cascadia argument is irrelevant because the national media barely gives soccer the time of day. True, the league popularizes Cascadia, and ESPN promotes it when they’re carrying the game, but you’ll never hear about it on Sportscenter since it’ll be too busy talking about baseball or the NFL offseason.
Still, I did have a bit of a revelation about why the 49ers aren’t being covered despite their success: the lack of a big name. I almost brought up earlier how the Dodgers lost their media spotlight once Manny Ramirez left, which further shows that what I’m pointing to as East coast bias has more to do with the media’s tendency to focus on players rather than teams. It’s the reason we heard waaay more about Ichiro in 2001 than we did about his supporting cast.
I met a possum.
by s0merand0mdude on Dec 6, 2011 4:40 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
You're kidding right?
You think people are talking about him now because of Florida? There’s no way you’re being serious right now. I think he’s an awful QB, but he’s 6-1 and probably the most polarizing sports figure of my lifetime. It has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that he went to Florida.
Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.
by Jeremiah Oshan on Dec 6, 2011 6:55 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Again, an exception to the rule.
Tebow has been news since before he was drafted.
Remember Joba Chamberlain?
He never would have been a story in Denver, but he had SEGMENTS devoted to him just for being a mediocre reliever.
There are exceptions, like Griffey, 116, etc. But those take true record-setters and hall-of-famers. I maintain that Griffey would have been even BIGGER had he been a Yankee, Red Sock, or even a Toronto Blue Jay.
That's Yankees bias.
No one is arguing that the Yankees don’t receive more media coverage than most teams, but it has nothing to do with where they are located. It has to do with the fact that they are the most popular baseball team in the world.
by Aaron Campeau on Dec 6, 2011 7:12 PM PST up reply actions
Jose Bautista is one of the most incredible stories in baseball in years.
Most people don’t have any idea who he is.
by Aaron Campeau on Dec 6, 2011 7:28 PM PST up reply actions
And he was the biggest star in baseball for a decade!
A-Rod and Randy were also huge star well before they left! The 1995 Mariners comeback was one of the biggest sports stories of the year!
by Aaron Campeau on Dec 6, 2011 7:31 PM PST up reply actions
I don't remember what things were like in 1995.
I was 5 at the time.
But like I said before, Griffey was one of the best in the history of the game, and his retirement couldn’t overcome one game recap.
I didn't give a crap about Griffey retiring either.
He was a non-factor at that point.
by Aaron Campeau on Dec 6, 2011 7:35 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
SO was Michael Jackson when he died
People acted as though he stopped in the prime of his career.
(yes, I understand death is a little different than “retirement”)
Griffey's retirement was overshadowed by an almost complete game
I admit that it was an important “almost” in that the umpire blew it, but we’re talking about the biggest name in baseball since Mays.
No, he could've gone to any school
My point’s that he’s not a name because of his NFL career, he’s a name because of his college career. I’m sorry if it seemed that I was saying Florida helped him make that name
I met a possum.
by s0merand0mdude on Dec 6, 2011 8:53 PM PST up reply actions
LA is the one exception to the rule.
Outside of LA teams, anything west of the mississippi only gets coverage when someone dies/is in trouble. And then it’s just a 200 word blurb that you have to google search to find.
By making such hilariously hyperbolic statements, you're doing your argument a terrible disservice.
by Aaron Campeau on Dec 6, 2011 7:11 PM PST up reply actions
Example: the death of Dave Niehaus versus the death of other announcers around that time.
Honestly, I was surprised then that he was even mentioned.
Another example is the NFL draft.
Last year there were commercials during the Seahawks’ second, fourth, and remaining picks.
It’s not hyperbolic. It’s how things are.
Holy cherry-picking dude.
For one, Niehaus’ death was a really huge deal in baseball.
As for the other point; seriously? I mean, seriously?
by Aaron Campeau on Dec 6, 2011 7:25 PM PST up reply actions
The draft thing happens EVERY year. People complain about it on Field Gulls EVERY YEAR
Let me ask you this. Do you think that the New Jersey Nets moving would have flown under the national radar the way the Sonics did (save for the wonderful work of the Sonicsgate guys)?
The Sonics moving didn't flow under the national radar at all!
It was a huge, massive story! It still is!
by Aaron Campeau on Dec 6, 2011 7:29 PM PST up reply actions
The reaction from people I know around the country has been a consistent "Meh"
These are sports fans even.
Their reaction: “You guys should have gone to more games”.
“teams move all the time now”
That's been the exact opposite from my experience
by Aaron Campeau on Dec 6, 2011 7:32 PM PST up reply actions
Well, being the Seattle SB blogger
I imagine you probably talk to people that are more in the know already.
I talk to all kinds of people.
It’s not like I live in a sports nerd bubble.
by Aaron Campeau on Dec 6, 2011 7:34 PM PST up reply actions
That's not what I meant. Sorry if it came off that way.
So let me ask this; Which has seemed like a bigger story to you? Sacramento or Seattle? Because I feel like both have been covered similarly in national media, and outside of the last few weeks of their season, I haven’t heard much about Sacramento at all.
Seattle was a way, way, way bigger story
by Aaron Campeau on Dec 6, 2011 7:36 PM PST up reply actions
I don't know, maybe I just always had those channels on at the wrong time
I continue to stand by my feeling that the west coast gets routinely shafted though. To continue; league replays of teams in the west are either shorter (or nonexistent) when compared to their eastern counterparts.
Thursday night football was a great example. The whole show, and Mike and Mike the next day, was ALL about Philly. Never mind the team had lots of good reasons for losing that game (traveling across country on the short week, 12th man, injuries, etc)
Right, but Philly was expected to be a Super Bowl contender
and instead are a disaster. In what universe is their continuing collapse no a bigger story than the Seahawks being mediocre as expected?
by Aaron Campeau on Dec 6, 2011 7:47 PM PST up reply actions
Those hopes were dead weeks ago
The media was beating a horse that had already become zombified from death. Traditionally, the winning team gets more coverage. When it comes to the Hawks though, It always seems to be the other way around when they win.
I’m pretty sure I’ve seen a highlight clip for a hawks game (one of the rare times they’re shown) where they showed more clips of the other QB throwing incomplete passes than they did anything positive for Seattle. But even when the Hawks shut out another team 28-0, getting shown on Sportscenter isn’t a sure thing.
But they're a mediocre team with no playoff hopes.
When they were good they were a big deal.
by Aaron Campeau on Dec 6, 2011 8:03 PM PST up reply actions
They had only had one bad year when they plastered the Rams 28-0 in the first week of 2009
Many thought that 2008 was a fluke under the last year of Holmgren.
And they sure weren’t a big deal in 2005, as almost every team they went against was picked to beat them. Redskins, Panthers, Steelers, all favored despite a league-leading 13-3 record.
The seahawks have playoff hopes.
They’re currently the ninth-best team in a conference that gets six playoff spots, and there’s still a quarter of a season left. Also, the only team with a winning record left on their schedule is the 49ers, and I believe that’s a home game.
We had the same record as the Eagles going into the game. Why do you think their playoff hopes ended after kickoff and say ours ended before?
I met a possum.
by s0merand0mdude on Dec 6, 2011 9:30 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
That's not the point I'm making.
The point I’m making is that the Eagles are a far bigger story than the Seahawks because the expectations were drastically different. The Seahawks being the team everyone expected is not news; the Eagles sucking a lot more than anyone expected is.
by Aaron Campeau on Dec 7, 2011 11:06 AM PST up reply actions
But the Seahawks aren't the team that everyone expected
They were supposed to be the Rams, and the Rams were supposed to be the 49ers…
I met a possum.
by s0merand0mdude on Dec 7, 2011 3:03 PM PST up reply actions
Really?
Kickoff times in the NFL is your big example of huge east coast bias?
It's the most egregious
ESPN moved a Sports Center show out to LA because of how blatanly obvious it was that they were east coast homers. And considering the ammount of air time they give to the Red Sox/Yankees, NY Jets, Miami Heat (before last year), its pretty easy to see why people that way.
Go banana!
There's also the joke that is the NBA Western Conference
The one that spans three timezones.
Also, the NFC West spans three.
I met a possum.
by s0merand0mdude on Dec 6, 2011 3:59 PM PST up reply actions
I realize that Dallas could
potentially be a no show with the fans, but they are bringing in New York and that will be boost. Lets just be happy that NBC is even televising MLS in the first place. I’m not so sure the first weeks slate of game is going to determine the growth of the league by 2022. Nor that Dallas/New York and Montreal/Vancouver will be lackluster. Chivas/Houston..I’d agree
I HATE HATE HATE that we never get to see Canadian games/ I hope Toronto hosts us for first kick
Would’ve been great if CBUT had won the Canadian MLS contract, because then we could actually see this opening kickoff.
I mean, putting Montreal/Vancouver and Portland on the national TV makes sense, but really? CHIVAS at home? DALLAS at home? They should have gone for the trifecta and done a REVOLUTION game at home.
I’m not shocked that Seattle isn’t in the First Kick this year. Don Garber said something to that extent in his interviews at the SEA-LA opener last year. “Other teams have earned the right” or something like that. But they left out LA too. It almost seems like some sort of mixup where the league could have had these team’s games but all thought everyone else had them.
BTW: Is it just me, or does ESPN seem to have developed a major boner for the Timbers? I guess it makes sense; two organizations that hate Seattle, joining forces. “The enemy of my enemy is my friend” or whatnot.
It’d be kind of interesting to see Seattle vs Toronto in that first week, considering they’re both in the Champions League Final. And since we’re not beholden to hosting for national television, I’m hoping we start on the road this year. It negates the risk of us showing up to watch two team’s reserves play in what’s supposed to be a big game (not that I have any problem watching reserves).
Is it possible
That Seattle and LA get a bye due to CCL? I know Toronto doesn’t, but just curious that both LA and Seattle don’t have a game on TV.
Soccer 2nd Tier in The Great White North
They’re starting 1st Kick with a game in Vancouver? The same night the Canucks (Stanley Cup Losers, AKA “We predict a Riot”) are taking on the Canadiens in Vancouver? Were they planning on having an empty stadium?
Not sure if anyone else watched a certain match at Philly last year – there was a Eagles or Flyers playoff game the same day. Their stadium was empty, and the Union have decent attendance. I predict the same outcome with this.
I’m not upset the sounders didn’t get picked (we’ve had the honor the past 3 years), just pick a team and fanbase that will make soccer seem exciting for all those new, potential fans that may tune in. You only get one first impression, if the game is boring and the stadium is silent they’ll change the channel.
by 2ndAveSoundersFan on Dec 6, 2011 12:59 PM PST reply actions
Eh, it's an afternoon game
Soccer and hockey doesn’t have a ton of crossover, and the Vancouver fans are usually pretty good.
I met a possum.
by s0merand0mdude on Dec 6, 2011 1:01 PM PST up reply actions
Getting all teams exposure is not the worst strategy for NBC.
I am going to be at Century Link for the Sounders game and just hope we play better than we did in our opener in 2011. Granted the Nkufo news had just dropped and LA played cynical soccer. I think a healthy league needs lots of successful teams on TV. I will probably watch as much MLS as I can but I also play MLS Fantasy Manager so there’s that.
Nos audietis in somniis, Nos audietis in altum: You will hear us!
So, my math...
Shows that we could play Chicago, Columbus, the Revs, RSL, Sporting, or Toronto. I am ready for the full schedule!
The decision to omit the Galaxy is somewhat odd for my money
As LA is probably the side most likely to field players your non-MLS fan has heard of, with fair consideration that Seattle would undoubtedly be the loudest stadium that weekend, and probably provide some of the best “atmosphere”. The March to the Match is practically a made-for-primetime event.
However, and this is probably what it comes down to, NY-Dallas is my guess for the largest combined TV market for two teams playing that weekend.
Honestly, happy to see Portland-Philly for the Monday night game. Love em or hate em, that stadium and the TA should represent well for the MLS.
Chivas-Houston makes a ton of sense for Galavision, and obviously you can’t do better than Vancouver-Montreal for the Canadian channels.
This author clearly isn't in marketing or advertising
A major point is the sounders fans will watch the game most likely anyways, as they are avid fans. By putting in a non-sounders team you get that teams fans +more sounders fans. Also, I know you love your team and think you are the center of all things soccer, but RBNY has a much wider national draw than the sounders do. Also you have to consider marque match ups that might happen later in the season and be more important that they’d rather air when they mean more.
Fixed
A major point is the sounders fans will watch the game most likely anyways, as they are avid fans. By putting in a non-sounders team you get that teams fans +more sounders fans. Also, I know you love your team and think you are the center of all things soccer, but Thierry Henry has a much wider national draw than the sounders do. Also you have to consider marque match ups that might happen later in the season and be more important that they’d rather air when they mean more.
by Agent_J on Dec 6, 2011 8:26 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
You have built your statement on the false foundation that RBNY is a national draw
It hasn’t been, ever.
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
by Dave Clark on Dec 6, 2011 9:02 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
See the fact that the Sounders drew only 40k for their home game against NYRB
I met a possum.
by s0merand0mdude on Dec 6, 2011 9:32 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Actually
There were 46k for the Red bulls game, but we also drek 63k for the Earthquakes game… so I’m not sure how much the opponent had to do with either.
Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.
by Jeremiah Oshan on Dec 6, 2011 9:35 PM PST up reply actions
Obviously the Earthquakes are one of the premier squads in the country that everyone wants to see
The 46k were more for the 3 game package that also included Manchester United than it was for Henry or the Energy Drinks (I mean that with ALL due respect).
This is undeniably true
But not sure how it fits into the whole East Coast bias argument.
Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.
by Jeremiah Oshan on Dec 6, 2011 10:19 PM PST up reply actions
My east coast bias argument is based on perception from leagues and media outlets
And has little if anything to do with how many Sounders fans come to see any given game.
Then again, the east coast is on the Atlantic Ocean, which is also the ocean that the UK borders on, and MAN U gets more coverage than we do, so that’s obviously an example of ECB (I’m 75 percent joking)
My question was more aimed at the person who brought it up
Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.
by Jeremiah Oshan on Dec 7, 2011 7:46 AM PST up reply actions
If you mean me...
It doesn’t have anything to do with it because that argument is a different thread.
I’m good at compartmentalizing.
I met a possum.
by s0merand0mdude on Dec 7, 2011 3:05 PM PST up reply actions
The NYRB game was also on a Thursday night...
…as opposed to a Saturday, and there was more time to market the SJE tickets.
Regardless
The attendance numbers of New York on the road being whatever they are are not an indication of their ability to generate national TV numbers. The only games of theirs with high for MLS TV numbers are those involving Seattle or LA.
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
by Dave Clark on Dec 7, 2011 8:02 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs

by 




















