Discussion in 'Off-topic Forum' started by arenazone, Feb 3, 2010.
Are you saying that because they are Mexican their interest and dollars are unimportant?
Maybe it's different in Denver, but on the east coast most cable companies carry telemundo, telefutura, etc (a set of Mexican stations), and those are what carry the game in Spanish. ESPN doesn't have the Spanish language rights to the USMNT.
Interesting, it is the same way here, Telmundo is an NBC affiliate, etc. It would make sense, if the could legally, just SAP on their regualr broadcast. It could have been on ESPN desportes.
USSF sells the English and Spanish language rights separately (I'm sure because there are a lot of Spanish speaking immigrants that watch the games in Spanish).
Learned something today.
Damn more pointless clutter in the brain.
You are confusing "weather" with "climate change".
Are you saying that because they watch soccer, it somehow makes soccer important in the United States?
Because I'm pretty sure that if we took 10% of our population and deposited it in, say, Bulgaria, baseball would be one of the top rated sports in that country. Overnight, in fact. And because it doesn't suck, it would thrive on its own, eventually.
Take 10% of our country and drop them in China, even. Same deal.
Don't p1ss on me and try to convince me it is raining, please.
We'll see. Somehow I doubt the Lighthouse at Seaport Lane is going to be teaming with illegal Mexican immigrants. The 32K in Seattle and the 20K in Toronto, and the 15K in the other places I've been sure aren't that way.
People did the Macarena. The Macarena. The Macarena.
Yes. They are are here, they watch the game, they fall sucker to the advertising just like any of us Americans. Heck, unlike most LAX fans, mexicans get out everyweekend and play the game themselves. They buy the shoes, balls and the jerseys at the same rate as any other sport.
You and I probably have the same feeling on illegal immigration, but that does not change the fact that they are here and are also a block of people for marketers to focus on.
nah my point wasnt slander
it was more along the lines of Soccer isnt big in America but the illegal alien rate is
thus the mexican fueled ratings and thats my opinion and prolly mine only
I guess haters are going to hate.
I don't care what people who don't belong here watch. If they are as I suspect, in fact, skewing the audience numbers (i.e. the aforementioned Mexico/USA match), their effect on the ratings should be discarded. Given what we used to witness when Fernando Valenzuela pitched, I don't think it is a stretch, at all, for me to figure the vast majority of that 10.7mm to be a demographic that does not represent my country. By definition.
People who "market" to illegal immigrants do so at their own peril (to wit: BofA ditching SSN requirements to facilitate illegals creating accounts) and deserve what they get.
Yes...this is a tangent, but one brought upon us in response to the ludicrous "proof" of soccer's place in American culture - the # of people who watched a U.S./Mexico game. I mean...really...
How were those U.S. vs. [any given non-Western hemisphere country] ratings?
4M watched English broadcasts of USA-Brazil in the final of the Confederation Cup, more than almost every NHL game there is. USA-Italy in the last WC drew 6.7M English language viewers, while the US-Czech Republic game which was on during work hours drew near 3M viewers.
Hell, the UEFA Champions League final drew almost 1.5M fans, and that's two European club teams.
But hey, 2,000 people watched the Mammoth game on Altitude last week, so I'm sure lacrosse is a much more popular sport than soccer in the US.
That's a 50% drop-off from your previous example.
I do not doubt that there is some juice behind the whole soccer-in-the-U.S. movement. That much is obvious by the hot cash injections it got even in the face of staggering yearly losses. Declaring any sort of "success" after going that far into the hole smacks of suggesting Conrail is peachy because they managed to turn some profit after years and years of limitless subsidy.
I seriously believe a lot of the drive behind the soccer thing has nothing to do with profit - it is just part of a much larger ongoing effort to attempt to make the United States more like Europe (via hobbling, naturally). Put it on the spectrum somewhere between "the metric system" and "universal health care". Seriously - some people actually consider "It is the #1 sport in the world!" to be a viable (persuasive is out of the question) argument for soccer (which brings me back to the Macarena comment...). Some other people seem to also think that we have something to learn from Europe, as opposed to the converse. Nutty, right?
How, exactly, are repeated apples-to-oranges comparisons of LAX <--> Soccer germane to the conversation, again?
NLL is niche. It is small. I like it that way.
Or maybe people just like the sport, and aren't xenophobic nitwits that think if it's not American, it's not worth it?
So, what is your derogatory term for nitwits that assume that if it's European, it must be good?
The thing is, the eurosnob soccer fans don't watch MLS, because it's not the Premier League or Serie A.
Anyway, I believe the tone of the OP was surprise over the extent of TV coverage given the demonstrated track record of the sport/league.
It is obvious that - for some reason - it is being given an, arguably, unwarranted leg up. Speculating about the reasons is fun, but ultimately pointless.
In the end, even the most ardent venture capitalists are going to want to see a return on their investment.
If things are as strong as you say - this should be a slam dunk. Allowing some of your points to go unchallenged out of convenience, though, from my perspective, this should leave zero room for excuses when it fails. There have always been myriad excuses for past failures. When history once again repeats, maybe this time, reality will be recognized.
Now it is just a matter of wait and see. I'm used to having to wait for this or that miserable experiment to predictably fail to be proven right.
Where shall we set the bar given...
- Tons of capital
- Infrastructure has been put into place
- Most popular sport in the world
- Television coverage
- Media attention
- Positive early sales
- Our country's "melting-pot" (legal or otherwise) dynamic which guarantees even the most obscure thing will have at least some following
- The appeal of the "non-violent" aspect of the sport to people who hold that to be important
Setting the bar at the soccer league beating the NLL is ridiculously pessimistic on your part - as the NLL seems, at times, unable to fight its way out of a wet paper bag. Given the above advantages, though, I would put my money on LAX.
Supplanting hockey as the recognized #4 stadium sport? Forced to choose, I'll go with that because it involves more than sheer numbers - that would require a shift in culture that I do not think is in the cards.
I'd be interested to hear what you consider to be a fair metric, though...
Separate names with a comma.