• Welcome to BradleyFans.com! Visitors are welcome, but we encourage you to sign up and register as a member. It's free and takes only a few seconds. Just click on the link to Register at the top right of the page, and follow instructions. If you have any problems or questions, click on the link at the bottom right of the page to Contact Us.

Soccer- MLS finals ratings at all-time low

Da Coach

Da Coach

Moderator
Staff member
I have seen it argued that soccer is gaining popularity here in the USA, but the ratings for the MLS final championship game between the Colorado Rapids and FC Dallas Sunday night set an all time low.
The 2-1 win Sunday night received a 0.4 rating and 748,000 viewers on ESPN, Nielsen Media Research said Tuesday. That's down from a 0.7 rating and 1.14 million viewers for Real Salt Lake's win over Los Angeles in 2009.
Since the league started play in 1996, the previous low for viewers was 876,000 for San Jose's win over Chicago in 2003.
This year's game also received a 0.1 rating and 232,000 viewers on Spanish-language Galavision.
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/soccer/2010-11-23-625442556_x.htm

FTR, I am a soccer fan, but I am also a realist, and I can see that soccer is not gaining in popularity here in the US. These ratings for the championship game at the highest level of professional soccer in the US are abysmal, especially considering this is coming off a World Cup year that was supposed to generate a surge of interest for soccer in the US.
 
I feel like soccer is more in the "national consciousness" than it has been, but I'm not sure it's gaining popularity. Incidentally, I'm also a pretty big soccer fan, but I think MLS is a poor product if for no other reason than they're running it like it's the NFL-- all top-down and corporate. The best part of the EPL (other than the play on the field) is the pyramid of promotion and relegation.
 
I think television ratings are just one of the factors.

If you look at the average attendance per game, MLS has been steadily improving since its inception and, in 2010, was averaging MORE per game than the NBA and the NHL.

Attendance Chart

I applaud the MLS brass for taking the approach they did in building the league and not being the NASL and buying top players when they couldn't afford to.

The quality of play is improving and is much better to watch than it was even five years ago.

That said, I'm not sure what it will take for soccer to break through in the US. Most people view it as European and are against most things European.

I'm guessing it will take a generation or two....maybe more, if ever.
 
unfortunately there are a lot of things that are going to have to change before soccer ever catches on in the US...manily to get some action and offense..

just my opinions...FWIW....and I'll throw out some suggestions -- but knowing it's a laugh to think they'd ever change the game..any time soon..

Since Europeans love the game the way it is, there's close to zero chance that just because it is abysmally unpopular in the US, that anyone over there wants to make the changes necessary for it to gain popularity here..

But the World Cup highlighted some of the problems..and it at least got people talking about change!!

--first and foremost -- most fans want scoring, offense, fast breaks, excitement, and then scoring, scoring, and more scoring..
The game has become such a defensive game that scores rarely exceed 1-2 goals per game -- boring as heck to 99% of the population.
I acknowledge there's a core group of die-hard soccer fans that would travel 1000 miles to see a game -- but even Ultimate Fighting and tiddleywinks have that many die hard fans -- you can't crack the big time with a handful of fans.

--even beyond the lack of scoring -- the BORING style of play needs to be changed...
how often do you see them pass the ball from up front all the way back even to the goalie and then stall, stall, stall....
This means stretches of 3, 4, 5 minutes and longer without even advancing the ball or threatening anything on offense. prohibit some of those back-passes...

--officiating sukks, they miss as many calls as they get right and all those replays at the World Cup proved that...
In a game that ends 1-0, you just can't be missing 3 calls that cost a team a goal!!
This possibly will change -- as long as it's the Germans, Brits, or Italians that keep losing on bad calls...
If it's the US that gets reamed -- nobody gives a hoot...


Here are just a few suggestions..and many of these are things they already DO at the younger age groups and guess what??
It's an incredibly popular game among those younger kids because of the alterations...

-shrink the field...it's so huge that some passes take 20 seconds just to get across the field...boring..

--ditch or change the off-sides...it's a rule that was installed over 100 years ago when out-of-condition players would just lag back and cherry pick and scores were 17-14 -- so they inserted the off-sides rule to prevent lazy "basket-hanging" goals...something that is NEVER really the issue nowadays
-- so the rule nowadays has no purpose other than for defenses to "trick" or catch the other team..

-- new rules to prohibit or reduce passing backwards -- they do in in basketball so you can't stall by passing back into the backcourt -- over-and-back..Imagine watching a basketball game that's played without an over-and-back rule or a shot-clock and teams endlessly take advantage of it..controlling one possession for 5 minutes before shooting!

--enlarge the goal -- it's one of the reasons the game is more popular among the younger, smaller players because a shot actually has some chance of going in -- but at the pro level players are bigger, longer, better, and even good shots off good offense just can't get by the goalie.
Plus-- there's no goalie in basketball, so maybe that's part of the problem..

--outlaw the hard contact and the faked injuries and be serious about enforcement...
I literally turn off the game and walk away if some jer*k lays on the field writhing for 5 minutes while the clock is still ticking away!!

--a shot clock -- hey -- why not -- if a team HAS TO shoot in 30 or 45 seconds, they aren't going to jack around with the ball 100 yards from the goal eating up the clock..

-- this one is kinda silly -- but seriously -- if the ball goes 1 inch over the end line, the defensive team gets a goal kick that effectively advances the ball for them 100 yards down field!
I say if a team gets that far downfield on offense, and the ball goes over the end line -- then just give the defensive team a throw in from the end line..
In other words..reward the offense instead of panalizing them

--I can think of others, but I know the chance of any change in our lifetime is nil..BUT they are very slowly talking about the need for change and even one RECENT (1990's) rule (no back passes to goalie by foot) is a step in the right direction to prevent stalling.
 
A few interesting ideas, T, though I think most wouldn't improve on the game... The offsides rule is a good one, it just needs to be officiated better. The goal is big enough that a goalie can't cover it... It's the right size to require the defense and goalie to have to work together to prevent scoring. I do agree that flopping/rolling around whining are big problems with the game in certain countries... Start issuing yellow cards for that crap (even if you do it after the match is completed and you only notice in the gamefilm), I'm with you there.

I do have a fundamental disagreement thoug: The whole thing about soccer being "boring" because of the lack of scoring really just means people watching don't understand or appreciate the game. I had the exact same but opposite argument with an English colleage about basketball who was complaining about the pace of scoring in basketball. It's all about appreciating and understanding enough about the game to get enjoyment out of it:

In basketball, scoring is commonplace so the exciting part of the game comes from individual player skills during the game (extraordinary scoring efforts, awesome rebounds, hugs blocks) and excellent team efforts-- beautifully executed offensive plays and (often most exciting) great defensive stops.

In soccer, scoring is very rare so goals are truly exciting events and often the result of a really excellently executed tactic. Most Americans view play in the midfield to be boring (just passing the ball around), but this is often where some really interesting stuff is going on in terms of how teams move the ball around and how individual players use skill to create or take advantage of space.

In baseball, the frequent downtime between pitches is often considered "boring," but if you're an infielder it's an interesting part of the game for positioning or managing baserunners. More exciting is the mano a mano showdown between pitcher and batter, which to an uniformed observer is just a guy trying to throw it past another guy, but which is actually an extremely complex matching of wits and talents.

I used to feel the same about soccer, but significant exposure to the game has allowed me to learn to watch it with a discerning eye and enjoy it for it's interesting parts.
 
fish -- we can argue whether WE THINK it is boring or not..
but the simple fact is that if you interview 100 sports fans in American and ask why they don't watch soccer...
98% will say it's boring...so if the soccer gurus are happy with blaming the "uninformed fans" who don't appreciate the game, then fine, but they are shooting themselves in the foot...

BTW -- lots and lots of youth soccer games, high school games, and even various European games, etc..are amazingly well attended even though most of the fans there
DO NOT UNDERSTAND or APPRECIATE the game....
but there are ways to make it more appealing...
like I said, even some of the died-in-the-wool top soccer people in the world are already trying to devise ways to change the game...so I believe it IS coming in the future...

Here are more people who I find are calling for the exact same stuff I listed..
http://ezinearticles.com/?FIFA-Save...ule-Changes-For-Soccer-Before-2014&id=4582796
http://talk.baltimoresun.com/showthread.php?t=254341
http://hubpages.com/hub/Football-Soccer-Rule-Changes-Needed-to-Improve-the-World-Game

and here's a guy who claims that the one rule chage they have made, the prohibiting of the goaling using hands to play a back pass
"SAVED THE GAME"....in other words it was really, really important in helping out...
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2008/06/020805.php
 
The MLS is an awful league. I would guess that the UEFA finals have higher ratings than the MLS cup. Even ESPN who now owns some rights to the EPL shows far more coverage on sportscenter of the the EPL than the MLS.
 
I don't think anybody thinks that disallowing the goalie to pick up a back pass was a bad rule change.

Anyway, I'm not a soccer guru by any stretch, I just don't think more scoring = better game... Which by no stetch means I don't think the game could be improved. As an example, I think the shot clock idea is kind of an interesting one (though you'd have to be careful how you implmented it)... I think sensors could be used to help with officiating... I think more referees could be on the field to help out. I think also, as an example, that a half-court style rule would be bad for the game for a number of reasons and would ultimately discourage offense.

The thing about the "they never score" argument... Take a very similar game that is relatively popular in the US, ice hockey. It's in a lot of ways (the way the ball/puck is advanced and defended and how a goal is constructed by the offense) the exact same game. I'd estimate it probably has about 2x as much scoring (it'd be interesting to know how many shots on goal they take vs. soccer), but that added scoring doesn't cut down on the boredom a non-hockey fan experiences watching a game. It's not as if that scoring takes up an appreciably larger amount of game time... The difference is we already have hockey fans, so they think hockey is exciting. We don't already have soccer fans, so soccer is "boring."
 
DeltaBrave03 said:
The MLS is an awful league. I would guess that the UEFA finals have higher ratings than the MLS cup. Even ESPN who now owns some rights to the EPL shows far more coverage on sportscenter of the the EPL than the MLS.
Click to expand...

Yeah the MLS approach is like, "hey we have a team, you're a fan now!" That's fine, and it's kind of the only way to work it out, but I think they need many many more teams. They should look to the FA for inspiration, not the traditional American big-business franchise model.
 
Anyone watch it? Was a great game. I went to the Rapids/Crew PLayoff game that ended in penalties after a 2-1 finish. Was a lot of fun. The only thing i'd change about soccer here in the states is to adjust the league length, or time table. By the time the playoffs come around, its ****ed cold outside, and a lot of these playoff destinations aren't exactly warm weather.
 
Last edited:
Da Coach said:
Here is a breakdown for each team's attendance in the MLS-
http://mls.theoffside.com/attendance/and-the-results-of-mlss-2010-attendance-stats-are.html

overall attendance has been fairly stable over the past few years.

However, the stadium in Toronto where the MLS cup was played Sunday was only about half full.
Click to expand...

Thats an interesting Chart. It definitely shows a lack of growth for some teams, it should however be noted that Seattle's first year was 2009. and now attendance over 30000, impressive - and a nice place to play. I've always been of the fold that I don't mind the relatively small fan base soccer has here in the states - I just don't want the game to be butchered to make it more palatable to american whims.
AS a general financial opportunity, someone should start filming an indoor soccer league - it should fulfill the majority of the needs listed here: Tons of scoring, little to no ball control game, and almost no offsides. I personally just think people have different tastes, and indoctrinations. Coincidently, if you asked me why I don't watch baseball, its because its so incredibly boring. If you asked me why I don't watch hockey, its because I wasn't brought up with it, and have trouble attaching myself to players and story lines. While i wouldn't mind seeing some legit minor rule changes put in place (flopping post game reviews, replay goals), I think the NBA is a good example of what can happen through de-regulation or mentality changes. Plenty of fans i know, but people including those here, regularly joke about how its a terrible game, a general disregard for standard basketball, almost no defense, the traveling, etc. etc.

So i say to you FIFA (as if you care), I like soccer largely the way it is, don't go turning it into the NBA.
 
Hey -- I like soccer, all my kids have played it, it's really popular at our kids' school, and I have even coached a lot of the area kids over the years and have enjoyed it...
I love soccer at the youth level -- but interest drops in watching the pro game -- just too much stalling and standing around. back passing, and low scoring..
 
Since Seattle lost the Supersonics NBA team, the entire city and community has rallied around and supported the Sounders soccer team, as well as their great support for their NFL and MLB teams, despite fielding subpar teams. It is a great sports town with tremendous downtown stadiums and facilities, which helps the attendance.

And the comparison with hockey is not as fair as it might seem. The NHL has made changes in their rules to allow for more offense in recent years- they eliminated the center-line offsides, they reduced the size limit for goalie pads, they altered the penalty rules to allow more 4 on 4 situations, and they created 4 on 4 overtimes and shootouts to eliminate ties among other changes
But the speed of hockey, and the high-level contact and hitting is much more appealing to the North American sports fans. Plus there is much more scoring in hockey- in the NHL, games average about 6 goals per 60 minute game.
The highest scoring team in the MLS (Real Salt Lake) averaged exactly 1.5 goals per game, and the overall league average per team was 1.2 goals per game in the MLS.
For the entire season, the MLS average was 2.4 goals per 90 minute game (total of 591 goals in 240 games).
http://sports.yahoo.com/mls/standings;_ylt=ArKi5z06x0YXc2HPrY4m5tWkvrYF

BTW- note the number of tie games in the MLS- a total of 58 out of 240 games ended in a tie (almost 1 in 4!). One team, Dallas FC had 14 tie games out of the 30 they played! The NHL has eliminated tie games, which even the most purist hockey fans seem now to appreciate.

I also have issues with the faking of injuries in soccer, but that might be a topic for another time. It is not as bad in the MLS as it is in internation soccer, but you almost never see a similar issue in hockey. NHL players take tremendous hits and get right up and resume playing. Even broken bones and major lacerations are fixed in the locker room and the players return to the ice. How many times do we see soccer players fake a fall or an injury, then lay on the soft ground and writhe for minutes to embellish it and try to get the official to call a penalty?
 
Da Coach said:
I also have issues with the faking of injuries in soccer, but that might be a topic for another time. It is not as bad in the MLS as it is in internation soccer, but you almost never see a similar issue in hockey. NHL players take tremendous hits and get right up and resume playing. Even broken bones and major lacerations are fixed in the locker room and the players return to the ice. How many times do we see soccer players fake a fall or an injury, then lay on the soft ground and writhe for minutes to embellish it and try to get the official to call a penalty?
Click to expand...

Yeah, agreed. Something American fans won't like, but to be honest, it's not a problem in MLS or NCAA games I've seen, and also not much of a big deal in the EPL either. Spanish and Italian soccer... ehhhhh.....

I still think fans thinking it's boring or not has nothing to do with the amount of scoring or backpassing or any of that. It's just if you were brought up a soccer fan. This feels a little bit like saying, all those other 6 billion people are nuts! That game's boring! If "exciting/fast play" was a driver of fan excitement then why hasn't ice hockey supassed soccer in those other countries?
 
thefish7 said:
The best part of the EPL (other than the play on the field) is the pyramid of promotion and relegation.
Click to expand...

I agree with this and I'd like to see this in other sports!

T - I also believe they need to do something about the off sides and award teams that attack. The off-sides allows the D to sit back and wait. If you moved the off-side line to the top of the box then you could have a much more wide open field. A big field in these conditions would be very beneficial.
 
I'm late to this conversation and didn't read the prior posts, so my points have pry already been stated.

Before I launch into my list of reasons, I will say that I am a huge football(soccer) fan.

Reasons for low ratings:

1. The MLS is already a poor product with hopes of grandeur, but anyone who is really interested in football, knows that the MLS is not a good product and have far more interest in the bigger leagues and National competitions. This has been reflected heavily in the World Cup games and the EPL games which have had far better ratings.

2. The MLS did a miserable job of promoting this and managed to somehow hurt themselves by putting themselves in Sunday primetime on ESPN2. It use to be in the middle of the afternoon on ABC. Now granted it had to compete with American football, but at least it was on network television and was usually slotted at the same time when only one other NFL game was on.

3. Finally, it pitted two teams with some of the least recognizable names and least interested fan-bases. If it had been Seattle, or LA, or New York, or Chicago, it would have done significantly better.

I really don't agree with the argument that Football in America is not growing. I think it is, people just enjoy football that has major star quality. Would you guys watch a baseball game that was Baltimore vs. Pittsburgh?
 
Fyrebyrd said:
1. The MLS is already a poor product ..
Click to expand...

College soccer and Euro soccer -- if they ever dare to put them on TV - do extremely poorly as well.
Even the World Cup -- where TV ratings everywhere else in the world are enormous -- literally everyone watching --
averaged a 2.1 rating this year -- even tho that was up 40% over the even worse ratings in 2006.
The maximum ratings on the final game -- virtually no different from the 2006 final game rating -- still says no more than a few million people in the US were watching.
Even the Women's World Cup Final in 1999 was watched by more people than any men's World Cup game ever.

So how good are those World Cup ratings compared to other things we watch??
Well...the top World Cup ratings are not even in the ballpark with Dancing with the Stars...
but maybe roughly on par with the very WORST individual World Series game (which got about a 7 rating). Very few World Cup matches even came close to an average nightly episode of Hannity or Anderson Cooper...
Very average Monday Night Football games easily do better than the very Top World Cup drew.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top