White Sox Interactive Forums
Talking Baseball

Welcome
Go Back   White Sox Interactive Forums > Baseball Discussions > Talking Baseball
Home Chat Stats Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #106  
Old 03-16-2013, 04:45 PM
WhiteSox5187 WhiteSox5187 is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Southside
Posts: 14,087
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by amsteel View Post
The only difference is that the World Cup and Olympics are established commercial enterprises. The knee-jerk anti-commercialism response to the WBC is somewhat muted by the fact that every professional event everywhere is a commercial endeavor. Of course the WBC is a manufactured event, it's inherent to the nature of big time sporting events in 2013.
I might be reiterating what you're saying but it seems to me that while the World Cup and the Olympics are clearly established commercial entities, they are least operated by independent bodies. FIFA established and operates the World Cup and is not beholden to the Premier League (at least I don't think it is!). The World Baseball Classic was established by Major League Baseball and while it is governed by IBAF it is done so in conjunction with MLB.
__________________

Go Sox!!!
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 03-16-2013, 05:29 PM
Mr. Jinx Mr. Jinx is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 788
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteSox5187 View Post
The World Cup has wide appeal in the US and while the Premier League might draw the same number of viewers as the NHL, the NHL has made itself into a niche sport. I don't think that soccer, other than the World Cup, would ever approach the level of popularity of the NBA, MLB or NFL but it could conceivably surpass hockey in terms of popularity. That might be more of an indictment of the NHL than on the popularity of soccer.
I don't think it is an indictment on hockey as much as increased access to soccer on TV now. 10 years ago about the only place you could watch a European soccer game was at a soccer bar who paid a ridiculous fee to get the games on satellite. Now you can watch the same at home via multiple cable/satellite channels. I don't know any natural born American who all of a sudden became a soccer fan in the last few years, but I know a plenty of people who were always fans but now can enjoy watching the games where they couldn't before.
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 03-16-2013, 05:39 PM
DSpivack DSpivack is online now
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Evanston
Posts: 28,208
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Jinx View Post
I don't think it is an indictment on hockey as much as increased access to soccer on TV now. 10 years ago about the only place you could watch a European soccer game was at a soccer bar who paid a ridiculous fee to get the games on satellite. Now you can watch the same at home via multiple cable/satellite channels. I don't know any natural born American who all of a sudden became a soccer fan in the last few years, but I know a plenty of people who were always fans but now can enjoy watching the games where they couldn't before.
You could argue that it's better to be a fan of soccer in the US than in any other country, given the plethora of TV options for worldwide leagues. It's easier to regularly watch (find on TV) the EPL here than it is England, if I am not mistaken.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lip Man 1 View Post
Seph:

If you say so. Sorry I don't buy soccer ever breaking into the big four in this country in popularity, television ratings, money or advertising.

It's is a niche sport.

Lip
Lip, just look at the facts, even if you don't care for the sport.

Money and advertising? This niche sport has a multibillion-dollar TV deal for the World Cup that is larger than that in any other country.

Popularity? The average attendance for an MLS game last season was 18,000. In North America, the only leagues drawing better than that are the NFL, MLB and Liga MX (Mexico's soccer league). The Seattle Sounders led MLS by averaging 44,000 fans per game. Only 2 dozen teams in European leagues drew better than that. As a whole, MLS is the 8th-best drawing soccer league in the world.

TV ratings? Look at what ESPN gets for Premier League games, or what Fox gets for the Champions League Final.

Some niche sport. You might not buy it, but the facts say otherwise.
__________________
Attendance records:
09 : 3-2.
10 : 2-3.
11: 0-1.
12: 2-1; Orlando Hudson and Alex Rios walkoffs.
14: 1-0; Opening Day 5-3 win vs Twins.

Last edited by DSpivack; 03-16-2013 at 05:44 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 03-16-2013, 05:55 PM
WhiteSox5187 WhiteSox5187 is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Southside
Posts: 14,087
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DSpivack View Post
You could argue that it's better to be a fan of soccer in the US than in any other country, given the plethora of TV options for worldwide leagues. It's easier to regularly watch (find on TV) the EPL here than it is England, if I am not mistaken.



Lip, just look at the facts, even if you don't care for the sport.

Money and advertising? This niche sport has a multibillion-dollar TV deal for the World Cup that is larger than that in any other country.

Popularity? The average attendance for an MLS game last season was 18,000. In North America, the only leagues drawing better than that are the NFL, MLB and Liga MX (Mexico's soccer league). The Seattle Sounders led MLS by averaging 44,000 fans per game. Only 2 dozen teams in European leagues drew better than that. As a whole, MLS is the 8th-best drawing soccer league in the world.

TV ratings? Look at what ESPN gets for Premier League games, or what Fox gets for the Champions League Final.

Some niche sport. You might not buy it, but the facts say otherwise.
A lot of Fox affiliates won't even broadcast Champion League Finals because the ratings are so low and ESPN doesn't get great ratings with the Premier League either. There are obviously a lot of die hard soccer fans in the US who have a huge passion for their sport but I think that right now it is still on the same level and maybe slightly below hockey, another possible "niche" sport with a passionate following from their fans.

Back to the topic at hand, I would be curious to know what the sort of coverage and reception the World Cup got in its third go around (which would have been what? 1936?) as opposed to the World Baseball Classic. I think the WBC could be a great thing for baseball but there are still some kinks that need to be worked out and participants (particularly the US) really need to buy into the importance of the event.
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 03-16-2013, 07:11 PM
Lip Man 1 Lip Man 1 is offline
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Chubbuck, Idaho
Posts: 26,312
Default

Spivak:

I fully suspect (and expect) that in 20 years (I won't be around though) soccer fans will continue to be harping about how "the sport is ready to break through in the U.S.!!!!!!"

Bet on it, for real, it's gonna happen! LOL

The "sport of the 70's" will morph into "the sport of the 30's"
(as in 2030...)

Lip
Reply With Quote
  #111  
Old 03-16-2013, 07:20 PM
mahagga73 mahagga73 is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Downs, Il.
Posts: 585
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TomBradley72 View Post
+1

I think this tournament is getting better each time out. If a tournament was only measured by American level of interest- the World Cup would be somewhere between the Music City Bowl and the AHL Finals. Clearly the teams and fans from Japan, Puerto Rico and the Dominican Republic all care deeply about this tournament and who wins. For this being only the 3rd WBC- impressed with the way its growing outside the US- and the quality of play across the board is improving for the "non baseball" countries like China, etc.

It's pretty cool to see players of this calibar playing their hearts out- not for money- but for pride in their country. That makes for some unique and interesting baseball.

It needs broader access on TV (need to have some games make it to network TV or at least ESPN/TBS, etc.) and MLB radio should have the games- especially Team USA.
I agree , it's to bad these asinine pitch counts ,and the fact the US first 3 strings of players won't play ,make it nauseating to the casual US fan. If USA trotted out their best team it would be a shoo in to win most these classics. Shane Victorino ,Hosmer, Rollins, and Zobrist don't cut it.But the classic is doing what it was intended to do, grow the game in popularity in non-traditional and traditional markets.

Last edited by mahagga73; 03-16-2013 at 07:27 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 03-16-2013, 07:22 PM
mahagga73 mahagga73 is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Downs, Il.
Posts: 585
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lip Man 1 View Post
Spivak:

I fully suspect (and expect) that in 20 years (I won't be around though) soccer fans will continue to be harping about how "the sport is ready to break through in the U.S.!!!!!!"

Bet on it, for real, it's gonna happen! LOL

The "sport of the 70's" will morph into "the sport of the 30's"
(as in 2030...)

Lip
The US World Cup team never did anything after that one Olympics they made it to the semi's .
Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old 03-16-2013, 07:24 PM
DSpivack DSpivack is online now
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Evanston
Posts: 28,208
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lip Man 1 View Post
Spivak:

I fully suspect (and expect) that in 20 years (I won't be around though) soccer fans will continue to be harping about how "the sport is ready to break through in the U.S.!!!!!!"

Bet on it, for real, it's gonna happen! LOL

The "sport of the 70's" will morph into "the sport of the 30's"
(as in 2030...)

Lip
I'm not one of those who think it will become the biggest sport in this country. And I don't really care whether it's detractors watch the sport or not. All I am saying is that is a sport of the present; I don't understand people who refuse to accept that as a fact. Is it football, baseball, or basketball? No, but it's just as popular as hockey is in North America.

I don't understand willful ignorance in terms of ignoring facts about it. If some Fox affiliates reject the Champions League Final because of low ratings, why don't NBC affiliates do the same for the Stanley Cup Final? The former has had about twice as many viewers as the latter in the last two seasons.
Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 03-16-2013, 07:25 PM
mahagga73 mahagga73 is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Downs, Il.
Posts: 585
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteSox5187 View Post
Why do you even pick Hosmer for the team?!
this ^^^
Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old 03-16-2013, 07:28 PM
mahagga73 mahagga73 is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Downs, Il.
Posts: 585
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DSpivack View Post
I'm not one of those who think it will become the biggest sport in this country. And I don't really care whether it's detractors watch the sport or not.

That said, I also don't understand willful ignorance in terms of ignoring facts about it. If some Fox affiliates reject the Champions League because of low ratings, why don't NBC affiliates do the same for the Stanley Cup Final? The former has had about twice as many viewers as the latter in the last two seasons.
You shouldn't care what others think .
Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old 03-16-2013, 07:31 PM
DSpivack DSpivack is online now
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Evanston
Posts: 28,208
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mahagga73 View Post
You shouldn't care what others think .
Did I say I did?
Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old 03-16-2013, 07:46 PM
mahagga73 mahagga73 is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Downs, Il.
Posts: 585
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DSpivack View Post
Did I say I did?
No, I was making more of a statement than aiming it at you . I like a few sports that are niche , and I get the same kind of condesention aimed at me sometimes, that's all.
Reply With Quote
  #118  
Old 03-16-2013, 07:51 PM
DSpivack DSpivack is online now
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Evanston
Posts: 28,208
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mahagga73 View Post
No, I was making more of a statement than aiming it at you . I like a few sports that are niche , and I get the same kind of condesention aimed at me sometimes, that's all.
Nor should you. I don't care for pro wrestling, auto racing, or golf, but I don't start disagreeing with fans of those sports while being proudly ignorant of facts involving them.
Reply With Quote
  #119  
Old 03-17-2013, 02:42 AM
cub killer cub killer is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,077
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mahagga73 View Post
I agree , it's to bad these asinine pitch counts ,and the fact the US first 3 strings of players won't play ,make it nauseating to the casual US fan. If USA trotted out their best team it would be a shoo in to win most these classics. Shane Victorino ,Hosmer, Rollins, and Zobrist don't cut it.But the classic is doing what it was intended to do, grow the game in popularity in non-traditional and traditional markets.
I wouldn't say shoo-in. The DR could also bring a powerhouse team. Plus, other countries play their hearts out for this. Heart lifts a team to the next level.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSpivack View Post
I don't understand willful ignorance in terms of ignoring facts about it. If some Fox affiliates reject the Champions League Final because of low ratings, why don't NBC affiliates do the same for the Stanley Cup Final? The former has had about twice as many viewers as the latter in the last two seasons.
Twice as many viewers? Are you comparing game vs game or game vs series? Game vs series is apples vs oranges. If it's CL Final vs Stanley Cup clincher, then I highly doubt it's twice as many viewers, or even more viewers at all. Please provide a link to back up your claim.
__________________
The regular season is merely the qualifying phase for the playoffs. The regular season does not determine the best team, nor the order of who is best.
Reply With Quote
  #120  
Old 03-17-2013, 10:15 AM
jdm2662 jdm2662 is online now
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Lombard, IL
Posts: 7,581
Default

As someone who was involved in soccer for 23 years (1984-2007), I can tell you the sport is light years ahead of when I first started. Light years in terms of leagues, competition, play, participation, and hell, parents/coaches knowledge. Traveling soccer is a big deal, and it made me jealous of what these kids get. There was also no national team (or one that couldn't qualify for the World Cup), or a division one out door league when I played. While the league and team isn't up to par with the rest of the world, these did not exist growing up. So year, it has grown. A lot, actually. However, I don't expect the non-fan or hater to even get this part.

The reason for that? Because, as a pro sport, it will never be big. The MLS has only been around since 1996. There is no big history. Kids also pick up to what their father is a fan of at an early age. Even though there are more dads that played today then during my childhood (my father was the only one that played soccer of all the parents), it's still not even close to being enough. There were plenty of kids in my generation who didn't care for the sport. Sure, it's way ahead of what it is, but the reality is, it's not up to par. And, nor will it ever in my life time. Another factor is that there are a decent amount of soccer fans here. A good amount of them follow other leagues because the quality of play is much better.

Soccer was a victim of instant gratification. The NY Cosmos drew monster crowds in the 70s. They had Warner Brothers check book and they could buy top stars. Since they did that, the whole league and general public went crazy. They failed to realize there were very little American born players playing and the rest of the league wasn't doing quite so hot. Hell, Elmhurst is a pretty good soccer town with an AYSO league and plenty of traveling leagues. The AYSO league wasn't even founded until 1984. Even then, since there are more opportunities with the other top sports, the best athletes aren't going to keep playing one they reach high school. I don't see that changing, and it's the reality of life.

People can think what they want to think. I'm not going to try and change their minds. I don't promote the sport, and I honestly don't really care if it becomes popular nationally or not. I think I'm qualified to give a fair and honest assessment on the topic. I'm not into sports like I used to, and I barely watch these days as it is.

But, going back to the topic of the WBC, as a country, we don't take international competition seriously. The days of the Soviet Union and other communists countries are long over. Another problem is that, as I said before, it's hard for a guy like myself to take this tourny seriously. The tourny forces American players who have zero ties to a country play for the country. The play itself isn't bad, I will watch it if I have nothing else on. But, I'm not going to have any emotional investment in it. Hell, both the White Sox and Bears faltered down the stretch last season, and even then, I didn't get too worked up over it.
__________________
4-time WSI NFL Pick 'em vs Spread Champion
2009 2010 2011 2013
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Forum Jump




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:40 PM.




Design by: Michelle

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Site-specific editorial/photos Copyright ©2001 - 2008 White Sox Interactive. All rights reserved.