Comments on: ESPN2 Shows EPL Teams Too Often In Champions League http://www.epltalk.com/espn2-shows-epl-teams-too-often-in-champions-league/3350 Daily News & Analysis of the English Premier League Sun, 22 Nov 2009 07:03:19 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Shazback http://www.epltalk.com/espn2-shows-epl-teams-too-often-in-champions-league/3350#comment-24874 Shazback Fri, 03 Oct 2008 08:06:14 +0000 http://www.epltalk.com/espn2-shows-epl-teams-too-often-in-champions-league/3350#comment-24874 TheGaffer, you make an interesting point. However, should the clubs you mention not also have a duty to perform in order to be chosen as top picks? Although I am French, I don't see any problem in ESPN choosing Man U vs Aalborg over Bayern vs Lyon. Yes, Bayern and Lyon are current champions of their countries (so are Man U and Aalborg, mind you), and although Man U's interest dwarfs Bayern or Lyon's, both the latter are an order of magnitude ahead of Aalborg. <br>However, Lyon -and furthermore Bayern- did not perform well in the Champions League last year. Man U beat Lyon in the last 16, and Bayern didn't even compete in the Champions League. Manchester United are the current champions. Surely when you watch the US Open you're more interested in watching the reigning champion (or the #1 seed) as early as the round of 32, instead of a game between seeds 16 and 12, that is probably more exciting.<br>Similarly, Liverpool last year went further than Werder Bremen and Inter Milan. In fact, to be fair, PSV has over the past few years consistently performed better than Bremen, and Liverpool better than Inter... So it's hard to see even a sporting reason that would call for Bremen vs Inter being broadcast instead of Liverpool-PSV.<br><br>Broadcasters in the USA apply I find a relatively logical broadcasting logic : take the top teams from last year, and broadcast them. Real Madrid have a massive fanbase, but that doesn't stop them from having not featured in the last eight for the last four editions of the Champion's League. That's a record worse than Lyon. I understand that they have a long history and so forth, but surely there comes a time when people (often people who like football) realise that teams have better and worse times. In the early nineties Marseille were one of the biggest clubs in Europe, and yet I wouldn't even dream of saying that they should recieve even a fraction of the interest vested in Arsenal (even though Arsenal has yet to lift the Champions' League trophy), simply because Marseille today is not as good as Arsenal. Nottingham Forest were great at one time, but surely that's no reason to complain that when choosing what FA Cup games will be shown in America, the broadcasters choose Premier League teams (or even "Big 4" teams!).<br><br>ESPN probably does have a strong interest in EPL rights, but the choices in themselves are nothing strange. People who aren't particularly interested in a sport will often prefer to watch the best team, even if their opponents aren't as good as they are. When you watch rugby, do neutrals prefer to watch South Africa vs Uruguay or Argentina vs Romania? The latter is by far the more interesting match for people who follow Rugby, but the appeal of South Africa (Reigning World Champions) is probably enough to sway those who don't follow rugby. TheGaffer, you make an interesting point. However, should the clubs you mention not also have a duty to perform in order to be chosen as top picks? Although I am French, I don't see any problem in ESPN choosing Man U vs Aalborg over Bayern vs Lyon. Yes, Bayern and Lyon are current champions of their countries (so are Man U and Aalborg, mind you), and although Man U's interest dwarfs Bayern or Lyon's, both the latter are an order of magnitude ahead of Aalborg.
However, Lyon -and furthermore Bayern- did not perform well in the Champions League last year. Man U beat Lyon in the last 16, and Bayern didn't even compete in the Champions League. Manchester United are the current champions. Surely when you watch the US Open you're more interested in watching the reigning champion (or the #1 seed) as early as the round of 32, instead of a game between seeds 16 and 12, that is probably more exciting.
Similarly, Liverpool last year went further than Werder Bremen and Inter Milan. In fact, to be fair, PSV has over the past few years consistently performed better than Bremen, and Liverpool better than Inter… So it's hard to see even a sporting reason that would call for Bremen vs Inter being broadcast instead of Liverpool-PSV.

Broadcasters in the USA apply I find a relatively logical broadcasting logic : take the top teams from last year, and broadcast them. Real Madrid have a massive fanbase, but that doesn't stop them from having not featured in the last eight for the last four editions of the Champion's League. That's a record worse than Lyon. I understand that they have a long history and so forth, but surely there comes a time when people (often people who like football) realise that teams have better and worse times. In the early nineties Marseille were one of the biggest clubs in Europe, and yet I wouldn't even dream of saying that they should recieve even a fraction of the interest vested in Arsenal (even though Arsenal has yet to lift the Champions' League trophy), simply because Marseille today is not as good as Arsenal. Nottingham Forest were great at one time, but surely that's no reason to complain that when choosing what FA Cup games will be shown in America, the broadcasters choose Premier League teams (or even “Big 4″ teams!).

ESPN probably does have a strong interest in EPL rights, but the choices in themselves are nothing strange. People who aren't particularly interested in a sport will often prefer to watch the best team, even if their opponents aren't as good as they are. When you watch rugby, do neutrals prefer to watch South Africa vs Uruguay or Argentina vs Romania? The latter is by far the more interesting match for people who follow Rugby, but the appeal of South Africa (Reigning World Champions) is probably enough to sway those who don't follow rugby.

]]> By: Charlie http://www.epltalk.com/espn2-shows-epl-teams-too-often-in-champions-league/3350#comment-24842 Charlie Fri, 03 Oct 2008 01:28:18 +0000 http://www.epltalk.com/espn2-shows-epl-teams-too-often-in-champions-league/3350#comment-24842 I really don't think it matters if Man United were playing Cupcake FC, ESPN knows a United match is going to pull in viewers. There's a reason why United is one of the biggest clubs in the world -- lots and lots of fans around the world. To spin it in a different direction... if you were an Aalborg fan, wouldn't you think it was pretty cool knowing your side wound up playing a match live on ESPN, the biggest sports network in America? I would.<br><br>Having said that, I'm sure ESPN is also angling to get a shot at Prem TV rights when they come up for bid again. I really don't think it matters if Man United were playing Cupcake FC, ESPN knows a United match is going to pull in viewers. There's a reason why United is one of the biggest clubs in the world — lots and lots of fans around the world. To spin it in a different direction… if you were an Aalborg fan, wouldn't you think it was pretty cool knowing your side wound up playing a match live on ESPN, the biggest sports network in America? I would.

Having said that, I'm sure ESPN is also angling to get a shot at Prem TV rights when they come up for bid again.

]]> By: JLay http://www.epltalk.com/espn2-shows-epl-teams-too-often-in-champions-league/3350#comment-24797 JLay Thu, 02 Oct 2008 20:49:33 +0000 http://www.epltalk.com/espn2-shows-epl-teams-too-often-in-champions-league/3350#comment-24797 My knee-jerk reaction was to disagree, Gaff - but I do see where you're coming from. I'd rather watch a closely contested match than a blowout featuring a team from the PL. To be completely honest, it doesn't affect me too much because I work during those hours. Fairly easy to find whatever I want to watch online when i get home.<br><br>I think that the earlier poster had it right when they mentioned ESPN bidding for PL coverage rights next year... yes, they get to look friendly to the league - but more importantly they are building brand equity for a future (planned) offering. My knee-jerk reaction was to disagree, Gaff – but I do see where you're coming from. I'd rather watch a closely contested match than a blowout featuring a team from the PL. To be completely honest, it doesn't affect me too much because I work during those hours. Fairly easy to find whatever I want to watch online when i get home.

I think that the earlier poster had it right when they mentioned ESPN bidding for PL coverage rights next year… yes, they get to look friendly to the league – but more importantly they are building brand equity for a future (planned) offering.

]]> By: vic http://www.epltalk.com/espn2-shows-epl-teams-too-often-in-champions-league/3350#comment-24722 vic Thu, 02 Oct 2008 06:19:47 +0000 http://www.epltalk.com/espn2-shows-epl-teams-too-often-in-champions-league/3350#comment-24722 ESPN showed real-zenit live yesterday since it was before the rest of the matches and then it showed villareal-celtic with manchester united-Aalborg...maybe thats why those matches weren't on ESPN2 ESPN showed real-zenit live yesterday since it was before the rest of the matches and then it showed villareal-celtic with manchester united-Aalborg…maybe thats why those matches weren't on ESPN2

]]> By: The Gaffer http://www.epltalk.com/espn2-shows-epl-teams-too-often-in-champions-league/3350#comment-24688 The Gaffer Thu, 02 Oct 2008 06:02:16 +0000 http://www.epltalk.com/espn2-shows-epl-teams-too-often-in-champions-league/3350#comment-24688 ESPN Soccernet is based in London hence their English bias. But Al, I agree. Their coverage needs to be more well-rounded.<br><br>Cheers,<br>The Gaffer ESPN Soccernet is based in London hence their English bias. But Al, I agree. Their coverage needs to be more well-rounded.

Cheers,
The Gaffer

]]>