Jump to content


Welcome to DBSTalk


Sign In 

Create Account
Welcome to DBSTalk. Our community covers all aspects of video delivery solutions including: Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS), Cable Television, and Internet Protocol Television (IPTV). We also have forums to discuss popular television programs, home theater equipment, and internet streaming service providers. Members of our community include experts who can help you solve technical problems, industry professionals, company representatives, and novices who are here to learn.

Like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community. Sign-up is a free and simple process that requires minimal information. Be a part of our community by signing in or creating an account. The Digital Bit Stream starts here!
  • Reply to existing topics or start a discussion of your own
  • Subscribe to topics and forums and get email updates
  • Send private personal messages (PM) to other forum members
  • Customize your profile page and make new friends
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

Photo
- - - - -

Directv World Cup plans: Anything special planned?


  • Please log in to reply
37 replies to this topic

#21 OFFLINE   dstorm

dstorm

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 88 posts
Joined: Mar 25, 2008

Posted 18 May 2010 - 01:08 PM

as previously mentioned, no need for a mix channel, with only a few instances during last day of group stage with overlap games.....

Now they could throw up a mix with Univision and the ESPN networks - might be kind of cool.

ESPN is hyping the World Cup way beyond what I would have expected. They are really pushing this big time. We'll see what the ratings look like, but ESPN has gone all out on this. Can't wait.

...Ads Help To Support This SIte...

#22 OFFLINE   dpfaunts

dpfaunts

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 253 posts
Joined: Oct 17, 2006

Posted 18 May 2010 - 01:09 PM

This seems to be like convincing a D* person that E* is better and vice versa. You either "get it" or you don't. Football and the World Cup are huge everywhere but the USA. If you enjoy "soccer" please watch, if not, enjoy all the other sports your entertainment supplier can provide.
Darryle

HR24-100 HDMI Samsung 85687W
HR22-100 Component Samsung HLN4365W
HR21-700 HDMI Vizio SV370XVT
HR20-100 SVID Panasonic CRT
SLIMLINE (SL3) SWM
DirecTV 8/98

#23 OFFLINE   vthokies1996

vthokies1996

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 136 posts
Joined: Oct 06, 2008

Posted 18 May 2010 - 01:21 PM

The trouble with a Mix channel is that very few games are played at the same time. I believe that only the final games in each of the groups are played at the same time to avoid collusion, but that is it.


Correct, only the final games of the group stage are played at the same time. This is to prevent teams from having an unfair advantage by knowing the result of the other group stage game and assuring which teams progress.

Looking at the links in the first post, it looks like the mix channel they are using in the Caribbean on Directv will have different camera angles during each game.

#24 OFFLINE   DogLover

DogLover

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,510 posts
Joined: Mar 18, 2007

Posted 18 May 2010 - 01:53 PM

I was a teenager when the soccer boom of the seventies occurred here in the US. At that time, everyone said that when the teenagers who played and watched soccer at that time grew up, the sport would take off in the US. Didn't happen.

I remember when the US hosted the World Cup in 1994. Again, everyone said that now that the US had hosted the WC, the sport would take off. Didn't happen.

Bottom line is that soccer will always be a niche sport here in the US. It reminds me of hockey -- it has a core group of fans in major markets that watch it and go to games. However, it just doesn't translate into major marketability and following here in the US for whatever reason.

Not trying to be critical of soccer, just stating how I see this situation given the history of soccer in this country in the last 40 years. I'm just very skeptical that soccer will ever boom in this country, esp. now that the sports market dollars are significantly drying up given the challenging state of our current economy.


Emphasis added by me.

My opinion is that advertisers haven't figured out how to advertise on soccer. There are not defined "time outs" or down time like in other televised sports. Without corporate advertising money (which is not as available in this economy), soccer isn't a money maker for the networks.

Perhaps this will change, ESPN seems to think they can make it work for the World Cup. If it becomes widely (and freely) televised, then those who played it as kids will begin to tune in as adults. Until then, it seems that it will stay a niche sport in the US.
DogLover

My Setup

#25 OFFLINE   paco1986

paco1986

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 574 posts
Joined: Mar 26, 2007

Posted 18 May 2010 - 02:06 PM

as previously mentioned, no need for a mix channel, with only a few instances during last day of group stage with overlap games.....


You're right about this, really no need for a mix channel. What they could do, however, is something similar to the Olympics soccer coverage. D* had specific channels with soccer only content for live games and replays. Of course, the coverage was produced by NBC and D* was simply the carrier.

This could be done for the World Cup, but ESPN would first have to produce these channels. It would be great to have, but I just don't see ESPN doing this.

#26 OFFLINE   wmb

wmb

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 452 posts
Joined: Dec 17, 2008

Posted 18 May 2010 - 02:32 PM

My opinion is that advertisers haven't figured out how to advertise on soccer.


FIFA doesn't help much in this regard... from the FIFA Interpretations of the Laws of the Game:

Commercial advertising

Commercial advertising shall be at least 1 m (1 yd) from the boundary lines of the field of play.

No form of commercial advertising, whether real or virtual, is permitted on the field of play, on the ground within the area enclosed by the goal nets or the technical area, or within 1 m (1 yd) of the touch line from the time the teams enter the field of play until they have left it at half-time and from the time the teams re-enter the field of play until the end of the match. Similarly, advertising is not permitted on the goals, nets, flagposts or their flags and no extraneous equipment (cameras, microphones etc.) may be attached to these items.


I don't think advertisers haven't figured it out, I think that soccer does not fit the US model of sports advertising. Many major companies are marketing at soccer games. Samsung is Chelsea's shirt sponsor, Emirate air lines sponsor Arsenal (I think they are owned by the same person), AIG paid huge change to sponsor Man U (which by the way is owned by the Glazers, the same people that own the Tampa Bay Bucs). Twelve of the 16 MLS teams have shirt sponsors.

As for money, here are the value (in $ billion) of sports franchises from Forbes for last year:

1. Manchester United $1.8
2. Dallas Cowboys $1.6
3. Washington Redskins $1.5
4. New England Patriots $1.32
5. New York Yankees $1.3
6. Real Madrid $1.29
7. Arsenal $1.2
8. New York Giants $1.18
9. New York Jets $1.17
10. Houston Texans $1.17

6 of the top 10 are NFL, 3 are European soccer clubs, and one is a MLB team.

So, someone has found a way to make money from soccer.

The US just placed a bid for the 2018 and 2022 World Cup Tournaments. The soccer environment here will be much different than what it was in 1994, when the US hosted the World Cup.

#27 OFFLINE   ddebrunner

ddebrunner

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 69 posts
Joined: Sep 07, 2009

Posted 18 May 2010 - 02:35 PM

Directv obviously thinks soccer has value to its customers, otherwise they wouldn't have set up the UEFA channels this season. To me that was a nice bonus, the ability to see Champions & Europa leagues in HD.

I do wonder why the UEFA channels are still in the guide, will they just remain for next season's coverage?

#28 OFFLINE   wmb

wmb

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 452 posts
Joined: Dec 17, 2008

Posted 18 May 2010 - 02:38 PM

This could be done for the World Cup, but ESPN would first have to produce these channels. It would be great to have, but I just don't see ESPN doing this.


I thought ESPN/ABC/ESPN2 would broadcast all the games live, as they were being played. No need for a dedicated channel.

As a side note, I thought the Olympic channel was the world feed. Not sure that there was commentary on it at all. The UEFA matches had commentary, but no half time coverage... basically a static logo followed by a highlights package.

#29 OFFLINE   paco1986

paco1986

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 574 posts
Joined: Mar 26, 2007

Posted 18 May 2010 - 02:50 PM

I thought ESPN/ABC/ESPN2 would broadcast all the games live, as they were being played. No need for a dedicated channel.


I see your point. I was thinking more of a 24/7 channel with game replays, post-game interviews, etc. throughout the day.

#30 OFFLINE   islesfan

islesfan

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,652 posts
  • LocationNevada
Joined: Oct 18, 2006

Posted 18 May 2010 - 03:15 PM

Why all the animosity? I love hockey and lacrosse, and that's what I'll watch first, but if there's a good soccer game on, I'll watch that too. That takes nothing away from hockey or lax. There's plenty of room for all kinds of sports out there. With hundreds of channels, it really doesn't matter if a sport catches on with the masses or not. If it can fill an arena or stadium (look at most of the MLS stadiums) with paying fans, then what's the harm? The Denver Outlaws of MLL pack the fans in in Denver every week. they outdraw all of the traditional lax markets all the time. So what if most of the country wouldn't pay to see lax or soccer or whatever? Just enjoy what we have and forget about its place in the sports heirarchy at ESPN.

Sony Bravia 55"
HR20-700
HR21-700
HDMI
HP Touchsmart IQ 846 (Windows 8) for DirecTV2PC and Media Share

GenieGO

iPhone 4S

iPad


#31 OFFLINE   DogLover

DogLover

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,510 posts
Joined: Mar 18, 2007

Posted 18 May 2010 - 03:27 PM

FIFA doesn't help much in this regard... from the FIFA Interpretations of the Laws of the Game:



I don't think advertisers haven't figured it out, I think that soccer does not fit the US model of sports advertising. Many major companies are marketing at soccer games. Samsung is Chelsea's shirt sponsor, Emirate air lines sponsor Arsenal (I think they are owned by the same person), AIG paid huge change to sponsor Man U (which by the way is owned by the Glazers, the same people that own the Tampa Bay Bucs). Twelve of the 16 MLS teams have shirt sponsors.

As for money, here are the value (in $ billion) of sports franchises from Forbes for last year:

1. Manchester United $1.8
2. Dallas Cowboys $1.6
3. Washington Redskins $1.5
4. New England Patriots $1.32
5. New York Yankees $1.3
6. Real Madrid $1.29
7. Arsenal $1.2
8. New York Giants $1.18
9. New York Jets $1.17
10. Houston Texans $1.17

6 of the top 10 are NFL, 3 are European soccer clubs, and one is a MLB team.

So, someone has found a way to make money from soccer.

The US just placed a bid for the 2018 and 2022 World Cup Tournaments. The soccer environment here will be much different than what it was in 1994, when the US hosted the World Cup.


Yes, there is lots of money to be made in soccer. The point I was making (obviously not very well) was that television advertisers haven't figured soccer out yet.

Until soccer is a regular on "free" channels, the average US Joe Sixpack won't watch. The "free" channels depend heavily on selling advertising time. Until the advertisers and channels can figure that out for soccer, they won't show it on a regular, ongoing basis. I include ESPN in "free" channels, because it is available in almost all of the lowest levels of the pay TV systems (cable, satellite, etc.)
DogLover

My Setup

#32 OFFLINE   wmb

wmb

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 452 posts
Joined: Dec 17, 2008

Posted 18 May 2010 - 04:18 PM

Until soccer is a regular on "free" channels, the average US Joe Sixpack won't watch. The "free" channels depend heavily on selling advertising time. Until the advertisers and channels can figure that out for soccer, they won't show it on a regular, ongoing basis. I include ESPN in "free" channels, because it is available in almost all of the lowest levels of the pay TV systems (cable, satellite, etc.)


ESPN2 showed EPL (thats English Premier League) games, typically at 8 AM Saturday morning. That would be the 1 PM England time (OK, UTC/GMT/whatev) time.

ESPN also shows MLS games on a near-weekly basis. Most are Thursday night, probably about 20 or so games.

Joe Sixpack isn't always the target audience. Personally, I like microbrews... Especially one from Stone Brewing Co,

#33 OFFLINE   DogLover

DogLover

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,510 posts
Joined: Mar 18, 2007

Posted 18 May 2010 - 05:00 PM

ESPN2 showed EPL (thats English Premier League) games, typically at 8 AM Saturday morning. That would be the 1 PM England time (OK, UTC/GMT/whatev) time.

ESPN also shows MLS games on a near-weekly basis. Most are Thursday night, probably about 20 or so games.

Joe Sixpack isn't always the target audience. Personally, I like microbrews... Especially one from Stone Brewing Co,


True. If the teams are happy being a niche sport, they are well positioned. If they want Joe Sixpack (to be as widely followed in the US as overseas), they will need to be televised enough that Joe can really follow a team. I don't think they are there, yet. However, there's more on than there used to be.
DogLover

My Setup

#34 OFFLINE   karlhenri

karlhenri

    Legend

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 140 posts
Joined: Sep 25, 2007

Posted 18 May 2010 - 08:05 PM

Great energy! I like it. Some comments on your posts.

- Animosity:
Why all the hate? I grew up in a soccer country, but I came to appreciate a lot of sports by giving them a chance. Last Winter Olympics, I finally figured out Curling and ended watching it a lot. This is how I approach sports: "If 20, 40, 100,000 fans in a stadium are going crazy about a game, they can't just be a bunch of morons."

I appreciate that one may not have time to pick a new sport, but if you are midly tempted, sometimes it helps to catch a sport at its best. I have to thank Magic, Bird, Kareem and Jordan for the NBA. I fell in love with baseball watching Doc Gooden pitch a gem against Hershiser. And Joe Montana and Dan Marino's exquisite passes helped me get excited about the NFL. All of America started watching golf because of Tiger.

So how about it? This World Cup, treat yourself to a Brazil match for example. Preferably against a team that plays an open game as well, such as a Portugal or an African team or God forbid they encounter Spain (yay). For a win-win, do it at a bar with soem friends who get it. Best case, they will help you understand. Worse case, the beer will be fresh and the fries warm and yummy.

First of all, understand the setting (Ex: Team A needs to win by 2. Or X has never beaten y in 50 years. Or they are neighbors but they hate each other) ask who the best players are and what makes them special.

Don't just wait for the goals. Try to see what else gets the spectators excited: A great run, a brilliant passing, a string of possessions, a great defensive play, a great shot, a great save, the way a play seems never to lose the ball or find his teammates, the speed of play, the energy, the desire. Before long, you will start noticing the stars, appreciating the athleticism, differentiating the skill and with some luck, maybe you will see something memorable the way I did for all those American sports I ended up following to this day.

#35 OFFLINE   mx6bfast

mx6bfast

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,237 posts
  • LocationDelray Beach, FL
Joined: Nov 08, 2006

Posted 18 May 2010 - 09:28 PM

I agree with other's in this thread that youth soccer is a great form of exercise for kids and it gives kids something to do, but IMO, that doesn't translate into becoming life long fans of the sport. If anything, I would think burnout on the game for kids would be an issue, espically after being hauled from tournament to tournament year after year after year after......

This argument is useless. I work with someone who has a son who plays baseball and basketball. Playing those 2 sports they were in tournaments 30+ times during a 52 week period. There is just as much a chance of burn out in soccer as there is in any sport.
Glory, Glory Man United

My setup with pictures

#36 OFFLINE   karlhenri

karlhenri

    Legend

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 140 posts
Joined: Sep 25, 2007

Posted 18 May 2010 - 09:28 PM

- Soccer popularity in US:

It seems like playing a sport does not necessarily translate to becoming a spectator of it: Millions of US kids have been playing soccer every weekend but have not really become watchers. I don't know why.

Some reasons why soccer may not be a top spectator sport in US
  • A lack of a quality league domestically
  • Hard to compete with more established sports
  • Until recently, lack of TV coverage of top European leagues
  • Even with the coverage folks may not connect with teams not named after their home cities. (Even with the most popular sports most people still cheer for their home team)
  • Chicken and egg story: Investors would want to see more revenue potential before they invest in soccer- That in turn deprives the sport of the investment it needs to attract top kid athletes. That in turn makes it harder for the product (MLS etc.) to improve and that keeps fan base from growing and revenue potential low. Wthout a clear revenue potential then

Reasons to be hopeful

  • Some of the more commited kids do watch soccer on TV and now even have favorite European players
  • Attention from international scouts may cause more kids to take a chance with soccer as their main sport
  • Some investors are willing to take a chance. ESPN has been making consistently larger investments in the Wrld Cup. There must be viewership
  • Here is an article with some interesting facts: http://www.mediapost...&art_aid=125566

The game's acceptance might also sjyrocket based on a major event or a personality.
Ex: Imagine if the US makes the finals or wins the World Cup.
Ex: Imagine if a couple years from now, the best player in the world is some young phenom from Colorado.

Edited by karlhenri, 18 May 2010 - 09:56 PM.
Adding one more thought


#37 OFFLINE   mx6bfast

mx6bfast

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,237 posts
  • LocationDelray Beach, FL
Joined: Nov 08, 2006

Posted 18 May 2010 - 09:31 PM

I thought ESPN/ABC/ESPN2 would broadcast all the games live, as they were being played. No need for a dedicated channel.

I have seen the schedule but not paid too much attention to it yet, but the only time when all 3 channels would broadcast games at one time is the last round in group play. Even then there are only 2 games on at a time for that round.

If D* wanted to give us grand WC plans they would give us FSCHD before kickoff.
Glory, Glory Man United

My setup with pictures

#38 OFFLINE   karlhenri

karlhenri

    Legend

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 140 posts
Joined: Sep 25, 2007

Posted 18 May 2010 - 09:52 PM

Mix channel:

- The idea for the mix channel or multiplex channels is not for separate matches but for alternate camera views. I would like to be able to check on the coaches from time to time as well as goali view and referee view
- Ouside of channels, alternate audio commentary would be useful. Interactive features could also be something. Things like stats, graphs, rosters, players on the bench, player profiles etc.
- 3D seems to be the new investment ESPN made. All games in HD comes expected these days.

I am not sure how much more impressive soccer in 3D would be. The main camera view in soccer is the wide angle shot. I don't think that that viewpoint provides much opportunity for a depth of play effect. If I am in the stands watching a match 30 meters away, I don't know if I get much depth perception. Now on a goalie shot replay, this could be amazing.




Protected By... spam firewall...And...