More proof footy is stuck in the dark ages

[timmyg]

Today kicks off March Madness. Which means that every single game is streamable online.

That's right. Every. Single. Game.

How long until EPL, UEFA, FIFA, et al try this, 10 years? 20 years?

Never?

[timmyg]

Here's what it looks like. Click on any score up at the top and you can go to that game. It's too simple.

[jarv]

You cannot compare the two. march madness, you mean college basketball? :tom: Who cares? It is a bunch of kids running around. OK, not quite, but if you showed all the under 21 soccer international matches on tv, who would watch them? A few friends and parents, that's who.
Same if tv showed reserve games. Say Fulham v Arsenal, who would watch? A few diehard fans and again, friends and parents of the players.
I would compare college basketball to non league football. Actually very entertaining to watch at the ground (if you have a friend or son playing) but has little to offer beyond that. Sorry. :002:

[ImperialWhite]

Today kicks off March Madness. Which means that every single game is streamable online.

That's right. Every. Single. Game.

How long until EPL, UEFA, FIFA, et al try this, 10 years? 20 years?

Never?

Problem is, if every game was streamable you'd never get anyone going to matches with the tickets prices as they are now.

£30 (~$50), in the cold, no beer, train fare, etc or watch online with a decent bottle of wine in the comfort of your own home...

Football is killing itself - stupid wages means stupid ticket prices and clubs going bust and falling attendances.

[timmyg]

You cannot compare the two. march madness, you mean college basketball? :tom: Who cares? It is a bunch of kids running around. OK, not quite, but if you showed all the under 21 soccer international matches on tv, who would watch them? A few friends and parents, that's who.
Same if tv showed reserve games. Say Fulham v Arsenal, who would watch? A few diehard fans and again, friends and parents of the players.
I would compare college basketball to non league football. Actually very entertaining to watch at the ground (if you have a friend or son playing) but has little to offer beyond that. Sorry. :002:

The post was more about new media presenting sports, but now that you mentioned it, yeah, non-league football is exactly like college bball. Oh, wait, no it's not:

Before the start of the season, TBS, TNT and truTV joined CBS in signing a new, 14-year TV contract worth $10.8 billion.

[RidgeRider]

You cannot compare the two. march madness, you mean college basketball? :tom: Who cares? It is a bunch of kids running around. OK, not quite, but if you showed all the under 21 soccer international matches on tv, who would watch them? A few friends and parents, that's who.
Same if tv showed reserve games. Say Fulham v Arsenal, who would watch? A few diehard fans and again, friends and parents of the players.
I would compare college basketball to non league football. Actually very entertaining to watch at the ground (if you have a friend or son playing) but has little to offer beyond that. Sorry. :002:

Jarv, sorry, college basketball is a MASSIVE business, so while it means nothing to you it means a lot to the vast majority of this country but I think the point was if a college sports organization like the NCAA can figure out it, why not the PL? PL has a better product as well so ........

[RidgeRider]

Today kicks off March Madness. Which means that every single game is streamable online.

That's right. Every. Single. Game.

How long until EPL, UEFA, FIFA, et al try this, 10 years? 20 years?

Never?

Problem is, if every game was streamable you'd never get anyone going to matches with the tickets prices as they are now.

£30 (~$50), in the cold, no beer, train fare, etc or watch online with a decent bottle of wine in the comfort of your own home...

Football is killing itself - stupid wages means stupid ticket prices and clubs going bust and falling attendances.

Ticket prices to these games can be very high but that is because scarcity is in play and this tournament has been marketed to the hilt for decades and you will have large numbers of travelling fans. Not sure if you can buy beer or not at a college game but certainly these games are played indoors in a cozy auditorium.

I think one of the big differences is the commercial time available in a college basketball game that doesn't happen in football. In football you have before the game, at the break, after the game, and of course those rolling electronic boards around the pitch. Not as many commercials so I don't think Sky, etc. can generate as much Ad revenue per game.

[jarv]

Sorry, I forgot to mention the tv money nonsense which is actually why it is shown. Don't mean to put it down, it is very entertaining to watch but the madness is the fact that it is a bunch of college kids and a huge amount of money swilling about. However, it does give the players something to look back on when they can tell their kids they played at college.

Not quite the same as a non league player, playing against Manchester United, to tell their kids.

[ImperialWhite]

Today kicks off March Madness. Which means that every single game is streamable online.

That's right. Every. Single. Game.

How long until EPL, UEFA, FIFA, et al try this, 10 years? 20 years?

Never?

Problem is, if every game was streamable you'd never get anyone going to matches with the tickets prices as they are now.

£30 (~$50), in the cold, no beer, train fare, etc or watch online with a decent bottle of wine in the comfort of your own home...

Football is killing itself - stupid wages means stupid ticket prices and clubs going bust and falling attendances.

Ticket prices to these games can be very high but that is because scarcity is in play and this tournament has been marketed to the hilt for decades and you will have large numbers of travelling fans. Not sure if you can buy beer or not at a college game but certainly these games are played indoors in a cozy auditorium.

I think one of the big differences is the commercial time available in a college basketball game that doesn't happen in football. In football you have before the game, at the break, after the game, and of course those rolling electronic boards around the pitch. Not as many commercials so I don't think Sky, etc. can generate as much Ad revenue per game.

I meant that no one would implement streaming in football, because attendances would suffer. I imagine that in the States attendances are good because I'm guessing the populace:stadium ratio is higher (am I right in thinking this would you say?).

Over here, I think streaming would cause attendance to suffer massively unless ticket prices fell (which they won't because they couldn't, given player wages).

I think it (probably) would be a good idea - it seems mad that Fulham fans overseas get better coverage than most British ones except for season ticket holders.

[RidgeRider]

Today kicks off March Madness. Which means that every single game is streamable online.

That's right. Every. Single. Game.

How long until EPL, UEFA, FIFA, et al try this, 10 years? 20 years?

Never?

Problem is, if every game was streamable you'd never get anyone going to matches with the tickets prices as they are now.

£30 (~$50), in the cold, no beer, train fare, etc or watch online with a decent bottle of wine in the comfort of your own home...

Football is killing itself - stupid wages means stupid ticket prices and clubs going bust and falling attendances.

Ticket prices to these games can be very high but that is because scarcity is in play and this tournament has been marketed to the hilt for decades and you will have large numbers of travelling fans. Not sure if you can buy beer or not at a college game but certainly these games are played indoors in a cozy auditorium.

I think one of the big differences is the commercial time available in a college basketball game that doesn't happen in football. In football you have before the game, at the break, after the game, and of course those rolling electronic boards around the pitch. Not as many commercials so I don't think Sky, etc. can generate as much Ad revenue per game.

I think it (probably) would be a good idea - it seems mad that Fulham fans overseas get better coverage than most British ones except for season ticket holders.

We actually get great coverage over here so I don't have any real complaints. I only stream when I don't want to wait for a game on video delay.

It's not right is it?  :dft012:

[ImperialWhite]

Today kicks off March Madness. Which means that every single game is streamable online.

That's right. Every. Single. Game.

How long until EPL, UEFA, FIFA, et al try this, 10 years? 20 years?

Never?

Problem is, if every game was streamable you'd never get anyone going to matches with the tickets prices as they are now.

£30 (~$50), in the cold, no beer, train fare, etc or watch online with a decent bottle of wine in the comfort of your own home...

Football is killing itself - stupid wages means stupid ticket prices and clubs going bust and falling attendances.

Ticket prices to these games can be very high but that is because scarcity is in play and this tournament has been marketed to the hilt for decades and you will have large numbers of travelling fans. Not sure if you can buy beer or not at a college game but certainly these games are played indoors in a cozy auditorium.

I think one of the big differences is the commercial time available in a college basketball game that doesn't happen in football. In football you have before the game, at the break, after the game, and of course those rolling electronic boards around the pitch. Not as many commercials so I don't think Sky, etc. can generate as much Ad revenue per game.

I think it (probably) would be a good idea - it seems mad that Fulham fans overseas get better coverage than most British ones except for season ticket holders.

We actually get great coverage over here so I don't have any real complaints. I only stream when I don't want to wait for a game on video delay.

It's not right is it?  :dft012:

:hook:

Pah! I prefer watching illegal streams the size of a beer mat for away games anyway. Sniff.

(I applied to go to MIT for my PhD, was weirdly looking forward to watching games at unnatural hours in a Boston bar somewhere. Didn't get in, obviously, so it's Craven Cottage for the home games and crappy streams away. Probably better on balance)

[HatterDon]

I'm not a big college roundball fan, and I'm pretty much ignoring the tourney out of boredom this year, but Mr. Jarv's comparison is incorrect if the comparison is in terms of fan interest. There is no single event in American sports, not

the baseball World Series
the Superbowl
the NBA Championships
the Stanley Cup finals
the Masters Golf tournement
the Summer Olympics
NASCAR

NOTHING
that so galvanizes the attention of the American sports fan. Is this the case with L1 and L2? No. And I think you'll find that every one of the tourney matches NOT played mid-day mid-week will be sell-outs.

Like I said, I'm not following it this year, but facts is facts.

[jarv]

Don,
I worded things incorrectly and stand corrected. I understand that this is huge but the bit I don't understand is the hype and why it is so big. Maybe every ex college sports fan comes out to support his old team. I had a darts match last night and both teams were absolutely glued to events in the basketball.

[HatterDon]

Don,
I worded things incorrectly and stand corrected. I understand that this is huge but the bit I don't understand is the hype and why it is so big. Maybe every ex college sports fan comes out to support his old team. I had a darts match last night and both teams were absolutely glued to events in the basketball.

because people in the states view the tourney the way that Brits used to view the FA Cup before The Prem and European competition became more important -- and for much the same reason.

Small schools with lower ratings can -- and often do -- upset bigger, richer teams from top flight leagues, and that's always a joy [unless, of course, you support the giant]. And the fun of it is, it often isn't an upset -- any more than it is in the FA Cup.

Teams from lower leagues who have good winning records do so because they're very good at closing out a game. Mid-table teams from higher leagues have been "taught" through the season that they're not good enough to close games. And so, upsets happen. Like people who love the FA Cup for its Forest Green v. Man United ties more than its Chelsea v. Arsenal finals, should feel right at home with the concept of UCLA or UConn being humbled by Hampton or Princeton.

Also, like the FA Cup, the longer a team lasts, the larger the mistique that it builds around itself. I've seen lesser teams go all the way just on the basis of organization, discipline, and pure spirit, just the same way that lower league teams have made it to Wembley.

Face it! It's a thang!  :005:

[jarv]

Don,
I get it now. Will pay much more attention next year.

[AlFayedsChequebook]

I definitely think that the ability to watch every top flight game/european cup game is long overdue.

I have never been convinced by the falling attendences argument. Yes some people may choose to watch from home but for the majority, there is nothing like being at the game. Would you turn down tickets to Fulham v Juventus and instead watch at home?

Ticket prices need to fall anyway, so this will help, but most importantly, many of the smaller clubs will get exposure. This means:

1) More TV Money
2) More Merchandising
3) More Sponsorship money

Any one of those three would easily counteract the, IMO minimal, loss from attendances.

We all know that ticket sales no longer run clubs so why are we so obssessed by them?

[MJG]

I said in thread a couple of weeks ago  it could and should come to football. I have watched baseball online for a few years and I'm sure football will go that way

[finnster01]

Well, I can only say I'm even into it. I watched on telly all day yesterday, have my "brackets" all in and are doing surprisingly good for knowing very little about the teams.  I live in Harlem NYC which is basketball crazy. I like watching them play inner city urban basketball whilst having my lunch at the projects in the summer. Fantastic talent that mostly end up disappearing after high school and end up in jail unfortunately.

In addition, I have to listen to live "commentary" from my girlfriend who used to play basketball and apparently thinks she is the US version of Andy Gray...(hope she is not reading this  :026:)

[timmyg]

Teams from lower leagues who have good winning records do so because they're very good at closing out a game. Mid-table teams from higher leagues have been "taught" through the season that they're not good enough to close games. And so, upsets happen. Like people who love the FA Cup for its Forest Green v. Man United ties more than its Chelsea v. Arsenal finals, should feel right at home with the concept of UCLA or UConn being humbled by Hampton or Princeton.

Not to hijack the thread, but another reason upsets happen is because mid-majors go through an entire season with the slightest margins of error. If they lose their conference, they're not going dancing.

Meanwhile, teams from the big conferences can lose a bit more games including their conference, but considering they face tougher opponents they still get in on prestige and the like.

Therefore when it's really do or die, the mid-majors can overcome the talent discrepancy.

And AlFayedsChequebook, you hit the nail right on the head in debunking the attendance argument.

[Burt]

Not sure about the falling attendances piece.

I would assume that revenues from broadcasting rights may be more likely to suffer.