OT: MLS closing in on NFL, NBA, MLB in U.S. - Landon Donovan
- Thread starter Coinneach
- Start date
Do you realize the rate they've been expanding? With viewership only going up 4% and 6% the last 2 years, it isn't even raising at the same rate as franchisees coming in to the league. With new teams in new cities, should bring in more eyeballs, but it clearly hasn't
I'm going to go way out on a limb and say that MLS's future lies somewhere in the vast expanse between "Americans will never like soccer lulz" and "MLS is primed to overtake the NFL".
I remain fascinated by the opinion that the NHL, which delivers an annual national TV audience of 150+ million viewers, will be hard pressed to get $400 million/year on their next TV deal, while MLS, which pulls in maybe 1/4 the national annual viewership, could be looking at something upwards of $350 million/year on their next deal. I mean it could happen, but it doesn't seem to be based on reason or logic.
I remain fascinated by the opinion that the NHL, which delivers an annual national TV audience of 150+ million viewers, will be hard pressed to get $400 million/year on their next TV deal, while MLS, which pulls in maybe 1/4 the national annual viewership, could be looking at something upwards of $350 million/year on their next deal. I mean it could happen, but it doesn't seem to be based on reason or logic.
I'm going to go way out on a limb and say that MLS's future lies somewhere in the vast expanse between "Americans will never like soccer lulz" and "MLS is primed to overtake the NFL".
I remain fascinated by the opinion that the NHL, which delivers an annual national TV audience of 150+ million viewers, will be hard pressed to get $400 million/year on their next TV deal, while MLS, which pulls in maybe 1/4 the national annual viewership, could be looking at something upwards of $350 million/year on their next deal. I mean it could happen, but it doesn't seem to be based on reason or logic.
I remember the thread you're referencing the sentiment range from some guys thinking they couldn't see how NHL even got double what they're getting now $200 mil yr($187m yr) to some reasons not based in logic that NHL would get 700-800 mil yr basically old MLB TV deal money.
I'm in the middle as I stated then I see NHL getting $450-500 mil yr probably something like $475 mil yr.
Now to MLS my logic is steady growth TV ratings etc along with potential. 3x to 4x what MLS gets now is simply following the logic of the how business sponsors/ TV advertisers view the league. All the major deals the league has renewed have gone at a rate of triple to quadruple since 2014. The outside investment will continue to be there as there are more and more growth opportunities see 2026 WC in US. It's easier IMHO given what I've mentioned to see MLS 3 TV partners to each pay MLS $100 mil or more each then to see NHL $350-400 mil piece from two networks given the congested TV sports schedule.
The NHL has been so invested in one TV partner in NBC so long it has hurt them long term. NBC has undervalued the product whether NBC thinks so or not. So I find it hard to believe that NBC will turn around and say ok NHL we will pay you what we're paying you now or double for the same amount of games. You gotta look at it in their mindset. So it kind of lessens the advantage of having multiple networks it doesn't hurt but I don't think it will be as advantageous with cash flow as some were thinking $700-800 mil yr. Its one of those things NHL should have done earlier yrs back and stuck with. Now we are late to the game, and other leagues have already built in partnerships contracts with networks. So NHL is kinda pigeon holed in terms of flexibility of a National Broadcast schedule.
Dirty Old Man
Yotah Hockey Club
What I wish would happen - although I know it won't - is:
- MLS - USA and Canada - (and maybe Mexico) get moved to UEFA - see how we measure up over time in Champions/Europa leagues
- Central American nations (7) (and maybe Mexico) get moved to CONMEBOL
- Remainder of CONCACAF gets run like Oceania, where they play an inter-federation tie to see who gets a WC berth - Jamaica or T&T vs. New Zealand every 4 years
- MLS - USA and Canada - (and maybe Mexico) get moved to UEFA - see how we measure up over time in Champions/Europa leagues
- Central American nations (7) (and maybe Mexico) get moved to CONMEBOL
- Remainder of CONCACAF gets run like Oceania, where they play an inter-federation tie to see who gets a WC berth - Jamaica or T&T vs. New Zealand every 4 years
$200 million isn't what the NHL is taking in per season, it is more in the $650 million range. You are using US only numbers.....NBC/Rogers have to be added together to get the real picture of what the NHL takes in , as Canada is almost as much of a revenue generator as the the US. When the new deal comes up in a few years, the NHL will be pulling in more than billion dollars a year between Roger's and the new US partner
Ummm not sure where you came up those WNBA numbers but they don't exist. Maybe you are confusing WNBA games on ABC or the WNBA Finals viewing avg IDK but that ain't it. WNBA issue is women don't watch it enough and they only are able to gin up support through social media pay equality campaigns vice the actual on court product. Every so often they raise enough noise awareness in it that they get curiosity bumps slash increases then the next yr they fall off as people move on to the next social issue. If you were on twitter alot in 2018 the WNBA issue was a heated debate and topic on both sides much of the year.
WNBA TV avg since 2013 source wikipedia
2013- 231k
2014-240k
2015-202k
2016-224k
2017-171k
2018-231k
Last edited:
Coinneach
Registered User
Compared to other US sports in that time frame to have even posted a gain is something to be applauded. In fact they've posted gains each yr since 2013. I'm not one to use hyperbole but that's a crazy thing to pick at in the new TV age where most US sports leagues are posting multi yr declines and the new tune is if you aren't posting declines you can claim "flat is up".
Yes too many Original and older franchises are. The newer ones hold there own well. You should look up Chicago Fire in that market prior to them moving local games to ESPN+ I can assure you the numbers were a sh@! show
Last edited:
"This conversation " is whatever you want it to be. I was talking about the NHL, and what they bring in for national TV money, and that number is close to $650 million. Will be a billion with the next contract in the US
Well not really its sort of starts with's the OP and article about Donovan and his wild claim about soccer in the US. Everybody is talking what it means in the US. What Hockey means in Canada has no bearing to it's popularity or ratings/coverage in the US. We are talking US TV deal NHL gets ($187 mil) $200 mil yr what Canada pays has absolutely no bearing on the value of the US deal is what I'm saying. You brought it up as if I missed something in the equation I didn't. It's nice and all but again no bearing. We aren't going to get more money in the next US TV deal because Canada pays X,Y,Z.
Last edited:
I dunno...
Sure MLS is growing and will continue to grow, but it's not like the NHL is some stagnant or declining business. IMHO MLS getting $300-400 million/year sounds as far fetched as the NHL getting $700-800 million/year. I mean the NHL currently gets $200 million/year and delivers 150+ million viewers/year and MLS is going to get 50-100% more than that for 1/4 the viewership?
I'm honestly not sure why the number of networks a league is currently carried by is relevant. You can't see NBC doubling what they are paying the NHL (or a second network coming on board), but have no problem seeing ESPN and FOX tripling what they are paying MLS?
Like I said, I guess MLS could get $300+ million (and/or the NHL could get $600+ million), but it would seem just as absurd as ESPN paying the NFL $100 million/game.
Last edited:
I guess you have to buy the growth of MLS and if it's sustainable. You either fall in the refuse to see or recognize it camp, the you see it but aren't quite sure it will last or you're all in on it. I'm the latter. For strictly TV discussion purposes say MLS is at 276k in 2018, their TV deal ends after the 2022 season So MLS is at 276k on average since their last deal was announced in 2014 they've added 76k to their viewership roughly 19k on average a season the last 4 yrs if MLS TV stays on pace they'll be at 350k overall cable average around the time of the new deal, still growing with accelerated growth coming on the heels of the 2026 US based World Cup. If you're comparing it to NHL like you are you have to look at trends. Where are the trends? What have they been the past 1,2,3,4,5 seasons what will they be in the near future? I'm not sure on NHL but I'm sold on MLS simply looking at the growth trends and don't see why it would stop. It could but chances are it won't. Nice debate tho man.
Last edited:
The trend for the NHL is total audience has also grown in recent seasons. Regular season ratings are down so it isn't all rainbows and lollipops for the NHL, but MLS also saw declines on both ESPN and FS1 this past season, and without the World Cup lead-ins to goose viewership on the main network they will be down significantly on FOX this upcoming season, so it isn't all unicorns and sunshine for MLS either.
Last edited:
ORRFForever
Registered User
- Oct 29, 2018
- 19,744
- 11,000
^^ This. ^^
I have been hearing this since I was a kid and it still barely matters in the U.S.
Well we'll see this year but I've heard that each season since the last TV deal was signed. The thing is there is always something that helps the numbers each season. Whether it's Gold Cup/Copa America/ World Cup or NFL lead-ins or lead-outs. Its a smart strategy fwiw of getting MLS more visibility it has helped grow the TV numbers gradually. The difference is that MLS is on a TV ratings growth streak since 2013. I know both sides of the debate will be interested in what happens those who are eager to see if it continues and those who are eager for it to end.
Last edited:
Doesn't have to be in Boston.Point is Kraft hasn't even tried.I love what he's built with the Pats,but he's just mailed in the MLS.Hell,Clark Hunt's done more.
Hockeyholic
Registered User
MLS's "best" rating would still be half (If that) of the NFL's "worst" rating. The NFL is an addiction. Most cannot get enough of it. And that includes me.
@Fenway has detailed the issues.... there's no potential site anywhere near what the Revolution have now, and it doesn't matter if the Hunts have done more in Kansas City, unless they want the Royals on top of everything else
SirQuacksALot
A Garibaldi in Kelp
- Mar 16, 2010
- 7,635
- 882
Of course the MLS is gaining. It's only 23 years old and has been expanding like crazy. Combine that with waning interest in baseball, basketball being less competitive than ever, and football killing all the fun then it's no wonder that soccer is gaining popularity.
Plus the players don't stand around doing nothing for most of the time, which is more than I can say for baseball and football...
Plus the players don't stand around doing nothing for most of the time, which is more than I can say for baseball and football...
Take out MLS and add any US Pro Sports League and that statement is still just about right. Football is still King and will be that way for sometime.
Coinneach
Registered User
PCSPounder
Stadium Groupie
You can literally witness student sections for major college football and understand this:
Football is still king among the 30-75 set. For now. The word "addiction" is a smart way to put it.
It's taken hit after hit for those below 30. It's taken hits that everyone thinks baseball is taking (and kind of is, but they may well be a beneficiary of football's issues). Mind you, that means another 20-25 years of football as "king" and then we find out if the NFL's ideas over the next few years can stem what's coming.
