I'm one of them. I no longer have cable and I stream sports now on android/internet. Bit of an adjustment but not like I was getting much value for the amount I spent on cable.Originally Posted by TFC07
I'm one of them. I no longer have cable and I stream sports now on android/internet. Bit of an adjustment but not like I was getting much value for the amount I spent on cable.
Can't be bothered. Plus TFC, as a brand, has pretty specific, negative issues.
I agree that this could be different given lots of time, say 10 years.
btw the cord cutting discussion is a waste of time, it's 5% of viewership on ESPN. Not that the Canadian networks will ever do us the courtesy of disclosing it.
http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/t...iewership.html
“What the world needs is more geniuses with humility; there are so few of us left.”
You know back in the old NASL days the media would tell us they are not covering the league because apart from very few teams most of the teams struggled to get 5000 to games, now when many teams are getting close to capacity attendance the media is not covering the league much because of TV ratings, so if TV ratings were to go up what the fuck will be their excuse then !
Truth be known, TFC is covered very well, as is the Impact. And if you look around, there are usually at least 2 beat reporters for every MLS team, except in the small markets were there is only 2 -3 media outlets.
The ratings are not based on a lack of media coverage. TFC has just been so bad for so long with no memory of good times that there has been no developed base of support.
Look at the thread in here on the CCL. SOOO many of us really got hooked on this team during that period of what really was small time success. But we got hooked on going to games. What needs to occur for TFC ratings to head up is
a) a consistent place to find games (that's why the Caps do OK)
b) a consistent successful product
c) a story that captures the imagination of the town
d) time....lots and lots of time.
We'll see. I think the growth in TFC will be found among people who go to games, which is why the evening home games is a good idea. From there, eventually, there will be tv watching growth. Now, if we somehow got jettisoned by Bogers and stuck with ownership that didn't want to fill media space, maybe then we'd have problems getting on TV. But, I can't see that happening. I still maintain that in 15 years, this team is going to be a HUGE at the stadium experience akin to what happens in Seattle and Orlando right now in terms of numbers. That will also draw eyeballs.
Until then, not worried about numbers.
Last edited by OgtheDim; 03-16-2016 at 08:53 PM.
To be honest, my immediate concern lies with the atmosphere inside of the stadium, not TV numbers. Supporter culture has dwindled dramatically since the good ol' days of our early gong shows. Casuals have taken the south and won't be leaving anytime soon so there's no easy fix, even if the SGs step their game up this season. I really hope that this roof actually does something.
lol funny choice of words since we got an actual gong into Saputo just last season. Dwindled was years ago. Support has changed. But what it has to do with TV I don't know. People don't watch on tv for the supporters. I hope.
Not that ratings really concern me.
FORMER FULL TIME KOOL-AID DRINKER
Ratings will come with time and once we are a winning team.
Remember last year's playoff game was the highest rated MLS game in Canadian history. We just need to win the whole fucking thing. Then they will respect us.
Yes very good point. And considering what a disaster that single playoff game was for TFC, it renewed the PTSD or derision amongst potential TFC supporters/viewers. TFC needs some sustained success to overcome that.
I hope the jays have a quiet year.
100% right. Had TFC gone to the Eastern Conference Finals or MLS Cup, the City would have gotten behind them. Maybe not to the extend of the Bluejays, but still.
This city loves a winner. Lets give them one!
Respectfully, interesting theories.
I don't think cord cutting explains it away. After all, Vancouver out draws TFC all the time. The Jays tv numbers shot through the roof last fall, i presume people under 40 were watching.
TFC has drawn over 300k for openers in the past. The difference? Hype. Most were early in their franchise and others were fueled by the hype of the bloody big deal.
This year? Just a solid looking team that is chasing not being in the bottom 4. Seasoned mls fans have been conditioned to believe that the regular season, though important for seeding, really is a step up from exhibition.
Lots of games to be played and then the real season supposedly starts.
Sort of a meh concept that meets a meh reaction from the general public.
Not at all talking hard core fans and supporters. More a commentary on where the 100k+ missing fans are.
Totally correct. You can look at the Jays to see what happens to a good team.
Forget about the Jays. TFC needs first be the top rated football on tv. Unlike the Jays, TFC faces competition from 2 other MLS teams. Plus, the most watched football in Canada is EPL. And if you include national team matches, the women are the most watched football in Canada. Next Friday's men's qualifier will likely get over 300k.
This is the same situation in the US. Most watched football on tv is MX, then la Liga and then EPL. Add in the national team tv ratings for US and Mexico, MLS has quite a few rungs to climb within the tiers of its own sport.
I think part of the reason for the ratings in that game is explained when you look at the numbers for Van-Mtl last week.
2 Canadian teams on a Canadian network.
Fans of TFC + Fans of Impact (Drogba) = combined high ratings.
When Toronto plays Mtl and Van this year, they should hit 200k based on the two combined fan bases.
Big fan interest in DP type hype signings is only one year, then they are just another player on the team to watch. You have seen that in the early ratings in the first defoe and first seba year.
If MLSE was using DP signings to increase interest, they might as well ladder the DP signings to one a year (ie. bring a new one every year and sign them to 3-year deals).
Of course, thats just the TL marketing/glitz and driving fan interest aspect, not the overall club level player development, quality scouting and decision making, and in the end winning product that people want here.
Last edited by Onyx; 03-19-2016 at 03:35 PM.
https://ca.sports.yahoo.com/blogs/eh...213612544.html
TFC-SKC number not mentioned, nor did it crack the top 30.
canada v mexico at bc place only got 142,000 viewers on friday
the ratings system is bullshit...there is no way they only got 142 k for that game with all the hype.
Sportsnet NOW just released a streaming service without the need for cable. I assume they will be able to report on streaming viewers for the TFC games available on this service and will be able to get better details on some of the viewers that go this route instead of the grey area streams they accessed before.
$25 without World seams a little steep, the adoption rate of a service like this will take some time especially at that price point.
I could get all channels I want for $15 per month. I am sure plenty of people can find similar deals out there, so I don't understand why Rogers want offer this service for $25 per month? At most, they should have price it at $10 per month. Don't get me wrong, it's nice Rogers is finally offering online service without being a cable subscriber, but they're asking too much money for little content (compare to other online services).
Rogers always overvalues their products.
Facebook is looking to make a deal with the NFL - that's where the real change is going to come in. The NFL isn't stupid - they know that streaming supported through ads is the future. I suspect Netflix will be coming in with bids on sports soon.
Netflix may have the Portuguese language copa coverage if i remember correctly. The tough part for Rogers may be the ad contracts, if they can sell traditional and digital program ads separately then they should be able to reduce the price but if all they are doing is taking a feed and putting it online it would be tougher for new ad revenue.
really?
im assuming that will only work for south American Netflix users.
IDK I saw it on twitter but it could just be a rumor.
From a quick search nothing appears to be finalized with netflix.
For those wondering about the Facebook thing, here's the Wired article.
I don't know if this whole internet thing will ever take off. I mean I have 12 channels and this already
The Argonauts get decent TV ratings and can't draw flies most of the time. TFC gets good gate numbers (relatively speaking) and is a relatively poor draw on television to date.
The reasons are obvious:
Ten seasons of relative suck-i-ness have not created (at least not yet) a culture of winning that can be leveraged to build a TV audience over the medium to long term.
Rogers and TSN have done little relative to what TSN for example has done for the CFL when it comes to making TFC games appointment television. Different bingo callers, different analysts, DIFFERENT CHANNELS and DIFFERENT KICKOFF TIMES never help either.
TSN to their credit wrote the book on how to take a moribund sports property (and the CFL fit that back in the day - due respect to them) and INVESTING in it to grow the property. Compare the hype they offer up for a CFL match versus the sixty seconds they come to air before kickoff of a TFC match and you will understand. I get that it costs money and resources to build a property up but in TFC's case that is whats needed.
Hell MLSE did a creditable job of a pre game show on GOL TV back in the day. What they are doing with ALL FOR ONE is excellent. Perhaps MLSE could go to Rogers and TSN and offer up a MLSE produced pre-game package that could (on the cheap) allow the broadcasters to start laying the groundwork to do whats needed to grow these numbers.
Last edited by bgnewf; 04-01-2016 at 04:26 PM.
^^ the one thing that may help this year is the majority of our home games are starting at 7/7:30pm (with a few exceptions here and there).
That should help with the appointment part of appointment television.
Toronto FC,#CMNT & #CWNT, Scotland, Heart of Midlothian FC, Tottenham Hotspur FC
"The Harder the Struggle, The Greater the Reward" - @OsoJ92AWAY DAYS - CHICAGO August 2017, MONTREAL March 2018
There was something in the Finding Toronto podcast that I found enlightening, between the usual jocularity about pies and the "they do that?" fun and the Northern British humour.
They were commenting on the ratings issue. They indicated that it takes generations to develop passion for a team. Expecting people to take up a team that has only been around 10 years is too much. People have to go with their parents to a game, then they get the passion and pass it on.
I would point out also that MLS has only been around for 20 years. All the major sports events that people go gagga over in the US have been around for over 40 years. Nascar, College hoops, College ball, NFL, MLB, NBA. Heck, people in the US now have over 20 years of watching the World Cups (mens and womens) and enjoy that in droves.
Up here, we've got the NHL and the CFL and the Jays and now the Raptors (although only really starting the last 2 seasons) and freaking curling, which has been around for over 50 years on TV (note - my family played the game, I played it in high school and if I still had cable, I'd probably watch the Brier and the Scotties and the World Championships).
If your sports product is good, you have a chance to build ratings. But it takes decades. I think both TSN and Sportsnet see that. But, until there are solid numbers somewhere, there will be no big investment.
As for the CFL investment by TSN, don't forget that the Grey Cup always got HUGE numbers and was on both CBC and CTV at the same time. There was a base to work towards. MLS doesn't have that base. Glad its growing for the Whitecaps as anything that grows the game in Canada is a good thing.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote