Soccer really sucks, doesn't it?

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Can you guys please put "news" in quotes when describing MSNBC? Akin to Faux "news" with more suck in ratings.

[Asher]

I apologize profusely for DanSing my post, Drake.

[Ming]

Shouldn't be, two regional teams competing vs two national teams?

A more apt comparison would be the US/Canada hockey game this year, which brought in a 17.6/33 rating in the US.

Not a fair comparison at all... The first USA/Canada matchup, which got a 4.3 rating, is a better comparison, since it was also an early round match up featuring two national teams in a global event. You are trying to compare this early round match to a "World Championship".

If USA were to make it to the final game (and pigs can fly), then the ratings would be worth comparing to the Gold Medal game. Needless to say, if the USA made it to the cup finals this year, the TV ratings would be huge.

[Asher]

Not a fair comparison at all...

Certainly more comparable than comparing two city teams from a single game in a 7-game series to two national teams in a single game.

[Ming]

It's not an excuse, it's reality. ABC is a mainstream, top-tier network in virtually every home. MSNBC is a relatively obscure network you need to pay extra to get.

The numbers on MSNBC set MSNBC records, IIRC. It did extremely well considering how little it was publicized and how hard it was to find on the dial.

Just incase you don't know what MSNBC is...it's a news network, not a sports channel or mainstream network. It was hard to find the game.

First... MSNBC comes as part of the basic package for the majority of cable subscribers. It is not a network that cable subscribers pay extra for. And, it is NOT relatively obscure...

Second, NBC promoted the game strongly on the mother station during it's coverage. It was NOT hard to find the game unless you were a total moron. And while it is a "news network"... it was also an Olympic network during the games. It covered tons of Olympic events during the games, and was heaviliy promoted.

[Drake Tungsten]

And, it is NOT relatively obscure...

It is for sports.

It was NOT hard to find the game unless you were a total moron.

I disagree. I initially turned to NBC to watch the game, thinking there was no way NBC would be stupid enough to show cross-country skiing or some other stupid sport on network TV while relegating USA/Canada in hockey to a cable news network. I was wrong, and had to check the DirecTV guide to figure out what channel the game was on. If I was a casual viewer who was just checking in on the Olympics and didn't know the hockey game was supposed to be on, I would've missed it.

[Ming]

Certainly more comparable than comparing two city teams from a single game in a 7-game series to two national teams in a single game.

Comparing a championship to another championship is a better comparison that trying to compare a championship to an early round match up. Again, a true comparison would be if the American's make it to the final.

[Ming]

And, it is NOT relatively obscure...

It is for sports.

But not for Olympic coverage... Anybody with half a brain that was following the olympics knew that it provided coverage of events not be covered on NBC. Maybe you couldn't figure it out, but most thinking Americans could.

[Drake Tungsten]

Again, a true comparison would be if the American's make it to the final.

I already provided a comparison between American soccer in the final of an international tournament and American hockey in the Olympic final. Hockey won, by a very large margin.

[Ming]

And, it is NOT relatively obscure...

It is for sports.

It was NOT hard to find the game unless you were a total moron.

I disagree. I initially turned to NBC to watch the game, thinking there was no way NBC would be stupid enough to show cross-country skiing or some other stupid sport on network TV while relegating USA/Canada in hockey to a cable news network. I was wrong, and had to check the DirecTV guide to figure out what channel the game was on. If I was a casual viewer who was just checking in on the Olympics and didn't know the hockey game was supposed to be on, I would've missed it.

Yeah... you sum it up nicely saying "I WAS WRONG"... and I'm sure it taxed your limited mental skills to have to actually use your TV guide to find the game... must have taken you hours to find it. Anybody that wanted to watch the game could find it easy enough.

[Guynemer]

But not for Olympic coverage... Anybody with half a brain that was following the olympics knew that it provided coverage of events not be covered on NBC. Maybe you couldn't figure it out, but most thinking Americans could.

At least 25% of Americans are retarded. FACT

[Drake Tungsten]

At least. The figure is probably higher in the hockey-watching segment of the population...

must have taken you hours to find it.

It took a while, actually. NBC is channel 6 here, while MSNBC is up in the 300s. You can't just look in the sports channel list, either, since MSNBC isn't a sports channel.

[Ming]

Again, a true comparison would be if the American's make it to the final.

I already provided a comparison between American soccer in the final of an international tournament and American hockey in the Olympic final. Hockey won, by a very large margin.

And as pointed out... you compared it to a second rate tournament. The olympics is far more comparable to the World Cup. That would be a true comparison.

[Drake Tungsten]

So you'd rather rely on a "true comparison" that we might never be able to make rather than a close comparison that we can look at right now? That's about the level of intellect I expect from you.

[Asher]

I still think soccer would be better if it took more cues from hockey:
1) Where's the bodychecking?
2) Put up some damned ****ing boards, the ball keeps going out of play
3) Why is headbutting the ball legal, but not other players?