I’ve not been following the XFL very closely, but the last I remember was that they were setting new record lows in tv ratings, in any category, across the board.
So, have they gone under yet? if not, when?
Well, they did manage to complete their first season last Saturday. I guess it remains to be seen if they’ll have a second season; if they do, I think it’s a given it won’t be on NBC or any of the other big ones. Maybe USA will pick it up.
Vince McMahon said that the XFL will be back next year, but won’t be on NBC. It is already on TNN and will probably need to find another cable outlet.
I heard on CNN (IIRC) that Vince (Well, they just referred to “The league’s president”, they never actually named McMahon) claimed that if a major network didn’t pick it up, that they would close up shop. They said that a cable deal wouldn’t be enough.
My guess is they may negotiate NBC carrying it on Saturday or Sunday afternoons, when the competition would be less intense, and a cable network continuing with a prime time game. There’s also been talk of UPN carrying a prime time game, but I don’t have a UPN affiliate around here, and don’t hear much UPN gossip.
I have a follow up question. Do the low ratings and general lack of interest in the XFL prove that maybe the NFL players really are worth their huge salaries?
It may look like that, but the answer is no.
Dead? Hardly. McMahon is talking of expansion, of all things!
Here’s an AP report from April 24.
Pretty much says that NBC canning XFL broadcasts is almost a definite (an announcement could happen within a week), UPN probably won’t pick up the slack and the XFL prez says that a cable-only deal won’t keep the league afloat.
Guess we’ll hear more soon.
[Edited by Alphagene on 04-26-2001 at 10:05 AM]
The ratings on Saturday nights were low because the target audience is out drinking on Saturday nights, for the most part. Sunday is more well-suited to football. The UPN and TNN games did a respectable share, all things considered, and they were reportedly thrilled with the 2.0 (or whatever it was) the games got, as this was much higher than old sitcoms or police dramas would have drawn. As low as their ratings seemed, keep in mind that the WUSA (the new women’s soccer league, for those who care) recently scored something like a 0.3 rating for its premier broadcast.
The football was decent to watch most of the time, and most games were competitive (the title game was a terrible blowout, though). Once the execs figured out that the lame “storylines” they tried to create in the first week or two (Ventura vs. NY/NJ coach Tillman, for example) were not appealing to sports fans, and that kind of stuff is more for wrestling fans (these are two very different groups), things went much more smoothly. Those who say that the football was bad are mistaken; eliminate all the fireworks and wrestlers on the big screens and trash-talking announcers, and the league had a respectable product.
I for one hope that they learned from the mistakes of their first year, and come back next year. I do fear that the stupid shenanigans may have turned too many people off, though. Just say “XFL” to some people and they will respond with a scoff like it’s some different breed of football. It’s really not.
OK, I don’t want to wander this OP into the General Debate, but . . . you have to put the ratings into context specially in regards to your statement. You just can’t compare the ratings of WUSA and XFL for the following reasons:
-
Soccer in the US is NOT part of the four major league sports. Those spots are held by football, baseball, basketball, and hockey.
-
WUSA may have a sweeheart deal with Discovery and TNT as compared to lets say Major League Soccer or other non-major sports, but it’s no on par as let’s say NBC and XFL.
XFL had a major partner with a national television station, NBC, it’s American football (a sport with deep roots in sport culture), the market was bombarded with constant promos on XFL, had the WWF $$$, and had a good time slot on Saturdays . . . .yet it only got in return 1.8 to 2.0 ratings on that time slot. Not much bang for the buck. Of course, XFL should have studied what other non-NFL leagues have gone through, but . …oh, well . .
XicanoreX
The problem is that it is not a new breed of football and we’ve already seen enough efforts to make ‘more football’ fall flat on their face since the 70’s. I mean the WFL (let’s lie about gate reciepts!) in the 70’s, the USFL (3 whole dollars, yay!)in the 80’s, the WLAF(minor league baseball doesn’t work well on TV either, so what where they thinking?) for the 90’s. (Is the WLAF still around?)and now the XFL, which dug its own grave.
Had the rules in the XFL been more signifigantly different then the world might have taken notice, but since its bigggest things were on-field cameramen (yawn), no fair catches (with a zone that makes it about the same thing.) and no touchbacks (CFL anyone?). This meant that it was just minor-league football with a forced corportate ‘attitude’. Big deal.
What’s the line on the XFL in Las Vegas…whoops there was no line.
The WLAF just goes by NFL Europe now. Since the NFL owns it, it’s likely to stick around for a while.
Agreed. My issue is that the media took EVERY opportunity to mock the XFL for their low ratings, but soccer is exempt from this. For some reason, the media keeps hoping that pro soccer–men’s and women’s–will catch on in the US, but there is no indication that this is happening or will happen.
Agreed. The XFL and NBC both made some huge mistakes in aiming a bit too high, perhaps.
The only thing I disagree with here is the “good time slot” part. Saturday nights just aren’t the time of week when folks want to watch football (or much TV of any sort, for that matter). They should have stuck with Sundays, at least to begin with.
Yes, they should have learned, but unfortunately Vince’s biggest mistake remains that he thought that his success in the “sports entertainment” (read “drama”) business of wrestling would translate to genuine sport.
WRONG! Semantically, economically, etc., that statement is simply false. If they are PAID that much, then logically they are WORTH that much, in the sense that the team’s owner is going to recoup many times his investment on a good player (hopefully). I think when some people say pro athletes aren’t “worth” their salaries, they’re just a little jealous that the skills these people have command so much more than the skills of the complainer. A lot of people think playing pro baseball or football or basketball is no harder than being a plumber or office manager, it just gets more money for some reason. Considering the grueling workouts, relatively short careers, and high risk of injury, I personally don’t think being a pro athlete is easy at all.
Yet another IMHO thread. Catch, TV!
Actually, I saw a story that reported that there was a line in Las Vegas. However, the betting limits were, by Las Vegas standards, incredibly low, just a thousand dollars or something – they felt McMahon was being honest about not predetermining the outcome of the games, but they still had to protect themselves in case McMahon was pulling an exceptionally good con job.
I’d be interested in seeing some support for the statement that the media keeps hoping soccer will succeed. Yes, you had some touchy-feely stories about the Women’s National Team, but that was as much a story about women’s equality as it was about soccer.
Where is this media conspiracy to push soccer on the US? How many soccer highlights do you see on ESPN or FOX? How much coverage does it get in most papers? I’m sorry, I just don’t buy your premise.
Now, on to the XFL. The point xicanorex made is valid. The hopes of both soccer leagues are to fill a niche market. The hope of XFL was to gain popularity approaching the NFL or at least one of the four major sports. The XFL failed to do that. The quality of play was pretty bad and they couldn’t decide what they were trying to deliver. Though TNN might be happy with a 2.0, the league investors won’t be.
[QUOTE]
Where is this media conspiracy to push soccer on the US? How many soccer highlights do you see on ESPN or FOX? How much coverage does it get in most papers? I’m sorry, I just don’t buy your premise.
[QUOTE]
You are right, of course, about limited coverage on TV. I have in mind my local print media. If I had a nickel for every time I’ve been told that soccer is the world’s most popular sport, I’d be a rich man.
At any rate, I don’t think that the XFL ever had any delusions of becoming as big as the NFL anyway.