| pokoko said:
That's almost exactly what happened and continues to happen with every World Cup, though to a lesser degree. If you watch sports, it's a very much advertised event. People get excited for World Cups, they get excited for Team USA, they watch the first match, and then they ... stop watching. The reality is, a long, boring match can be dreadfully long and boring, which is exactly what a lot of early World Cup matches are. People will start out interested, ready to be converted, but watching the ball get kicked back and forth at midfield for an hour will win no one over. THAT is what happens, especially when you have teams in the first rounds aiming for a "0-0 tie" because they have no real hope of out-scoring the powerhouse teams. |
Except I have posted that the US v. Ghana match in round of 16 got higher ratings than the US England match in the group stage. Ratings tend to be affected by day and time and what network they are on more than anything. The 2010 World Cup saw a significant increase over 2006 which saw a significant increase over 2002.
"24.3 million total American viewers in 2010 (vs. 19 million in 2006), making it the most viewed soccer game in U.S. history according to Neilsen ratings."
I also have shown clear data that the domestic league has grown in scale and interest and that people do not watch and then give up, many stay and numbers grow. Sorry if I am getting defensive, but this thread is a cycle of "state outdated perception" "have perception refuted by evidence" "ignore evidence and restate perception" is wearing on me.
