http://www.socceramerica.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=Articles.showArticleHomePage&art_aid=30541

Contest kicks off the final round of 2010 FIFA World Cup qualifying series for both teams ESPN2 will televise the 2010 FIFA World Cup qualifying match between the U.S. Men’s National Soccer Team vs. Mexico Wednesday, Feb. 11, at 7 p.m. ET, live from Columbus Crew Stadium in Columbus, Ohio. The telecast, available in high definition on ESPN2 HD, will feature the CONCACAF (Confederation of North, Central America and Caribbean Association Football) regional rivals in their first match of the final round of the 2010 FIFA World Cup qualifying series.

ESPN’s lead team of play-by-play commentator JP Dellacamera and analyst John Harkes will call the game with sideline reporter Pedro Gomez, who is fluent in English and Spanish and has handled several sideline reporting duties for U.S. Soccer and MLS events, including the 2008 MLS Cup on ABC.

The February 11 match will mark the third straight final round of FIFA World Cup qualifying matchup between the two CONCACAF powerhouse teams in Columbus. In the first meeting Feb. 28, 2001 - dubbed the “Guerra Fria” (’Cold War‘) because the game-time temperature topped out at 29 degrees - for the 2002 World Cup, the U.S. won 2-0. Four years and six months later, Sept. 3, 2005, the U.S. team earned a place in the 2006 FIFA World Cup in Germany with another 2-0 victory over Mexico.

The U.S., Mexico, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Honduras and Trinidad & Tobago are the six nations competing in the 10-game home-and-away series, Feb. 11 - Oct. 14. The top three teams will automatically advance to the 2010 FIFA World Cup in South Africa.

The fourth-place team will compete in a two-game playoff to be held Nov. 14 and 18 against the fifth-place team in the South American (COMNEBOL) World Cup qualifying series.
Good to see them get this one in HD this time around.

Great news. Of course I'll cross my fingers that somehow Columbus on Feb 11 will be above freezing.

Great news. Of course I'll cross my fingers that somehow Columbus on Feb 11 will be above freezing.

I'd rather see it below freezing, let those warm blooded "el tri" from south of the border freeze their little nuts off

I'd rather see it below freezing, let those warm blooded "el tri" from south of the border freeze their little nuts off

Couldn't have said it better :) We play in the altitute at Mexico City, they have to play with 0F in OH ;)

USA ... USA... USA

should be a good one

That should be a really good match. The temperature is not that important, it affects both teams. Most of the players, in both teams, are used to play in warmer weather, but there are also a lot that play in Europe where temperatures are not that warm, specially at this time of the year.
For the USA team, Columbus is more important because they have a full stadium that's more pro-USA. And you know that's hard to have in almost any other stadium.

I don't have high hopes but... VAMOS MEXICO!

Great news. Of course I'll cross my fingers that somehow Columbus on Feb 11 will be above freezing.

I will be there again and I hope it is below freezing just like in 01. That's partly why we scheduled it there... in addition to the demographics of the region, the greater control of ticket distribution, and the smaller capacity.

That should be a really good match. The temperature is not that important, it affects both teams. Most of the players, in both teams, are used to play in warmer weather, but there are also a lot that play in Europe where temperatures are not that warm, specially at this time of the year.
For the USA team, Columbus is more important because they have a full stadium that's more pro-USA. And you know that's hard to have in almost any other stadium.

I don't have high hopes but... VAMOS MEXICO!

Yeah, it didn't impact La Guerra Fria I, with Mexican players not wanting to go out for warmups... right? :)

DOS A CERO

At that time we didn't have a lot of players in Europe, I think it was just Marquez.

But I think it's the same with the altitude. Not all the players play in Mexico City, so really the altitude affect both teams. The major impact of playing in Mexico City, is having 100,000+ people supporting your team.

Right now, this is a classic, like Brazil vs Argentina in South America, so I think the players are really motivated not matter the circumstances.

But yeah, I tie will be a great result for Mexico.

Regarding Azteca I disagree. The altitude is a big advantage since Mexican players play their more often. If we played there more than once every four years, and other countries played there more regularly, you'd see some different results.

Play us in Monterrey and see what happens :)

AARGH. The Dayton-Xavier game was scheduled for this time slot. What happened to college basketball on espn? First pro basketball and now european football??????? UGH............................ ESPN owes America an apology. This is getting completely out of hand.

This game should be put on ESPN Deportes.

AARGH. The Dayton-Xavier game was scheduled for this time slot. What happened to college basketball on espn? First pro basketball and now european football??????? UGH............................ ESPN owes America an apology. This is getting completely out of hand.

This game should be put on ESPN Deportes.

ESPN would rather show a game people care about. :)

Let's make the Green Bay game last year with the Giants look like the Pro Bowl.
It's awesome to have this game in Columbus, Ohio and also in HD.

Great news.

ESPN has stated due to other coverage they will not be able to do early pregame coverage or much post. Oh well. I'm sure they will still show the red Don't Tread On Me TIFO (organized display) that is planned. Be disappointing if they don't get anthems aired.

I hope USA wins....its going to be a good match.

Usually, ESPN telecasts within the US are in HD, and broadcasts originating outside the US are in SD, unless they are massive events like the World Cup.

Oddly enough, this winter season, NBC did the reverse. Their coverage of the Alpine Ski Racing events in Colorado were in 4x3 SD, while this past weekend's coverage of the Alpin Ski Racing World Championships in Franch were in 16x9 HD (or at least 16x9 very professionally upconverted 540i - it was hard to tell since the white-on-white and poor lighting of ski events are very difficult to photograph).

I will be there again and I hope it is below freezing just like in 01. That's partly why we scheduled it there... in addition to the demographics of the region, the greater control of ticket distribution, and the smaller capacity.

Well, it looks like it'll be in the fifties - have a good time, will be watching on ESPN2 in glorious HD.

Go USA!

On right now. PQ very good.

AARGH. The Dayton-Xavier game was scheduled for this time slot. What happened to college basketball on espn? First pro basketball and now european football??????? UGH............................ ESPN owes America an apology. This is getting completely out of hand.

This game should be put on ESPN Deportes.
I just love posts like these.

This game just proves why they are called the try-colors.

What a great win for the USA, love seeing the home matches in HD. Hope to see some of the away legs in HD if the host country has the infrastructure. That means prolly only the game at Mexico.

However, there has been a bunch of cricket in HD from the Caribbean islands in the past year or so (even on ESPN) maybe we'll get lucky.

AARGH. The Dayton-Xavier game was scheduled for this time slot. What happened to college basketball on espn? First pro basketball and now european football??????? UGH............................ ESPN owes America an apology. This is getting completely out of hand.

This game should be put on ESPN Deportes.

I'm still hoping ESPN gets the rights to broadcast the English Premier League; that way I can drop the sports package -- or switch to FIOS when my committment to D* ends next January. I want to see the Premier League in HD! Oh, and some cricket would be great; I'd love to get into that.

Very good game last night. The US beat Mexico, and still wasn't as sharp as I would have thought (but this was just the first game of 10 in the hex, so perhaps I am being a bit too critical).

Couple of points: I am sold on Michael Bradley. He had a superb game last night (and that doesn't even count the goals).

I like the quick passing style the US is developing in the midfield.

The first goal was a bit lucky (Bradley in the right spot at the right time), but the setup was superb. And his knock into the goal did require some pretty good skill.

The second goal Sanchez should have had - on the wet field, the knuckle ball just dipped below him. Howard would have saved it.

Speaking of Howard, he made some great point blank saves tonight. The US got lucky the Mexicans couldn't put the ball into the corner of the net but generally shot right at him.

The red card was a little harsh, I thought. But you don't mess with a goalie. And a picture I saw this morning did show a studs up challenge, which wasn't entirely clear from the replays.

I'm still hoping ESPN gets the rights to broadcast the English Premier League; that way I can drop the sports package -- or switch to FIOS when my committment to D* ends next January. I want to see the Premier League in HD! Oh, and some cricket would be great; I'd love to get into that.

Don't think they got it, Sky got five (Fox Soccer in the US) and Setanta got the sixth. FIOS has both of those now, so c'mon over in January.

I'm still hoping ESPN gets the rights to broadcast the English Premier League; that way I can drop the sports package -- or switch to FIOS when my committment to D* ends next January. I want to see the Premier League in HD! Oh, and some cricket would be great; I'd love to get into that.

ESPN with all the annoying tickers? No thanks. I would rather have somebody else. Luckily I'm in Canada and never had to deal with this nonsense when it comes to Soccer coverage.

Couple of points: I am sold on Michael Bradley. He had a superb game last night (and that doesn't even count the goals).

The red card was a little harsh, I thought. But you don't mess with a goalie. And a picture I saw this morning did show a studs up challenge, which wasn't entirely clear from the replays.
Beasley did have one of his best games in a very long time last night. I just wish he would take the ball and fly down the field like her used to do so many times years ago.

The red card was completely warranted. I saw it when it happened live that the bottom of his foot came in first. Bottom of the foot means studs up. I think had that have been a slide tackle even on another player a red would've been the punishment. The Mexican player knew what he was doing. He could've simply pointed his foot down instead of up. Or not led with his foot. :)

Beasley did have one of his best games in a very long time last night. I just wish he would take the ball and fly down the field like her used to do so many times years ago.

The red card was completely warranted. I saw it when it happened live that the bottom of his foot came in first. Bottom of the foot means studs up. I think had that have been a slide tackle even on another player a red would've been the punishment. The Mexican player knew what he was doing. He could've simply pointed his foot down instead of up. Or not led with his foot. :)

totally agree on both points! consider, however, that DMB is still coming back from injury & not playing a lot for Rangers. he looked about 85-90%

might add Dempsey looked good in tight spaces early in the game, not letting himself get pushed off the ball & winning some 50-50 challenges. think the Prem has toughened him up.

I'm wondering if CONCACAF(or maybe FIFA) may hit Marquez with an additional penalty-a fine or a 2-3 match ban. what he did would earn you a 4-5 match suspension AND a hefty fine in the EPL.

at 1st I thought it was the usual tactic of crashing the keeper to screw with his concentration & maybe force a mistake(since from the replay there was no chance Marquez would win that ball) but then I saw the way he hooked his leg out & exposed his studs. good lord if it had been a bit higher he would've hit Tim's knee!!

OTOH Marquez got no added punishment AFAIK for head-butting Cobi Jones in the '02 World Cup so probably not now either.

ESPN moved the Dayton vs. Xavier game to ESPN-Classic. It also replayed the Dayton vs. Xavier game on ESPN2 at 11:00PM Eastern.

Look, soccer is fine as a niche sport here in the US, but it just doesn't have the following of college basketball.

The Dayton- Xavier game was:

1. The first time two 20 wins teams played each other this season in college basketball.
2. Played before a sold out crowd of 13,500.
3. Had NCAA tournament implications.
4. Is a rivalry game.
5. Xavier is #14 in the nation, and Dayton is on the edge of being a top-25 team.

ESPN moved the Dayton vs. Xavier game to ESPN-Classic. It also replayed the Dayton vs. Xavier game on ESPN2 at 11:00PM Eastern.

Look, soccer is fine as a niche sport here in the US, but it just doesn't have the following of college basketball.

The Dayton- Xavier game was:

1. The first time two 20 wins teams played each other this season in college basketball.
2. Played before a sold out crowd of 13,500.
3. Had NCAA tournament implications.
4. Is a rivalry game.
5. Xavier is #14 in the nation, and Dayton is on the edge of being a top-25 team.
You are not going to win this argument.

College basketball might have a bigger following in the US, but as a college b-ball fan, I could really care less if Dayton-Xavier were playing last night. So to lump all of college basketball against US soccer is a bit ill advised. This game might have been big for you and the surrounding area, but nationwide?

1. First time in 2010 qualifying these 2 teams have played in which Mexico hates us.
2. Sold out crowd also, outdoors.
3. Had World Cup implications. College b-ball is not anywhere near as popular as soccer is world wide.
4. Rivalry game
5. Top 2 teams in the CONCACAF region

I'm sure the people of Mexico cared more about the outcome of the Xavier/Dayton game than they did their game.

Congratulations to whoever won.

Let's not forget the World Cup is an ESPN product and the NCAA tourney is not. As much as ESPN loves college bball an A10 game doesn't provide them much payoff down the line. The hype machine at ESPN knows that US v Mex is a huge rivalry with an evolving storyline. It will continue to play out over the next 16 months ending at the World Cup which has been a ratings winner for ESPN.

Does the fact that the US game sold out 25,000 seats in 90 minutes mean anything? And that is without any presale to "season ticket holders" of any kind. And the crowd appeared to me at least to me mostly US soccer fans.

What strikes me is as much as some people like to view the US as some homogeneous country where everybody likes the sames things everyone else does, it just simply isn't true. My "friend" community is mostly soccer players, coaches, ex-teammates, etc. Not always, but there is usually some kind of connection to soccer. My co-workers couldn't care less about soccer. And yet they refuse to believe me that there is a large contingent of US soccer fans out there - it's like a completely different world that doesn't mix with "traditional" sports, like an underground movement or something. There is simply no recognition that soccer exists or is even popular (and in a lot of cases, THE no. 1 sport for an American).

Geez, I was at Kaiserslautern in Germany for the US v. Italy game in the last World Cup. The city was overrun with US soccer fans.

What surprises me is that soccer is the ultimate sport to rally behind for jingoistic nationalist fervor - it is really, truly the only international sport - and yet the national team is nothing more than a blip on most people's radar. Geebus, the whole country should be getting behind our national team

But back on topic. The bottom line is that the game showed a dominant US team against its traditional rival - a story line that goes beyond the game straight into current political events. Of course, it was on US soil, so the US should have won the game. BUT, even though the US dominated, they still showed they have a ways to go to reach that upper echelon. I am optimistic, though, and I think Bradley has been doing a pretty good job, even if I sometimes question some of his tactics - mostly his subbing policies.

Does the fact that the US game sold out 25,000 seats in 90 minutes mean anything? And that is without any presale to "season ticket holders" of any kind. And the crowd appeared to me at least to me mostly US soccer fans.


There were at least 4 presales before the tickets were released to the general public. Sam's Army and American Outlaws were selling tickets in the supporters section to members and non members. I bought mine on January 5th and I think general sale was almost 3 weeks later. Also Columbus Crew season ticket holders were able to buy up to 8 tickets per account in a special presale. There was also a presale for the USSF mailing list and something called a Visa presale which may have been the same thing.

The crowd was mixed for sure but it's hard to speculate. A lot of people were wearing rain gear which makes it hard to know who they support. That said there was a lot of green. From my memory and those on bigsoccer more than in 2001 or 2005. We were in the US supporters section on the stage (in fact my back got quite a few close ups from the crane) and even around us there were a few Mexican fans including one in green.

Perspective from someone that has never played soccer (well, except for one game):

While soccer popularity in the US will probably not ever match that of the traditional US sports, I wouldn't be surprised to see it steadily gaining and becoming a solid alternative to football, baseball, basketball, hockey, etc, for a number of reasons (better TV coverage, youth soccer players growing into adults, ticket affordability).

I'm old enough to have missed playing the sport when I was kid, but my son started playing a couple of years ago (he's now almost nine), and I've started really enjoying watching it on TV, and after playing just one game (end of league "kids vs adults" game, which was a blast) am considering joining an adult beginner league.

Even though there's not a lot of scoring compared to traditional US sports, I love the fluidity, watching players position themselves going down the field, the passing, the counter attacks, the set plays, etc. There's always something happening. The lack of commercials is nice (for the fans, maybe not so much for the broadcasters). And at the end of the game (and the first half), play actually speeds up instead of slowing down. I've come to hate where the end of almost every basketball game consists of teams fouling, calling timeouts, shooting free throws, and (usually poor) attempts at three point shots.

The Euro championship last year was some of the best TV sports I've ever watched.

Cliff

Perspective from someone that has never played soccer (well, except for one game):

While soccer popularity in the US will probably not ever match that of the traditional US sports, I wouldn't be surprised to see it steadily gaining and becoming a solid alternative to football, baseball, basketball, hockey, etc, for a number of reasons (better TV coverage, youth soccer players growing into adults, ticket affordability).

I'm old enough to have missed playing the sport when I was kid, but my son started playing a couple of years ago (he's now almost nine), and I've started really enjoying watching it on TV, and after playing just one game (end of league "kids vs adults" game, which was a blast) am considering joining an adult beginner league.

Even though there's not a lot of scoring compared to traditional US sports, I love the fluidity, watching players position themselves going down the field, the passing, the counter attacks, the set plays, etc. There's always something happening. The lack of commercials is nice (for the fans, maybe not so much for the broadcasters). And at the end of the game (and the first half), play actually speeds up instead of slowing down. I've come to hate where the end of almost every basketball game consists of teams fouling, calling timeouts, shooting free throws, and (usually poor) attempts at three point shots.

The Euro championship last year was some of the best TV sports I've ever watched.

Cliff

Awesome - thanks for the perspective.

The Euro championship last year was some of the best TV sports I've ever watched.
Just wait until the World Cup next summer.

Just wait until the World Cup next summer.

Who has the Confed Cup this summer?

Who has the Confed Cup this summer?

Good question. It's supposed to be a practice session for the WC, so hopefully it's in HD. The teams involved will give the US a good measure of where we stand, it's going to be great. I want to see Brazil - US.

There actually were pre-sales.. to help keep tickets out of Mexican supporters. Thousands of tickets in US Supporters sections in the north end were sold via the US and Crew supporters group. Crew season ticket holders got first dibs. Then the USSF had a presale for their mailing list. Only after that did Mexican supporters have better opportunity with a VISA presale.

Yes, K-Town was overrun with US fans. I know, I was one of those fans :) And the jingoist nationilism of it all is partly why I love the game.

The recognition is slowly growing. The ratings continue to improve. It really is a top down situation with the national team being the quickest source to fuel interest in the game. A better performance in 06 would have helped. If South Africa fails and we get the WC back in 10.. look out.

From the NYT blog:

http://goal.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/12/a-lot-of-eyeballs-on-columbus/

A Lot of Eyeballs on Columbus

By Jack Bell (http://goal.blogs.nytimes.com/author/jack-bell/) ESPN and Univision both set records for viewership during Wednesday night’s United States-Mexico World Cup qualifying match in Columbus, Ohio.

The match, won by the United States, was seen in an average of 794,800 homes (1.2 million viewers) on ESPN2. It was the most-watched World Cup qualifier among the 26 matches ESPN2 has carried over the years. ESPN2 showed the game from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. Eastern. In addition, the network’s Spanish-language channel, ESPN Deportes, 192,000 viewers for its pregame show and 223,000 for its postgame edition.

Perhaps not surprisingly, the game on Univision, the Spanish-language network was seen in part or in its entirety by 10.7 million viewers and was watched by more people than any other sporting event in the history of Spanish-language television, the network said in a news release. Bear in mind that Univision, in addition to being carried by many cable systems, is also available over the air, while ESPN2 is a cable-only channel.

Beyond the Hispanic market, Univision was the No. 1 destination during the match’s two-hour time period among adults and men 18 to 49 years old in Los Angeles, Miami, Houston, Dallas, Phoenix, San Francisco and Sacramento; and in all households in Los Angeles, Houston and Phoenix.

The game also exceeded the viewership of all first-run England-language prime time shows (such as “American Idol,” “Lost,” “Law & Order” and CSI: New York”) among men 18-49 in Los Angeles, Miami, Houston, Phoenix and Dallas.
All the figures are according to the Nielsen Station Index.

ESPN with all the annoying tickers? No thanks. I would rather have somebody else. Luckily I'm in Canada and never had to deal with this nonsense when it comes to Soccer coverage.

I second that. I could not stand their constant "close up" shots and finally stopped watching after 10 minutes. Let's hope FSC keeps the rights for EPL matches here in the US!

It's a Hobson's choice. The announcers, clueless presentation, sportscenter cutaways vs. extremely good HD, and being available on the premier sports channel in America. I mean, have you seen the PQ on Fox Soccer or (heaven preserve us) GolTv? I don't think they plan on going HD any time soon. Setanta is fine, but the ESPN HD blows it away too.

Tough choice.

It's a Hobson's choice. The announcers, clueless presentation, sportscenter cutaways vs. extremely good HD, and being available on the premier sports channel in America. I mean, have you seen the PQ on Fox Soccer or (heaven preserve us) GolTv? I don't think they plan on going HD any time soon. Setanta is fine, but the ESPN HD blows it away too.

Tough choice.

Tough choice, right you are. I just got so sick of ESPN's "in your face" broadcast that I couldn't stand it for more than 10 minutes. Don't these people have a clue about what the viewing audience in the stadium (given the ideal seat) will see? That's the experience most viewers would like to come away with when watching the soccer match, not the details of hair or dimples on the face or tatoos on the players. Oh by the way, the stadium viewers are lucky enough to not have their view partially blocked by the annoying, imposed, "bottom line" graphics either!