The World Cup is up and running, in 11 NFL stadiums. The United States won its opening game convincingly, with an eye-popping TV audience of nearly 25 million across Fox, Telemundo, and Peacock.
And Fox, which holds the American broadcast rights (English language), is reportedly not pleased by the amount of coverage the World Cup is receiving from the self-styled Worldwide Leader in Sports.
Via Michael McCarthy of Front Office Sports, “[s]ome Fox executives are frustrated” that ESPN is apparently giving international soccer the cold shoulder. The article points to ESPN’s lack of focus on the 4-1 win over Paraguay, the first three-goal victory by the U.S. in a World Cup since 1930.
“We’re talking about a historic performance by Team USA,” an unnamed source told McCarthy. “Where in the hell was ESPN?”
ESPN previously had the rights to broadcast the World Cup. Fox took over in 2018. This year, Fox is reportedly paying only $485 million for the full tournament. (And Fox is reportedly making $250 million from the made-up “hydration breaks” during what usually are two 45-minute halves of uninterrupted play.)
FIFA’s broadcast rules don’t help matters. As explained by McCarthy, ESPN can show no highlights from a given day’s games until all games for the day have ended and Fox’s coverage has concluded. FIFA’s rules also confine highlights to SportsCenter, and not to other programming.
On Tuesday morning’s edition of Get Up!, host Mike Greenberg promised that the World Cup will be addressed on a regular basis.
“We’ll cover this every day for you here, because obviously this is a major international happening taking place on national soil,” Greenberg said, per McCarthy.
With the NBA and NHL seasons concluded, and with the NFL offseason programs almost fully wrapped up, there’s plenty of real estate to talk about the World Cup. All that’s left at this point is Major League Baseball and the College World Series.
Still, it’s no surprise that ESPN would embrace certain sports and shy away from others. Now that ESPN has a deal with the WWE, there’s plenty of ESPN integration of something that really isn’t a sport, because the outcomes are scripted. (That doesn’t mean it isn’t physically demanding and grueling for the wrestlers.)
There’s always an element of force-feeding by networks as to the sports they televise or partially own. When ESPN took an equity stake in the Arena Football League 20 years ago, the Arena Football League suddenly became far more relevant to ESPN.
Making this particular fight a little more intriguing is the fact that the NFL now owns 10 percent of ESPN, and that Fox has been consistently antagonizing the NFL through the American political process.
Ultimately, it’s in ESPN’s interests to cover the events its viewers care about. And its viewers clearly care about the World Cup. To get nearly 25 million people on a Friday night in June to watch an opening-round match proves it.
The usual choices are lead, follow, or get out of the way. Even if Fox is leading the World Cup coverage, it would be foolish for ESPN to get out of the way.
Especially if the U.S. keeps winning.
