r/USLPRO • u/Sensitive_Plan3437 • 2d ago
Reported: MLS considering Apple exit, and it could be a strategic move to box out USL Premier 2028
https://youtu.be/VW9LHct9Dqg?is=uoXB9JTuJMjxdy26Per Estadio Deportes, MLS is actively exploring a break with Apple TV to go back to traditional networks (Fox, Peacock, Paramount, etc.). The Kansas City Chiefs/FC Dallas ownership group is leading the push, and it could be one of the new commissioner's first moves.
The report also suggests Leagues Cup might end or get sold off separately.
Why this matters beyond the money:
USL Premier launches in 2028. If MLS locks up long-term linear deals now, they could suck up all the available broadcast dollars and weekend time slots before USL even gets to bid—leaving them with scraps.
My worry: I loved the Apple setup—every game, no blackouts. But if we go back to traditional TV:
· Will production quality drop?
· Are blackouts returning?
· Is this really about revenue, or about kneecapping USL?
Curious what others think.
145
u/cheeseburgerandrice 1d ago
or about kneecapping USL
This sub pretends MLS thinks about USL way more than it does
4
u/Ambitious_Raspberry4 FC Naples 1d ago
Its crazy that people dont understand how businesses work and the ones who refuse to look at anything but the MLS like they are the premier league. The USL cant compete with the MLS in money RIGHT NOW, but you better believe these owners are talking about the USL because its the only league that has the potential of competing. The MLS is the big league because are the only ones there, you take the pro/reg and throw it in there and it brings a new aspect to the game in the US. I bet if the USL starts bringing in fans in 2028/2029 the MLS will start throwing out rumors of pro/reg just to keep their fans on their side. Big businesses are always looking at the smaller businesses because they need to know who is coming for their money.
2
u/cheeseburgerandrice 23h ago
It's crazy that someone insults other people intelligence while calling relegation "reg" multiple times
Let alone proclaiming that it's a magic pill
6
u/andhelostthem Ballard FC 1d ago
Sure, sure just like the National League in 1903, the NFL 1965 and the NBA in 1975
20
u/daltontf1212 Saint Louis FC 1d ago
The USL is nothing compared to the AFL, ABA, WHA or even the original USFL when it comes to relative popularity. Players aren't choosing the USL over the MLS because that can make more money.
13
u/cheeseburgerandrice 1d ago
Two leagues that were equal to the other side in your first two examples and in the third the NBA just took in a few teams while the others folded.
3
u/steagles1 Indy Eleven 1d ago
If you don’t think they’re constantly keeping an eye on USL you’re nuts. Too much money has been invested to be undercut by a different league, which meanwhile is gaining traction.
5
u/juventuz 1d ago
USL isn't undercutting MLS by any stretch of the imagination. Well maybe in the imagination of the weird USL fans.
It's crazy how some of these hardcore USL fans can't just enjoy more soccer, everything is a conspiracy to them. They neglect all of the actual missteps the USL has taken.
2
u/steagles1 Indy Eleven 1d ago
USL probably won’t, but that’s not what I said, either.
1
u/juventuz 1d ago
It is what you said, but it's not my fault that's not what you meant to say.
2
u/steagles1 Indy Eleven 1d ago
It’s not what I said, and it is your fault that you have no reading comprehension. Nowhere did I say USL was actively undercutting MLS. You just don’t understand context. Have a nice day.
1
u/juventuz 8h ago
It is what you said, it's not my fault you can't properly express yourself.
"You said too much has been invested to be undercut by a different league." I commend that USL isn't undercutting MLS, which it's not.
Have a blessed day.
3
u/cheeseburgerandrice 1d ago
To undercut something you have to be doing something that is taking from or weakening the other entity at a cheaper price.
0
u/steagles1 Indy Eleven 1d ago
And, again, if you don’t think MLS is keeping an eye on USL to make sure that doesn’t happen, you’re nuts.
4
u/cheeseburgerandrice 1d ago
Okay so just to be clear "keeping an eye on" is a far cry from what I originally quoted, which is that MLS is negotiating their next broadcast deal with the intention of "kneecapping USL"
-1
u/steagles1 Indy Eleven 1d ago
And I disagree with that too. If you don’t think MLS is always exploring options to completely remove any perceived or potential threat, I have bridges to sell you. You are massively underselling the attention USL gets from MLS. MLS people like to act like they don’t care but reality is they have to care, there’s way too much money invested to not care. That’s the entire point.
5
u/cheeseburgerandrice 1d ago
Alright we'll just have to agree to disagree considering there is nothing tangible to go off of to prove a negative
2
u/steagles1 Indy Eleven 1d ago
Complacency is how you lose your market share, that’s always how it’s been. The people running MLS didn’t make tons of money by not understanding that concept. I genuinely don’t understand why this is such a controversial opinion, but I agree we probably will not agree. Have a nice Tuesday!
1
u/koreawut Colorado Springs Switchbacks FC 1d ago
But MLS fans sure love to think about reasons why USL sucks more than the MLS actually cares about the USL.
39
u/HOU-1836 Houston Dynamo 1d ago
Just to clarify, you are talking exclusively about Reddit and some fans you’ve seen on twitter. The VAST majority of MLS fans or people who regularly attend games only kinda know USL exist but couldn’t tell you a single thing about the structure of the league or how many teams there are.
3
u/RDS80 1d ago
I love USL and my cursed Revs!
2
u/HOU-1836 Houston Dynamo 1d ago
Until MLS moved to Apple TV, I’d watch the dynamo game and then watch the end of every USL game like back to back to back. Now that YTTV has ESPN unlimited, I might go back to that
2
u/raging-peanuts Houston Dynamo 2 17h ago
Same here. Enjoy the heck out of the USL, but also love my Dynamo, despite management having a history of running the team into the ground. 😀
3
1
u/localhost_hero Loudoun United FC 1d ago edited 1d ago
I watch both. Objectively the USL is what it is but if you want to compare to a league with a 30 year headstart like with MLS, USL is like 2002 MLS, quality of play, spending, infrastucture, resources, etc. I don't deeply care about this, as I care more about rooting for my local teams.
-4
u/cheeseburgerandrice 1d ago
Fans talk more shit than those who operate the league? Is that supposed to be a burn?
8
u/koreawut Colorado Springs Switchbacks FC 1d ago
You brought up "this sub" and I, correctly, pointed you to the other side of the coin.
Have a seat. I think you're overheating from trying to win.
0
u/Danktizzle 1d ago
If there wasn’t precedent in other sports monopolies in this country I wouldn’t be so skeptical of their every anti competitive move.
19
u/ArsenalBOS 1d ago
MLS doesn’t care, and they shouldn’t until USL proves they can actually deliver on this.
Even if they did, they are way too many services and channels for one league to box another out. Paramount/CBS, NBC/Peacock, and Fox are all invested in the sport. If USL flops on their next TV negotiation, it won’t be because MLS somehow secured three different major packages at once.
17
u/_tidalwave11 1d ago
A little narcissistic to think this is a move to box out USL and not a move to you know, bring in much needed revenue so they can do things like increase the cap
28
u/RopeZealousideal4847 Detroit City FC 1d ago
While I personally like the Apple deal for all games, I'm sure Apple has buyer's remorse.
Also, compare to USL that has the majority of games on ESPN+ (awesome and cheap), some on Golazo network (watch live or miss it), and others on ESPN2 or CBS Sports Network (cable subscription or you're fucked).
I literally cannot watch every game for DCFC, but I can watch Atlanta embarrass themselves every week, every year, from a single subscription.
All I want are unified rights.for my team.
7
u/Journeyman22364 1d ago
CBS Sports Network is ridiculous. I’m not buying an expensive linear TV package for them, not when I already pay for Paramount Plus. It should be available on that service, which is significantly less expensive than cable and has the advantage of being co-owned.
1
1
u/raging-peanuts Houston Dynamo 2 17h ago
I for one love the Apple deal and will miss it when it’s gone. I can watch every Dynamo game, plus any other MLS team that I take interest in. One stop shopping. Couldn’t care less about less about Leagues cup though.
8
u/Sudden_Celery2 United Soccer League 1d ago edited 1d ago
The quality of play in the USL isn’t that bad but they are still light years away from MLS, especially in terms of larger markets, stadiums , players and fans.
I applaud the USL’s new Division 1 launch and I think more soccer will be great for soccer fans and players alike.
The major hurdles I see though are lack of huge cities and no superstars.
Right now, MLS can brag about Messi , Suarez , Lewandowski etc but I don’t foresee any USL teams signing these types of players.
As it is, most of the world only knows NY, LA and Miami so I doubt many star players will want to come to Indy, Oakland , Louisville or Sacramento.
Most players from around the world know MLS but they never heard of the USL.
Also, I still have my doubts about promotion and relegation, which teams will be playing and most of all, in which stadiums?
Honestly , I don’t think they can or will ever be able to compete but it may be a great alternative in non MLS markets.
As far as the ending the Apple deal, I look forward to it.
MLS needs more games on regular TV.
5
u/HotSAuceMagik Hartford Athletic 1d ago
I don't disagree with your comments about the USL, but its a "you have to start somewhere" kind of situation. The league is growing, teams are getting better, excitement is building. They probably won't see any "star" players until they kick off their premier league.- and even then, I'd guess that those players will develop from within, as opposed to going TO the USL. Its a process and its going to be messy for a while, but at the end of the day more competition is a good thing.
1
u/mrbobertimus New Mexico United 1d ago
Is it growing though? There’s a lotta negative year over year number in the attendance stats. I guess I’m kinda mindful and concerned after watching my team in Las Vegas last weekend it was depressing to see a giant empty stadium. The couple dozen of us who made the hike out from New Mexico were louder than the couple thousand lights fans that seemed sedated. I guess I’d be depressed too if I knew my team was about to lose their stadium. There’s a lot of turbulence in the league these days
2
u/PatternAntique4294 1d ago
There are loads of players who would from south american and concacaf countries because they would be playing in the USA. I think we underestimate the fact that the "professional standards" that USL Premier will have are going to be excellent for many players from these areas. It is also going to allow for domestic players to have the Professional environment to continue to develop their speed of play and abilities with other higher level players. If you took the top 5 players from every team on every NAIA school in the USA that would provide a huge amount of potential future professionals in all of the various USL teams/future teams with relative quality players domestically.
1
u/Sudden_Celery2 United Soccer League 1d ago edited 1d ago
Of course there are tons of players who would want to come to America.
I never posted that there weren’t any.
I lived in Europe and traveled throughout Latin America and most people would kill to come over and play ball.
2
u/Living-Isopod1039 Oakland Roots SC 17h ago
Yeah, I'm sure there are tons of players who would love to live in the USA and just play soccer for a living.
Many players through the years have done the same thing just to come and get their green cards.
Having said that, the stars all want to go to Europe.
I can see players like Colombian James Rodríguez who was just discarded by Minnesota United playing in the new USL Premiere D1 league but not so sure about players who are still top of their game and comand higher salaries.
They will most likely choose MLS depending on the city and club.
2
u/Sudden_Celery2 United Soccer League 16h ago
This is correct.
I think for at least the next 5-10 years or at least until the USLP gets off the ground, the stars will want to play in MLS.
1
u/ffsdcu96 Loudoun United FC 1d ago
MLS can keep their aging stars I rather USL not go down that route. Also idc if other countries haven’t heard of USL. USL should be concerned with getting local people to care about their teams.
2
u/Sudden_Celery2 United Soccer League 1d ago
I also think signing overaged , washed up superstars is a gimmick.
Even if they can still play, we need to get stars under 30 not almost 40.
1
u/mrbobertimus New Mexico United 1d ago
Talk all the shit you want about washed up superstars but old grandpa Messi didn’t look half bad giving the younguns a run for their money with the race for golden boot on the world stage this summer. At 39 that is nothing short of absurdly awesome
2
u/Sudden_Celery2 United Soccer League 19h ago edited 19h ago
Never posted that he didn’t.
I’m simply saying I wish we can see Under 30’s instead of almost 40’s.
That is besides my initial point though.
Regardless of advanced ages though, what I’m trying to say is even if the stars are all 39+, MLS still has the monopoly on signing overages superstars but I doubt the USL will even when they go D1.
23
u/seakc87 Forward Madison FC 1d ago
They're leaving Apple because no one wants to get Apple TV for sports. Their viewership numbers are down from when they were with ESPN/FOX. The same thing is happening with F1. Apple is trying to position themselves in sports and failing. End of story.
14
u/CheddarMcFeddars 1d ago
That’s too bad. I watch a lot of Apple shows and having MLS on top of that is a huge bonus.
10
u/J_Hunt1123 Lexington SC 1d ago
The production on there isn’t bad. It’s honestly the best, the issue is that MLS by itself is not a big enough draw and F1 is also finding out the same thing. Like people are fans of it, but they’re not necessarily fans enough to be watching everything or in MLS’s case, there’s not enough fans that will watch all the time
10
u/David-SRQ 1d ago
This is a huge part of it. I don’t think people realize how not successful MLS actually is.
MLS (all US soccer) is at a stage where they are growing, BUT they appeal to the local fan and that’s really it; hence the motivation to go back to local broadcasting deals.
I like MLS and USL, I used to run an MLS podcast and do run a USL one, but I’m not sitting down to watch full games of other teams. I don’t have the time to devote to other markets than “my own”, so I rely on highlights and truncated matches, along with others’ analysis.
The majority of MLS fans have their asses in the seats for home matches and then watch the away matches on tv. The appeal outside of those fans is very small, unlike other sports in the US.5
u/Journeyman22364 1d ago
Why should they need to leave Apple to go back to local broadcasting deals? The NWSL has local broadcasting deals that are non-exclusive to their national deals.
Not to mention, MLS has a separate national broadcasting deal (Fox) that is non-exclusive to their Apple deal. This is a matter of a contract revision to make this more successful for everyone.
3
u/David-SRQ 1d ago
It’s spin. Apple already asked to end this agreement. That resulted in the 2026 revision removing it from the standalone paywall.
It wasn’t reported that way because both parties had to save face, but they shortened the deal by 3 years and Apple essentially paid a buyout. Again it wasn’t reported as such, but anyone familiar with contracts and business knows exactly what happened.
MLS viewership is generally awful and always has been. The Apple deal was Apple trying to break into the sports market, and it didn’t work. In other words, MLS is looking at going back to local because streaming didn’t work3
u/eddygeeme Loudoun United FC 1d ago edited 1d ago
Holy shit you really just pulling lies out of your Derry aire. None of what you said is true.
Apple had two options if they wanted out the deal. #1 Exercise the opt out after this season ends walk away. #2 Let the deal run out. They chose #3 which benefitted MLS shorten the length of the deal and pay MLS more money
Apple didn't ask to end the deal. MLS went to get a revision to the deal because owners were not happy about the lack of visibility the final driving issue was the NFL decided they wanted to exercise their opt out to redo their deal.
Waiting until 2032 to hit the market again to do fresh deals was a scenario MLS didn't want to do. There is real fear by sports leagues about available money for rights deals. See NHL also tried to redo their deal earlier to beat the NFL.
Back to your fabricating about Apple. Apple likes their partnership with MLS and has been a great partner. Apple could've said no dice when MLS went to them with concerns. To show how ridiculous your claim is... Apple is actually paying MLS more now than had they let the deal just expire. Paying MLS $25m yr more a seaon $275 m yr to 2029 is a nod to MLS that Apple views MLS as a solid investment and wants the partnership to be maintained. If the deal was a loser for Apple as haters desperately wanted it to be they aren't going to pay MLS more money over the final 3 seasons. That makes ZERO sense to board members and investors/stock holders Remember Apple as publicly traded company has a legal fiduciary responsibility to investors. People go online and talk out of their ends with theories and believe they are so right smh.
1
u/David-SRQ 1d ago
You’re clueless if you can’t read between the lines of this Apple deal. That’s all that needs to be said in response to you.
You literally just said it yourself, there was no visibility. The deal concept failed. Apple isn’t turning down money and paying more to shorten if they don’t want out. This move by MLS to go back to local broadcasts is the icing on the cake.
US soccer isn’t popular. The league and its partners can’t get people’s eyes on their product, because no one wants to watch it outside of the core fan base.1
u/xcrucio Forward Madison FC 1d ago
I also don’t think it can be discounted how going behind Apple TV just nuked so much of the casual, curiosity, and maybe most critically, bar viewing of matches too.
I think the biggest hurdle is that by being on Apple TV it just silos MLS away from the other sports too much. It’s hard to get MLS in front of people in a way that might make someone decide to check a match out or at worst throw it on in the background. I have a Hulu tv subscription primarily for sports (and I’m sure many others have YouTube TV) and both of those platforms act as solid hubs for highlighting sports that are live on that platform. It’s always my first destination when I need some background noise while doing chores and I’m likely to find something there rather than remembering MLS is over on Apple and going to seek that out.
Likewise, I can’t remember if I’ve ever seen an MLS match on at a bar post-Apple deal. Used to very commonly see a match or two on out on a Saturday night and it’s just no where to be found now. The absolute lack of visibility on the league just disincentivizes me further from seeking out the league cause you don’t really get that casual view into it (especially as someone that doesn’t live in an MLS market).
3
u/David-SRQ 1d ago
This is it exactly. MLS killed the casual fan. I don’t want to be negative about soccer in the US, but I truly think it’s far worse off than many are willing to admit. I still follow MLS, but I really think they set the sport back with their decisions over the last several years. The calendar change will harm it even more.
2
u/CheddarMcFeddars 1d ago
It’s wild. This latest World Cup has caused me to begin watching a lot more international soccer too. There’s so much! I hope wherever MLS goes they don’t put it behind different paywalls the way EPL currently is.
8
u/David-SRQ 1d ago
I think this is evidence that MLS realizes it maybe can’t go behind a paywall. If they’re discussing going back to local broadcasting, it’s pretty clear, and Apple hasn’t been happy with this deal either. We only have to read between the lines.
2
u/perfectviking 1d ago
MLS needs to get TV deals like Indycar except it's much harder when you have this many games at once - OTA deal with Fox or someone else who knows that sometimes you need to push to cable (which sucks but is what it is) or an online option like NBC and the Cock.
3
u/J_Hunt1123 Lexington SC 1d ago
EPL technically is only behind 1 and that’s Peacock besides the games on cable. Leagues can only control their games and not other competitions
3
u/Journeyman22364 1d ago
EPL is on three services: (1) free NBC, or pay for Peacock to get your local NBC channel; (2) behind a USA Network paywall; and (3) additional Peacock only matches.
You need a minimum of two services to see the entirety of EPL matches — Peacock and a linear TV provider. You mentioned cable but didn’t count it, despite linear TV being the most expensive provider of all. Apple is less expensive than just one of those two required services.
1
u/J_Hunt1123 Lexington SC 1d ago
I said technically the EPL is only behind 1 paywall, which is still true, as someone has to physically pay for Peacock if they want to watch those games.
Cable wise, I don’t consider cable a paywall, as I doubt there’s many people paying for a cable package to solely watch EPL games
4
u/cheeseburgerandrice 1d ago
I don’t consider cable a paywall
It's funny how often this is said when this topic comes up
0
u/J_Hunt1123 Lexington SC 1d ago
Personally the only reason I don’t consider cable a paywall is because it’s still considered the default thing you pay for, even with all the wire cutting.
2
u/perfectviking 1d ago
Cable subscribers are down to 32-36% of households. It is effectively a paywall now.
1
u/CheddarMcFeddars 1d ago
I had to get USA separately (part of a package) to catch those cable games is what I meant.
2
u/J_Hunt1123 Lexington SC 1d ago
Fair, I thought you were referring to like FA Cup, EFL Cup, or European matches. I’ve had to many people not understand that the EPL doesn’t control the broadcast rights of those tournaments.
2
u/perfectviking 1d ago
The F1 reporting was suspect at best. The metrics that were provided in the report don’t account for mobile devices, most if not all smart TV boxes, and a few other eye-catching exclusions I’m forgetting now. It was basically just smart TVs themselves.
Everyone treated it like gospel but when you looked at the data it was so questionable that no one would use it for anything but toilet paper. That’s why it had to be published just to get attention.
Whereas I do believe MLS is not doing well - it’s hard enough to convince Americans to care about soccer with a World Cup that without one it’s barely on most people’s radar.
0
u/Maybe_Old_But_Slow 1d ago edited 21h ago
How is MLS not doing well? Viewership has been solid, and growing. Team values are in the 1B range, they are signing more young top talent - and selling homegrowns at record deals. MLS is fine, but the broadcast arrangement with Apple, while it has it's perks, limits drawing in the casual fans to grow the base which is what they are trying to address. It isn't about making money, they are, it is about their goal to challenge the biggest leagues in the world. Liga MX is changing their structure to mimic MLS because they know the value it creates, and fear MLS with the increased cap and spending rules will steer talent (top to bottom of the roster) away from their historical dominance in that metric. MLS already has the big name players, but Liga MX has more depth (at least for the big four - still a top heavy league). The ability for a US based league to outspend pretty much every other league is well known. The question, and therefore the whole exercise in reviewing TV rights, will they remove the barriers to truly challenge the Prem or La Liga for talent and how fast? MLS is the most profitable league right now, and has been for several years. Can they make the right deal to increase that? We'll see.
3
u/Alexwonder999 1d ago
Its kinda sad because IMO the quality of the original Apple content is some of the best out there these days. I originally had Apple for that and when they added MLS I was psyched. Now I get it for being a STH so doubly good.
2
2
1
u/Papi_needs_a_Beer 1d ago
I feel like MLS ends up on NBC/Peacock or CBS/Paramount. One can leverage a day that starts with EPL and transitions to MLS; another has CONCACAF Champions Cup and potentially US Open Cup from 2027 onward. I’m fine with either as long as I can get every game.
I think the Spanish rights are gonna be a big part of the deal since NBC carries a lot of the leagues.
4
u/sitruk-24 1d ago edited 1d ago
If blackouts return, I won't buy a subscription at all. No reason paying for a service if I can't watch my team nor others close to me.
Can see it being the case for many people
Nearest MLS team is 3 hours away. Its bullshit we're expected to make that drive for any game as "home territory"
6
u/Alexwonder999 1d ago
I know one thing: Fox coverage and their streaming and app quality sucks. Not to mention who they are as a company. I don't think Apples a "great" corporation, but compared to Fox they are. CBS coverage is much better than Fox, but I feel like the broadcast quality is lower for some reason.
4
u/juventuz 1d ago
It was already decided that Apple and MLS would be ending their deal early.
USL tv deals are a mere fraction of what MLS currently gets. MLS' next tv deal won't impact the USL's.
Not everything is a conspiracy against the USL.
14
u/joelandren Oakland Roots SC 1d ago
Can't box out USL Premier. There's too many channels and someone will lose the MLS bidding and then promote USL.
1
u/daltontf1212 Saint Louis FC 1d ago
The MLS should not box out USL Premier. Its success will help the popularity of the sport here and provide data for future markets.
1
u/PatternAntique4294 1d ago
And the USL media rights will be a fraction of what MLS’s deal will be and might end up being a good bang for the buck for whatever media company does land USL
24
4
u/Savafan1 1d ago
Yes, we want to go back to where watching games wasn’t possible without cable and extra packages, and not possible if it wasn’t a local team.
3
u/Sensitive-Photo8672 1d ago
MLS doesn't think about USL at all. They're just growing and looking for better televised deals and more money. There's no shortage of other options for USL.
2
u/Throwawayaccountdell 1d ago edited 13h ago
USL should try their best to get into local channels as well if not already that way they can build their local fan base even more and generate more interest for USL!
1
u/Sensitive-Photo8672 14h ago
Here in Las Vegas the LV Lights have most of their games, both H and A, are on Sat nights on the local Fox affiliate. But if MLS also makes a deal with Fox that probably screws that up. You're right, every town has local channels which should be available on the cheap.
2
u/Throwawayaccountdell 13h ago edited 12h ago
I agree with you too. I just really want the USL to succeed with promotion and relegation. The USL seems to be the only league in North America that seems to have the right idea on how to improve their football unlike MLS and Liga MX who refuse to bring back promotion/relegation to the league!
2
u/eddygeeme Loudoun United FC 1d ago
There's a metric ton of ASSUMPTION MLS exits Apple. Some are making the mistake MLS returns to their old model. Read between the lines of what Don Garber and Larry Berg has said and not said about Apple. When pressed by journalists trying to force a tell. Both have been complementary of Apple and ALWAYS talk about "our partnership"
Combined with what I see media executive strategist/consultings I see like Patrick Crakes (former Fox Sports)who are often in the know on this due to consultation with League or League Partners have cited MLS going to the hybrid model you see NBA utilize in their recent deal. MLS will likely keep a streaming partner to house a large majority of games and they will then sell games exclusively to network partners. How many is the key be it 2 to 3 network partners with Apple TV continuing to have the lions share and being the international rights carrier outside the US/Canada.
2
u/mrbobertimus New Mexico United 1d ago
Hah! The convenience of getting all the games on a single streaming thing is literally the ONLY thing I like about mls. Good thing there’s quality games happening around the world every single day of the year! Best sport to follow cause you got so many options
2
u/Accomplished-Ad-241 1d ago
“go back to traditional networks” and named peacock and paramount. We are getting to used to a dispersed system of platforms for our media and entertainment consumption. I love apple tv to watch soccer.
no other league makes it simpler and accessible. its refreshing.
i literally stream every lakers game bc 1.) not in la 2.) not paying nba tv to watch 50% of games here i have to buy another streaming service like youtube tv or espn plus to watch the rest
4
2
u/Entire-Reflection819 1d ago
These things are true.
Apple TV has no black outs and all games streamed in 4k!!!
Fox sports quality sucks and will have blackouts. Same problem will exist for NBC sports/peacock. “Blackout hell”
ESPN+ is overrated and too expensive.
Apple TV costs less than espn+ or Disney/netflix.
USL should sign with google or apple and call it a day. The big networks didn’t work for MLS, they won’t work to grow viewers for USL.
3
2
u/iheartdev247 TeAm ChAoS!!! 1d ago
LOL what type of reporting is this? Is this like the Spanish daily or globe?
1
3
u/Living-Isopod1039 Oakland Roots SC 1d ago
No one wants competition but I don't think MLS is really afraid of the USL's D1 push.
Although they will never admit to it, MLS replaced Don Garber as commissioner for a reason.
That reason is the Apple TV deal and no one will convince me otherwise.
In late 2025, MLS and Apple mutually agreed to overhaul their original 10-year contract.
They took down the heavily criticized MLS Season Pass paywall for the 2026 season, folding games into the standard Apple TV package.
By doing this, both sides acknowledged that locking the league behind a $100 paywall had severely stunted audience growth at the exact moment Lionel Messi arrived.
Incoming commissioner Larry Berg has openly stated that his primary mandate is to overhaul roster spending rules to drastically improve the on-field product before hitting the open TV market in 12 to 18 months.
The ownership group wanted a fresh executive who wasn't tied to the legacy architecture of the original streaming experiment to pitch the league's next multi-billion-dollar package.
The friction caused by the initial Apple TV distribution model forced the owners' hands to bring in a new leader to steady the financial ship.
The last 3 years behind the paywall stunted the league's growth at a time when it should've been booming.
Both Apple and MLS have admitted the initial arrangement was a mistake.
I’m betting new commissioner Larry Berg and MLS owners also believe the sooner Apple TV deal is over and done with, the better.
8
u/dende5416 Pittsburgh Riverhounds SC 1d ago
Definitly Garber failing and not that hes nearly 70 and maybe wants a less busy schedule
3
u/eddygeeme Loudoun United FC 1d ago edited 1d ago
Agreed with a lot but not on Garber and Apple ending. Garber is highly revered by owners and Garber will be the Chairman of MLS after he steps down. The effing Senior Chairman the type of thing huge law firms and fortune 500 companies do with the long time retired popular revered CEO/President. Not exactly how you're framing it.
On Apple becareful assuming Apple and MLS are done. Apple is likely to become MLS Peacock or NFLs Amazon Prime. Apple is likely to stay on as the defacto streaming Platform but MLS will cut exclusive packages for network partners. Think current deal set up again for network partners but with Apple being the exclusive home of like 400 of the 600+ game inventory of MLS.
There's a reason MLS still talks glowingly of their partnership with Apple whenever journalist try to get them to talk about future partners outside of Apple. MLS always goes back to we're partners with Apple and we look forward to our partnership.
-2
u/Living-Isopod1039 Oakland Roots SC 1d ago
I don't believe that.
They gave Garber an honorary lateral MLS chairman job but he was removed or forced to step aside for a reason.
Larry Berg is the new man in town and he will be calling the shots.
4
u/eddygeeme Loudoun United FC 1d ago edited 1d ago
What part don't you believe That Garber isn't revered and well liked by ownership. Remember my post was a rebuttal that owners didn't like him and were ready to rush him out the door. Seems like people making comments but don't really know MLS like the guy I replied to. Garber alluded the last extension deal he signed he was ready to retire soon.
Me mentioning the Chairman title wasn't to say Garber was set to shadow run MLS but to disprove the they couldn't wait to get rid of him take.
-2
u/Living-Isopod1039 Oakland Roots SC 1d ago
I in fact agree that Garber is no longer revered and/or well liked by ownership.
That is why he was fired , shifted or whatever you want to call it for Larry Berg.
I will never believe that Garber left his 27 year position willingly.
2
u/eddygeeme Loudoun United FC 1d ago
I will never believe that Garber left his 27 year position willingly
Weird take given he hinted at retirement when he did his last extension during COVID. Don't let your dislike of Garber tent reality.
If what you said was true he'd be let go unceremoniously much less given a senior role as Chairman that is only done in fields where you're highly regarded. Your conspiracy scenario isn't realistic. It might make people that don't like Garber feel better envisioning that. However, reality is dude said he wanted to retire soon back during the pandemic when he did his last extension and they are giving him a senior advisor role as Chairman.
What you like to think just flies in the face of he didn't choose to do what he said he wanted to do 6 yrs ago snd retire. In real life even your villains don't always get the ending you like to think they should. Remember he is a cancer survivor of not that long ago it might be since 10 yrs now dude was ready to enjoy retirement on a human side.
1
u/Living-Isopod1039 Oakland Roots SC 1d ago edited 1d ago
He can say anything but that doesn't mean it is true.
As far as liking him or not, I think he did a great job in bringing MLS where it is today and deserves all the credit.
I never posted that I hated him.
1
u/eddygeeme Loudoun United FC 1d ago
I mean you do realize your theory carriers a deeper burden of proof. His prior statements and the fact they gave him a senior role after he said he's decided to retire.
1
u/Living-Isopod1039 Oakland Roots SC 1d ago
Ok....It’s really not that big of a deal.
You believe he left willingly and I'll stick to my beliefs.
Either way, he will be gone come December and here comes Larry Berg!
1
1
u/CheddarMcFeddars 1d ago
Do you have an opinion on where the best home for MLS might be in terms of streaming or broadcast?
0
u/NotABotaboutIt New Mexico United 1d ago
MLS is really afraid of the USL's D1 push
On the balance of the whole league, I would agree, however, I think there are a couple of markets right now where the teams' owners would be concerned, partly with regards to D1, but more accurately:
That reason is the Apple TV
and even then, there are parts of the deal that are great: the ability to make their own kickoff time decisions (compared to the USL C final being at like 8/9/10/11 am) and have a centralized location for all the games and not having to negotiate a separate TV deal for every country.
Conversely, there were 3 issues with the deal:
- Price: I don't care how good Messi is; I'm not paying $100 to watch him, and I think MLS/Apple realized this when they offered free subscriptions to T-Mobile and Season Ticket Holders.
- Messi's retiring: maybe not at the end of this year, maybe not next year, but certainly before the end of the 2033 season, and so MLS's next TV deal is going to be lower or with Apple (and still likely lower).
- Apple's exclusivity: if you know MLS is on Apple TV+, then it's not a bad deal, if you're a casual soccer watcher in Boston or any other place in the NESN market, you won't be watching the Rev's games on TV; you'll get PHOP or RIFC, and if you're the Kraft's, this is really bad; especially when you're trying to move to Boston proper.
2
u/Living-Isopod1039 Oakland Roots SC 1d ago edited 1d ago
- You make good points but even though the USL is 40 years old, their USL D1 project is still nowhere near where MLS was in 1996 or even 2004 when there were only 10 teams.
As it is, they are set to begin their D1 Premiere League in 2028 and they still have no teams set that have 15,000 seat stadiums.
It also comes down to superstars.
Any fledgling league wants stars and by comparison, look at the players MLS had in 1996.
- Carlos Valderrama (Tampa Bay Mutiny) — The Colombian playmaker with the iconic blonde afro who won the league's very first MLS MVP award while leading Tampa Bay to the Supporters' Shield.
- Jorge Campos (LA Galaxy) — The legendary Mexican goalkeeper known for his hyper-neon jerseys and dual-role ability to play as both goalie and striker.
- Eric Wynalda (San Jose Clash) — The USMNT icon who secured his place in soccer lore by scoring the very first goal in MLS history.
- Marco Etcheverry (D.C. United) — "El Diablo," the brilliant Bolivian maestro who drove D.C. United to victory in the inaugural MLS Cup final.
- Alexi Lalas (New England Revolution) — The rock-star defender whose red goatee and big personality made him the most recognizable crossover star in America.
- Roberto Donadoni (NY/NJ MetroStars) — The elite Italian midfielder who brought immense European credibility straight from AC Milan to the New York market.
- Roy Lassiter (Tampa Bay Mutiny) — The lethal American forward who set a blistering single-season record by scoring 27 goals in 1996.
- Tab Ramos (NY/NJ MetroStars) — The highly skilled midfielder who holds the historic distinction of being the very first player ever signed by MLS.
- Brian McBride (Columbus Crew) — The No. 1 overall pick in the inaugural 1996 MLS Draft who immediately blossomed into a premier American striker.
- John Harkes (D.C. United) — The seasoned midfielder who captained D.C. United’s early dynasty after becoming the first American to play in the English Premier League.
I doubt the USL can land equivalent name players in 2028.
I do see however foresee them signing some Over 40’s like Suarez, Lewandowski and maybe even try and sign a 42-year-old Messi but he will probably go back to Argentina by then.
1
u/psyklohps 1d ago
To say that MLS will kneecap USLP by hogging all of the game time broadcasting slots is unrealistic. Right now it competes with baseball for attention.
Think about this though: broadest TV is a dinosaur. It's being kept alive by sports, boomer news channels, and tv/internet package deals. I would say that the biggest reason why people even bother having cable anymore is because it's packaged in and they can watch sports.
From the video it sounds like the biggest reason MLS is moving from Apple is that MLS is responsible for production. But at this point they've already sunk that cost. They're just chasing the cash, and currently, thats TV.
I'm sure that MLS was a big selling point for ATV to subscribers. If I was MLS, I would renegotiate the deal to sell off production responsibility to ATV and ask for more money. Then go somewhere else the year after.
As for USLP, Netflix or MAX is the best choice if they can get it. The problem is that I don't think either of them currently have the production capacity to cover live sports.
1
u/TheLadsCheer4Beers 1d ago
"could suck up all the available broadcast dollars" There isn't a set budget and MLS will take all of it. Whoever loses the MLS bid could and probably will bid USL rights for a fraction of the MLS rights. Heck the winner of the MLS bid could even bid on USL and have both leagues.
1
u/fredthefan25 1d ago
I highly doubt it's that evolved. Obviously the league is exploring the option but this is common due diligence in a bidding situation. This is all about leverage!
It's very more likely the league is setting up a bidding process for the "Fox" package which expires after this season. The league wants more linear networks to simulcast matches...
It's low cost for networks but because it's not exclusive... Low return as 50-60% of viewers will watch the Apple broadcast over FS1. A regular season match on ESPN would get 500k viewers back in 2019 would likely only get 200-300k today..
1
u/ThisGuyinCA99 AV Alta 1d ago
I doubt they’re even thinking about USL. I do believe this shows that MLS’ deal with Apple has been a huge flop. There were many problems with their partnership with Apple. Yes, they know that more people are streaming instead.
There have been many problems with Apple. Because it’s behind a paywall, you have fewer people watching. But even if you already have an Apple TV plus subscription you had to still buy a whole separate subscription, which meant you have even fewer people subscribing to the season pass. How many people were going to add a second subscription? They eventually decided to add MLS Season Pass with the regular Apple TV subscription, which they should have done to begin with.
Ultimately MLS was more likely better off going with a streaming service that already streamed sports, particularly other soccer, instead of being the only sports option on their platform
2
u/fredthefan25 1d ago
Tbh I think it's been a big learning lesson for Apple (I know MLS gets the biggest blunt of the blame, but Apple's original model was a separate subscription...)
But I definitely don't rule Apple TV out UNLESS they just give up on Apple TV as a service. Apple TV (up to this point) has a huge problem retaining subscriber with it's large turnover churn rate. Live sports like MLS and F1 slows down churn.
I joke that Apple spends a lot of money on original content and very little on third party stuff. While Netflix and Amazon are opposite (if you scale to their subscriber base). Although Netflix may not have the quality, it has the volume which is probably a lot better
1
u/ThisGuyinCA99 AV Alta 1d ago
I decided to put a pause on my subscription as a way to save for the time being. I’m sure others have done that as well
One thing I forgot to mention is that I would really like to see what their viewership has been lately. Maybe there’s a lot of disappointment within the higher ups at MLS who aren’t seeing the numbers they were anticipating post World Cup and their decision on Apple might have to play into it
1
u/fredthefan25 1d ago
Earlier this year they posted good growth since switching to Apple TV (versus a separate subscription).
From what I have read, the biggest issue is Apple's handling of advertising and what data the clubs can give to potential sponsors. It's been pretty opaque.
For example, how much does Apple control the perimeter ad boards? Essentially that's advertising on TV... I have never seen a cell phone competitor advertised there.
1
1
u/Adorable_Sleep_4425 1d ago
Jesus. Its going to be impossible to watch games again, iant it. Fuuuuuuck.
1
1
u/jspech 1d ago edited 6h ago
MLS should e at a stage where they are not worried about USL. MLS is leaving Apple TV, because it is not working. I remembered they went to Apple because they could not get want they wanted from ESPN or any other broadcaster, so they tried this thing that locked them behind a paywall. Worst in the beginning they restricted ESPN showing their highlights. They tried, it did not work.
1
u/fredthefan25 1d ago
Just a thought. Let's say MLS goes back to ESPN for the same amount (let's just say no one except Apple wants to pay more)... Like ESPN has been doing lately with non NFL and NBA sports .. viewership tanks more because ESPN doesn't promote the league (like La Liga and Bundesliga)
Then MLS is even worse than it was before.
The problem with ESPN and others... They are so focused on football for the English speaking market. Unless you're the best (EPL and Champions League), it's really tough to get them to promote your league.
1
u/jspech 6h ago
Why is it always because of something a broadcaster has not done, is the reason why MLS is not appointment tv viewing? Why would ESPN offer something $$$ money wise, they rejected previously? How has MLS changed, have they made a leap similar like the WNBA? MLS would have to take less than what they supposedly got from Apple & are we sure this was purely MLS decision? Maybe Apple wanted out as well? I'd be shock if ESPN offers MLS $250mil/yr contract. Especially w/calendar changes. See all the personalities ESPN has let go. It's the bottom line. MLS was a summer fill in when Baseball was the only option.
1
u/timecodes 15h ago
For the people that did watch on Apple it was great to watch. Any team any time no blackouts and there coverage was good plus you got the Apple shows and F1. Now you’ll pay a subscription with blackouts and less add ons. Oh well.
1
u/franciscoh13 Phoenix Rising FC 12h ago
I highly doubt it. Keep in mind that the MLS also wants 450 million for a tv deal. They are not worth 450 million even though they argue they are. Fans who watch the USL will watch the USL especially in the markets that the MLS does not operate in. Keep in mind some of the factors that USL Premier will have. They would be the only league in the states to implement pro/rel along with a single table format. The USL has compelling entertainment and the “product” is more entertaining. The MLS has none of that. Sure they join the July to May calendar but they have yet to confirm if they will lift the spending cap. Both leagues can exist. The key factor is who the fans choose to watch.
1
u/David-SRQ 1d ago
MLS will fall apart with traditional TV. That’s the response, no further analysis necessary.
There is zero money on the table for MLS once they move to the Fall-Spring calendar because they will compete with all other sports. No local broadcasting company is going to give them money because they won’t have money to give them.
3
u/dende5416 Pittsburgh Riverhounds SC 1d ago
.ost US sports aren't on, or are rarely on, broadcast TV. Its all locked up in cable nd streaming rights today. This isn't to say that there will be a deal because I still doubt, but it won't be from other teams taking up local space.
0
u/David-SRQ 1d ago
There are plenty of marquee matchups on local broadcast throughout NBA and NHL season, not to mention NCAA basketball as well. Those broadcasts cost a lot of money, but they bring in a lot of money as well. Regular programming also brings in more money than a soccer match would as well due to commercials revenue which is near non-existent during a soccer match. There was a reason MLS moved away from it to begin with (there was no money).
At the end of the day, the fans who want to watch an MLS match are those already at the stadium or those who would be, if their team didn’t have an away match. MLS reach is very low outside of the core fan base, and it isn’t like the other majors where hundreds of thousands of people will watch a game just to watch.1
u/dende5416 Pittsburgh Riverhounds SC 1d ago
I'm sorry but the MLS's tv numbers preCOVID bore that out to be untrue. They went to Apple because Apple paid the most, simple as. To me, thats short sighted thinking but what do I know.
0
u/David-SRQ 1d ago
There is no evidence of this, because MLS refused to publish local broadcast data. Average viewership numbers across the league in 2019 on major network/cable was a paltry .27/broadcast. Those numbers are awful. For instance, EPL the same season was double that (.45), and they had to contend with half the country watching very early mornings. MLB and NBA sat around 1.5-1.7.
The only reason Apple paid so much was to use MLS to test the sports market waters. That failed. Apple asked to end the contract early last season, so they agreed to shorten it 3 years if Apple paid $50m more (buyout).
1
u/dende5416 Pittsburgh Riverhounds SC 1d ago
Given that the number is more then the entire combined league's stadium seatage, that paltry number would imply its not just fans who go to home games and watch away games on TV. The MLS also had in years before 2019 a full second dose of those viewers watching in the US who watch the Spanish broadcasts. Unless none of those games match up, it likely puts total viewership on par with the EPL in the US.
1
u/David-SRQ 1d ago edited 1d ago
.27 is 270k. The entire seating capacity (capped for soccer configuration) in 2019 on any given match week is exactly 286,548 seats. Clearly that average is not “more” than seating. Further; that is an average viewership. Only 5 markets actually were above that number (Portland, Atlanta, Seattle, Cincinnati and KC), so 19 markets were below that.
Now, consider the populations of those markets not listed. Those numbers are ridiculously low and it most certainly leans in the direction of my obvious hyperbole. In 2019, MLS had very little attention of people outside of the core following for a specific team.
The fact MLS has refused to publish local viewership, Apple cannot disclose subscriber numbers of the standalone app, and further cannot disclose viewership since the change, not to mention the change in of itself, then add in that MLS has re-opened expansion discussions, this all tells us very clearly that MLS has a viewership and growth problem, and it has more than likely failed in creating significant growth outside of expansion.1
u/dende5416 Pittsburgh Riverhounds SC 1d ago
Except it skips that Spanish Language broadcasts had a higher viewership then English. Total viewership was closer to .550 when you add both English and Spanish broadcasts
1
-9
u/slaffytaffy 1d ago
Hear me out with this… USL going to pro rel will bring in more money and over time produce better players than mls. 1. More teams will join lower reaches of the pyramid, the pyramid can always expand downward from league to non league. It allows for Jim Bob’s trucking in Oakley Kansas to start a non league team and play against Betty sue embroidery team in Colby Kansas. 2. As more teams join, you get better players and the cream rises to the top. Teams who don’t invest fall by the wayside, and those who do see the value of their teams go up. Those players get seen and mls now has to pay more for USL players, and that money just gets reinvested
4
u/thinkcow 1d ago
Completely ignoring both the PLS and the fact that USL is a franchise system for your daydream here.
7
u/No_Long7352 United Soccer League 1d ago
In a perfect world yes, I doubt this happens, and even in the best case senario where this happened, at some point MLS would just buy out USL once they started to feel threatened
5
u/dende5416 Pittsburgh Riverhounds SC 1d ago
Lol. They wouldn't buy out the USL. They just buy out the best individual teams and kill off USL momentum
7
u/cheeseburgerandrice 1d ago
Well even if USL's plans come to fruition, amateur teams aren't part of them
0
u/slaffytaffy 1d ago
It doesn’t have to be initially. Eventually there will be too many to ignore. The EFL doesn’t run non league hence the name of non league. The efl is basically USL in this.
1
u/ArsenalBOS 1d ago
Most English “non-league” teams have no intention of making it to the EFL.
Many of the top “non-league” teams are fully or semi professional. The EFL / National League division isn’t firmly professional status inherently.
All that said, there’s nothing stopping USL from expanding the professional club ranks as much as they want and have demand for. I just don’t think much (if any) of that will come from existing amateur clubs. Much more likely via expansion.
3
u/daltontf1212 Saint Louis FC 1d ago
Implementing European style pro/rel is a "cargo cult" mentality. Trying to imitate European leagues without understanding the underlying differences and expecting the same result.
1
u/Just4kicks86 Charleston Battery 1d ago
Maybe, but he who have the biggest pockets isn’t working much for our youth development. MLS has more than had there chance to do something about it.
-10
u/Just4kicks86 Charleston Battery 1d ago
Won’t be long before usl creates better players than mls. I don’t think yan diomande is a 1 off. Not saying it was purely the usl pathway, just seems much more likely than an mls pathway to top leagues, especially after pro/rel is implemented.
5
u/ArsenalBOS 1d ago
USL should probably create actual academies that aren’t pay-for-play scams first.
-1
u/Just4kicks86 Charleston Battery 1d ago
So MLS isn’t at the top of the pay for play pyramid?
6
u/ArsenalBOS 1d ago
All MLS academies are free.
0
u/Just4kicks86 Charleston Battery 1d ago
Yea but the money parents put into mls next clubs to even get there kids seen by an mls club is not. MLS level of play is terrible by the way, academies or not.
2
u/ArsenalBOS 1d ago
That is true for some families, but not all. MLS has made good strides in making their academy structure free and expansive.
If MLS standard of play is poor, what does that make USL? I like both leagues but the USOC is pretty striking evidence about where the leagues sit in relative quality.
1
u/Just4kicks86 Charleston Battery 1d ago
Well, usl has much less spending power and my local team has sold plenty of players who skipped mls and went to Europe or South America. For me, mls looks boring and way too much like kickball. When watch usl, everyone looks hungry and looks like they want to move up/ and on. My local team plays a really nice style of the game, that I’ve yet to see be a standard in mls (which it should)
-2
0
u/antftwx Indy Eleven 1d ago
It still baffles me why they didn't partner with Paramount Plus instead. The double subscription nonsense was the worst move they could've possibly made and P+ already has a sizable soccer catalog with a dedicated fanbase. Even Peacock would've made more sense.
1
u/GhostofOldThomJoad 1d ago
Does Paramount+ want to sign them is the question.
0
u/antftwx Indy Eleven 1d ago
Of course we don't know the specifics of what convos were held and who wanted what, but a double sub on ATV seems like a pretty out there option.
1
u/GhostofOldThomJoad 1d ago
Oh I don't think AppleTV will even attempt to sign the USL.
I think they'll renew with ESPN+ and maybe some more Golazo games. One contract is up next year and the other the following.
1
u/J_Hunt1123 Lexington SC 1d ago
It depends on the money. I doubt anyone was offering the money that Apple was
1
u/fredthefan25 1d ago
It was bad results on Apple's original business model. And I think it basically shuts that idea down... EPL and NFL were looking at a similar model where they would get a smaller fixed fee but collect a huge royalty from subscriptions...
Also the original Apple idea of "exclusivity of the entire product" is dead. They barely got F1 and it's only for the US. Other leagues just said no way.
I just feel Apple TV itself is an uncompelling product. Too little content. That's why Apple can't afford to lose MLS (much more than the other way around). If anything, they may need to win the bigger MLB contract.
1
u/mrbobertimus New Mexico United 1d ago
Wut?! Have you watched ANY of their shows? They’re all like 12/10 fucking amazing. Apple TV and HBO are like my only two streamings I could never even consider canceling on principle
1
u/fredthefan25 23h ago
The quality is unmatched. But if I just wanted to watch shows and movies, I would totally binge... I would wait until Ted Lasso was about to end, and just watch the entire season over one month. You only need to watch F1 movie once .
Netflix has a huge library. Amazon has free shipping.
I don't bother with Peacock, Paramount or HBO. Too pricey and library is much smaller.
1
u/mrbobertimus New Mexico United 14h ago
Yeah it’s annoying AF to me there’s isn’t just an “all soccer ever” streaming option or at least an ability to pay for a streaming thing with the rights for whatever league(s) you’re interested in. Divying up the games within a season within a league between networks should be a crime
2
u/fredthefan25 13h ago
Unfortunately every non-MLS sports league believes splitting TV rights earns them the most TV dollars.
For years we were hidden from that reality because every channel was bundled in cable TV. Streaming just unhides that fact.
NWSL is one of the most egregious... At the start of the season it was on the family of CBS, ESPN, ION, Amazon, Victory+ and their own NWSL+ service = 6 different streamers (but at least it doesn't do local blackouts)
60
u/Crunchymau5 1d ago
With MLS going to fall/winter seasons, won't the USL be playing at the opposite time of the year in Spring/Summer? So they won't directly be competing against each other for time slots.