Top Stories

Must-See Video: New Women’s World Cup promo

Alex Morgan


  1. It’s called marketing, people. They know people tuned into the Men’s WC like never before this past year….they are just playing off that success. It’s not a rip on the women or the men.

    On another note, there is a bit of settling the score at play (not much, but some). It’s a NATIONAL team, therefore they represent the entire NATION….yes, the women can’t right every wrong, but there’s at least something to it. Decent commercial overall….it gets the emotion and competitive feelings going, and that’s what they were aiming for.

  2. Imagine the reverse: Women’s world cup, USA loses early; Men’s World Cup the next year, no hope of “settling the score”.

    USA women could win and really ride the wave of new soccer fans from last summer.

  3. Thought ESPN’s promos for the WC last year were much, much better. They really highlighted the global aspect of soccer, and Americans (surprisingly) responded positively. This was a bit patronizing towards the women, but not terrible.

    The best thing the women have going for them is they have a legitimate chance of winning the thing. America loves winning more than it loathes soccer. Fox should just highlight the USWNT’s past success and its chances of bringing home the trophy this year. Done and done.

  4. I understand their intention to get the US World Cup crowd that tuned in last summer, but it just seems like it’s at the USMNT’s expense. Wouldn’t it have been better if they captured the passionate crowds or goals from the 2014 or 2011 World Cups and said something like, “Relive the drama and passion” or something like that?

  5. The new kits don’t look all that good for my liking. I think the one above in the picture looks way better and the new ones is basically a downgrade compare to it. Anyone else think the same?

    • But without talking about men, how would the FOX audience know they are allowed to watch women’s sports? (lol FOX)

      I think this commercial is a little cheesy…. but it still got me excited for the WWC.

  6. Okay, have to say, seeing those kits on players running on the field, I won’t be buying this one. Maybe somewhere in the 50 shades of blue, there is the right shade, but all jumbled together it looks kinda un-American.

  7. Meh. Underwelmed by that. Pretty sure the USWNT can tell a story without needing the men’s lost to piggy back off of. Seems a little lazy to me. FOX needs to step their game up before 2018… Considerably.

    • Fox is trying to appeal to all the first time fans from last summer. They don’t know the women’s story so fox is trying to lure them in with a crossover episode. Like Sony letting them sput Spider Man in the new Avengers movie… Megan Rapinoe is spider man.

    • ’98 and ’06 were huge failures. We actually got respect by from other nations in 2014 and consider the level of opponents we played, too. No, just no.

    • I disagree. We got a ton of respect of from other countries, and while I think we could have played better with Altidore in our lineup, and some of our games weren’t beautiful, we got it done and played well. I actually went back and re-watched the Portugal game, and I have to say, that was one of the best games the US has played, and Tim Howard said so in an interview. One guy on The Guardian’s ‘football’ podcast said he doesn’t understand how the US can play world class football without any world class players. I’m not saying we played world class, but that is a testament to how the US earned praise and respect. Were we great? No. But we played well.

      • Yeah, we managed to tie a pretty weak team decimated by injuries and suspensions.
        Thinking that was a good game is the reason we’re not very good.
        We have to accept the fact that we didn’t play well in the WC, and were very fortunate to get out of the group.
        False positivity doesn’t help.

      • Matt, that was our best game the whole tourney(except the last 10 minutes), you have to admit that, put any other way just sounds like loser talk or god forbid you expected us to take the tourney by storm. Injuries, bad call ups and omissions aside we played about as good as you could have expected. Again, JK hurt the WC team by omitting more influential players and not having effective backups/depth for instances of injuries and tactical changes.

      • Belgium had 18 shots on goal. You could have added Donovan and whoever else you wanted to see for depth purposes and we would have still been overmatched and outplayed.

      • You’re right, it was our best game. By far. But it was against a team that we should have beaten, with the state they were in.
        The rest of the games we were badly outmatched, but managed to get the results we needed to get out of the group. Nothing wrong with that, but in general, I don’t see the WC as a success.

    • Eh, not really. It focused more on the heartbreak of elimination. At the moment the whistle blew when we lost to Belgium, most people were not counting our blessings for getting out of the GoD. It was more like, “Ffffffudge.” It was a fairly successful WC by US standards, but the vast majority of Americans don’t understand how elimination in the round of 16 is a success.


Leave a Comment