Growth in MLS

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Sort by date Sort by reaction score
r-u-s-x said:
its not the PSG effect (on its own) that's already had its impact with an above market rate TV deal its the other rich owners entering the league. Its probably a good place to invest - comparatively cheap and a lot of upside, undervalued presently.

www.sportsbusinessdaily.com

Ligue 1 Signs $5.3B TV Rights Deal With Mediapro, BeIN Sports

Ligue 1 will be carried by Mediapro and beIN Sports from '20-24 in improved domestic deal worth more than €1B per season as LFP parts ways with Canal+, which has broadcast France's top tier since '84.
www.sportsbusinessdaily.com www.sportsbusinessdaily.com

"The French Professional Football League (LFP) awarded the Ligue 1 TV rights for the '20-24 period to Mediapro and beIN Sports, which will replace Canal+, according to Dimitri Ranchou of MEDIA SPORTIF. Starting in '20, Ligue 1 rights will be worth €1.15B ($1.33B) per season, compared to €726.5M ($837.7M) now. This is a 60% increase from the current contract,"

current distribution -
www.statista.com

Ligue 1: value of TV rights by football club France 2017-2018 | Statista

This statistic shows the distribution of the Ligue 1 television rights in France for the 2017-2018 season by football club, in millions of euros.
www.statista.com www.statista.com


The US need to sort out the youth system first, its still pay to play attracting mainly middle class - they don't have a closed system so I cant see College "soccer" as an alternate. They need to tap into the poorer immigrant community to improve US talent and then the league.
Click to expand...
AlabamaSpur said:
Now that the academy system is in full swing and the college system has been kicked out, I think the US will start producing more players like Pulisic. Gonna take some time though.
Click to expand...
Just read an article the other day about how youth soccer in America is down something like 4%. You're absolutely right r-u-s-x r-u-s-x , if MLS doesn't tap into the immigrant/poorer communities they are going to be fucked. It's so expensive to play youth soccer at a certain level. An expense many lower class and even lower middle class people can't afford.


Stopspot said:
I'd like to meet the king that gave them royal protection just to ask them why.
Click to expand...
This guy
brigham-young-medium.jpg
 
Last edited:
SoCalSpurs said:
Just read an article the other day about how youth soccer in America is down something like 4%. You're absolutely right r-u-s-x r-u-s-x , if MLS doesn't tap into the immigrant/poorer communities they are going to be fucked. It's so expensive to play youth soccer and a certain level. An expense many lower class and even lower middle class people can't afford.
Click to expand...

The expense of club level youth soccer is absolutely ridiculous. I kick myself twice a year for paying what I pay for my son to play
 
AlabamaSpur said:
The expense of club level youth soccer is absolutely ridiculous. I kick myself twice a year for paying what I pay for my son to play
Click to expand...
Imagine in other countries the amazing players that have been produced by lower middle class/lower class and deprive this world of them. Football would be night and day different.
 
What was wrong with the existing MLS thread? I swear, this place sometimes...

Anyway, for all the "once they start paying players yadda yadda" and "the problem is the salary cap" crowd, the MLS is still hemorrhaging money. The only way they can currently keep things afloat is with expansion fees they extort from new ownership groups. That's why they just keep adding teams even though the talent is already spread way too thin.

The academy system is much harder to implement due to the scale. More than half the kids in the country aren't within 500 miles of an MLS club. Even for those that are, it's difficult/financially onerous to develop players properly when finding equitable competition for the elite academy players would involve traveling schedules greater than that faced by senior PL clubs.

Attendances mean fuck all, at the financial level of professional sports literally nothing matters outside of the tv revenue. That makes up the vast majority of revenue, and what isn't directly related to tv (shirt sponsors, kit deals etc.) are greatly effected by television viewership. NYCFC could sell out Yankee stadium (55,000) twice a week and they couldn't afford to pay Kane's wage.

Promotion and relegation A) won't happen, B) wouldnt make a fucking difference. Would anyone give half a shit if you replaced Cincinatti and Vancouver with Nashville and Pittsburgh? Does anyone actually care that the PL consistently swaps out Newcastle and West Brom? Does it make you more likely to turn on a match because the stripes on relegation candidate 1A this season are black instead of blue?

I hate to be on the soap box, but the US and Europe are 2 different places, and you aren't going to get a European solution to a US issue.

For what it's worth, Mexico is the 10th most populous nation in the world and outside of Brazil (and maybe China/India, but their numbers are so big it defies comparison) has more active footballers/followers than any other place on the planet. And they suck at producing top level talent and competing internationally as well, despite funneling huge sums of money to their players.


Honestly the MLS would have been better off focusing on regional growth rather than national. All that matters in US sports is TV. Most sports fans rarely, if ever, get inside a stadium or live within driving distance of their favorite team. 4 clubs in LA, 4 clubs in NYC, 2 teams in Chicago, Dallas, Austin, Houston, SA, Boston, Philly, DC, Baltimore, Montreal, Toronto. There's a 20 team league in major metro areas, convenient for traveling and academy competition which covers a massive population of youth greater than any single European nation. And the rest of us would just pick a team and watch on tv.
 
Last edited:
FightingIllini said:
Well, I'd say the optimist's view of soccer in America is that it might be a different sort of relationship between the pro game and the soccer community at large.
Click to expand...

The MLS isn't going to defy conventional wisdom and rebel against a tried and true model in order to appease the US football bourgeoisie. It doesn't make sense.

If you want a more detailed opinion see below, but the title is your warning.

The requirement of any league's thriving is being able to field talented players. Television revenue is the only way to do that in the modern game. Assume every MLS team could average 30,000 in attendance (something not even the PL can do). Assume they play 25 games at home, and the average ticket price skyrockets to $60. That's $45M in revenue. Assume you spend 60% of revenue on salaries. $27M in salaries. Spread that across the 30 player squad and you have an average MLS salary of $900k - which is more than double the current average, and approximately equal to the Championship but less than 1/3rd of the PL average salary.

So, in order to even pull even with the Championship you could spend $100Bn or more in stadium infrastructure and more in local public relations to try and create a giant local supporter base that historically doesn't exist...

Or you could follow the path that's been proven to work for US audiences, focus on the television product and marketing teams nationally rather than locally. Allow the rising tide to raise all ships, rather than create an unnatural pro/rel system that would require a sea-change to the legal framework of the organization and gravely endanger clubs who could not "stay up".

The later is a far more expedient and efficient path, which is why the MLS is going this direction. At the end of the day, the "football purists" who drool over the European model are a tiny fraction of the number of eyeballs the MLS needs to succeed. Recruiting MLB/NBA/NFL fans is always going to be way, way more important to the league than making you, me, or Alexi fucking Lalas happy.

The two most valuable athletic organizations in the world by nominal "team" value are the NFL and NBA. Assuming that the MLS would, or should, attempt to emulate any other model - including European soccer where a handful of clubs possess an overwhelming amount of the value to the detriment to almost every other club (most of whom vacillate between the brink of financial collapse and being recently saved from the brink of financial collapse) - is just folly. They're going to, and should, keep doing what they're doing and position MLS as something US sports fans can easily identify with and simply wait for the declining participation in football and baseball, along with the increasing participation in football to increase the general interest in the sport and the league.

We regularly hear that promotion/relegation is the way to grow the sport. But look at what's happened to Bury and Bolton recently? Relegation, with modern salaries and operational costs being what they are in the game, can be a death sentence. Would Sporting KC survive in the USL Championship? Doubtful.

You know who isn't going bankrupt and can show up season after season to entertain their fans with top caliber sporting events, despite not winning a title or even threatening to? The Orlando Magic. The Cincinnati Bengals. Meanwhile the financially successful clubs in Europe are trying to find a way to completely cut ties with the entire outdated pro/rel concept and the small clubs that are siphoning off their revenue.

Philosophically is this good? It doesn't seem to be, at all. But it's certainly what's best for the clubs/leagues/players at the top of the game. And you can't get people off their phones anymore, even at the stadium. The old ways are dying...adopt the new perish with them. Such is life.
 
MemphisWill said:
The MLS isn't going to defy conventional wisdom and rebel against a tried and true model in order to appease the US football bourgeoisie. It doesn't make sense.

If you want a more detailed opinion see below, but the title is your warning.

The requirement of any league's thriving is being able to field talented players. Television revenue is the only way to do that in the modern game. Assume every MLS team could average 30,000 in attendance (something not even the PL can do). Assume they play 25 games at home, and the average ticket price skyrockets to $60. That's $45M in revenue. Assume you spend 60% of revenue on salaries. $27M in salaries. Spread that across the 30 player squad and you have an average MLS salary of $900k - which is more than double the current average, and approximately equal to the Championship but less than 1/3rd of the PL average salary.

So, in order to even pull even with the Championship you could spend $100Bn or more in stadium infrastructure and more in local public relations to try and create a giant local supporter base that historically doesn't exist...

Or you could follow the path that's been proven to work for US audiences, focus on the television product and marketing teams nationally rather than locally. Allow the rising tide to raise all ships, rather than create an unnatural pro/rel system that would require a sea-change to the legal framework of the organization and gravely endanger clubs who could not "stay up".

The later is a far more expedient and efficient path, which is why the MLS is going this direction. At the end of the day, the "football purists" who drool over the European model are a tiny fraction of the number of eyeballs the MLS needs to succeed. Recruiting MLB/NBA/NFL fans is always going to be way, way more important to the league than making you, me, or Alexi fucking Lalas happy.

The two most valuable athletic organizations in the world by nominal "team" value are the NFL and NBA. Assuming that the MLS would, or should, attempt to emulate any other model - including European soccer where a handful of clubs possess an overwhelming amount of the value to the detriment to almost every other club (most of whom vacillate between the brink of financial collapse and being recently saved from the brink of financial collapse) - is just folly. They're going to, and should, keep doing what they're doing and position MLS as something US sports fans can easily identify with and simply wait for the declining participation in football and baseball, along with the increasing participation in football to increase the general interest in the sport and the league.

We regularly hear that promotion/relegation is the way to grow the sport. But look at what's happened to Bury and Bolton recently? Relegation, with modern salaries and operational costs being what they are in the game, can be a death sentence. Would Sporting KC survive in the USL Championship? Doubtful.

You know who isn't going bankrupt and can show up season after season to entertain their fans with top caliber sporting events, despite not winning a title or even threatening to? The Orlando Magic. The Cincinnati Bengals. Meanwhile the financially successful clubs in Europe are trying to find a way to completely cut ties with the entire outdated pro/rel concept and the small clubs that are siphoning off their revenue.

Philosophically is this good? It doesn't seem to be, at all. But it's certainly what's best for the clubs/leagues/players at the top of the game. And you can't get people off their phones anymore, even at the stadium. The old ways are dying...adopt the new perish with them. Such is life.
Click to expand...

Well, I think you're fighting a straw man a little bit there, I don't think anyone is making the claim that TV revenue is irrelevant, or should be discouraged, or is anything less than essential, really.

But in an environment where we're seeing declining attendance across the major legacy US sports, not to mention some softening of the TV numbers, butts in seats at soccer games are on the rise. And it's a little bit of a different in-person product than the other sports are selling, rather than a wall-to-wall assault on the senses for each individual, you're there to be a part of the crowd watching the game, or at least experience the more boisterous supporters groups watching the game. It's a different sort of atmosphere, plus it's coming it at a lower price point than the Big 4. That's an appealing package, and it's proving to be quite popular not just in MLS, but in a variety of smaller cities as well, where other "minor league" sports are struggling.

To me I think there's value to leaning in where you have a competitive advantage that way. And I also think that resembles the setup that made the NFL or MLB the powerhouse it has become. It became a TV product because it was an in-demand live event.

I'm happy to leave the pro/rel elephant sitting over there in the corner, which I do think is something for the sport to aspire to, but is tangential to what we're talking about, IMO.
 
FightingIllini said:
Well, I think you're fighting a straw man a little bit there, I don't think anyone is making the claim that TV revenue is irrelevant, or should be discouraged, or is anything less than essential, really.

But in an environment where we're seeing declining attendance across the major legacy US sports, not to mention some softening of the TV numbers, butts in seats at soccer games are on the rise. And it's a little bit of a different in-person product than the other sports are selling, rather than a wall-to-wall assault on the senses for each individual, you're there to be a part of the crowd watching the game, or at least experience the more boisterous supporters groups watching the game. It's a different sort of atmosphere, plus it's coming it at a lower price point than the Big 4. That's an appealing package, and it's proving to be quite popular not just in MLS, but in a variety of smaller cities as well, where other "minor league" sports are struggling.

To me I think there's value to leaning in where you have a competitive advantage that way. And I also think that resembles the setup that made the NFL or MLB the powerhouse it has become. It became a TV product because it was an in-demand live event.

I'm happy to leave the pro/rel elephant sitting over there in the corner, which I do think is something for the sport to aspire to, but is tangential to what we're talking about, IMO.
Click to expand...
I think there's a lot red herring to the attendance "increase trend" that the MLS is experiencing. Just like its need for expansion fees to balance the books, MLS' attendance gains are largely a product of "new" markets/experiences that have historically shown a short shelf life before they recede back to the mean.

MLS Seeing Attendance Decline At 2019 Halfway Point

Overall this season, attendance is down 4%. But if you dig into the numbers it's much bleaker than that. 18 of 23 teams are posting year on year losses, including 7 experiencing losses greater than 8%. Minnesota and Montreal are down 12% and Chicago is down 16%. Of the teams that play in the most populous cities, NYC, LA, SF/SJ, Chicago, Houston, and Dallas only LAFC is seeing an increase - a paltry 0.7%. The NYC clubs together are losing 10%. Denver is somehow experiencing a population boom but an attendance loss of 7.2%.

Of those experiencing gains you have the false positive that is Columbus whose 21.8% gain (up to 13.6k) is really more a rebound from the strike that occured by supporters who thought the club was abandoning them, and DC United's new stadium bounce checking in at 16.4%, marginal gains at Philly and LAFC, and Cincy whose entire attendance is gain because they're a new club.

That leaves Atlanta's continued momentum, and Portland's capacity increase as the only "real" MLS attendance gains. If you project further future losses for expansion teams going forward (in keeping with that trend as the "new" of the experience fades), it is going to become increasingly difficult for MLS to sell the mythology of increasing attendance as new clubs/new stadiums start coming on line less frequently.

What definitely is increasing is TV ratings, as some of the clubs field increasingly competent, entertaining, and compelling squads. The product on the field, sometimes, is worth watching - but it's only a handful of clubs because the talent is too thin. And the talent is too thin because the MLS is trying to paper over the financial cracks by adding new clubs and build this mythology of booming attendance/interest using the new club/stadium gimmick.
 
MemphisWill said:
I think there's a lot red herring to the attendance "increase trend" that the MLS is experiencing. Just like its need for expansion fees to balance the books, MLS' attendance gains are largely a product of "new" markets/experiences that have historically shown a short shelf life before they recede back to the mean.

MLS Seeing Attendance Decline At 2019 Halfway Point

Overall this season, attendance is down 4%. But if you dig into the numbers it's much bleaker than that. 18 of 23 teams are posting year on year losses, including 7 experiencing losses greater than 8%. Minnesota and Montreal are down 12% and Chicago is down 16%. Of the teams that play in the most populous cities, NYC, LA, SF/SJ, Chicago, Houston, and Dallas only LAFC is seeing an increase - a paltry 0.7%. The NYC clubs together are losing 10%. Denver is somehow experiencing a population boom but an attendance loss of 7.2%.

Of those experiencing gains you have the false positive that is Columbus whose 21.8% gain (up to 13.6k) is really more a rebound from the strike that occured by supporters who thought the club was abandoning them, and DC United's new stadium bounce checking in at 16.4%, marginal gains at Philly and LAFC, and Cincy whose entire attendance is gain because they're a new club.

That leaves Atlanta's continued momentum, and Portland's capacity increase as the only "real" MLS attendance gains. If you project further future losses for expansion teams going forward (in keeping with that trend as the "new" of the experience fades), it is going to become increasingly difficult for MLS to sell the mythology of increasing attendance as new clubs/new stadiums start coming on line less frequently.

What definitely is increasing is TV ratings, as some of the clubs field increasingly competent, entertaining, and compelling squads. The product on the field, sometimes, is worth watching - but it's only a handful of clubs because the talent is too thin. And the talent is too thin because the MLS is trying to paper over the financial cracks by adding new clubs and build this mythology of booming attendance/interest using the new club/stadium gimmick.
Click to expand...

To me the fundamental question for MLS is how do you replicate Seattle/Atlanta elsewhere, neither of which seemed possible until they happened.

A league of a bunch of Seattle/Atlanta's mixed with some Portland's and Cincinnati's (I was in Cincy recently and couldn't believe how much FC Cincy gear I saw just walking around the city on a non-game day) would be just an entirely different animal.

Chicago seems like they're going to take a big swing at it next year. It's in those all four sports legacy markets, where the local MLS team has been an afterthought for a long time, that there has just been circling the drain. We'll see how it goes. I'm definitely thinking of getting a season ticket at Solider Field.

But to agree with your point, I think the idea that the MLS' growth is something of a mirage so long as cities like Chicago, Boston, Philly, Dallas, Denver, major, major markets are just these small time nothingburger teams, is largely correct.
 
Last edited:
FightingIllini said:
To me the fundamental question for MLS is how do you replicate Seattle/Atlanta elsewhere, neither of which seemed possible until they happened.

A league of a bunch of Seattle/Atlanta's mixed with some Portland's and Cincinnati's (I was in Cincy recently and couldn't believe how much FC Cincy gear I saw just walking around the city on a non-game day) would be just an entirely different animal.

Chicago seems like they're going to take a big swing at it next year. It's in those all four sports legacy markets, where the local MLS team has been an afterthought for a long time, that there has just been circling the drain. We'll see how it goes. I'm definitely thinking of getting a season ticket at Solider Field.
Click to expand...
I want to see Atlanta's attendance in 10 years, honestly. I think they'll be lucky to still be bringing in 20k. That's still a very "new" club. Cincy as well. It's too early to say that replicating anything they've done is even possible outside of doing what MLS keeps trying to do but soon will run out if the ability to do - create a new club where one previously did not exist.

Seattle and Portland are the only MLS cities who have shown the ability to maintain momentum and interest long term. LA can do it, so long as they have 1 or 2 of the biggest names in the sport's recent history playing out their retirement there. But when it's a down year for their DP collection, they struggle.
 
MemphisWill said:
I want to see Atlanta's attendance in 10 years, honestly. I think they'll be lucky to still be bringing in 20k.
Click to expand...

The way they've cracked the actual, real, I-care-that-this-team-wins-and-this-isn't-just-a-hipster-fashion-accessory sports market in Atlanta makes me think that that isn't true. It wasn't true in Seattle which is still going strong 10 years on. We'll see.
 
Prior to Zlatan coming, more than half the season I was only able to watch The Galaxy on the spanish channels. And this is coming from a person that only lives about 40 miles from the stadium. MLS have made some horrid decisions in the past 5 years that have almost completely turned me off to supporting the league.
 
Head coach Bruce Arena has resigned as boss of Major League Soccer club New England Revolution.
1 hour ago
The 71-year-old was alleged to have made "insensitive and inappropriate" remarks and was placed on administrative leave last month while the MLS investigated the matter.
No specific details of the charges have been made public.
Bruce Arena: New England Revolution boss resigns after 'insensitive and inappropriate remarks' - Arena resigns after MLS investigation into remarks
 

View: https://twitter.com/MichaelRyanRuiz/status/1707503422004412701?t=8UKItVo3ty5tT-kaPahmqQ&s=19


View: https://twitter.com/MLS_Buzz/status/1707844465363132669?t=u0PYHSAIE7euzzc8VG85eQ&s=19

:levyeyes:

Well, something is growing at least.

Stuff like this is honestly why I have a hard time relating to the annual moaning about ticket prices. Not that it's not justified, but the cost of sports tickets here vs. there is just night and day.

And then consider that almost all of these stadiums were built by taxpayers!
 
MemphisWill said:

View: https://twitter.com/MichaelRyanRuiz/status/1707503422004412701?t=8UKItVo3ty5tT-kaPahmqQ&s=19


View: https://twitter.com/MLS_Buzz/status/1707844465363132669?t=u0PYHSAIE7euzzc8VG85eQ&s=19

:levyeyes:

Well, something is growing at least.

Stuff like this is honestly why I have a hard time relating to the annual moaning about ticket prices. Not that it's not justified, but the cost of sports tickets here vs. there is just night and day.

And then consider that almost all of these stadiums were built by taxpayers!
Click to expand...

This is just a reflection of the larger sports ticketing situation in the US. A damn upper deck Nissan Stadium ticket to watch the sorry ass Titans play the sorry ass Falcons is 100 bucks after fees.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom