In the game of poker, you have to catch the right cards to hit an inside straight. Well, if the league catches the right cards, here is how the future could end up looking. You're now getting an inside "straight" look into the future of the NWSL. None of this is guaranteed. Some of this is the league's ambition. Some of it is wishful (but not impossible) acquisition, and some of it is hearsay. Now it's time to have a look at the possible future of the NWSL. Objective: To create and sustain a league that is healthy, and one that continuously grows into a powerful professional platform similar to the MLS within the next decade +. 2013: 8 teams, 55 subsidized players from USA, Canada, and Mexico. Attendance is strong in the inaugural year. Enough that the player salary cap boosts up to $250,00 for 2014. 2014: 10 teams, Costa Rica announces 10 players subsidized. Canada upgrades from 16 to 20 subsidized (before the 2015 WWC, which they are hosting). Total subsidized players in the league now = 70 players for 10 teams. Attendance continues to grow (slightly in 2014 from 2013), and the league announces the salary cap will boost to $275,000 for the 2015 season. 2015: 12 teams. After Haiti fails to qualify for the 2015 WWC (in CONCACAF qualification that takes place in 2014), Haiti announces 6 players subsidized as an initial building block for the 2019 WWC. Mexico upgrades from 16 to 20 subsidized to catch up to Canada's quantity (as Mexico knows they are making the 2015 WWC, but they want to also qualify for the 2016 Olympics in Brazil). The U.S. expands from 24 to 28 players subsidized, due to all the young talent that is out there including the prestigious current U-20 pool from 2012 who is ready to enter the fray on the national team picture in gearing up for the run in 2015 and 2016 and beyond (the announcement from U.S. soccer of the expansion to 28 subsidized players will actually take place in 2014, for the 2015 season). Total subsidized players in the league now = 84 players for 12 teams. It is announced the salary cap will stay the same ($275,000) in 2016. 2016: 12 teams, 84 subsidized players. No growth here in an Olympic year, especially when growth, ownership, and subsidized announcements are pre-planned from a year earlier (and 2015 is the year earlier, and 2015 is a WWC year). The league announces the salary cap is moving up to $300,000 in 2017. 2017: 16 teams. Brazil decides to enter the mix, after the 2014-2016 stretch which saw them host a World Cup (2014 men's), and the Olympics (in Rio, 2016). They now have more enthusiastic energy and demand to invest in their pool of women's players. Brazil decides to subsidize 12 players to the league. Colombia follows by investing 10 players, after qualifying for the 2015 WWC "and" the 2016 Olympics, and they want to continue to build on that. Haiti steps up their allocation from 6 to 8 players. Canada now has "multiple" franchises in this league (after the 2015 WWC), and steps up their subsidized efforts from 20 to 24 players. They are now more of a women's soccer nation than ever before. Christine Sinclair announces that the 2017 season will be her last as a professional and international player, and Canada knows they need to invest in more younger players to prepare for the next great run. Total subsidized players now = 112 players, for the 16 teams. The league announces the salary cap is moving up to $350,000 in 2018. After the 2017 UEFA Euro tournament is over, quite a few top international players from Europe announce they will be in the NWSL in 2018. The U.S. and Canada are getting a lot of attention now in this league. As a "gift" and a thank you to Mexico, the league announces the 2018 NWSL All-Star game will be played in Mexico City. 2018: 16 teams. No growth. The league added four more franchises (and CONMEBOL, Brazil, Colombia) into the mix in 2017, so they want to settle down for the time being on the growth ambition going into 2018. No increased subsidized efforts from anyone in 2018. The league had a "BIG" year in 2017. Thanks to the aftermath of the 2015 WWC and 2016 Olympics. 2019: 16 teams. No growth again. It's time to get ready for the 2019 WWC. There is more demand from the fans for women's soccer than ever now. The league announces the salary cap will boost to $400,000 for 2020. 2020: 16 teams. No growth again. However, each team now has $400,000 to divide among 13 players (as 7 players on each team are still subsidized). More quality internationals are coming over from overseas. The avg. non subsidized player now earns roughly $30,000 per year. That is equivalent to about $22,000 in 2013, when looking at it in future vs. current value. Just a reminder, each year, every franchise has paid for housing and health insurance. 2021: 18 teams. Expansion happens again, after a successful run for the sport in the 2019 WWC and 2020 Olympics. U.S. expands from 28 to 30 subsidized players. Mexico expands from 20 to 24, to catch up to Canada. Brazil expands from 12 to 16 players, although quite a few Brazilians still decide to play in Europe. Brazil wants to continue to invest in their young players. Colombia expands from 10 to 12 players. Costa Rica also expands with two more added subsidized players. A special league All-Star "tournament" is announced to take place in Atlanta. This is unprecedented. It's not just an All-Star game. It's an All-Star tournament. Yes, multiple All-Star games. Federation vs. Federation type of theme. The league now has 126 subsidized players for 18 teams. 2022: 20 teams. The league finally hits the 20-team milestone. They are enjoying MLS type of success. Argentina finally wants to get involved as a 3rd CONMEBOL team in this league. 2022 is a big year for the U.S. national team (even though it's not a big tournament year). Alex Morgan is now the all time leading goal scorer in the history of women's football worldwide, although she's not doing as many bodypaint photo-shoots in 2022 as she did a decade earlier.
The idea of 14 hr flights to Argentina to see a women's soccer game is intriguing, if you coupled it with a vacation. The idea of making those flights to play is crazy. And the idea that Argentina would go for such a thing will get you committed there. You obviously haven't been to Argentina.
How helpful would having Haitian WNTers be? They formed the core of FC Indiana last year, creating a team that was embarrassingly bad even at the WPSL Elite level.
I'm not talking about Argentina having a franchise. I'm talking about Argentina subsidizing players to the league, which is not impossible at some point in the future.
It would be their top players, and they wouldn't be playing together. Only one Haiti player per every two teams, so some teams wouldn't even have one.
Keep in mind, we're talking about the year 2022, and not 2013. I know that Argentina will not subsidize players in this league anytime soon. But once Brazil and Colombia do subsidize in this league, and they pull further & further ahead of Argentina in total success on the field in CONMEBOL, then eventually Argentina will consider to join.
Intresting how you involved all the football federations and their reasons for joining. I think its alot to assume that more federations will want to subsidize players in a new league. The way I look at it is the national player allocations will form the base that the league can survive on. We may see more federations join in, but it won't be the do or die scenario for NSWL or the requirement for expansion. I think in the future the national team players can and may be used in a way where players are allocated to the league on a yearly basis, the league decides where they play and if a player retires or gets replaced with a new player, then the league then decides where that new player then plays. It sorts of gives the league flexiblity. Say for instance Karina Leblanc retires and Canada then replaces her with a forward. Does Portland really need a forward allocation? Maybe that allocation can goto a team that would benifit more. This would ensure that the league can place high profile players in markets that need them and not rely in the future for federations subsidizing players to help grow the league. If it happens then great, but the league shouldn't need federations to buy into the league to help it grow.
Leo Messi will have won 2 World Cups for Argentina by 2022, and that will satisfy the Argentine Psyche. They could win 3 WWC's in the span and most Argentines wouldn't know, much less care.
I understand they don't care about women's soccer now. And they won't care "much" more about it in 2022 than they do now. But they will care about it somewhat more so than they do now. And you just made the point. The success of the Argentina men's team (over the next several years) will bring in lots more cash to them. Yes, 95% of it will get reinvested in the men's team, but the other few % will go to the women (eventually). Women's football will grow (in demand), and even somewhat (not too much) in Argentina over the next ten years as well. Argentina subsidizes 8 players to NWSL in 2022. Bank on it.
I have had this discussion with Argentine Futbol fans as recently as last Spring . With an inflation rate above 25%, they don't believe in banks. Trips are getting cheaper, though.
Maybe in 2022 there will be strong women's league in Spain that argentinian ladies would surely prefer over NWSL.
If the league is this successful wouldn’t the goal be to move away from relying on subsidized players and move to something more self sustaining?
If anything I see it going the other way. Right now this is the entitlement league. I would think the feds want a league to work with less involvement not more. If they did find another fed to help pay players i wouldnt be surprised to the US commitment cut to 20 instead of raised. Obviously they had a hard time finding 24 . I would guess the hope is to make the league self sustaining in three years. That doesnt mean profitable and it doesnt mean the feds pull out. What it means is the bills continue to get paid and the teams can take over the burden of rewarding the better players. While the fed will always be paying their WNTers, there will come a point when the best players decide they get their Fed money whether they play here or not so why help the league if it doesnt help them back.
Well the model is good. The problem with this league isnt that Alex Morgan isnt making a million dollars. The problem is the minimum pay has to be enough to allow the rank and file to be full time athletes for 8 months. Whatever that number is, the minimum is the key for this league. The maximum is based on tv money, sold out stadiums and other revenue streams. If they can sell the product everyone benefits, especially the big names. This certainly seems to have a much better chance than the first to hopeful attempts.
This model will work. It would have worked with WPS. If all the WPS teams had the top 7 expensive players paid for on their roster - 100% paid for by federations, of the 20 players on their team, and they only had to pay for their bottom 13 (least expensive) players, then 90% of those franchises wouldn't have folded, and we'd still have WPS right now. Plus the salary cap is a lot lower here than in WPS. Simply put, with this current model, if each franchise just averages 2,500 in attendance per game, then the league certainly survives. In WPS, 2,500 wasn't enough because of the much higher payrolls, and no players were subsidized. The only way this league fails, is if at least half the franchises average less than 2,000 fans, and/or if all the sponsors just back out, and they can't land any new prominent sponsors. Sponsors weren't the biggest problem with WPS. Yes, the whole PUMA thing did blow up. But they would have been fine in persevering in WPS, if they had "this model" we're on now. They would have found another sponsor to replace PUMA eventually. Also, it should be noted. U.S. Soccer has a wonderful relationship with Nike, and with NBC Universal (NBC/Comcast), Fox Soccer (and all of Fox), and the ESPN networks. Not to mention, BeIN Sport (which wasn't around during WPS). There are so many options for this league to be televised, both nationally and regionally/locally. U.S. soccer has a much better relationship with these networks than the league front office of WPS did.
I do think there is a point of diminishing returns for players supported by non-US feds. I don't think Haiti & Costa Rica can support those numbers and, as I've said before, you are probably better off to support the players as individuals if they can make a roster. You also will hit some legal problems if you have that many foreign players getting "guaranteed slots". I'm convinced the NWSL really has 6 international slots (including the allocated players) and if you got allocated 1 or 2 US citizens, then you get the extra slots (makes more sense from a legal standpoint, but the USSF has some well-paid lawyers giving them advice, so what do I know).
Not really sure how it works for Allocated foreign players. The Canadians r being paid by Canadians to do jobs only Canadians can do. That they be doing them here is the snag.
"Guaranteeing" a foreign worker a job over a US worker is a legal issue. I'm not sure how NWSL is addressing it, but it may come up. Now maybe this is being looked at as some kind of "training/development job," but I know as a US employer I can't set aside 10 jobs to be filled by Canadian/Mexican workers if it displaces US workers (but I can bring them in for extended training stints). Again, maybe they have figured something out, but I think the best way legally (I work with some of this stuff at work, but IANAL) is to provide the teams 6 slots for internationals. We give you 4 Canadian/Mexican players who have salaries supported by their feds. If you don't want them, you will lose that salary support. If any of those are already US citizens/Green Card holders, you can switch the international slot to another player. I'll be curious to see how the legal aspect of employment in the US in handled.
I know for a fact that U.S. soccer has been in discussions with other nations, regarding subsidized efforts into the league. They have been in contact with nations such as Brazil even. Whether or not Brazil enters the league will be based on two things, 1.) their money and investment into women's soccer, 2.) legal terms (can CONMEBOL be in this league?). With CONMEBOL having too many issues with financing an entire professional league (a real pro league) for women's football in their own confederation, then I think CONMEBOL will be in this league at some point, as this would continue to grow women's football across the world. I have been saying ever since around Thanksgiving time when news and conference calls about this league were announced, that it won't actually be just these three nations (USA, Canada, Mexico), within a few years from now, and maybe sooner. Other nations will be in this league. It fits the model, it helps with expansion (in terms of keeping 7 subsidized players per roster, or the minimum, 6 players per roster), as the league expands to 10 teams, eventually 12 teams, and possibly more a few years down the road. Here's an article that backs it up. And this was published after I had been saying that U.S. soccer had been in conversation with other federations. Heck, that news got around twitter before this article was even published. "One interesting note is that other federations around the world are already expressing an interest in subsidizing and sending players to the fledging league." http://www.examiner.com/article/fc-kansas-city-and-nwsl-details-are-coming-together
I don't doubt that at all, but I do think you have issues when you have marginal players in a US professional league. If they are good enough to make the 23 or whatever, great. Then their fed coughs up a salary or some kind of support. But, if it's not a "training/development league," you have some issues around taking up slots that can be filled by US players and the complexities that come with keeping multiple feds happy. I still say attach the support to the player and let the player earn her spot.
True. But we have to keep in mind that if this league expands to 12 teams eventually (12 *20 = 240 players), and 84 of those players are subsidized (from USA, Canada, Mexico, and a couple/few other federations), then that leaves 156 other players who aren't subsidized. WPS had 7 teams at most in any given year for a full year (7 * 20 = 140 players), so WPS had a total of 140 players, including the U.S. stars. NWSL could have 156 total non-subsidized players, who aren't national team players. That's a lot of available spots for other players to develop. And if the league expands to 12 teams, then each roster will dilute into a little bit less talented roster overall. Therefore, Costa Rica's 6th best player may still be able to start or be a key reserve on one of the 12 rosters, and so on. Certainly Brazil's Top 10 or 12 would be good enough to start with a league of 12 franchises (with diluted talent per roster, compared to just 8 rosters now).
It doesnt displace a US worker because the Canadian and Mexican Federations cant hire and pay US workers for those jobs. The US owned teams cant hire anyone to fill those slots. Not sure how it works legally but there r only 16 US workers on each team. For example, say u sent one of ur employees to Canada on an assignment. He isnt a Canadian worker. He's still paid by u. U pay his employment taxes to to the IRS. Maybe it works something like that.
The restriction on hiring a US worker for those jobs is artificial. A company can bring an employee in to fill a job, but has limitations on how that person can be hired/used. For example, you can't hold open a job to only be filled by a German citizen, even if you are a German company. You can send an overseas employee to work in the US for periods of time, but has to meet certain qualifications and has a time limit. Even if you send a current worker into Canada, the person has to have a work visa (to do more than just attend meetings) and Canada makes sure it doesn't undercut Canadian workers. It doesn't matter who cuts the check, you still have to play by the rules wherever the person is working. I'm sure they have this thought through, but then again, MLS didn't think they would get in trouble for putting Green Card holders into the "international" category with its limitations.