I guess on that field you only need one fullback and one winger to be really fast, though they have to switch sides after the half.
Me too - the only non-NY move that makes sense to me is a 1 year massive pay day in China, Russia, or the Middle East to help finance his MLS franchise outlay. Celtic? What the heck for? Cause he misses a little physicality that he's not getting in MLS? How much can they conceivably pay him? A-League? How big is the truck full of cash? Brazil? I'll be very surprised because Beckham doesn't have the legs any more and he knows it. Champions League sub in Italy, Spain or France? Maybe - but do those teams really want him? He's a show pony at this point.
At least comparable to his MLS salary if FFA does actually pay part of his salary. Sydney FC is paying Del Piero about $2.5 million and they are expecting to get double that back in jersey sales alone, Becks would easily outstrip those sales. Sydney FC road games are also getting big bumps in attendance and at home. Not only that, but ADP's arrival has been a massive bump for A-League in general. They are currently on pace to have their best attendance year in their history this season and a lot of that is attributable to ADP.
ESPN polls on MLS and Beckham's impact: http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/post/_/id/8655574/what-was-david-beckham-mls Go make MLS look good...
The A-League also just got a 4-year $160 million dollar TV contract starting next year. The clubs now have some fooling around money.
History will remember Beckham's time in MLS as the time when the league really kicked on. His arrival and Toronto's entrance were the two things that really kicked the league into 2.0 mode. While in the early days he did have some issues with LA, it's undeniable how successful he's been both commercially and on the field. Without Beckham, MLS wouldn't be were it is today, people who deny that are just letting their personal views cloud their judgement.
If A-League I going for the Brisbane Roar who is having a bad national season and also play the (asian) Champions League in 2013 and host in a 52.000 stadium that need some nice guy to fill it.
Considering the majority of American's (Present Company Accepted) hate soccer, I say its about right....
I don't see the point of going for "comparable" unless he really feels it's his mission in life to be an ambassador for the sport which I guess is possible. China makes more sense to me though - especially if it's for a lot more money.
If everyone in China contributes .50-.75 cents for the chance to see Beckham in person or a TV, the guy will be a billionaire. For that amount of money, who wouldn't go there?
David who? It's fuzzy to me. Maybe that's because he was in MLS for six years, and only set foot in Columbus once. Hard to miss someone that was never really around.
I disagree. And my view isn't obscured from being on the other side of the pond. Beckham has been a circus side show who, if anything, has hindered MLS from being taken seriously as a professional sports league in this country. The growth of MLS since 2007, when Beckham entered the league, has been powered by the rise of the supporters culture, with Toronto and Seattle leading the way. Because of the unanticipated and overwhelming success of both these franchises in immediately attracting fans there have been tectonic shifts in the way the league has approached its marketing efforts and, more importantly, in the way the league is perceived. When Beckham played his first game for the Galaxy (a friendly against Chelsea) back in 2007, a San Jose Mercury News scribe wrote: "I didn't watch and neither did you." But when Seattle entered the league and immediately attracted crowds exceeding 30k per game, another Mercury News sportswriter remarked, "didn't see that coming," and acknowledged that maybe MLS deserved a second look. I think the Merc reporters encapsulate the view of the general, non-MLS sports public. Beckham has been a ridiculous marketing ploy, but large, rabid and growing fan bases are to be taken seriously.
I think he helped out the league to a point but not like everyone wants to believe. I mean I believe the advent of Toronto , San Jose, Montreal and Seattle coming into the league weren't really related to Beckham's arrival because they were already on track to join before 2007 and San Jose already had a team until they were moved. I'm not saying his presence wasn't felt but I do think those clubs would have come into the league regardless.
it's debatable how successful Beckham was for MLS from marketing point of view, but one thing is for sure. Becks is news, and there is no such thing as bad PR. I'd rather have people talk about MLS, even negatively, than not talking about MLS at all. just how often did European media talked about MLS prior to Becks? what Becks did for sure was to increase the player quality in MLS. I bet a lot of players gave MLS a shot because of Becks. I don't think Becks singlehandedly made MLS 2.0, but he gave it one helluva boost...
A Nexis search shows that the only Mercury News report about the Galaxy-Chelsea game was a wire brief that morning. And there's no instance of that quoted sentence at all in 2007. I'm not just being pedantic -- I was curious to read that story. Are you thinking of something else?
When I lived in Italy from 2001-2004, not many people knew much about MLS other than maybe how it was a retirement league and how no one cared about soccer. The same things are still said and thought about MLS to a point but their perception of the league is a lot better that it was back then. This isn't really attributed to Beckham coming over , however. At that time, people started turning their heads when the USA did well in the 2002 WC and when Brian McBride, Tim Howard and Dempsey did well in England and how now Bradley is playing regularly at Roma. Still Euro players and fans alike eye MLS as a last pay check league.
I seem to remember Beckham drawing some pretty large crowds in San Jose over the years... If you believe that the amount of corporate sponsors MLS has picked up over the past five years, the TV deals, Henry, Marquez, Ljungbeg, Keane et al playing in MLS, the extra investors MLS has gained for it's teams to the point we only have 2 owners with multi-teams, increased expansion fees, the increased world profile et al is all because of Seattle and Toronto then you can but the simple matter is that Beckham put the league on the map which has filtered into all of the above. Plenty other leagues have teams with fanbases as large and passionate as Seattle/Toronto but haven't gained the media attention or investment that MLS has over the past 5 years, nor grown their average attendance as much. The Seattle/Toronto issues are localised, they look good on TV, they impress people in attendance and serve as an example to other franchises about how to improve their franchise but a random multi-millionaire like Joe Roth was attracted to the league precisely because of Beckham, not because of Toronto's fan culture. He'd probably never even heard about Toronto FC before Beckham signing for LA piqued his interest in the league. Nor are people in Houston likely to start going to matches simply because Seattle looks like a swell place to watch a match, they are if Beckham is in town. Simple fact is that while TFC was hugely important for the league in providing a new model and also proving that expansion could be a real shot in the arm (RSL has been pretty successful from the pre 2.0 era as well), Beckham's arrival was much more important commercially (look at how he grew Real from #4 highest turnover team in the world to #1 by the time he left). Beckham's LAG 2007 jersey was the #1 selling jersey in the world in the year after his move, outselling all the Euro shirts, I doubt Seattle or Toronto shirts would even scrape the top 20 across all their players. Seattle took the ball that Toronto set up and ran with it, it was also hugely lucky that the Supersonics happened to leave at the same time and give them a massive group of fans who were looking for a new place to spend money. So yeah both TFC and Seattle were important but Beckham overshadowed them. Ticket sales tend not to be a driver of sporting franchise profits, TV deals are. The Seattle attendance has done squat to drive TV, Beckham has even if the league still has loads of work to do. Nor has Seattle's attendance driven any of the above themes I mentioned, Robbie Keane and Thierry Henry didn't decide to come to America because Seattle draws 35-40k regularly and TFC fans throw cushions in unison.
Beckham hasn't moved the TV ratings either... I seem to recall from Wahl's book that Beckham's first game was pimped to heck by ESPN and then drew flies in ratings... Since then it has been largely flat, hasn't it?
True but if you think his arrival had nothing to do with the fact that MLS is now being paid for it's TV contract than you're totally wrong. Without his arrival, the media blitz and the other big names that have followed his path, MLS would probably still be receiving no TV fees; regardless of Seattle's attendance figures. There is of course also this, which is actually larger than the national deal (if less per annum): http://aol.sportingnews.com/soccer/story/2011-11-16/la-galaxy-land-10-year-55-million-local-tv-deal