Garber: MLS has a Harvard Business School plan for MLS to be 1 of the top soccer leagues by 2022

I don't care if they change the name... as long as they have shown to finally understand they're not trying to sell the game to NFL fans, and others. Just stick with the people who would actually watch the sport, the other league soccer fans we have everywhere. The league will succeed like that.

 

yeah. i've never understood why they'd spare one second of focus on trying to attract anything other than soccer fans who don't like MLS yet (SFWDLMLSY). there are litterally MILLIONS upon MILLIONS of these fans out there (from occasional WC viewers to die hard fans of EURO/MEX/SA fans). capturing that crowd would grow the league to bigger than hockey imo. maybe spare some time to capture the "anti-sports" hipster demographic which seem to be amenable to soccer and local MLS and you've got all the fans you need.

which is why i argue for making MLS MORE like soccer in the rest of the world (ie make the play offs like WC group stage, etc). not because i am a eurosnob, i'm not. not because i have an inferiority complex about domestic soccer. but because those are the huge swath of fans you are trying to attract, and to attract them your product must be familiar to them ... the more familiar the better ... the lower you make the bar to adopting MLS, the more similar the MLS product is tot he product they already consume the easier and more SFWDLMLSY you can convert to also consuming MLS as a soccer product.

 

SFWDLMLSY

And thus, new acronym in futbol lexicon create. Is excite.

 

You've articulated the reason for my unease much better than I did. You can already almost see some future press conference where they declare victory by defining the goal of becoming a "top league" has been achieved in some weird way. "As a result of our ten year plan, we are pleased to announce that our fans are now just as passionate."

I think there's a risk in doing that. To raise the expectations of stakeholders -- fans, media and sponsors -- by publicly talking about making MLS the best league in the western hemisphere or comparable to the European big five by a specific date and later cutely declaring mission accomplished because MLS has the "top" business model is going to make them the butt of a lot of jokes, I think.

And what's so strange about this is I really think MLS' strategy, planning and implementation has been superb over the past decade since contraction: The formation of SUM, the acceleration of the SSS development, the aggressive expansion into new markets, the use of the DPs to raise the league's profile and the establishment of the academies. The league has been strategically focused with laser like precision since 2002 and the results have been magnificent. It's the period of the league's development that I think they really will study at the Harvard Business School someday.

Now, as the league plots it's second decade since re-organization, there's this ambitious goal with vague benchmarks supported by a plan that Garber says is really cool and he might show to Grant Wahl someday. Perhaps it is brilliant, but it seems more publicity driven than substantive at this point.

 

In 2010 the USMNT ended the WC at one stage earlier than it had in 2002. This was a great triumph, and the 10 year Project Plan 2010 was thus deservedly crowned as a magnificent success. We all may be assured that the 10 year Harvard MLS Business Plan 2022 will be equally triumphant, and also is to be crowned as a magnificent success.
These 10 year Plans, so Forward and so Progressive, are damn exciting stuff. The Future is Radiant, Komrads.

 

All good stuff. I wanted to say, though, that maybe we'll know once we see the new TV contract how substantive the plan is. If they're hoping for a big broadcast fee in 2014 to cover a large increase in salaries, and they get it, maybe there is some hope for improving player quality. It'd have to be a pretty outstanding contract to push MLS to top-5 discussions, though, so maybe it's unrealistic regardless.

 

...but one stage later than what was achieved in 1998 or 2006.

I think Project 2010 was created in part as a response to the embarrassing WC1998 results. (and perhaps an honest assessment could/should look at all results that were, or we're not, achieved from 2000-2010. And the operational results are certainly more encompassing than just the on-field W-T-L record seen every 4th summer in a month-long competition.)

This improved ("among the top leagues") MLS 2022 "plan/target" seemed to be in conjunction with the WC22 bid process, initially. And it also seems to be in response to MLS not being able to get past LigaMX teams in the CCL.

The on-field results will not be the only metric by which the businesses will assess themselves and their overall performance across some self-designated operational and business goal-cycle.

 

Honestly, people are ragging on a goal oriented 10 year plan for MLS? I personally like the setting of goals and a plan to achieve them. It's how I live my life. And even if I don't necessarily achieve everything I set out to do, I am always in a better position than if I had not the goal and plan in the first place. Seriously, how can anyone rag on this?

And I love the disparaging of the plan before anyone has actually seen the plan. It's like declaring a movie a success or failure based on the trailer.

 

Of course there is a risk to doing that. But do the risks outweigh the potential rewards?

Will this 2022 plan show the kind of ambition and focus that will help the overall business in many ways, from negotiating new tv contracts, to creating more favorable and more enriching expansion opportunities, and bigger sponsorship opportunities, and quality player acquisition/retention opportunities, and other related business growth areas?

Everything comes with possible risks and possible rewards.

But such a supposed reality across the next decade is likely also going to get MLS a lot of praise (from people who matter) for how their business is modeled and effectively run.

MLS has been and always will be the butt of a lot of jokes. (On-field results and or "status achieved among the top5" or top10 or whatever leagues in the world, isn't going to quickly, or on a ten-year timeline, change that.)

So why not let them focus on working to improve their own business and let that be a success or not?

Yes, we as fans want some easily measured results and positive scorelines, but the vagueness of this 2022 initiative is exactly what it is because MLS/SUM are private companies. (and companies get to publicly discuss, and hype/market/define their plans and their eventual/possible successes as they see fit.)

Agreed, and not that there's anything wrong with that.

I think the 2002-2012 years have been a success because the business targets, for the most part, have been easily met. If over the next decade we're analyzing only the on-field results, we may be disappointed or may not be focused on what MLS itself is planning for and targeting -- the continual improvement of their business as a whole.

 

All of the goals, plans, etc. have to be dependent on a much larger TV contract. That is the last and maybe only area that can have substantial growth over today. Most teams have their own stadiums, demand for MLS is somewhat elastic so you can only raise ticket prices so much more, most teams have jersey sponsorships. Yes, all of these areas can be enhanced and augmented but TV is where the big money is.

It's all about the national TV contract and to some extent about the local team TV deals. Whether that happens in 2014 or 2018 or never, that's got to be what they spend their time on, figuring out how to raise ratings without blowing budgets and getting a bigger TV deal.

They keep holding out the LA local TV deal as some sort of sign of things but that is a unique situation in a very large market (read Grant Wahl's interview with Leiweike, sounds like the Spanish language channel may have been the bigger driver). MLS teams aren't going to be getting $3-5 million per year for local TV in most markets.

 

That's not quite fair, since Heineman's version (top 5 within 8 years) is an order of magnitude more ambitious than the league's (top 10 within 10). The former I think is nuts, the latter is the kind of just-barely-plausible goal that such an organization might actually set, and might actually aim for without throwing away a high pair to draw for a straight.

TV revenues. I think they actually know TV revenues are coming. And I'll tell you why I think they know that (I've pointed this out before):

1) 2014 is a World Cup year, and one in this hemisphere, where there will be games in prime time, and thus it's likely to be the most watched World Cup in terms of cumulative viewership in US history
2) 2014 is also the year, at MLS's request, that the NBC contract ends (it is also the year the ESPN contract ends, which may or may not have been at the league's request, it was a long time ago when that deal was negotiated)
3) 2014 is also the year, again at MLS's request, that the Collective Bargaining Agreement ends.

Only a complete fool deliberately times the CBA and TV contracts to end in the same year, all the more so in a World Cup year, when more eyes are on the game than any other time--a fool, or someone who knows something. Someone who knows TV is coming, and who can make a CBA offer the players won't refuse.

 

The ESPN deal was originally signed as an 8 year deal back in 2006. My guess is that they were just happy to have this signed in 2006 and really had no extra strategy to it looking 8 years into the future. The strategy likely started when they worked with NBC on the new deal.
http://m.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Da...-Year-TV-Deal-That-Includes-Rights-Fees.aspx?


To say that 2013/2014 is going to be an interesting period with the tv contracts and CBA being negotiated is an understatement.

 

How big are people assuming the tv contract will be? I think the very upper end we can hope for is in the $100m a year range which translates to roughly 5 million a team.

Note that the NHL is getting around $200 million a year but they have significantly more games to televise (when they are actually playing) and get better ratings (significantly better during the playoffs, in which they televise up to 70 games just in the playoffs).

I feel like I would be really happy with anything over a $65m a year range (all combined: US English, US Spanish and Canadian rights plus what ever extra MLS can get from international rights).

$65m a year is not a game changer obviously at ~3 million a year per team but if they sign a 4-5 year type deal, it gives them a chance to build the ratings to go for an even bigger contract after that.

 

There isn't a single soccer fan anywhere on planet earth that is a fan of a particular league or team based on the competition format.

Anyone who says otherwise is a lying sack of shit.

The single solitary thing that matters is the quality of play on the field. That is it. That is all.

 

As for MLS being one of the top leagues in the world, the NHL went from $400 million in revenues when Bettman started to 3.3 billion dollars in revenue in 18 years. If that was MLS, it would mean that it would be the second largest league in the world, so I'm guessing it could be possible but not in 10 years.

 

In all fairness, I knew that 'Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter" was going to be a giant turd by just watching the trailer.

 

what does the MLS currently get per year for their TV deals? 10-15M?

i think 100M is out of the realm of possibility.

even if the new TV deals brought in 40M per year you could ostensibly spread that over all 20 teams for an extra 2M per team. i think MLS would be even footing with LigaMX if the salary cap was 5M per team (with 3 DPs at 5ooK cap hit) and the max salary of 500K for the 1-20 roster (maybe with more foreign spots to make sure you aren't just paying the same guys more but paying more for better guys). you'd get a 1-20 roster with most of the guys making 250-500k ... that would be a game changer for the overall quality of the league both breadth and depth. it is amazing to think that even a small increase in the cap (like 2M per team) could really (with a few other rule tweaks) make a measurable difference in quality for MLS.

 

i was going to say if you saw Pauly Shore or Adam Sandler/Eddie Murphy in drag you could pretty much know that the movie was going to suck ... pretty much the same sentiment.

tho in defence of AL:VH it wasn't really as bad as all that ... it isn't Citizen Kane or anything close but it was frivolous fun ... certainly no worse than those Twigglet movies.

let's hope Pride And Prejudice And Zombies is better eh?

 

okay. you understand there is a difference between something that makes you a fan of a league/team ... ie something you actively like ... and something that causes a league/team to seem unfamiliar and thus creates a barrier to a person liking said thing?

i am not saying that changing MLS to be more like the product the SFWDLMLSY already like will make them like MLS on on literal one for one basis (ie no playoffs = they like it) but it will surely remove some of the barriers that make MLS seem strange or unfamiliar or uncomfortable for these SFWDLMLSY folks.

 

10 from NBC
8 from ESPN
8ish from Univision
? From Canada
? From international rights

http://m.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Da...-Year-TV-Deal-That-Includes-Rights-Fees.aspx?
http://m.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Da...t-Year-Agreement-To-Broadcast-MLS-Games.aspx?
http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/Issues/2011/08/10/Media/MLS-NBC.aspx

 

I don't know for sure but if the new deal only brings in $40M, I think the league is going to be disappointed. That is very small growth from what they have today that spans back 8 years for ESPN and Univision.

 

oh. well if they are already at 20M then i think 40M total starting in 2014 is the minimum we should be happy with and $50M would be good ... anything above that and i'd be stoked.

what will really tell if this 10 year plan is BS or not is if the cap isn't at least 5M per team after the new TV contracts or not ... if the league doesn't spend more money on better players (not just pay the same guys more as is so often the argument) then the 10 year plan isn't worth anything other than as toilet paper or pet cage liner.

 

You're delusional if that is what you think.

If the quality of play is there, people will tune in and watch. Period.

There is no barrier based on the playoffs. Mexican fans (the largest demographic of soccer fans in this country by the way) aren't ignoring MLS because of playoffs. Their own league is determined by a playoff.

Playoffs aren't a foreign concept to European ex-Pats either. Plenty of leagues there have playoffs of some sort to determine various rewards (league champion, European competition spots, promotion spots, etc.)

And playoffs sure as shit aren't a foreign concept to Euro-posers in this country that grew up on American sports but choose to ignore MLS.

Quality of play. That is reason 1-100 why soccer fans in this country choose to ignore MLS. There is mountains of data and surveys that I've seen from various publications I've worked for, from friends who work in the MLS front office ect, that proves this to be the case.

 

100% increase? that really isn't small but i get your point.

 

It looks like the Canadian rights are through the 2016 season

http://m.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2012/03/05/In-Depth/MLS-NBC.aspx?