if anything was passed through the cracks like that, they could give clusters of tickets to corporations to fill the seats since even a dog bone contract would bring revenues to each club. that being said, fitz is a lawyer/govt contractor. why in the hell isnt he working the corporate seen in atlanta? not much profit but 1500 or so in seats, just for fillers for the camera and maybe a couple of new fans. did they do a mother/daughter day for mother's day or anything like that?
I do agree that the focus can't be heavy on kids, but I feel there needs to be a combination. I don't mind kids being there for they are future players and I know they have players that they look up to. I just think there should be a "rowdy" section away from the kiddies where the single forever alone bachelors and bachelorettes or the fun time couple can act grown up like. A place where people without kids can have fun as well. That said marketing is not always an easy task.
I think the Breakers have done a good job of allowing all types of fans to have a good time at their games, far superior to the WUSA days and apparently better than what other WPS teams are doing? Mookie, maybe you need to move! Re: MLS- I thought that MLS Cup was on ABC, is that not a national network anymore? WPS would be in great shape to have 35-40% of MLS attendence averages.
I do like what the Breakers have done and I think they are one of if not the only team to get it right. They appear to make sure there's something for everyone and I think that's why they usually pull in the highest of the attendence numbers. I really like the balance that The Tide have. They're witty and passionate, but not overtly loud or obnoxious. Boston is one of my favorites, but I don't think I could ever leave my Sky Blue. I don't know if other teams or the league can find that niche. If you don't have diehard supportors it's going to be hard to make money and stay afloat. The fair weather fans are going to come and go, but the loyal and true are the heartbeat of the league. Cost cutting can only stop the bleeding but so much. The next goal should be building and keeping a diehard base.
Europe is taking positive steps towards serious pro standards within the women's game. In the process they are also trying to assess what type of fan base the women's game should actively seek, and for the most part right now they think very similar to the minds behind WPS. I think over time you'll see Europe come to the conclusion before the U.S., that little girls while playing the sport in large numbers, are still alien to the concept of serious female top flight football. The big male club affiliation of women's teams lends itself to cross over support. This support comes in the form of highly developed coaching and training infrastructure, with a wide demographic of potential ready made fans. This male club association also tends to intrigue the media too, with the female sides connected to the biggest male teams getting (while still small) substantially larger amounts of interest compared to their opposition. The merry go round of WUSA/WPS/WPSL ect... all ends with eventual MLS partnerships. Cries of MLS doesn't have the money are perfectly valid, but I don't think MLS has to bank roll the league or teams in order for partnerships to work out in the long run. The connection to a much better developed U.S. male game is what will eventually bring in more fans, and how could that not be beneficial for both sexes. If people forgot the sexism and politics for a second, the still hugely untapped potential figures of money having women within the football community, is the reasoning for such famous (or infamous) Blatter quotes as, "The future of football is feminine". For all his problems Blatter sure knows the smell of money. When the big football organisations want to increase revenue streams, show me the money, and show me the women are going to be very similar things down the line in global football.
I respectfully, but strongly, disagree. There's a way to do it and still respect an audience with a lot of families in it. I've seen it done, and done with great success.
mls doesn't want the wps as a whole, wants a w-league which can draw the same number of fans as the wps, and wants to turn those ticket buyers into mls fans. if they did, the first step would have been for DC United to save the Washington Freedom, the flag ship of the wps. Nope, they let them go to FL, and are putting a semi-pro team in the complex which will draw the same freedom fans at no cost them but to convert those fans to DC United paying customers. 100% ownership of wps by the mls turns into something like kelly smith had at arsenal, a couple of pounds a game and u13-18 PT coaching job for arsenal to make ends meet. now, she earns top 5% wages in the wps. in the end the mls wants to be the north american version of Bundesliga, and wont carryhe money sucking wps along in its' current state, which i've said looks almost as good or better on certain nights than the amateur (by euro standards) mls games. of course i'm all for the serious mls clubs like vancouver and portland to join. maybe paul allens group picks up the lady sounders. put that with the jacks and sahlens and you might just have something if the league can make it. mls or not, 2900 showing up at a blue home opener isnt going to do. it's still up to the fans to put 4500-5000 in the stands.
Calling MLS, which has produced many U.S. Nats and has a number of quality professional players, "amateur" is ignorant at best and trolling at worst. Even by European standards. Europe is not just Barcelona and Man U. There are plenty of teams and leagues that MLS's level is comparable to and is greater than. And at 17,000 a game, it draws more fans than many European leagues. As someone said, WPS would kill to average 25-30% of that. Saying it is a failure because its highlights aren't on ESPN Sportscenter is hilarious considering soccer is not thought of as an important sport in America. In that case, soccer itself is failure. But compared to every other attempt to sustain soccer in America, MLS is a huge success. It has been around for 16 years and is growing quite fast. Who knows where it will be in another 10 years? It's the only thing that has worked and deserves a ton of credit for making it. And yes, ABC broadcasts the MLS Cup. It's certainly not MLS's job to save WPS. I have no clue about the relationship between the leagues. But WPS doesn't really offer anything for MLS to get involved. Other than losing more money. As cruel as it sounds, MLS would be wise to leave WPS to its fate. Then if MLS and its clubs even have the slightest interest in women's soccer, they can establish their own soccer league with complete control. For a fraction of the cost you can draw similar crowds without the huge loses.
Wrong Jossed, ESPN broadcasts MLS Cup. That shows even YOU don't care about it! LMAO!! I gotta agree with newsouth. MLS is horrible. Unwatchable. Even the Beckham games aren't really worth it anymore. I can see why the ratings are beyond awful!
I've thought the same thing but I didn't want to sound too negative. Someone wrote - I don't know the source - that WPS wouldn't operate with fewer than six teams. That means MLS only has to wait for one owner to get "owner fatigue". Then they launch WMLS and the surviving WPS teams that want to continue can be absorbed by them. That way they don't need to provide many teams, only enough to lessen the travel burden. In the meantime they can continue with teams in the W-League and WPSL or join the semi-pro WPSL division.
Why didn't they do that in the first place?? The pro women's league should've been formed with the support of MLS to start with! Is MLS really considering their own women's league?? That will likely kill of WPS. If WPS was in a stronger position then you could say it would kill of WMLS.
I have a feeling that there may be all kinds of changes in the post-college women's game in the near future. We can all agree that the the WPS didn't end up being like most people imagined it would be prior to it's startup in 2009. Most of us thought that an attendance between 4,000-7,000 on a weekly basis was concievable. Most owners figured they may lose money but not THAT much money. There is a place for Pro soccer in the women's game, but not in the model the founders of the WPS set out to be, including Tonya Antonucci. I'm curious as to how the WPS will look after this season, if at all. The Red Stars seem to be experimenting in the WPSL this season and I believe they can learn a lot from this experience for themselves and for other teams in the WPS. Is Fitz Johnson going to survive into next year? Is Borislow going to get bored with his new toy quickly? Does Boston have enough gas left in the tank for a year 4? Can Sahlen sell enough hotdogs to pay all those salaries for a second year? Will WPSL and maybe WMLS start some competion for WPS with lower cost and fairly competitive soccer? There are more girls coming out of college now that are high quality soccer players then there were during the WUSA days............and not enough WPS teams to play on. So will this pool of skilled women soccer players make a WPSL or WMLS as fun to watch as WPS in the near future? How will the USWNT and USWNT players affect all this and vice-versa? I am confident that those involved, including us fans DO want to see Women's Pro soccer succeed. And I think they will find a way to make it succeed. But in what form? A lot of things will be answered after this third season.
What people are forgetting here is the continued rise of the women's game globally. Some nations especially in Europe are getting everything in place to do pro women's soccer teams and leagues in a fashion that years from now will be seen as great. The UEFA women's champions league is already a breading ground for the top pro/semi pro teams to play each other on a annual basis. While only small in participation number and scope now, it's probably already the top club comp in the women's game right now, and will no doubt get better as the years go bye. Sponsorship money like in the men's game is vital to any women's side, and like with the men's champions league, the female version can be a very nice pay day when in the later rounds. As huge as the men's comp has grown over the years, UEFA can slice of major sponsorship profits for the girls to drive the incentive for women's football teams having more pro players to compete for major prize money. The recent up turn in major clubs adding women's teams to it's ranks just highlights where this is all headed. They attract the top domestic and a few international players to create female super teams, providing pro conditions for the nations top players. Even with the amateur nature of much of the globe in women's soccer, just by allowing the girls to use a little of what the guy's regularly get in this fashion has had a huge impact on the recent progress of many nations. Without WPS would any MLS clubs be ready to do this for the WNT girls? Much of the advantage of the U.S. girls has been due to the college system. College soccer unlike with the men gives U.S. girls a high level pro environment to train as top athletes. Other counties by borrowing the facilities of their major men's clubs can now replicate the last advantage of the U.S.. When doing this they also receive top coaching in creative and tactical playing aspects american girls can only hope to experience in age group international play. Without the help of the incredibly weak USSF in basic organisation like generating sponsorship deals, the only other partner who could help would be MLS. I mean I just don't get how the WPS teams expect to survive when they are not covered with sponsorship logos from head to toe like any good modern football club should be. It's the modern necessary evil of major sports, and yet WPS teams couldn't even beg a decent non profit to put anything near a single franchise . Male players over the history of football have always played where they have the best environments to be pro, and this trend has always gone in cycles. There's no guarantee the U.S. is always going to be the mecca of female players world wide. As when Europe gets it's collective act together, U.S. girls may have to leave home to experience quality play and get good money. Things need to be in place to make sure the U.S. doesn't lose any more ground if this is ever the case.
Here is something by Jeff concerning the opener in Rochester: Jeff Kassouf April 27, 2011 at 9:26 am · Reply I’ve been told that there has been very little presold tickets for the match in WNY. Unless they get a huge walk-up, the crowd won’t be that big. I'm not sure if Jeff is saying sub 4000 or what. Does Sahlen have to give them a Baked Ham to come to the game? So, 7000 to see semi-low Rhinos but light sales for a stacked and exciting Flash Team. I guess they havent watched the last 2 Flash Games.
Unfortunately, 2 or 3 of these teams are located in not so good women's soccer markets in my opinion. But because there are owners in those cities with DEEP pockets who want a team, those cities have WPS teams. While good soccer markets like St. Louis and Chicago where the Red Stars as far as I recall, never had a crowd less then 3,000 even on their worst day bitter cold and rain and had a few games over 5,000, cannot have a WPS franchise (at least not this year) because we don't/didn't have owners with DEEP pockets. The St. Louis guys along with Boston had the most passionate fans in the WPS. Unfair? I may think so. But it is what it is. IMO, Boston is a women's soccer market Chicago is a women's soccer market Portland is a women's soccer market St. Louis is a women's soccer market Raleigh/Durham is a women's soccer market NY/NJ is a women's soccer market Even LA can be a women's soccer market in the right venue. I just don't see big size crowds in Philly, Atlanta, South Florida on a consistent basis. I hope I'm proven wrong in the long run about these three cities but I just don't see it. I hope that there comes a day when the WPS commissioner can be like the MLS commissioner and can pick and choose what city or market he/she wants to put the new WPS franchise in, because there are owners waiting in line. Meanwhile fans of the WPS Pro game have to just accept franchise owners with DEEP pockets to keep the league going, even if it's in Podunk, Iowa.
Philly not a women's soccer market? Didn't THE CHARGE used to average near 11k? Maybe don't put the stadium so far outside the city. (Perhaps they had to go into Chester Country last year in order to control costs, I don't know.) And then, maybe don't have a stadium with attendance cap at 4k when that's the league average! Again, costs may have played a role in that decision as well but I don't know what happens if Philly has to host a semifinal or championship game in a facility so small (same question could be asked of magicjack). I also maintain that the website's load time and a URL that's 45 characters long is a detriment especially when your fan base's scattered across a wide area. These limiting factors notwithstanding, the Philly market exists and I still have hope in the rediscovery of the Independence.
My comments are not ment to put down these areas. It's just that Atlanta and Philly have not shown comparatively consistent good crowds in their first year and starting in year 2 and I don't think ever will. I admit, I may still be a little bitter over the decision by my Red Stars not to participate in 2011 in WPS due to lack of DEEP pockets. But we had some of the best crowds in the WPS. Both years. IMO, Chicago is a good women's soccer market comparatively to other WPS cities. We averaged around 4,000 consistently. Marta days over 6,000 and 8,000. I know, I was at every CRS game . There are teams in the WPS that can barely get 2,000 to a game on a nice sunny afternoon. And yet they have a WPS team and we don't. Doesn't seem fair.
Hmm, Philly hasn't played a home game yet so we don;t know for sure what impact the new stadium location will have
Philly Charge @ Villanova averaged 7500 per game in 2003... THe Mia factor brought those games up to near sellout (over 11K) I think the location last year and this year will limit it but I understand the move was all about saving money (and moving to a bigger facility will not nessesarily mean bigger crowds at first anyway WHy does the WPS not sign the 99ers to come out and attend 1 game at each location each year to sign autographs and sell picture Ops..
Wow, isn't Vill Stadium within 20 miles of Widener? Now, Widener is a problem for Philly fans but is less than 15 miles from PPL? Either people go to the WPS games or not because this is getting ridiculous. There is a problem with 4000+ seats but only 2900 or so are showing up. I'd like to see the stats for the BLue game. Aren't they a big rival? So, it should be a sellout, standing room. I guess if they played in PPL before the Union that would be problem because people would have to leave home 2 hrs earlier. Might be some hope for mr magicjack. He gets people to pay to sit on the grass with no advertising. What happens after the WC if he starts to really push the team? 3000 in temp seating plus others paying to sit in the grass. Who knows?
newsouth, that's one of my contentions that people complain about driving 20miles. Would these same people complain about even driving longer for an Eagles game? I am going to the Beat MagicJack game on the 8th in South Florida and I can't wait. And that's 1000 miles from where I live and several hundred $$$ out of my wallet.
There has not been a home game at Philly this year so we don't know what the crowd will be 20 Miles on Highway is different than 20 miles of lights and changing roads I am 20 minutes from VIllanova but 50+ minutes from Widener (Without Traffic) It was 35 Minutes to each game last year. as far as travelling to an eagle game... I don't , but I do make 1-2 trips to the NY Giants each year but I would not go more than that I have been to the Linc for Soccer Games, but it is a staight shot down 1 highway and is very easy to get to for me as far as PPL, the crowd would look lost in there Also this year will have to account for gas prices being 1$ more per gallon than last year
, ops indeed. The same golden girls who made the first pro league possible, attracting decent crowds, with the help of the blank fat checkbooks of big business fathers wanting to help their daughters wholesome hero's. Shame then that these very girls who gave birth to female pro soccer in America, did everything just right to piss off their new friends by expecting the world. All that good progress undone with a ridiculous amount of a haphazard sense of entitlement. Entitlement no code of soccer player or league has ever been able to hold in America, ever. 99's golden girls just about killed any and all genuine attempts at a prosperous future, leaving us asking is a WPS with it's initial modest targets and better players ever going to be sustainable.
I am not complaining about the mileage anymore. I just said that with a cap of 4,000 it will be impossible to average 4,000+. But as big of a fan as I was last year, a 3.5 hour round trip to west chester's stadium legitimately prevented me (and perhaps hundreds if not thousands of other potentials) from buying season tickets last year so I went to three games, & followed the rest of them on TV and online. I'm just not going to go to that trouble every week and especially not on work nights. I guess I'm Not dedicated? (I'll drive anywhere - up to 10 hours, to see my college's soccer team play on the road. I can't really do the same for a pro team because I don't feel that level of personal affiliation yet, and perhaps if the league were around longer I'd develop a history with it the way I have with my college or say, the Phillies- I don't follow the Eagles.) Now as soon as they announced they moved to Widener in 2011 I bought a gold plan. I still can't go to every game, maybe more than half, but I do feel more invested in the team now that it's actually in my metro area and I did promise to buy tickets if they left WC. I enthusiasticly followed through on that during this past offseason. After I had strongly hoped for a Philly/Nova/Chester city location in the offseason, I'm truly glad the circumstances worked out with Widener because like I said, it simply was not going to be logical for me to travel 3.5 hours to watch a 90 minute game, on a routine basis. Do our teams do any banner Advertising on facebook? The fan groups feature is free but whoever is maintaining them, can they add people or do they have to be "followed"? Should every one in the facebook group suggest all 500 of their friends "like" their local team? even if only 5% of those people follow up and only 2% buy a ticket, Would that increase exposure at no cost whatsoever? Currently, only about 1.5% of my facebook "friendss" "LIKE" the WPS Philly Independence. Whereas close to 10% like the Sixers, Flyers, or Eagles, and 25% or MORE "like" the Phillies.