Man City Owners Pondering Bid for NY II; Red Bull Having Second Thoughts?

ummm...wow. Let me just play along for a moment. Obviously a 'GPL' would go against FIFA and if some crazy billionaires wanted to create such a global league, I think they would focus on Asia. They wouldn't worry as much about NY Cosmos as they would teams in Shanghai, Beijing, Tokyo, Mumbai, even Seoul. Look at the populations and the potential TV revenues from these markets, it is astronomical. But of course this scenario would never happen, but if it did I think the owners would focus their attentions on Asia and then pick off the biggest Euro clubs. You also might want to wait about a decade or 2 until supersonic commercial jets become commonplace. Some of these away games are going to be rough!

If you wanted to have a conversation that is based in some sort of reality, I think a more realistic option would be if global interest in the game continues to grow in N. America and Asia and investment continues to grow in these places, then the Fifa Club World Cup might actually become meaningful. Remember the European championships were kinda meaningless until Real Madrid started taking it seriously. If there was indeed LOTS of money to be made through TV and sponsorships with a Club World Cup, you might just have Fifa establish a Fifa World League and just abandon the cup. Again this would need to be decades in the future in which we could actually travel to these locations fast enough to make a global competition really work, but if it did happen I think FIFA would make sure it stays in their house and they can cash the checks. So maybe in 50 years you could actually see NY Cosmos play in a global league with Barca and Boca Juniors. But if it does happen, it would just be an extension of the current global club competition we already have not some break away rogue billionaire's league.

 

MLS would call their bluff, that's what. Because MLS, the oil sheiks and anyone who chooses to think about it for a second know that what would happen is:

What "big money" would they get? It's not like the USSF owns the NASL and would be selling it. And if you think that the USSF would just take a huge bribe to name the newly purchased NASL the USA's first-division league, you must be more interested in taking a hypothetical swipe at the USSF than you are at reasoning (Hint: Reasoning is NOT simply assuming that people you don't like will always do whatever bad stuff you can imagine).

That too. Ridiculous.

Please look up the word "escalated." Apparently, you're under the impression that it means, "so unlikely that anyone who has even the most passing familiarity with the real world wets themselves at the thought of someone seriously considering it."

Okay, my turn: If the Kentucky Derby allowed unicorns, there would be NO WAY that Darth Vader would be able to beat Mr. Spock at foosball.

 

"No way"? Really? Now you're just being silly.

 

The biggest reason that "Red Bulls" is not "New York" is because the Red Bull corporation is not a "New York" company. There is absolutely no 'local' relationship to Red Bull. It is entirely a foreign entity.

If Red Bull were to set up corporate offices in New York or Newark....
If Red Bull were to set up factories in New York or Newark....
If Red Bull were to employ a few thousand union workers in Harrison and Kearny....

....then the fanbase might feel some real affection for the team.

The New York Cosmos were owned by Warner Communications -- a New York company owned by New Yorkers. Steve Ross was born in Brooklyn. Ahmet Ertegun was born in Turkey, but came to New York when he was 12-years-old. They were both New Yorkers to the core. Cosmos fans felt like this was a local, New York phenomenon. ONLY IN NEW YORK!

Going to Red Bulls games feels like wiring money to Austria.

 

What other sports teams do you follow? Quick, without looking it up, tell me who owns each one and their family history.

 

Difficult to say when it's not the team's name and it's not written across the team's jersey.

 

Correct. And that's why I wrote "Etc." in the original list. The top Asian cities would be a must.

But so would New York and Los Angeles.

The current "NASL" (with New York Cosmos) as a *rival* league to MLS -- rather than as a Division II league -- could be the legal entity that eventually becomes a "Global Premier League."

And if you don't think it could happen, you haven't studied history.

The NASL was the strongest soccer league in the United States in the late '70s when a pesky little indoor circuit called the MISL popped up. The NASL thought nothing of the MISL, but eventually went into competition with it -- and eventually, the MISL was one of the major factors that put the NASL out of business.

And later, there was a pesky little indoor circuit in the '80s called the AISA to which the MISL paid no attention. The AISA eventually became the NPSL and it put the MISL out of business.

Then MLS came along and made the NPSL irrelevant and it went belly up (but later morphed into the current re-branded MISL).

In other American sports....

The ABA eventually forced a merger with the NBA.
The AFL eventually forced a merger with the NFL.
The WHA eventually forced a merger with the NHL.

This stuff happens *all the time*!

And that is why MLS needed to expand so quickly over the past decade. It needed to get into as many major American and Canadian markets as possible to avoid a rival league popping up to force a merger.

There aren't enough major American markets left to start a rival Division I *domestic* league successfully, I don't think.

But pissing off the Sheiks could lead them to use the NASL as a beach-head for a Global Premier League with clubs in New York, Los Angeles and maybe Chicago.

And that would render MLS virtually useless.

 

Seattle Seahawks - Paul Allen
Seattle Mariners - Nintendo (well, its head, I'm a little unclear as to the split between personal and corporation)
Blackburn Rovers - Venky's
Queen of the South - Shareholders owned, I think the largest holders are David Rae and Norman
Blount

 

I have heard people say that but I don't buy it. Salt Lake City is about the 50th biggest market in the US, MLS only has 15 markets covered in the US AND there are several underperforming markets (Denver/Dallas/Boston, possibly Chicago). Beyond that there is no fundamental reason why a rival group couldn't go directly into current MLS markets and compete. If some rival group got a stadium built in Manhattan or downtown LA and decided to spend a ton on their roster, they might be able to out perform even the largest MLS clubs. I don't think it will happen, but the point is that because MLS has teams in markets it doesn't mean that a competitor couldn't come around and take market share from an MLS club. It can be argued that in many MLS markets (I live in one in Chicago) that the MLS team is probably not even the biggest club in the city. There are probably more Chivas/America/Man United/Barca fans in Chicago than there are Fire fans. The point is that the reason why there is no rival league to MLS is because there are no investors willing to make a rival league, not because of MLS geographic footprint.

 

If you think that it could happen, then you haven't studied enough history. Or, enough about the sport of soccer, past or present.

The MISL was not even close to a "major factor" that contributed to the demise of the NASL. There were only two "major factors":

1. Soccer was not popular in America.
2. The NASL owners overestimated their own ability to change that.

Period. No other "factors" matter in the slightest. The NASL would have died exactly when and how it did had the MISL not existed, ever.

Again, there is no reason whatsoever to think, and not a scintilla of evidence to suggest, that the MISL would not have died exactly how and when it did regardless of the AISA or the NPSL. And, neither is anything close to a "Global Premier League," since they had no clubs with the slightest fraction of the value of the clubs you're dreaming about.

Sorry, but the NPSL was already irrelevant. MLS had nothing to do with that, either.

No, they negotiated to have four ABA teams join the NBA when the rest of the ABA folded. Nobody "forced" jack shit.

Again, nobody "forced" the merger. The only attempts by another league to "force" the NFL to do anything failed miserably (cf. WFL, USFL).

See ABA answer above. Same thing. Nothing whatsoever resembling the scenario you're trying to pretend is possible.

If by "this stuff," you mean the steaming pile of bullshit that is your "Global Premier League," you're going to have to provide a single example that bears anything more than the most superficial resemblance to it. You have yet to do so.

We'll just add the process of MLS expansion to the list of things of which you are apparently totally ignorant.

First, MLS hasn't expanded all that quickly. Here is where you would compare it to the old NASL if you really had any idea about the history of that league, or cared about basic logic or reason.

Second, if they were as desperate to expand as you seem to need to pretend, there would be a hell of a lot more teams than there are. Philadelphia would be playing in Glassboro, NJ, and there would be MLS teams in Cleveland, San Antonio, Miami and probably more.

This is the first thing you've posted in this discussion that resembles a rational argument. Sadly, it's apparently an island in a sea of shit.

That would require permission from USSF, and that's not going to happen. It would also likely lead to FIFA and the FA's of the other clubs blackballing their very top clubs. You may cling to the simple-minded assumption that the Sheiks would be able (let alone willing) to bribe the USSF and FIFA and each of the other FA's sufficiently to make it happen, but thinking people won't. Unlike you, oil billionaires know a stupid business idea when they see it.

So would a meteor hitting every MLS stadium simultaneously, which is probably more likely that your Global Premier League.

Now, take your "you haven't studied history" and cram it. Sideways.

 

Wow...

It didn't even take Karl Marx to kill off this latest F.cosmos thread...

 

Yes, the consortium could own every team. What's the difference? I've see the Single Entity defended here forever. Why would this be any different?

Yes, of course, but they can also make MLS compete for the existing American and foreign talent and, if MLS sticks to its budget model, they can easily double it.

Of course, no one knows that for sure.

But there are a lot of football stadiums that will love to be rented out - the Giants stadium in NJ, the Linc, the Memorial, the FedEx, Jerry World, etc. Maybe if there's a decent international $10M-$15M roster occupying those fields, the inertia may move to the new league from the $4.5M roster filled league.

No, they won't need to.

They can play in the Toronto Dome/ Rogers Centre and all the other biggies. Remember, a large stadium can be rented for ~ $300K. If you get 20,000 spectators at $40 each, you can still make decent profit.

The question is, of course, if one can fill 20,000 seats. With a decent $10M roster, one might.

Not if they buy (into) an already existing league like NASL.

Plus, there are anti-trust issues too.

 

Well, that was Bruce Arena shitting his pants after Kasey Keller knocked at the ball into own net off Carlos Hermosillo's noggin at Foxborough. (or, to be more precise, after the US lost to Honduras at RFK).

You're missing the point. All of them.

They would be doing this in order to integrate themselves into a Western/American society, not to make a meager buck.

Local politicians would jump at a chance for a new sports league.

The USSF can be easily bought off.

There are plenty of soccer fans who skip MLS and this could actually become a profitable venture with a minor - by the ManCity, PSG, Chelsea standards - investment.

PS. According to rough estimates, the Saudis have invested between $400 and $600 Billion in the US already. That would buy a lot of leagues.

 

What money? Take a look at the money these investors represent. It's plenty if they choose to bankroll a significant investment in soccer in this country, and make the USSF turn its attention to the NASL if the NASL were to be bought and owned by them in this scenario.

If you don't think the USSF could be bribed with a fraction of the money these investors represent, your idea of reasoning is more ignorance that anything.

 

Sure, if by "missing," you mean, "thinking through, apparently for the first time."

And, just what would make you think that? What evidence can you show that they have the slightest interest in this "integration," let alone enough of that interest to blow a whole bunch of money doing it?

This sounds a lot like wishful thinking to me.

What?! When has ANY start-up sports league been met with anything but skepticism by politicians (and everyone else)? What possible reason would any local politician have for hitching his wagon to a group of foreign Arab investors and their pipe dream of a worldwide soccer league (other than, "I think that it would be cool, so everybody would!!!!1!1!!)?

Right. Simple. Because you say so. Lots of smart people just make statements like this, that everybody can be bribed without the slightest bit of evidence or precedent.

No, wait. They don't.

Because it's safe to just assume that soccer fans "skip MLS" in favor of any other soccer available. Millions of Eurosnob Chelsea fans would instantly glom onto their local NASL 3.0 club, and skip the weekly telecast of "their" Blues to go watch New York City United Sporting Rangers playing PSG or River Plate.

No, wait. They won't.

Are there any of those "rough estimates" of investments made for reasons other than getting a return on that investment? What's the "rough estimate" of dollars spent for the purpose, not of making money, but achieving integration into "Western/American society"?

I swear, you guys should be the inspiration for a "A Little Knowledge Is A Dangerous Thing" telethon.

 

Oh, bullshit. You do know that Don Garber, Kevin Payne and Sunil Gulati are all members of the USSF Board of Directors, right? Sorry, but no oil Sheik is stupid enough to commit a big enough fraction of the money that they "represent" to trying to bribe these people (and a lot of others), on top of throwing the sort of money that such a hare-brained scheme would require at start-up and operating costs.

Oh, but MLS has "pissed them off" by not rolling over for their demands, whatever they might be that MLS would completely reject, so they would just open up their enormous wallets out of spite and little else to create a soccer league in a country whose history is littered with failed soccer leagues not named MLS.

Seriously, are you so completely unable to distinguish wishful thinking from the regular kind? Seriously?

 

Launching new sports leagues in America is certainly not glamourous. It takes a very long time and they often don't work. The #1 reason why oil billionaires are dropping silly amounts of cash on clubs is because it is glamourous. Chelsea or City or PSG are like big yachts and victoria secret models, it is just something multi billionaires can flaunt around to show off. Trying to launch a new league that no one will really know about for a few years that will probably be called a 'minor league' because of MLS status in this country at this point is going to be far from glamourous. I just don't think there are billionaires out there willing to go rogue and start some rival league when MLS has already done all the heavy lifting and they can just write a check and buy into something already built. I think this is why MLS is doing work in NYC now. If they can get a 30k stadium built in Queens (only SSS in NYC) and establish the first NYC MLS franchise, then they can boost it up as being 'glamourous' and unique...and probably find one of these guys to buy it.

Its not that these guys are afraid of loosing money, they just want to loose money while looking glamourous. You don't do that buy dumping cash into some minor league in America. You do it by sitting in some new 30k stadium in NYC and watch 4 or 5 30-something superstars play for your club as you sip champaign with Posh, Becks, and Pele.

 

#postfrom1776

 

To be fair, MetroStars is a pretty stupid name too. Especially when you do things like call it New York-New Jersey instead of picking one, and other such nonsense.

New York Cosmos ftw.

 

Except Red Bull is in the thread title, so it is on point. Besides as a United fan isn't it fun just to watch the NY crowd turn on each other like it is the Lord of the Flies?

 

Except that the only path to the World Club Championship would be to win the Lamar Hunt Open Cup. You have somewhat of a point.

Also, you haven't factored in what they're trying to do. They're doing PR. An attempt at a hostile takeover of pro soccer in the US would obviously be counterproductive.

 

There's a limit. People have noted some of them. Another one is that Chivas Mother Ship wanted to move to LA, but the Fed backed up MLS and said no. Giving in on this crazy hypothetical of sidefoot's would be a much bigger deal than that.

 

It was a phenomenon of the 70s due to unique conditions of the time. It's not coming back anymore than Herb Tarlek is going to become a fashion guru.

Arena wasn't the coach at that time. FYI.

This is crazy talk. FYI.

For one thing, just one thing, what's the end game here for the Arab princes, and what's the end game for the Fed???? You're like Oliver Tse in the BeIn sports threads. (If you want to see an overload of the crazy, check out his posts about BeIn over the last 6 months.) You've distilled the Underpants Gnome Theory to its purest essence.

 

Rump upstart leagues in soccer are impossible to start regardless of financial backing. FIFA, its regional associations and its national associations have a lock stranglehold on the sport. Any player signing with this new GPL forever forfeits their eligibility to play in International Tournaments including the World Cup. So maybe Pele would consider playing? Or other similarly retired from real football players.

A GPL would threaten FIFA's world cup, UEFA's CL, CONMEBOL's Copa Lib, and who knows what else.