so the one piece of evidence is a quarter century old? the current rowdies are NOT exceptional in lower league attendance ... they are average. (EDIT: they are actually BELOW average ... NASL had 469,872 fans over 126 games for an average of 3,729 per game; the Rowdies averaged 3,116 per game ... that is below the NASL average). and it isn't any kind of evidence that they can be EXCELLENT. i am sure any MLS team in Tampa would be able to average 14K-16K ... but they aren't very likely average 20K and they or fill a 28K stadium given the basic facts and there is no evidence to support that they would (30 year old attendance not withstanding) and plenty of evidence to support the fact they would be an average at best MLS market. it isn't a matter of whether or not an MLS team in Tampa could exist at all or be average. the question is given all of the factors how likely is it that the Tampa market has the potential to be EXCELLENT compared to other markets ... and in those terms they come up far short. and the other data i quoted are not a veiled insult ... they are data ... you don't like the data take it up with the census bureau.
The Rowdies were an incredibly well-supported NASL team. Thirty years ago. That doesn't apply today, as the landscape in the market has changed considerably. USF's attendance means nothing, it's college soccer on campus. And, yes, the current Rowdies are a below-average-drawing D2 team. Partially because they play in a baseball stadium on the wrong side of the Bay, and partially because I don't know how savvy their constantly-changing front office is. Could an MLS team in Tampa draw well? You'd have to take the over, wouldn't you? Based on how well MLS expansion teams (other than Chivas and Miami) have drawn? Especially now, right? What "single shred of evidence" was there for Salt Lake City? But 20k might be a stretch. 28k - a stadium larger than any SSS in MLS - is a pipe dream. I grew up in Tampa, it's my hometown, love it to death, but that ain't happening. Also, the latest from Steve Davis on this: http://prosoccertalk.nbcsports.com/2012/11/30/soccer-stadium-in-tampa-dont-hold-your-breath/
I do agree with your refutation of the hokey people throw out there about the original Rowdies. It is over two decades old. A couple things you miss though. If a new stadium was built, I think MLS would do quite well here. Youth soccer has been huge here since I was a kid, so you have a very large number of folks in this area who have played soccer. That doesn't make them a lock to buy tickets, but it is a soccer market. There is a strong and growing South American population in this area. Colombians in particular. That is a fanbase that the Mutiny actually did tap into at first but kind of ran out of gas without an owner. I could see a very diverse fanbase for MLS here in Tampa. Plus, the best comparison for them in the marketplace will be the Lightning. The NHL is the hip sport in town. If you have a date, you take her to see the Lightning. Baseball does have a bit of that old people's sport going on and the Bucs are so expensive that if they don't win, nobody goes. MLS could very well position itself as the hip thing to do in Tampa. Especially with a retractable roof stadium in downtown. We have factors going for us that could counter the drawbacks.
The size of the stadium shows that these folks haven't got a good pulse on what is going on in MLS. Maybe they learn, maybe they don't. And BTW Kenn, you know that podcasts from basements are the goto sources, right? Why bother with actual news outlets.
As I'm sure you know, original Rowdies games were Great Moments In The History Of White People. It's a much different target audience now, and MLS' recent expansion teams have demonstrated the skepticism that greeted the original teams has lessened to a great extent (partially because the league didn't go away and did all the other things they've done over the years). Of course, Miami had a great potential market as well, but they put people in charge who couldn't sell Bobby Petrino a time machine.
I agree Kenn. Not sure if you ever caught a Mutiny game in say season one or two. The latino component to fanbase was really significant even if overall attendance wasn't. It baffles me why the new Rowdies don't effectively reach that market themselves.
well if you look at the demographic data for Salt Lake you'll find that the population is very young (plus 1), it is also a very affluent MSA (plus 2), as well as having low poverty (plus 3), and there is also only one other pro team in the market on an opposite scheudle (plus 4). so there are 4 bits of data based evidence that could have shown that RSL would be a viable MLS market ... and it has turned out to be an average (off-field) MLS team in MLS 2.0. so taken that RSL's market has at least 4 data points in its favour and it, now after 5 years, is right in the middle of the MLS 2.0 pack in attendance/off-field i would say that the "under" on Tampa who has none of those 4 factors in it's favour would be much more likely. again it is what do you mean by "could have an MLS team"? could it have a team that attracted 15K fans? sure, i'd bet on that in MLS 3.0 in just about any large MSA. but that isn't really what future expansion is about is it? to find some more average to below average markets? with only a handful of expansion teams left to go i'd think the bar for an expansion MLS market would be above average to great potential. a lot of why the post 2007 expansion teams have been such successes (in addition to ownership, etc) is that they were into EXTREMELY good MLS potential markets: Seattle, Portland, Vancouver, Toronto, Montreal ... all young, wealthy, educated cities with large populations and/or low other pro teams and most with a very vibrant soccer history (in NALS) and a vibrant contemporary soccer culture (for most). even Philly was one of the countries biggest MSAs with a few thousand strong supporter group before a team existed. but because other expansion into very favourable high potential markets has been successful does NOT mean that expansion into ANY market will be successful (or above average successful). that is why it is important to look at DATA and FACTS about potential MLS markets, compare each market to the others on those factors and see how they rate. and unfortunately on 7 or more factors Tampa rates at or neat the bottom of potential MLS expansion markets (San Antonio, Orlando, Atlanta, Minneapolis, San Diego, San Francisco).
There's nothing that can be taken from the Rowdies attendance figures. The Rowdies are smack dab in the middle of St Pete. It's hard to get to and, except for small core of hipsters, in the middle of a great urban wasteland of poverty. They are ten blocks away from the Ray's Tropicana Field and I'm sure there are millions of articles written on why this is a bad place to be. Hillsborough is a whole 'nother place. For the most part, the Lighting and the Bucs do just fine. According to this article, the county commission has talked to VSI and they are looking at Selmon Expressway near US-75. That seems to me too far out.
I don't know how recent Ole's demographics are but the Tampa region is getting younger and Hillsborough itself is currently pretty standard. It's really too urban a place for it to be a good destination for retirees anymore. Those guys have been going much farther south to Sarasota and Venice for a while now. Lately a lot of young people have been coming in to Pinellas and Hillsborough because it's an urban scene with great beaches and isn't so sweltering hot as Miami. According to Wikipedia: Seattle's King County: 21.4% under the age of 18, 6.7% from 20 to 24, 31.5% from 25 to 44, 26.9% from 45 to 64, and 10.9% who were 65 years of age or older. The median age was 37.1 years Hillsborough county: 25.30% were under the age of 18, 9.30% from 18 to 24, 31.70% from 25 to 44, 21.70% from 45 to 64, and 12.00% were 65 years of age or older. The median age was 35 years. It's still a bit of a baseball and football place but there are many thriving soccer leagues and people from all over the world and of course it's big.
wrong. San Jose and San Francisco-Oakland are two entirely separate MSAs according to the US Census Bureau ... they both could very easily sustain separate MLS teams. i am not saying it is likely but i put San Francisco out there as a demographically ideal market (defined by MSA) that is still untapped. you can also see by the fact that the Quakes don't sell out their 10K stadium but get much larger crowds when they play in or nearer San Fran that most of their regular home games in SJ are not attended by people from the SF-OAK MSA.
and you would be wrong. they had 6 games at buck shaw this season that did not sell out. if they had the same 40K-50K demand they get when playing in SF when they play in SJ (because lots of SF people were coming down to SJ) then they could pretty easily sell out every single game in a 10,525 capacity stadium. and they don't. i am not saying if MLS will ever go to SF-OAK i am simply saying that it is a very good potential MLS market given its very favourable demographics ... whether MLS ever chooses to go there or not is a different story. but Candlestick Park and Buck Shaw stadium are over 40 miles apart which is further than RBA and the proposed Queens stadium and further apart than any two stadiums would be in LA. if MLS ever decides that the affluent, young, hip, liberal, well educated population of a totally separate MSA (SF-OAK) would make a good addition to the league (and create another heated local rivalry) all of the data indicate that the SF-OAK market (mostly SF) far outstrips potential-wise than Tampa.
I can see it now. The San Francisco Strawmen, with OleGunnar20's assface as its logo. They'll be selling seasons tickets and merchandise for sure.
If you aren't making any distinction between Hillsborough County and Pinellas County and you aren't looking into how the one might be skewing data when looking at the other, then you are just proving yourself to be yet another who doesn't actually know much about what they are speaking of. But we already knew that, didn't we? You keep having fun with your MSAs , I'm sure it isn't a huge waste of your time. Unless you count exhaustive, stuffy Bigsoccer posts among your life achievements and list them accordingly on your CV?
I'd just like to note that most here would completely agree that 28k for a soccer stadium in MLS in Tampa Bay is asking a bit much. Absolutely no one would expect a Tampa MLS team to draw that many fans per game, its actually ridiculous to suggest and even more ridiculous to expect. However, while a 20k stadium would make more sense, does it really matter if you are drawing near 20k in a 28k stadium? Especially if those extra 8/9 k seats come in handy when trying to draw U.S. national team games or other big one off games to the area? Looking at the average attendance in MLS, even without throwing out the Seattle numbers, Tampa Bay would not have to draw crazy numbers to be considered successful. Unless you are Ole Gunnar, who thinks every new market has to be exceptional, rather than simply steady and successful, ya know, cause he says so and stuff.
yes. because ignoring or excluding data that might not be favourable to ones argument is definitely quality data analysis ... i hear that is how they do it at NASA. you can't just pick and choose the favourable counties that support your arguement. MSAs are decided by the government based on a dozen different criteria, the only way to fairly compare one market to another is to use the same parameters. counties are impossible to use because then you induce bias by deciding what counties to use and which to not. not to mention it is inaccurate as teams draw from multiple counties. if MSAs are good enough for the US Census Bureau for deciding contiguous economic population densities it is good enough for any amateur MLS market analysis. just because part of the Tampa market is rich and part of it is poor doesn't mean you can ignore the part you don't like. you have to take all parts to fairly compare one market like Tampa to the whole of other markets. do you think that only Tampa has income disparity between one county and another that make up its MSA?
yes, because ignoring data that does not support your argument is definitely the most honest and accurate way to analyze things ... i hear that is how NASA does it. you cannot use counties to compare one market to another because you introduce bias deciding which county most "accurately" represents an entire market. not to mention it isn't accurate since teams draw from multiple counties in real life. the US Census Bureau came up with MSAs based on dozens of criteria to define accurate contiguous economic population centers ... if you have a problem with the MSAs and how they are defined i suggest you take it up with them ... but if it is good enough for the Census it is good enough for amateur MLS market analysis. and do you think that only Tampa has income disparity between the counties that make up its MSA? try again. as for a 28.8K stadium ... it just proves how incompetent and clueless the "ownership group" is ... (another indicator of expansion success is quality ownership, minus 1 Tampa) ... let's be really really really generous and assume that Tampa will average 18K a game, average for MLS, (despite the fact nothing in any of the usual indicators suggest they would do so and plenty of the indicators suggest they would be more likely to be an below average MLS attendance market) you would then have a stadium on every game day that had over 10,000 empty seats which would ruin the atmosphere. watch a RBNY game sometime and that is from only 7,000 empty seats. and of course in real life, where Tampa is a medicore below average soccer market, they would likely average 14-16K which would leave HALF the stadium empty ... yeah, that will make for a great atmosphere! and let's ignore the fact that both SKC's Livestrong and Columbus Crew Stadium prove conclusively that the USMNT does NOT require anything near 28K capacity to be considered for games or to be considered top home field advantage atmospheres. this is just a collossally stupid idea all around ... from actually thinking Tampa is a viable market compared to other markets still left with higher potential to the rubbish "ownership" group which is floating a patently ridiculous "stadium" idea. i will be happy when VSI Tampa Flames fail miserably just to further prove how incompetent this group is and hopefully they die a quick death so soccer fans in Tampa can get back to reality and support the EXCELLENT team they already have in NASL, the Rowdies. Tampa is the perfect D2 level market for soccer and could very well, with focused fan support, grow into an upper echelon D2 supported team ... of course this internecine fight between Rowdies and Flames is sure to not help that situation much.
It's even more likely that "crunching the numbers" of your "data points" isn't as reliable an indicator of future success as you like to think.
It does sound far fetched. But for selfish reasons since I like vacationing in nearby Clearwater beach I hope it happens. I'd try to attend every Chicago Fire away match in Florida. Also, looking at it from a US National team perspective a 28K SSS would be the perfect home for World Cup Qualifying matches & Friendlies in the south. And Klinsi has said in the recent past that he likes National team games in Tampa...
I think you misunderstood that post! Regardless, I do obviously think MLS would work in Tampa. But I am also in full agreement, even with Ole G., that the proposed stadium size is too much and these VSI characters hopefully won't do more damage to any future legit attempts to bring MLS to Tampa by carrying on with this half cocked scheme. Shit or get off the pot, immediately if you want to bring MLS to Tampa. Dragging this plan out and talking up MLS without ever really accomplishing anything clearly wouldn't be in the best interest of building support for pro soccer in Tampa Bay. At any level as it will no doubt affect the Rowdies as well.