What is your frame of reference for the NASL being as bad as the USL?!? The USL has had a decade plus to EARN their cr@p reputation as an organization. The NASL hasn't even had one year to fully operate a league on their own! LOL You should have just stopped after your first sentence.....
So let me see if I get this right. Your saying that the ability for the US to be able to qualify for future World Cups, comes down to if we have a strong D2 in this country? I think there was hope that NASL would offer something different in the way of an approach or business model. I jus haven't seen any action that shows how they are different.
After 1 season, 3 teams are in serious doubt of returning. Doesn't sound much different than any USL off-season. NASL could turn out to be different than USL; they just haven't done anything to prove differently. Last year I got annoyed with Traffic basically blaming all of their problems on USL. They were out of USL this past season and nothing really changed. NASL fanboys can hype the league up as much as they want, but the TOA/NASL has yet to offer anything showing how they're different.
Here is a positive for NASL. http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/...soccer_today_106938578.html?showFullArticle=y
If the NASL turns out to be competent then seven figures will be a bargain. Too bad it's still a big if.
Two things that NASL needs to do if they want to grow/survive: One: They need to make some TV deals. Maybe talk to FSN2 and Versus. Teams have to be able to make more money than just ticket sales. Companies are willing to pay higher sponsorship fees with greater exposure. Two: NASL needs to create a couple of liason positions and have these liasons work with ownership groups who are trying to put franchise bids together; some are really struggling. They need to target key markets: either large markets like Phoenix, Detroit, San Diego, or medium size markets with no other pro sports competition like Las Vegas, Albquerque. Also: NASL will still be very dependent on the local fan base for their revenue, so they need to make every game an event. Encourage tail gate parties, and fan events. Don't try to make the games too expensive that a family can't afford to go to a game. Make the fans feel like they are a part of the team, not just a consumer of the entertainment.
I find this entire thread an amusing example of binary opposition, the natural tendency of all people to pick a side, even when neither really deserves their support. Neither league understands their customer base, and that fan culture has to dominate corporate culture for soccer clubs to thrive economically. They're both totally doomed.
Without the proper infrastructure in place before a league starts, it's doomed. A team requires -- absolutely requires -- a soccer-specific stadium to reach its maximum potential in terms of gameday atmosphere, which in turn is essential to ratcheting up interest from casual ticket buyers. It's been proven to work in both Toronto and Phildelphia, and new clubs that haven't had that opportunity (seattle, vancouver) have been smart enough to modify existing facitilies to CREATE that close-to-the-action atmosphere. If NASL's investors spent a few years laying groundwork instead of rushing into the game, and established a few more cheaper, smaller soccer-specific stadiums, it would go a huge way to convincing die-hard fans who don't respect the North American game that it's worthy of their time. Those people are your core audience: they love and support the game, but feel the quality and effort put into it in North America is inferior. They've only taken to MLS in the last couple of years because they see the DPs, the new teams going hard after the fan dollar, the atmosphere. NASL can do that, too, just on a reduced scale; stadiums like Saputo, which can be built for around $20M and are adjustable but bring the fan close to the field, can be used both for a club and, with practice pitches engaged, as community space, lowering the upfront cost. If the planning isn't at THAT serious a level, and that in advance of the clubs coming into play, most of NASL's franchises will simply be fly-by-night.
I don't think D2 is ever going to be successful until it comes under the authority of MLS. And it would have MLS in the name; MLS 2 or whatever. but NASL and USL are important for creating support for the clubs in their leagues. in 10 years I think we will have an MLS 2 and clubs from NASL and USL will leave for MLS 2
In order for their to be a Division 2 MLS ("MLS 2") within 10 years, they would have to be tallking about it now. Setting up a new league is not something they could do in just 2 years. Since they aren't talking about this....they have never even mentioned or considered the idea...you will not see an MLS 2 within the next 10 years. Remember, NASL was the "MLS" of it's time and has the potential to at least be what they were back in the late 70's. If they learn from their earlier mistakes, they can be a viable D2 league.
The NASL can be a viable D2 league, but only if there is enough fan support to enable teams to someday get close to even while operating under the USSF D2 standards. They question really is, if this is possible in enough markets to support a D2 league. I think one of the biggest helps in this will be when MLS decides, at least for a good long while, to hold off on expansion. Then markets will have a chance to come into pro soccer on the lower levels and see if they really are sustainable over time without the added variable of we won't support anyhting outside of MLS. When soccer is popular enough to matter in this country just for what it is rather than getting support just because it is at the top level. It happens all over the world, but will it ever get to that level here? Who knows.
Unfortunately I don't think it will be around. MLS or some big time investor will have to take a gamble at this very unstable league. Hopefully I am wrong, and it will continue to grow and expand and improve. Maybe even become a MLS reserve league or something to that effect. Traffic needs to go or adopt a business structure like MLS. As much as I would like to see NASL go balls to the wall all out! with expansion teams that could play rival to many MLS teams, meaning having a NASL team in LA vicinity or NY vicinity or Seattle vicinity or Chicago vicinity, etc etc NASL are on a very slippery slope, very unstable, but we all know this already. Hopefully the new marketing company will help NASL...
It could go either way it just depends on how much Traffic is willing to Invest into this league. The fact that Traffic seems to be willing to help 3 teams stay afloat is a positive sign. I think we will know more by the end of the season.
I think it is more in the hands of the fans and supporters. But definitely a TEAM effort, between us and Traffic. We and Traffic can only do so much "single handedly" they have to support us and we have to support them.
I think if the NASL is successful, there is a good chance you'll see teams that have a long, solid Div 2/3 history join. Charlotte, Richmond, Orlando, Rochester, etc. No reason Birmingham, Nashville, Memphis, New Orleans, Oklahoma City, Tuscon, Milwaukee, Detroit, Pittsburgh and others can't be in on the fun. Seven figure expansion fee, though? To those bagging on the USL for charging too much.... And I don't think you'll see the AC St. Louis name survive - after the way they dropped the WPS team and then fell apart in the NASL, I can't see them having any legitimate credibility...
Yea i don't see the AC surviving even when St. Louis returns. I do believe St. Louis will return one day though. The good news on the Expansion fee is that it is just a one time thing vs paying a fee every year.
I'm pretty sure that is the way the USL was as well - a franchise fee up front, then the annual fee was smaller. Anyone have the actual details?
The francise fee was a one time fee. It was $750K (only hit that ammount in the last four or five years I thinkit was aboutu $500K before that) This year I understand it is about $350K for a "new" franchise. The word new is in quotes because I assume that it gives PDL teams get a "discount" or pro-rated fee to move up. There was an annual fee for USL1 that was arount $30K but not sure what the exact ammount is now with USLPro but I would expect it is reduced in line about the same scale as the franchise fee.
Just for fun, based on some of the speculation from the "Who's next" thread... Western Conference Victoria Highlanders FC Edmonton Calgary Sacramento Fresno Fuego Hollywood United Hitmen San Diego Flash Phoenix Central Conference San Antonio Scorpions Austin Laredo Heat New Orleans Jesters Tulsa Roughnecks NSC Minnesota Stars Des Moines Menace Milwaukee Eastern Conference Ft. Lauderdale Strikers FC Tampa Bay Puerto Rico Islanders Atlanta Silverbacks Carolina RailHawks Baltimore Hamilton Ottawa Of course, this is a bit of a stretch to say the league will grow this much in ten years! There's no guarantee any of the lower division clubs I included would want to move up at all, let alone to the NASL. Of the outright expansion cities I've included, only Ottawa and Hamilton are known to have interested investors, all others are outright speculation. Then again, the original question was quite speculative in nature.
i think u have too many Canadian teams. what about san francisco? also..the pacific northwest is fertile ground for soccer...could have Div 2 clubs in Eugene and Boise. Hollywood United...one problem..where would they play? right now they play at a high school field.