Seattle MLS: USL chief doubts it would work

[sounderfan]

The CEO of the USL (Dave Askinas) has his doubts about Seattle supporting MLS long-term...



Quote:
SL: What are your thoughts on the Rhinos and/or the Seattle Sounders possibly going to MLS in 2006, as well as Portland in the future? How does that affect the A-League?
DA: We would be sorry to see each of them go. In my opinion Rochester has earned the right to make an informed choice as to the league in which they believe they have the best chance of business success. Seattle is a different story. The support for the Sounders from the community hasn’t provided a lot of hard evidence that professional soccer of any label would be successful. Showing up to see Man U v. Celtic only proves that a big time European game will draw well. There’s a big surprise. Rebranding soccer with an MLS name isn’t necessarily going to bring in an extra 15,000 fans per game. The Sounders are struggling to bring in 2,500 fans per game and I see nothing to indicate this will change enough to pack Seahawks Stadium, the type of facility MLS has publicly stated they wish to put as part of their past.

from:
http://www.soccerloop.com/interviews/dave.askinas/

[Joe Stoker]

Is Askinas explicitly doubting the Seattle community or implicitly doubting Hanauer's ability to operate a successful franchise?

[TAKK]

....or is he very concerned about losing two of this strongest most commited ownership groups?

The Blitzz were doing well, and MLS will run them out of town.

Think about it. Three solid building blocks (one your marquee team) gone. Not good for him.

The suttle little comment about the Rhinos "having the choice to decide where they are most profitable" is a good one too.
Pure businessman there trying to protect his league and job. Can't blame him.

[YTFC]

Is Askinas explicitly doubting the Seattle community or implicitly doubting Hanauer's ability to operate a successful franchise?

Based on what I've seen, Mr USL may be right. Seattle "fans" only sppear to be up for the big events. The biggest Sounder draw last year was the 8k for Los Angeles in the cup. A friendly earlier that same season against San Jose drew about a third of that.

And as somebody posted on the the Sounders board, "the definition of insanity in business is doing the same thing and expecting different results." Seattle's had a couple of years of Hanauer doing the same thing. What's he going to do differently if granted an MLS franchise? More "game tonight" signs right outside the stadium? :p

[nsamsarmy]

Based on what I've seen, Mr USL may be right. Seattle "fans" only sppear to be up for the big events. The biggest Sounder draw last year was the 8k for Los Angeles in the cup. A friendly earlier that same season against San Jose drew about a third of that.

And as somebody posted on the the Sounders board, "the definition of insanity in business is doing the same thing and expecting different results." Seattle's had a couple of years of Hanauer doing the same thing. What's he going to do differently if granted an MLS franchise? More "game tonight" signs right outside the stadium? :p

I posted this in a thread under expansion titled problems with seattle bid for 2006. Everyone there just seemed offended at the thought that the fanbase in Seattle may not support an MLS team, and were even further offended at the thought that Seattle should be looked over if they plan to permanently make Qwest their home. All I got was a bunch of pictures of how pretty Qwest is, and that for me doesn't support any arguments as to why MLS should expand to Seattle. IF the right ownership is found, the fanbase is right, AND there is a willingness to construct a soccer specific venue then a franchise should be awarded(or at least considered). That's the criteria the league established in the words from Don Garber himself, and two of the three are very questionable at best with Seattle.

[sounderfan]

Hanauer and Seattle Pro Soccer LLC have their dream: MLS in Seahawks Stadium.

Problem is, there has been little mention or notice that any great number of people actually SHARE that dream, outside of MLS corporate offices, that is.

From a purely USL perspective, Seattle is a very under-achieving market. How else can you describe it? A club in their top-level system draws only 2,500 per match in a 67,000 seat stadium?

So we get back to the same question we always do...how much does the label "MLS" mean to attendance in Seattle? I think only as much as the "new" ownership group will help it to mean. In other words, it would be an important marketing tool---and they should kill themselves trying to maximize the "top level" aspect it would bring. After that, everything else is equal" same sport, same stadium, same small hard-core fan base, same overloaded sports market in the city, same Mariners baseball juggernaut to go up against.

So, either Hanauer is a visionary, able to look beyond his own current club and see a great Seattle soccer future...or he's a rich guy who just wants to get into the game! (He is a poker player, after all, and recently grabbed 450K at a LV tourney).

There are passionate fans of soccer in Seattle who are praying MLS DOESN'T come here. They think it would be a huge failure and a black eye for the league. I speak with people who have that opinion all the time. Some of them are current Sounders season ticket holders. One guy in particular is a DC United fan. He has the "Direct Kick" package, and loves MLS. He sees nothing but doom if MLS comes to Qwest Field.

I fall into the category of not being sure, but wanting Seattle to finally get a shot somehow, some way, so we know for sure one way or the other.

Frankly, the bar has not been set all that high. A Seattle MLS franchise that averaged 13-15K it's first season would be considered a moderate success. Anything over that and the league would be quite excited, probably.

There is the nagging realization, however, that those 13-15K don't exist accept in someone's wishful imagination.

Hanauer, all the businessman, likely has his stats that show projected attendance. And he's still interested in going forward.

[sounderfan]

I posted this in a thread under expansion titled problems with seattle bid for 2006. Everyone there just seemed offended at the thought that the fanbase in Seattle may not support an MLS team, and were even further offended at the thought that Seattle should be looked over if they plan to permanently make Qwest their home. All I got was a bunch of pictures of how pretty Qwest is, and that for me doesn't support any arguments as to why MLS should expand to Seattle. IF the right ownership is found, the fanbase is right, AND there is a willingness to construct a soccer specific venue then a franchise should be awarded(or at least considered). That's the criteria the league established in the words from Don Garber himself, and two of the three are very questionable at best with Seattle.

And I was one of your detractors. But I see reason for the doubts.

As for Garber...why do so many BS posters have selective memory about his expansion criteria?

He has continually stated a "dual" business plan:

1. SSS whenever possible in large-midrange markets.
2. "NFL" Stadia OK with NFL ownership groups that might want in.

SEE #2! Garber has been unwilling to rule out clubs based soley on lack of SSS or an SSS plan.

If the rumors that Paul Allen/Seahawks are involved in 2006 Seattle MLS ar true, then why would Garber even suggest to Allen "Your 400 million dollar stadium isn't an SSS, so no thank you."

[soupcan]

I stayed away from Sounder games for years because I felt the A-League wasnt a high enough caliber to spend my money on. I knew it was second division, and I saved my cash. I never go to minor league baseball, semi-pro football, junior hockey or WNBA either. Why? There is a better option. I'd rather save my cash for Sonics, Mariners or Seahawks.

I am not a Sounder season ticket holder, but the minor league reputation and budget of the A-Leage team in Seattle is what keeps fans away.

Why did the Galaxy match have the highest attendance last year? Because it was a chance to see the best our country has to offer.

How many cities that have major league teams of any sport are able to lure corporate sponsorship for minor league teams in the same city? My guess is none. Why wont Nike touch the Portland Timbers? If they were MLS would it be different?????

My guess is yes.

[kenntomasch]

I stayed away from Sounder games for years because I felt the A-League wasnt a high enough caliber to spend my money on. I knew it was second division, and I saved my cash. I never go to minor league baseball, semi-pro football, junior hockey or WNBA either. Why? There is a better option. I'd rather save my cash for Sonics, Mariners or Seahawks.

That's fine. That's your perogative. Others would rather enjoy the experience and not feel like we have to take out a bank loan to take the family for a night out. A night at the ballpark (especially in the newer minor league parks these days) can be just as enjoyable, for less money, with fewer hassles, and feature players who, while they obviously aren't at the tops of their sport, at least play hard (or at least give you the perception that they're playing hard).

I love minor league sports. We have more minor league baseball teams than major league baseball teams in Chicagoland, and I go to at least one of each minor league team's games every year. It's a great experience. Easy in, easy out, nice intimate ballpark, prices are right, there aren't many drunks usually, you're outside, you get out and get home at a reasonable hour and didn't drop $200.

But that's just me. I also go to Cubs and Sox and Bulls and Blackhawks games when I can, but not as many because the prices are simply outrageous. And the fact I'd get to see high-level play doesn't offset that for me.


How many cities that have major league teams of any sport are able to lure corporate sponsorship for minor league teams in the same city? My guess is none.

Do you mean major league teams of one sport and minor league teams in the same sport, or minor league teams in any sport?

Indianapolis has the Colts and Pacers, and the AAA Indians do very well, thank you very much. Nice new (1996) ballpark, plenty of corporate sponsors, and they turn a profit every year. Sacramento has the Kings, and their AAA baseball team does just fine, too.

Even in Chicago, the aforementioned minor league baseball teams are doing fine, the AHL's Chicago Wolves are printing money, and the Arena Football League's Rush has no lack of sponsors, either.

You're making a blanket statement that doesn't connect with the facts. I'm sure there are people like you in every A-League market who don't feel the local side is worthy of your entertainment dollar, and that's fine. There are obviously a bunch of people in MLS markets who feel the local side isn't good enough, either.

[metros11]

If the rumors that Paul Allen/Seahawks are involved in 2006 Seattle MLS ar true, then why would Garber even suggest to Allen "Your 400 million dollar stadium isn't an SSS, so no thank you."

My understanding was that Paul Allen is not interested in Seattle MLS, but he is giving Hanauer a favorable lease on the stadium. Perhaps including percentage of concessions and parking. Time will tell.

As for Askinas, I think he is totally right about about a franchise in Seattle. I hope that he and I are proven wrong by the soccer fans of the city, but in all honesty 2500 average for even a-league don't look good.

[JPH]

Although it's an overused phrase, 'cautious optimism' would be the the way I would describe the chances of an MLS team in Seattle succeeding. Seattle seems to be (and this is coming from a complete outsider) a decent to good sports town. Some observations:

* The Mariners were a baseball graveyard until the 90s, and then fans flocked to games when their team became good and loaded with All-Stars. Their new ballpark helped as well. It will be interesting to see what will happen to attendance if the team continues to be at the bottom of their division like they are this year.

* The Seahawks seem to go up and down in attendance with the performance of their team. They have a solid team now and a new stadium, s otheir attendance number should be good.

* The Sonics have seen attendance drop off some as they have become less of a factor in their division.

I don't think it's a slam dunk in Seattle, regardless of whether they use the Sounders name or try for a new image. I imagine they would have a better-than-expected 1st year, then a drop-off in Year 2; Year 3 would demonstrate if the team has made any imprint by a level or increase in attendance from Year 2. Another drop from Year 2 to 3 would not be promising.

[Keeper113]

[QUOTE=sounderfan]
(He is a poker player, after all, and recently grabbed 450K at a LV tourney).QUOTE]

Adrian scored third place ($41,100) in a $436,500 total prize pool tournament.

[BulaJacket]

(He is a poker player, after all, and recently grabbed 450K at a LV tourney).

Adrian scored third place ($41,100) in a $436,500 total prize pool tournament.

Gotta do some homework before pimping all things Seattle :)
http://www.pokerpages.com/tournament/result9709.htm

[Geoduck]

If the owner is set on abandoning the Sounders name, the Seattle Aces wouldn't be too bad.

[FuzzyForeigner]

Seattle is an odd sports market. I am originally from italy and a die hard Juventus fan...Vecchia Guardia!!!
I have just moved to Seattle for work and i am planning on supporting MLS as much as i can because its exciting to see a new league grow...its unique on the soccer scene where most of the worlds leagues are reaching the thier 100+ years of existance.

I think Seattle has good potential due to its international scene. There are a lot of subcultures and people from all over the world. Many people of asian decent live here it seems and it seems that MLS is not very interested in attracting them...their cater a lot to the large soccer-frenzied hispanic population in the US without considering the fact that asians love the game just as fanatically. I mean look at the world cup and look at how they flock to games of teams that simply field one or tow asian players (Nakata at Parma, Li Sung Park ant PSV Eindhoven and Hong Myung Bo at LA).
On the other hand i was at the Championsworld game and a game that should have witnessed a sold out venue only attracted 30000 fans (not complaining the atmosphere was awesome). weird i dunno. I do believe that the Sounders Manager is a weak mannered man that is not fueled by the right dose of passion that is needed to get a sport growing in such a hostile sports market.

Well...thats what i think!

[BulaJacket]

Seattle is an odd sports market. I am originally from italy and a die hard Juventus fan...Vecchia Guardia!!!
I have just moved to Seattle for work and i am planning on supporting MLS as much as i can because its exciting to see a new league grow...its unique on the soccer scene where most of the worlds leagues are reaching the thier 100+ years of existance.

I think Seattle has good potential due to its international scene. There are a lot of subcultures and people from all over the world. Many people of asian decent live here it seems and it seems that MLS is not very interested in attracting them...their cater a lot to the large soccer-frenzied hispanic population in the US without considering the fact that asians love the game just as fanatically. I mean look at the world cup and look at how they flock to games of teams that simply field one or tow asian players (Nakata at Parma, Li Sung Park ant PSV Eindhoven and Hong Myung Bo at LA).
On the other hand i was at the Championsworld game and a game that should have witnessed a sold out venue only attracted 30000 fans (not complaining the atmosphere was awesome). weird i dunno. I do believe that the Sounders Manager is a weak mannered man that is not fueled by the right dose of passion that is needed to get a sport growing in such a hostile sports market.

Well...thats what i think!

I've always been suprised that MLS didn't go after more Asian players for LA & SJ. That's a pretty big demographic, and Japan's, Korea's, etc's leagues aren't exactly the EPL, La Liga, Seria A, Budesliga, etc... If/when Seattle eventually makes it in, and if/when SJ becomes stable (in SF?), then I hope the league makes a little effort to attract the Asian audience as well.

[kenntomasch]

They should put a Korean guy, a national soccer hero, in LA. That would boost attendance.

[rocketeer22]

They should put a Korean guy, a national soccer hero, in LA. That would boost attendance.

In all fairness, one of the previous posts did mention Bo at LA, so they knew an attempt has been made. Now if your sarcasm was directed at the purported success of this particular venture, that I cannot answer.

[kenntomasch]

It was both at the purported success of the venture, and that someone would say there should be more Asians on West Coast teams to boost attendance, when we've pretty much seen what little success there has been in that regard.

Ethnic pandering has had little success.

[BulaJacket]

It was both at the purported success of the venture, and that someone would say there should be more Asians on West Coast teams to boost attendance, when we've pretty much seen what little success there has been in that regard.

Ethnic pandering has had little success.

To be fair, I was also thinking in relation to the players in the Asian leagues, although re-reading my post I didn't emphesize that. I think the leagues are a not too far apart, and that MLS would/could/should get a couple decent players, not just "pandering," but getting some young quality talent unlike Bo. MLS generally seems to be able to do this with South America, so why not there. My point is, I'm suprised that MLS hasn't thought more along the Asian pandering line, like they try to do with the hispanic market, and tried to tap that market and get some Asian players. Personally, I think there could be a couple decent players from there.