A link to a fine post by one of our own...

[IvanIV]

MLS AND DAVID BECKHAM:
A (somewhat hellish) MATCH MADE IN HEAVEN (http://www.owlsalive.com/73.html)

[alexspepa]

outstanding article...thanks for the link

[mattie g]

It's a decent article, but what I think is the premise is based on an assumption that soccer fans (the millions, not "hundreds of thousands" - unless, of course you're talking about the "true" "football" fans, whoever they may be) will flock to MLS if you give them what they want. And this is flawed.

"Because, even if inadvertently, the whole Beckham saga has come to represent, if nothing else, the conclusive rejection of actual footy fans as the driving market for America’s football merchants.

And that is my lament."

A large number of what is referred to as "actualy footy fans" haven't turned out in droves because they look down their noses at the product that is in their own backyards. There's a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" issue that MLS faces. Too many people expect MLS' on-field product to match that of overseas, but the reality is that a league that's barely over 10 years old can't possibly do that if they're trying to grow organically (i.e. not buying a bunch of big-time foreign talent to fill its ranks).

Like I said, though, it's a good article, so I hope no offense is taken to my view on it.

Out of curiosity, how many fans who watch soccer, live and in person, overseas - let's say in England - are fans in the way you think they are. I would imagine that many of them are passionate, football-as-life fans. But I'd also imagine that many are fans in that they have a team they support and they follow, watch on TV, maybe go to a few games, but don't necessarily have lives that revolve around the game. I'm also sure that many people who aren't fans watch the games on TV or follow on the news because that's just what you do!

There are a lot of people in the US who follow the NFL similarly. And if MLS can generate a reasonably-sized fan base that resembes the NFL's, I'll be thrilled. Unfortunately, there aren't enough soocer/football-as-life people out there to support the league and help it continuously improve.

[pookspur]

It's a decent article, but what I think is the premise is based on an assumption that soccer fans (the millions, not "hundreds of thousands" - unless, of course you're talking about the "true" "football" fans, whoever they may be) will flock to MLS if you give them what they want. And this is flawed.

absolutely fair.

but we'll never know. because after MLS drove away a huge number of football fans at the outset, many of them have never looked back. i totally understand what you're saying though, and admit that reality is surely less black and white than the article might make it appear.

for what it's worth, it was nothing more than the elaboration on a brief post i'd put up over on their site. an administrator asked me to do it, and i put up an extension of a position. it's not meant to be anything other than one perspective of one opinion.

[alexspepa]

Let me chime in as well - when ML started, and up until just a couple of years ago, the real football fan had virually no outlets other than a few select pubs to view the EPL or Euopean football. So the maret was wide open for MLS to capture that market. Instead they went after soccer moms and ignored what could have been a good fan base.

Now the ship has sailed, because we have access to FSN, Sentanta, live streaming, etc., and we can watch more quality football than I at least ever dreamed about.

Again - I thought it an excellent article Pook.

[IvanIV]

Let me chime in as well - when ML started, and up until just a couple of years ago, the real football fan had virually no outlets other than a few select pubs to view the EPL or Euopean football. So the maret was wide open for MLS to capture that market. Instead they went after soccer moms and ignored what could have been a good fan base.

Now the ship has sailed, because we have access to FSN, Sentanta, live streaming, etc., and we can watch more quality football than I at least ever dreamed about.

Again - I thought it an excellent article Pook.

spot on again.

[mattie g]

spot on again.

See...I don't think it went after soccer moms. Rather, I think MLS went after the widest possible audience and didn't think that soccer/football-savvy potential fans would turn their noses up at what was being offered (BTW - when I say that, I don't mean it in a snobby way, as I was offended by a lot of the crap early MLS pulled, too).

The shootout was a disaster - no question about it. The names were, in general, poorly chosen, though the uniforms were somewhat reminiscent of the times. The clock counting down was also a poor decision, though not as bad as the shootout. As an aside, IMO, the count-up clock is something that a lot of generic sports fans now understand, though they may not have understood it in the mid-90s. And since soccer is in a much better place today than it was in the mid-90s, it can now survive on its own merits and doesn't have to pander to the masses by changing the way the game is played.

When it finally became obvious that the "Americanizing" of the game did, in fact, matter a lot to the soccer-savvy crowd, MLS made the changes that I think it should be applauded for (and without going back for another read, I believe the article addressed that).

I realize that the damage may have been done by that point and that other outlets are now available to those fans; however, I think it's unfair for those fans to still not support the league, given the huge strides it's made both on and off the field in the past 5-7 years. Hell...I'm a fan of Philly sports but didn't turn my back on the league - not even when I and a few others were disappointed by the dysfunction we say in trying to establish a league presence in the Philly area.

(I do think that's a different way of looking at the game than a lot of "non-native Amercans" - for lack of a better term - see it. I and many other, though not all, American fans see it as "my league," whereas I don't think there's that connection to the actual league in other places.)

In hindsight, MLS perhaps should have stuck with going after its core audience - fervent soccer fans - and building from there. You'd think that any marketing studies they did before the launch of the league should have showed them that those fans woud be at its core. And though I can't fault MLS for thinking big from the start (i.e. going after the generic American sports fan), that plan now looks to have been flawed and came back to bite the league in its ass.

I do hope, though, that the fans who were driven away in the early days are able to come back and appreciate what the league has become.

[mattie g]

absolutely fair.

but we'll never know. because after MLS drove away a huge number of football fans at the outset, many of them have never looked back. i totally understand what you're saying though, and admit that reality is surely less black and white than the article might make it appear.

for what it's worth, it was nothing more than the elaboration on a brief post i'd put up over on their site. an administrator asked me to do it, and i put up an extension of a position. it's not meant to be anything other than one perspective of one opinion.

Pook, I meant to address this directly, but did so in the post above. Thanks for giving the background to it.

Addressing issues in black and white can often be hugely beneficial. I just think in gray a lot of times :o

[alexspepa]

Let me also make it perfectly clear; if by some miracle MLS landed a franchise in Charlotte, I would be the first one standing in line to buy a season ticket.

We have the Charlotte Eagles, but they have chosen to use their team to promote an evangelical Christian platform, which basically means no beer!

[IvanIV]

:eek:Let me also make it perfectly clear; if by some miracle MLS landed a franchise in Charlotte, I would be the first one standing in line to buy a season ticket.

We have the Charlotte Eagles, but they have chosen to use their team to promote an evangelical Christian platform, which basically means no beer!:eek:

[DigitalTron]

I think MLS did the right thing actually. The NASL embodied much of what the hardcore fans wanted, but it wasn't financially viable. MLS took the best of the NBA, NFL, and European soccer to build it's product.

The Single Entity system allowed the league to focus on the positive without losing too much money and folding. That was a hugely positive move, despite the numerous naysayers who spout off drivel at the mouths but dont' really know what they're talking about and wouldn't pay for the NASL or MLS.

The Salary Cap was similarly an absolutely vital move ... and MLS's recent move away from it may or may not prove a success, but it doesn't change the fact that it was neccessary for the first decade.

The NBA and NFL had a Salary Cap, and I'm sure if either league were starting from scratch today, they'd similarly embrace Single Entity, it really promotes the league, and when the league prospers the owners and sport thrive.

NBA masterminded the whole "market the player not the team" strategy that catapulted them into becoming a major sport. Professional Basketball didn't used to be nearly as big as it is today. College Basketball was king by a wide margin ... now it's a 2 horse race for ratings. Not because people identified with teams, but because the league concentrated on the kids hero-worship of the best players. It leveraged the collegiate media machine to promote it's own sport ... clever and effective. MLS is attempting to do that now with the whole Beckham rule. Blaco is a very polarizing figure, a real villain to some and hero to others, love him or hate him type, but he puts bot fans and critics in the stands ... and I didn't think he'd work out because of his ego, guess I was wrong about that one.

Yes, MLS has targeted a wider demographic. There simply aren't enough hardcore soccer fans to pay the bills or generate US TV ratings. They targeted families especially kids because they are actually playing the sport, have an interest, and it's a good family activity ... and one of the few professional sports that's actually affordable today. They established the season in the summer to promote actually taking the family to see a game ... which increases interest, attendance, and overall exposure. By not playing in the fall/winter, they avoid the glut of US sports on television so we have the opportunity for a bit more TV expsure.

Again, you can't re-make the NASL and expect success, because the money just isn't there to support it. Those hardcore soccer fans aren't living in the US, at least not enough to consistently fill the stadia paying high priced tickets. Regardless of who plays in MLS, those types are still far more likely to go to the pub and watch a Premiership, La Liga or Serie A match and sit around drinking pints and talking about how the US footy is unwatchable than they are to actually attend a game and find out what the quality really is. And personally, if that's how they wanna be fine ... so why would we want to build a league that caters to those people who already inflexible and disinterested anyway?

Eventually if soccer is to truly succeed in the US it needs to come from people growing up being interested in soccer. We have an opportunity to do that because kids play it here all the time, it's become a traditional sport to play--even moreso than baseball these days. THOSE are the people MLS needs to be targeting. They may be 12 or 17 now, but eventually they'll be 22 or 27 and taking their kids to games. By then hopefully they'll be invested enough emotionally into the game and league to start making an impact on the TV ratings. When MLS becomes a weekend staple on cable TV, then MLS will be poised for it's big jump in popularity. America is full of Armchair Fans ... and honestly, that's what pays the bills, not attendances, hotdog sales or critical acclaim from people trying to compare the product to the Premiership or La Liga. Hell, by those standards there are hundreds of leagues in the world that are trash ... including the German, Dutch, French, Brazilian and Argentinian leagues ... despite there being good teams and players in each of those leagues ... and in MLS.

I think MLS has done the right ting so far, grass roots, financial stability, and dig in for the long haul. It's those kids growing up following the sport who re-connect when they bring their 12 year olds to the games that is going to grow the fan base ultimately. Because they are who MLS needs to genrate the Advertising revenues and TV exposure.

-Digital

[ken0sha]

A lot of good facts in the article and most of it is on target, but it suggests that the MLS business was failing until Beckham was signed. What a quaint hypothesis.

More and more frequently the notion was being put forth that profitable professional football in the U.S. simply wasn’t viable. Until (cue chorus)…

Emerging from the pages of People magazine and Fabio Capello’s intransigence came the one force powerful enough to bridge the gap between the average American and the established American football fan - David Beckham!

One point that escapes so many of the negative MLS people is that MLS is within a couple of years of having a viable economic model. That alone will ensure they are here to stay regardless of whether they reconnect with the knowledgeable football fans or not. Teams like Toronto, RSL, LAG, Chicago, probably Denver at some point, and Columbus are not hemorrhaging red ink and some are likely showing an operating profit. Considering how hard it is to break into the monopolies that are profession sport, this is an amazing accomplishment. Once the league on net is profitable viz. when Red Bull, DCU, KC, SJ and Houston all have their own SSS, then it can start to climb into a much higher stratum and be compared to decent leagues like the Portugal, Netherlands, Mexico, maybe France... For all you MLS bashers, a little objectivity won't hurt. They have a business model and they are taking two steps forward and one back. Yes it's slow, but we may see something pretty nice in our lifetimes although today it is a long way from the top 4-6 leagues in the world.

[pookspur]

A lot of good facts in the article and most of it is on target, but it suggests that the MLS business was failing until Beckham was signed. What a quaint hypothesis.

More and more frequently the notion was being put forth that profitable professional football in the U.S. simply wasn’t viable. Until (cue chorus)…

Emerging from the pages of People magazine and Fabio Capello’s intransigence came the one force powerful enough to bridge the gap between the average American and the established American football fan - David Beckham!

One point that escapes so many of the negative MLS people is that MLS is within a couple of years of having a viable economic model. That alone will ensure they are here to stay regardless of whether they reconnect with the knowledgeable football fans or not. Teams like Toronto, RSL, LAG, Chicago, probably Denver at some point, and Columbus are not hemorrhaging red ink and some are likely showing an operating profit. Considering how hard it is to break into the monopolies that are profession sport, this is an amazing accomplishment. Once the league on net is profitable viz. when Red Bull, DCU, KC, SJ and Houston all have their own SSS, then it can start to climb into a much higher stratum and be compared to decent leagues like the Portugal, Netherlands, Mexico, maybe France... For all you MLS bashers, a little objectivity won't hurt. They have a business model and they are taking two steps forward and one back. Yes it's slow, but we may see something pretty nice in our lifetimes although today it is a long way from the top 4-6 leagues in the world.

absolutely fair. 'viability' was technically the wrong word. or at least applying it to 'professional football' rather than its ability to draw fans. and it's undeniably true that MLS has been putting structures in place (such as the new stadiums with their vastly superior 'deals', ie., rents, concessions, parking, etc.) that are able to increase revenue streams without increasing draw, at all.

but in fairness to myself, i didn't claim that it was becoming less viable, i just said it was becoming increasingly questionable. put it in the context of, let's say, chicago's move to bridgeview. the fire undeniably strengthened it's hand financially. and this would surely qualify as an example of appealing to the 'right' market, or 'us'. great move all around, right? but, then, within months it became apparent that the crowds were nothing beyond what had been coming to soldier field II.

with no intention, AT ALL, of going into why bridgeview didn't increase gates, nor how it's GOING TO (or even already begun), i think it's fair to say that there were more than a few people (like me) who want it all to succeed who looked at the 12k gates and said "what the hell?". and that's what that particular part of the article was referring to.