Based on what we are seeing with Portland and Houston, don't you think the next franchise or franchises will go to a MLS team if they want one. While teams like the Flash, Spirit, and Reigh (non MLS ownership) may be holding their own, how much better would they be doing if owned and run by MLS teams with the facilities and marketing advantages they have. While Portland may be an anomally, still you have the Houston model, where they managed to sell, from what I have heard, close to 3500 season tickets and are averaging 5300 a game. We know what Portland has done, selling 7000 plus the first season, and increasing that figure upwards to 11,000 this year. Realistically, even if you cut their season average in half, they would still lead the league in attendance and be making money doing it. Noticed that teams don't tend to draw well when having mid week games. Houston was able to draw just under 5000 by scheduling the game before the Dynamo game. They might want to consider doing that with the rest of their mid week games at home. Just another advantage for MLS owned teams. What is there to be done with teams like Sky Blue, Boston, Chicago and KC , who suffered a 55% drop in attendance from last year. They have to be losing money? How long will the NWSL carry teams losing money? Does anyone think that in the best interest of women's professional soccer, these teams should probably merge or sell their interests to an existing MLS team. Anyone think that it might be best for the league right now to have the Championship game played at Portland. What better exposure then to have it played before a packed stadium of 20,000 on ESPN. Right now the name of the game for the NWSL is EXPOSURE! EXPOSURE! EXPOSURE! Let me pose the question, regarding expansion for next year. What would be reasonable: one, two, three, etc. teams? Will it pose any problems with the allocation of US, Canadian, and Mexican players, and how much will it effect the quality of play based on the number of teams added?
Would a NASL San Antonio club be good partner for an NWSL club? Stadium is closer in size to what an NWSL club would need. Houston will have a rival, Womens National team seems to have more scheduled games possibly in SAN Antonio. The Scorpians also draw well with Mexican club friendlies, would there be any interest with Mexican Women's alloted players being in San Antonio? What is the vibe for Womens soccer in SA?
The problem is, you can't assume that all MLS teams will have the same level of interest and dedication to a NWSL team that Portland and Houston do. If there are passionate MLS owners that want a NWSL team, sure, let them in. But if there aren't and there are passionate owners with experience running a W-League or WPSL team, let them in. KC is the only one who has suffered a drop in the 50%+ range (and I think that's related to the higher prices more than anything). As for SBFC, Boston, and Chicago (if you ignore their doubleheader), they have dropped in the 10%-20% range. But Washington is also down 18.2%. So, 5 out of 8 teams are down for the 2nd season. And Seattle's the only one with a real big increase that's pretty much guaranteed to not end up negative by the end of the season (Portland or WNY could still drop before the end of the season). So, what are you suggesting, they dump 5 teams on MLS owners who may or may not be interested in a NWSL team?
Let's put it another way, if the rest of the year continues with attendance headed down further for these teams , or even continuing as is, what then. Why would a MLS organization bother, unless they felt they could make money. We know Portland is making lots of money, and I am sure Houston is also making money. I would think they are dedicated to making money. I am sure there are several MLS team owners quietly watching Houston and how well their model is working, and to see if Portland continues to flourish in their 2nd year. Right now I am sure they are very interested in what the bottom line is for Portland and Houston, , especially those teams owning their own stadiums. I would find it hard to believe that Paulsen as well as the Houston group would not be trying hard to further stabilize the league by getting more MLS owners involved. It is a matter of protecting their investment, especially if any of the other teams are not getting it done. You know the NWSL is going to look favorably on MLS owners because of what Portland and Houston have done. I would bet that if Portland and Houston continue being successful the rest of this year, that there will be a couple, if not more MLS owners that will be interested.
There's no solid evidence, but it's not that hard of a claim to believe. Consider this: The Spirit say they, as an independent team, can break even with 3k paid/game. (They made 3k/game last year but apparently didn't break even, though I'd bet they weren't too far off.) Houston is averaging over 5k/game and don't have as much overhead as independent teams since they can piggyback on the MLS infrastructure (stadium, advertising, medical staff I would guess, etc.) Some solid numbers would be nice, but I think it's reasonable to assume the Dash are in the black, maybe slightly, maybe more so. Or not, but we won't be able to tell without someone saying something.
Let's not forget Sponsorship money and concessions as well.. If Houston can produce evidence to the other MLS owners that they are making money with the potential of making more, then you can expect them to get involved. The question is how many teams do you add, should they expand for next season. The other question is if no other MLS owners want to get involved, then do they even consider expanding next season or stay pat to see if the existing teams can increase their attendance in year three.
I do not want expansion next year as that will just be TOO much going on in a world cup year. My hope is that existing teams are strengthen by whatever means necessary or needed. That is to say, the expansion committee should take a good look at some of the struggling teams and maybe make the decision, as the Washington owner said, to move the team to another market. That could main even some limited or full partnership with a MLS team.
I am not sure the league would be willing to overlook any strong MLS applicants at this stage for next season. Establishing strong financial stability as quickly as possible is the league's primary concern and more MLS ownerships may be the best way to go about it. I would think that the MLS teams that would have the most interest in getting an expansion team, are those, like Portland and Houston, who own their own stadiums. Stadiums that have plenty of open dates on their calendar that could be put to better use. When the season is over and Portland and Houston can show them there is money to be made, then expect to see more MLS applicants and a willingness of the league to accept them. Look my primary concern is for the survival of the league so I am all for the league going in this direction; however, my one concern is the number of teams added for next season. One is probably the best way to go right now, but there may be other more pressing economic reasons to expand with more teams. Do have concerns with the effect it will have on existing teams in a two or three team expansion draft. As far as full partnerships with MLS teams, I'm not so sure we will see too much of that, especially after discussions between the MLS New York Red Bull and SKy Blue fell apart. Got the impression that the Red Bulls wanted far more control of the team then what Sky Blue owners were willing too accept. Since the MLS has a far better bargaining position, it will be either an expansion team first, or they may go the way of a complete buy out of one of the existing teams. I guess if they can't get an expansion team right away, they will probably just wait for one of the struggling teams. Not sure those teams that up and move will be solving their problems in the long run.
Honestly, I would prefer expansion to happen during major tournament years. For one, the league will be competing for attention those years, and getting new teams will be a draw. Two, since the league is going to be disrupted by the tournaments anyway, I'd rather have two years of shuffling and then two stable years instead of four years of constant shuffling. That said, no matter how many MLS teams are interested, (or strong independent groups like the LA Blues,) I think the league should never expand by more than one team per year on average.
I'd like the league to add at least one team this offseason, so there aren't so many midweek games next season. Those are killing some team's attendance.
Adding a team won't kill midweek games without some other sort of schedule change. Right now we're at (3*8*9)/2 = 108 total games, but can only play 4 "at a time", leaving theoretically 27 gamedays. Increase to (3*9*10)/2 = 135 total games with 5 at a time and it's still 27 gamedays.
Well, I would expect they would alter the number of times each opponent meets and not just increase the total number of games with each new team added. And yeah, 10 isn't ideal for a balanced schedule. Some teams will have to play some teams more times than other teams.
I was told by an RSL Women's player last night that RSL has submitted an official bid to join NWSL. I haven't been able to find anything to back this up, other than the quotes last fall that RSL is interested in securing a women's franchise. Has anyone heard anything on this?
There were the original hints in September that RSL was potentially interested, and then some news articles in early November that said they had officially begun discussions with NWSL and their current women's team and such. (See posts 320-350 in the "American expansion possibilities" thread - that's more the "real news" thread while this thread is more fan wishing.) Glad to hear the application seems to have actually happened!