Well (2) Two other #NASL teams are still negotiating an exit to #USL . @IndyEleven is not one of those teams. Future of league would be very— Nipun Chopra, PhD (@NipunChopra7) October 25, 2016 and (7) From source (independently confirmed)-Every #NASL club except @NYCosmos & @TheMiamiFC has at least spoken to #USL about exit previously— Nipun Chopra, PhD (@NipunChopra7) October 25, 2016
Not sure how many times this has to be said until it sinks in but none of the minor league teams are being paid for their fictitious 'media rights'. That isn't a source of revenue. Sponsors are used to underwrite Internet and television production costs. Now how much money they make on those deals depends on how good they are at begging for corporate donations. The size of the market obviously gives you more potential prospects as well. It stands to reason that Tampa Bay will have more sponsors than say Wilmington.
Tampa Bay Rowdies now officially selfrelegated http://www.rowdiessoccer.com/news/2016/10/25/tampa-bay-rowdies-announce-move-to-united-soccer-league
(6) Finally, Rayo might take a gap year next year to relocate to Vegas or Omaha, but will likely stay in #NASL .— Nipun Chopra, PhD (@NipunChopra7) October 25, 2016
This also puts into question the Chicago NASL team (already a long shot) if NASL folds, I doubt that a new team in USL would get any pull, do fans that are angry at the Chicago Fire really want to follow a team that will play Chicago Fire B (eventually).
USL confirms Out tawa http://www.uslsoccer.com/news_article/show/713356?referrer_id=2364194-news-archive
I thought the whole idea was that "in the city" + "professionally presented" = success? As Cincinnati and Sacramento show, what about either of those two criteria does USL prevent?
No MLS team in their city. Going with NASL was already a huge risk (that may have failed regardless) now going with a league that will have Chicago Fire B as one of the teams (Eventually all MLS teams are supposed to have B teams), that makes it even more difficult for an extra Chicago team (Again not that it was going to be easy anyways) to become an "alternate" to the dumpster Fire.
I know this is a crazy idea but whats to stop the Fire from joining with the Wilt experiment and have them be the "B" team? It would be great but I realize the chances are pretty slim to non-existent.
I agree with your statements, but so it is clear, MLS teams have to have affiliates or B/2 teams in USL. However they do not have to be in the same metro area. In fact USL is encouraging more RGV/Houston and San Jose/Reno type arrangements as apposed to B teams in the same city and stadium.
For Sure, The Fire will eventually need a B team (Does not have to be Chicago), so Wilt could run the Chicago Fire B and play out of TP or the TP practice field. But that still leaves disgruntled Fire fans with a Fire team as the only options, not that marketing to disgruntled soccer fans is a great idea to start a team anyways. BTW, Official statement. http://www.nasl.com/news/2016/10/25/nasl-releases-statement-on-tampa-bay-and-ottawa-announcements
That is correct. Wilt has talked about eventually getting a team in Milwaukee (born there or lived there for a long time) so perhaps the best thing for Wilt would be burry any hatchets that the Fire ownership and Wilt may have and get a Fire B team in Milwaukee.
But, again, isn't the premise that the Fire aren't "in the city" part of the Chicago-NASL project? (I'm being half facetious here. I'm not actually arguing that the concept in the USL would work, just that it's not any more likely to work in the NASL.)
How far is it to Milwaukee? One of the advantages of the Galaxy 2 is that it's at the same place so it's easy to move players back and forth. But if the team was seen strictly as a place for the young players to play, then I guess it wouldn't matter.
Bring back the Wave? That'd be awesome and I think it would work like gangbusters with Wilt running the show but that's probably not going to happen.
So what you people are telling me is we need to clone Wilt so he can get the team in Chicago up and running, a team in Milwaukee, he can take a more hands on approach with his work in Cleveland, and he can begin working on his next big soccer market Omaha giving the NASL 4 new expansion franchises in the Midwest?
Oh for sure NASL was already a long shot, getting a stadium in the city is not going to happen IMO, an independent Chicago team is probably dead (if NALS truly dies like we are projecting) now. 1 hour away just about. Maybe more from TP as you have to cross the city, no more than 2 hours each way (well maybe if there is lots of traffic). It just makes too much sense, so no it will not happen. Yes, or make him the Commissioner of NASL
Milwaukee is definitely close enough for convenience's sake as a B side. And that really is the best idea for poor drawing B sides. (Which is nearly all of them.)
To be fair, having the B team in house saves money. IF Milwaukee Fire B is going to draw 500 fans, then it makes economic sense to keep them at Bridgeview, if Wilt or someone else can get 4K+ fans to show up, then it would make sense to give Milwaukee a try. Remember we are talking the Fire, keeping it cheap is how we do things.
The more recent reports have the NASL salaries about 40-45k average and the USL's at 20-25K. If I'm a player thats a significant gap and I'll take the extra $ to play in NASL. The higher pay is one of the reasons the NASL has a higher level of play (which I will clarify as not a huge gap but it exists). As for the media rights, NASL already has much better media deals than Usl with the 3 National TV deals, ESPN3 deal, and local TV deals all the NASL clubs have.
The media deals the NASL currently have generate no money as they're paying for the channels to carry games and honestly that isn't hard to match if the USL wanted. Also wouldn't the salaries have to go up if the D2 status comes for the USL?
The 2 defectors moving down to D3 Usl has been rumored for a while now so not completely unexpected. With nine clubs having posted bonds already and Rayo OKC reportedly going on hiatus for next year it looks like a stronger core of 9 NASL clubs for 2017. Like Peter Wilt basically said, NASL is better off even if there's fewer owners than in the past but pointing in the same direction with the same vision. With NASL expansion in SF in 2017 and at least Chicago in 2018 but likely more the league will get its club count up again. Like MLS had to contract after its early years by 2 clubs and nearly folded NASL will weather the storm and continue on IMHO.
But where does that extra $20k/player money come from? As noted the media rights, if they're worth anything, aren't worth that much. Unless Traffic are keeping the league afloat. NASL are losing three of their top 4 teams by attendance average this year, and that's typically proven to be a great proxy of sustainability. They're also losing an owner who showed he'd be willing to prop a team up when it needed. Leagues have come back from worse, true, but it certainly won't be stronger next year. What I'm interested in is how quickly they'll replace the teams that left. If there are multiple new teams next season, I'd take that as a big red flag. Would you mind posting where the teams have said they've posted the bond?