I think you've got this backwards and you're misinterpreting the reality on the ground. 1. Philadelphia was in the league when it was unlikely that the league would ever play a game. The fact that Miami hastened their demise feels a little irrelevant. 2. Startup leagues have volatility, that's just how it goes. USL had over 20 years of clubs folding like crazy. Hopefully it won't come to that, but let's note the double standard here. 3. Nobody is rooting for or hoping that clubs fold. What they want is for clubs to have a chance to see what they can achieve. There will be successes and failures. Hopefully we learn from the latter how to make more of the former.
Why do you care? Do you handwring about every restaurant that opens worrying if their business model is sound enough? Does Charlotte Independence cover their rent? Does Tulsa? The wheat will eventually separate from the chaff. Surely they're not going into this blindly and PLS requires having 3 years operating expenses on hand anyway.
Reddit and twitter might be able to get behind it, but not me. It seems ass backwards to me for a team to play a year then fold and people are fine with it. We should want all teams to succeed. Not be fine with a bunch folding so a handful succeed and become stable.
D3 is pretty low, they're just somewhat arbitrary regarding principal ownership. The actual required money isn't really beyond expectations. Neither is a 1,000 seat stadium. Finding a $10 millionaire isn't trivial and kind of dumb if the company is otherwise healthy, but clearly not impossible.
Nobody wants teams to fold, but they do want teams to have opportunity. So if a club folds because it has no support, why is that some kind of tragedy? The point here is to have more soccer, but in letting a thousand flowers bloom, they're not all going to make it. If you think that a 100% success rate is required for any new league, that's a standard that literally no league has been held to.
Until recently, USL was not operating in an environment where ( a ) people gave a shit about lower-level soccer or ( b ) there were standards in place to mitigate "clubs folding like crazy." Yes, the TOA split kind of forced that environment on USL, but the point is that a startup league now IS operating in a different environment and volatility should not be dismissed as the cost of doing business just because it used to be. This was the NASL's (ridiculous) argument (Rocco's point of view, mostly), that because MLS got the benefit of the doubt for 10-15 years that they should get that much time to get their shit together, too. Well, no. That would be like me starting an automobile company and creating cars with bench seats and no seat belts, no air bags, huge steel dashboards that would kill you in a crash, no emissions standards and crap fuel economy and then saying, "Well, you didn't make General Motors do all that stuff for DECADES, I want the same runway." It's a new (better) environment with more exacting standards and expectations. You can't have a 70% failure rate anymore and just shrug and say, "whattayagonnado?" Here's how we can have a pretty good idea what you can achieve: 1 - If you don't have any money; 2 - If Matt Driver is involved. I don't want to see clubs and leagues die, either. What I *do* want to see is people fall under the boot of their own hubris.
Leaving aside for a moment the very real repercussions on players, staffs and others dumb enough to not be able to sense when something is a fantasy, the overall ecosystem is harmed when fly by night operators make promises and can't deliver. It makes it harder for the next guy and feeds into the long-held narrative that the game isn't popular here. (Despite all recent evidence to the contrary.) Do you really think Philadelphia is ( a ) the only NISA team likely to fold and ( b ) the only problem the league has? Every thing they do just screams inexperienced wannabe. They should have Yackety Sax playing over everything.
I think there's kind of a difference between "some teams might not make it" and "70% failure rate". "20% of small businesses fail in their first year, 30% of small business fail in their second year, and 50% of small businesses fail after five years in business. Finally, 70% of small business owners fail in their 10th year in business." https://www.fundera.com/blog/what-percentage-of-small-businesses-fail Everyone is subject to this, it's not somehow exclusive to lower division soccer. Oh please. I mean, yes, when a league goes down in flames, it makes it harder on the next one to come along (the XFL - which had almost zero chance - now gets to be compared to, not only their original try, but the AAU; NISA is stuck with NASL; etc.), but this is incredibly hyperbolic. NISA's success or failure has no impact on USL or some other hypothetical pro league in the future should another Peter Wilt-like character come along with grand visions. Prior to the Miami surprise, 100% of the league would have folded without playing a game. I mean, maybe 1904 would have someday have found a league and FC Golden State Force would have stayed in UPSL or whatever, but it was never getting off the ground. I highly doubt majority of the "expansion teams" will ever actually play a game. Do I think NISA is an ideal situation? Of course I don't. 3 months ago it looked like vaporware with bad fonts. This I agree with. However, in that case, it seems like having actual clubs, with actual experience would be a move in the right direction, doesn't it?
Is anyone else thinking that the NPSL "full season" is a safe landing spot for teams when NISA eventually folds up shop? I mean, Miami FC should be "above" that ... and Oakland, Detroit and Chattanooga could be ... but it seems like NPSL's announcement may keep teams from jumping into NISA because it allows a full season without paying players or dealing with PLS. Why would ANY new expansion team that isn't interested in USL now start paying it's players in NISA instead of testing their market for full season in NPSL? I really think more than MLS/USL/PLS being the "boogyman" to NISA ... look at the options NPSL just gave everyone looking for a next step or low cost entry into full season soccer.
While I think this would have been the preference for the teams currently in/looking at NISA, NPSL full season's biggest hurdle is going to be finding talent. NPSL is competitive because you have access to the best amateurs in the country. Most places are simply not going to have access to enough talented players that are willing (or able) play in a national league "on the side". Since the fallout of Founder's Cup is that you can't have any pro players, your options for filling out the roster are pretty limited to who is local.
Very true. But with low wages in soccer across the country, you may have college graduates choosing their profession and then playing on NPSL clubs on the "side". Quality won't be there due to a lack of training, etc. but I bet you can find some takers. You're probably correct though, it would be tough. I'm not sure what the limitations on "paying" those players either ... can you offer them room/board? A single guy could be an Uber drive and do ok if he wasn't paying for housing/food ... a least to keep a dream alive of playing soccer.
#NISANation? 👀— RayoOKC (@RayoOKC) September 30, 2019 Oh, boy. NISA is digging up classics now. Wonder if we will get the San Francisco Deltas and Puerto Rico FC, as well?
Rayo OKC takes the field! Seriously though? They cannot be serious. All the reasons and then sole they suffered huge losses and folded last time still exist.
However, NISA hasn’t yet received an application from the Cosmos. Drop dead date from USSF for Fall 2020 is Nov 1st. If the Cosmos apply to NISA, their application will be considered by the board & voted on. There is a board meeting in November where applicants will present— Chris Kivlehan (@kivlehan) October 8, 2019 Don’t see it happening.
So, if, and I mean if, the Cosmos join the NISA, we'll just shuffle the deck chairs of the NASL insanity all over again?