2015 USL Attendance Thread

Ugggggh. Did you not read the preface to my comments? I'm not talking about performance or value to the parent club. I'm talking about attendance and significance to that market. I'm saying a USL team generates more interest and enthusiasm in a market when it's an independent/affiliate club in another city rather than an MLS 2 team in the same one. I'm talking about why that is, not that it's a better recipe for success or more valuable to the parent club. In terms of attendance and significance you can't really argue that a Sacramento, OKC, Tulsa, Austin, etc are a worse blueprint.

 

What preface? Your point in your previous post that reserve teams in the metro area of their MLS club draw less than independent teams that in their own market? That's an obvious statement, not a preface.

Essentially your argument went like this:
1. Reserve teams draw poorly in the same market as their MLS team.
2. Basketball and baseball teams don't do it this way.
3. MLS should do it that way.

Your ultimate conclusion was "It might be better to not have the 'MLS 2' teams set up in the league like currently". You obviously don't like how the MLS reserve teams are set up, and are suggesting that going to the more common farm team model would perhaps be better and indeed criticized the model as being "European".

I'm saying that for all the FOs thus far, the benefits of keeping your reserve team under your roof have outweighed the minor financial advantages (if any) of putting your reserve team in another market. G2, at least, is operating exactly as intended and the attendance is irrelevant. Independent teams and reserve teams have different goals and intentions. You can't say that Sacramento, OKC, Tulsa or Austin are better "blueprints" than the MLS 2 teams because they're not the same. It's comparing apples to oranges. The people growing the oranges want to grow oranges, the people growing apples want to grow apples. It's okay they don't taste alike.

 

^^I generally agree with your apples and oranges sentiment.
I'm just not entirely sure what to think about watching them grow on the same tree.

 

As someone from a "non MLS" market, I thought you'd want the MLS teams to keep their brands and reserve teams in their own markets to allow other markets to build up their own brand, acadamy, marketing strategy, and desire to win over just "develop". I'm not sure why anyone cares what MLS 2 teams bring through the gate (unless someone here is an MLS owner with money on the line) but I would think that those not in MLS markets wouldn't want to see the "Sporting Omaha" or "Real Reno" or the "Tulsa Dynamo" (all of those are just possibilities).

I'm in an MLS market, I would probably take my young kids out to a Sporting 2 game in Swope Park because it's closer to home, cheaper and they just love watching sports.

 

I've never been in favor of a straight-up farm club system but have no problems with MLS fielding higher profile reserve squads operating as D-3 USL clubs in their own or adjacent markets. But I do question the wisdom of USSF getting petitioned to allow all those squads to compete in D-2.

This year there's probably some novelty and "new car smell" with the new clubs in particular. But I'd imagine Sacramento fans would not be too thrilled with the prospects of all their regional rivals year-in and year-out having the number 2 next to their names.

USL attendance stats going forward should all have asterisks for the USL attendance with and without the MLS clubs who clearly don't consider drawing crowds to be a priority.

 

I can't say I disagree with any of this. Sacramento obviously has bigger ambitions than USL (which is a good thing). I don't know that I mind MLS 2 squads in D2 (if a MLS team can consistently put out a talented reserve league that can compete at that level then I don't see a reason they should have to be placed in D3 just for the sake of being a "reserve" squad. I do hope USL isn't allowed to move the entire league to D2 because I personally don't feel like all teams are at that level ... but I don't see how the Galaxy 2 squad needs to be D3 (just as an example) and the Tulsa Roughnecks can be D2 if the play on the field shows that the Galaxy squad is better than the Tulsa squad.

I also don't really care what "D" each team/league is in ... you play the teams in front of you in our "pryamid". Until there is pro/rel then who cares what division USL is in, it won't make the teams better, the front offices better, the ownership groups better. If NASL lose's their "D2" sanctioning because they don't have a team on the west coast ... I don't for one minute think their attendance will suffer, their front offices all of the sudden get "lesser" players or their owners spend less money ... maybe I'm wrong, but the D2/D3 label is insignificant so who cares what leagues "reserve" teams play in.

 

From the fan perspective you are right. It does hold water in player acquisition and to casuals that may not have an understanding of the soccer setup in the US but may be familiar with MiLB. AAA Baseball outdraws AA Baseball.

 

Is that the market they're in as much as the level of play? If so, I'd expect to see it across the board ... and I really doubt that's the case.

 

It is the expectation of the spectators that they are watching just below Major League.

 

If that's the case, you could argue that players on Galaxy 2's team are the closest ... I mean I haven't gone to look at the numbers, but how many players from 2015 NASL teams are on MLS rosters this year vs USL rosters?

The point is ... it really didn't matter to the 6211 (on average) fans that went to Tulsa Drillers games that their team was in AA last year ... any more than the 6045 (on average) that went to Oklahoma City Redhawks AAA games. Things like location, cost, timing are FAR more important than if the team plays in the Texas League vs the Pacific Coast League ... and MLB teams put a TON of their top prospects in AA and a lot of AAA teams are filtered with AAAA players that are to old to be interesting prospects ... so there are plenty of "talent level" overlaps that go along with AAA and AA baseball and there will be similar overlaps to D2 and D3 soccer. To suggest otherwise is inaccurate.

Casual fans don't care about AAA vs AA ... and neither will casual soccer fans. I don't see a bump in Tulsa Roughneck attendance because casual fans all of the sudden thing that since they're D2 they're going to see a product "closer to the MLS level" than before.

 

I spent some time at USL and got to see some of their D2 package and what they presented to their owners. In minor leagues the jump from AA to AAA is real. It is consistent in all sports with that setup. The numbers verify it.

There are outliers of course and it obviously won't hold when you are in the same complex as the Major League team.

 

A jump in what? Attendance? That's funny, because unless you have the same team play in the same stadium in the same market as a AA team and a AAA team then it's hard to really base it on being AA vs AAA. I'll agree that the talent level does go up, but that's not what we're talking about. If the USL gets the D2 tag and doesn't increase spending, it's still going to have the same talent on the field as it does today, and the D2 label isn't bringing in talent just because it's "D2" ... the Money that D2 teams are spending are what is bringing in that extra talent.

Talent between AA and AAA doesn't really factor in to soccer because it's all 1 organizations talent that they have to place in their multiple levels. That's not the case for the independent D2 and D3 teams, they're all competing against each other for the same talent.

 

Well the owners of USL believe it to be so, and the numbers point to a measurable jump potentially happening. We will see what happens in 2017 and with the stadium initiative. New stadiums could be the most important factor in dealing with perception of that league.

I think OC Blues disappears this year and Harrisburg moves South. That should finish the USL weeding out process for the D2 jump.

 

If they don't change the amount they invest in player salaries, it won't matter, and they could do that without a change in division. If they think it will help then I have no issues with them doing it either though ... more power to them. Doesn't sound like it will "cost" them much for the "D2" title. I think the only real reason to do it is if they wanted to eventually get to a D2 AND D3 level but that's just me ... a fan!

 

Would things be better if LA2 and OC Blues merged in to one entity and just be the Galaxy affiliate/reserve team.

 

Well you do have Louisville City which has the same naming convention and colors as the parent, Orlando City. They seem to be doing well attendance wise although I wish they had used more imagination in their team name. If they ever became a potential expansion market for MLS, I think they would need to make changes

 

Better for whom?

Probably not for the players that would lose their jobs due to the squad size of 1 team instead of two, same with coach's, probably not for the small portion of fans that do go to the games because they're likly from a very short distance to the stadium ... so you'd be hurting one group or the other. Probably keep the OC owners from losing money, but that's about it ... and it likely wouldn't solve any of the world's soccer (or america's) problems ... and it certainly wouldn't solve all of the attendance problems this forum thinks MLS 2 clubs have (or teams like the OC Blues who don't invest in marking/sales staffs).

Just wondering who you think it helps ... or how it makes things (whatever those things are) better!?

 

Yeah, it's hard to figure how much involvement the Orlando ownership had with the Louisville decisions (outside of the one owner that has a small stake in Orlando and large in Louisville). I mean, they said the "purple is our two school's colors combined" or some trash like that. They also pulled a guy off the Orlando retirement heap to coach and he seems to be doing well. They're performing great in the stands and on the field, but I don't think much of the talent comes from Orlando, although I think some of the marketing/sales strategies may (Orlando used their affiliation with Sporting for some success in that arena I think).

Either way, I think there is enough seperation that Louiville city isn't just a reserve squad for Orlando so I hesitate to put it in that category.

 

That's why I was asking. OC Blues seems like a lost cause and I doubt its players and coaches will be in USL for another year. The only possible help for the Galaxy is exposure in OC now that they will have to compete with LAFC for fans

 

Better in terms of significance, attendance, meaning - yes. That's exactly my argument. Better in terms of performance, no, not necessarily. The MLS 2 teams are basically the new incarnation of the reserve league. My argument is if you want a larger footprint, to have more interest in soccer and connection to cities and communities, having an independent/affiliate team in another large market is better than having a "2" team in the same location. Not anything else. It's not that I don't like how the MLS 2 teams are set up - it's that they are a different type of team playing in a league with different types of teams. If all of these teams are going to make basically reserve teams, just have a reserve league.

I know! I fully acknowledged that in my previous comments. Nowhere did I say performance would be better under the minor league model than the "2" model. Obviously there are advantages to having the same facilities and operations as the parent club, and in many ways that is actually an advantage to performance on the field. They're different.

 

Based on where they are in the standings? I'd look again, they're performing quit well. Maybe you ment to say the ownership group based on ticket sales/attendance figures won't be in the USL for long ... and to that, many will say that's been the state for many years prior to this. And I'm not sure, but the attendance (as low as it is now) may be "trending" in the right direction even ... at the same time as their travel budget is smaller.

The players and coach's seem to be doing a pretty good job playing in front of few fans ... well enough to likely find a job within USL next year even if the organization (OC Blues) aren't.

 

I think the MLS2 teams bring a strong brand and solid players when they come to Tulsa. It doesn't change our attendance much regardless.

I'm looking forward to Tulsa getting an affiliate in the next year or two. It will only help the product on the field and if it's the MLS team I think it will be there is a lot of overlap with our AA baseball team with the same owners which helps form a good business relationship.

 

But part of the point was to get the young developing players games against other types of teams (not only against other Reserve teams). It was less about spreading footprint and marketing reach as much as it was about getting these players games against teams of older players that are playing for trophies ... the reserve league didn't do that. The USL seems to be doing this at this point in time, without deminishing the product for the independent USL teams.

 

So you're expecting an affiliation with LAFC?

I think there will be more and more independent teams without MLS affiliation in the near future as more independent expansion happens and more MLS teams put in their full USL teams. There's a chance Tulsa never gets an affiliate ... or one that is a long term affiliate.