I don't know quite how to take this, exactly. I know why it is not feasible at this point in history. I know that it won't have all the miraculous curative effects many of its adherents insist it will. But I'm not opposed to the concept. For that, I get labelled all sorts of things by people who think renting an airplane to pull a sign is a reasonable course of action.
I found the discrepancy. Pittsburgh tweeted 3,122 while the game was still underway: Thanks to all 3,122 Hounds fans that chose to spend the Fourth of July with us. Let's hear you this last 25 mins or so. #PGHvNY #unleash— Pittsburgh Riverhounds SC (@RiverhoundsSC) July 5, 2015 And in a few match reports it shows the same 3,122, including one on Pittsburgh's official website (archived because it no longer exists). However, the USL match report (archived data) says 3,801.
So OKC Energy drew 6,455 and Rayo OKC drew 5,851 playing at the same time. Regardless of how many tickets Rayo gave out for free (though I think it's funny that the Energy's match report specifies it's paid attendance), there were 12k+ between the two of them and that's impressive for Oklahoma City as a market.
Great number! .@FCCincinnati attendance for home opener announced at 14,658 @USL #WLWT pic.twitter.com/qttxXphRmq— Derek Forrest (@DerekFSpx) April 10, 2016 . This paired with San Antonio and good turnouts in OKC and Louisville, probably the biggest cluster of numbers USL has ever seen on a single weekend.
So you assume Rayo OKC gave out free tickets but Energy didn't? Don't kid yourself, Energy gave out free tickets. Most pro sports teams do to an extent. Funk's known for it and also has a history of it with his folded hockey team as well. That is funny that the match report claims it was all paid attendance, they're trying way too hard. Almost the opposite of the home openers when Rayo OKC drew 6400+ and Energy drew 5600+ although they didn't play on the same date for those.
I think attendance would be maximized if teams were in locations that are underserved by professional soccer and if they had their own name and branding that was specific to that location. I don't think it's about having as many names and colors and badges and scarves as possible, it's about creating an identity that fans can embrace. And finding fans who are looking to embrace a new team. And not only the awful "Team 2" names but also the crests with 2 slapped on as an afterthought, do hurt that. I mean who is going to invest their fandom (time, money, emotions) in a team that doesn't even take the time and care to get a graphic designer? Who would buy "Galaxy 2" merchandise and proudly wear it? Who would go to "2" games at a stadium where a far superior team plays 17-24 times a year? Aside from a few outliers like Portland where there is a 10k waiting list for season ticket holders, most of the fans in attendance are going to be the few hundred hardcore-est of the hardcore, and people who get free tickets. Take the Galaxy 2, if they found some other stadium (perhaps a college) and were the Inland Empire FC (just as an example), people in an area that currently has no soccer teams would not only have an option nearby (most are not driving two hours to Galaxy games, and none are for Galaxy 2 games), but it would have a name / crest that represents their area and they would be proud to wear. And it's close enough that the players could keep training in Carson. I think that kind of arrangement is the future, and we're already starting to see it. RSL went with a separate brand name in Real Monarchs, and have been trying to get a separate stadium. Swope Park Rangers have their own brand even if they're in the same metropolitan area. Bethlehem Steel have their own brand and are in a separate area that didn't have a pro team. RGV Toros, own brand, separate area. Orlando City kept the brand but put their team in a separate area. And now we find out the Sounders are looking to do something different and have considered Spokane and Boise before likely settling on Tacoma. I think it's far more likely for the Red Bull 2s of the world to move in that direction than for Bethlehem Steel to become the Philly Union 2 and play in Chester. That system works for the other American sports league that's most concerned with player development at lower levels, baseball, so it's not just some fantasy of soccer nerds. There is money to be made in higher attendance at games, and the selling of merchandise, it doesn't make much sense to leave it on the table when that could help cover the costs of the USL team.
I'm not assuming anything about free tickets. I never said Rayo gave out a lot of free tickets and the Energy didn't. There was a discussion on the NASL boards about the number of free tickets given out by the club and my post said that regardless of that, 12k+ is impressive for the market. You can substitute Rayo for Energy in my previous point if you like and the point is exactly the same.
The Barons rarely gave out free tickets. The Blazers did, but that was with Lund (the Rayo GM) as the GM. Yes, the Energy give out some free tickets, and so has Rayo: but the respective numbers aren't equal. It's like saying that I have slept with some women, and so has Ron Jeremy.
Most of the tix in Tulsa are sold behind the goals, with a large fraction on the grassy knoll (Do they call it something else? If not, I'm using this). This is cherrypicking.
We just call it the lawn. 4100 is for sure accurate for last week. I haven't seen an official number but there were probably around 5500 last night. Lots of kids in town for the Lexus Cup. OKC and Tulsa pretty much pull about the same for each game it seems.
"Maximizing attendance" is not the raison d'etre of these teams, though. They're about player development. The number one way to maximize attendance is to have actual humans working to sell actual tickets (particularly groups) every day, whether the team has a 2 on the end of it or not. Toronto FC II doesn't draw because they don't try. NYRB2 doesn't draw because they don't try. How do S2 and T2 draw, again? So you're saying "FC Cincinnati" is an inspired bit of branding, then? Must have been that what brought out 14k last night. Jesucristo. You know some people just ********ing like to go watch soccer games, right? Has anyone ever said, "Well, that center forward is quite a player, but they don't have a ********ing graphic designer, so I'm out?
Just heard attendance was 4011 for Tulsa. Seemed like more, but that's probably because our supporter groups are growing on both ends and that's where I'm at.
I follow T2 primarily as its easier to obtain tickets (hasn't sold out like the first team does for every game) and tickets are much cheaper. $10 vs $40 for cheapest tickets or $8/game vs $22/game for season ticket holders. Becouls Providence park is sold out for every game, there are potential fans turned away from games, but if they want to go to a game then they can go to T2 or Thorns and as already stated if timbers moved the USL team too Eugene then that would crush Lane United's ambitions of a USL team once they finish rebuilding the Civic stadium there. One last point T2 were the best supported reserve team last year and are an example how a reserve team can still draw big crowds (sorta). Montreal on the other hand don't seem to want to get any fans at games.
Louisville getting shown up by Cincy... if those numbers hold the odds of their MLS push working out go from 0.01% to 0.00%.
1. Having big crowds helps with player development, because the whole point is to have as close to a replication of MLS as possible. Playing in front of 500 won't even prepare these kids for games in Bridgeview. 2. There is a big cost to player development, whether it's the academies or the USL team. Selling more tickets and merchandise would help defray those expenses.
I think there is a difference on gate attendance and sold attendance going on. At the end of the day, OKC is selling more tickets but I question the in person attendance.
Louisville and Tulsa might be dealing with the same issue: Nobody likes seeing soccer in a minor league baseball stadium.