Columbus Crew to Austin Texas?

I did say in a previous post that the Crew do benefit from the lot. My only point (and it is more a question because WTF do I know), is that because the other activities at the fairgrounds also benefit from the improvements that it could weaken the subsidy claim.

 

Eh, they've done alright vs the NY teams, at least, recently. I won't complain too much about the Crew making the final four twice in the last three season. That said, it is more about what teams will spend these days--and not all of them are in LA or NY. And the question has arisen as to the motives of the Crew owner for spending on his team or lack thereof that may have more to to do with greasing the skid for a move than competitiveness.

 

Ha! I appreciate your daily news thread very much.

 

Something other than, "We are doing our best to ensure that the Crew will stay in Columbus."

 

If you follow the conversation train back to the beginning instead of jumping in at the end, the original complaint was that the league was actively directing top US players away from the Crew because of Columbus as a market. That is something that is independent of the performance on the field, so this comment isn’t particularly germaine to the topic at hand..

However, given your previous comment, it would seem that even though Precourt isn’t splashing the cash, it seems like he is spending his money wisely? If we are to accept that the Columbus business community didn’t fully embrace the team until after the potential move to Austin was announced (and I’m not saying we should) and given the team’s onfield performance with limited money, couldn’t it be argued that if Precourt had more money rolling in from the team’s sponsors the team could be doing even better?

 

Garber pretty much threw Columbus’s business community under the bus.

He said that the league has reached a stage in its growth that it can’t really stay in markets whose business communities don’t embrace the team and that if Columbus’s business community had embraced the Crew before the potential move was announced like they are now, then the Crew wouldn’t be moving... He basically absolved the Crew’s ownership groups of any of the blame for failing to engage the business community..

 

He's also blatantly lying. The business community has been trying to get involved with the Crew for a few years.

This is personal for Garber. I dont5know why he's made it his mission to get the Crew out of Columbus but it's clear to me this is vindictive.

 

I have a funny feeling someone (and perhaps more than one) in Columbus didn't "kiss his ring" at some point--perhaps when the ALL Star game was here or in 2008. He's ex-NFL and I wonder if some expectations came with that. But we may never know.

 

I'll give credit to Berhalter--he's gone out and found some anyway. Steffen, while not a lock by any means, is certainly on the national team radar now. I also think it's not something the league has done recently as market forces have come to bear--more in the middle years. Of course, at the beginning, the Crew got Caliguri, even though he's been promised by the league that he could play in LA.

 

A previous Crew sponsor, Heartland Bank said the team tried to double his rate for 2017 so they dropped the sponsorship. No wonder the Crew has fewer sponsors in 2017 than in 2016.

 

Paving the parking lots might qualify under that except fans had been complaining for years about mud/dust in the lots so it probably helped attendance. I used to buy VIP parking since it saved me a carwash every game.

But there's no question the team profits from parking sales during games and thus the anti-Modell law applies.

 

Doubled from what? And how would that number compare to similar sponsorships around the league?

I'm sure no one here has those answers, of course, but it would put the Precourt's alleged revenue issues as compared to the rest of the league into perspective.

 

It's weird.
Why risk losing sponsorships because you are asking too much? The market determines what it's worth. The Sponsor determines what it's worth to them.

A sponsor is better than none.

If it's worth it to them they will renew for more. But if it's not... You can't just force them to double it.

You better have good data to take to the Sponsor to show them how much the sponsorship benefits them...

 

I wonder if this beef has something to do with the NFL and the Hunts and nothing at all to due with MLS or Columbus. The league's reasons for supporting the move are shallow and crumble under even the slightest scrutiny. The way they let Precourt add an Austin out-clause to essentially circumvent the expansion fee is pretty weird. Wouldn't a league at least demand Precourt pay the difference to relocate?

Yes, I do think it could be that petty. I don't think for a second Don is above it.

 

Not always. Would Joe's Bail Bond be a good sponsor? (yeah I know the league has has some "interesting" multilevel marketing sponsors). Sure you can price yourself out of a market--but if you want to be considered as "major league", you also do have to have minimums at least. That said, there were rumors that the Crew had a major sponsor lined up that the league put the kibosh on (I think during the Hunt era).

 

Yeah, I get the personal vibe too here. Every comment from Garber since October 16th has been full of contempt for the people of Columbus. Zero empathy. Only the most clumsy attempts at diplomacy.

To hell with this garbage league ... Pirate sports ownership pillaging communities and spitting them out like trash. If they open this pandora's box, I'm 90% certain eventually it catches up to RSL. I give Red Bull about 50/50 odds ... as soon as that stadium becomes dated and out of style. Within the next 20 years or so I'd also be watching my back if I was a Galaxy or San Jose fan. Even Kansas City ... that stadium won't be sexy forever. Does MLS really NEED to be in Kansas City?

I feel relatively safe in DC, but still I'm getting off this ride before they start throwing people off. I will gladly be Columbus's Dorothy Boyd ...

 

Again, some of your examples of vulnerable teams are odd. The Galaxy were the most valuable team last year. Maybe Atlanta will be above that, but there's no chance that they or the Red Bulls move. Their markets add too much value to consider it. San Jose, too. Adding Sacramento means there won't be another Bay Area team, which only helps.

The amount that RSL is spending on infrastructure is amazing. The main training facility was $50M, and includes a stadium for the USL team. The first of eight satellite facilities was just completed for $6M. That's a total around $100M for facilities other than the main stadium. He just bought and moved an ailing NWSL team to Utah. They have a local TV contract in not just Salt Lake, but Vegas, Reno, Boise, Phoenix, Tucson, and Albuquerque, with average viewership of 45,000 for non-national games. Dear Leader Hansen is committed to soccer there. As long as he's alive and a billionaire, RSL will stay put. If the next owner isn't a local, there could be a problem, of course.

The headliner for next relocation threat is Colorado. Low crowds, indifferent owner, barely competent front office, smallest city with every sport, estimated value below the expansion fee. Vancouver is probably the next riskiest; smallish market, potential exchange rate problems, imperfect stadium situation, valued at expansion fee. Other small market clubs are in good situations right now, but who knows what the future holds.

Large markets are unlikely to relocate, and almost certain to be replaced if they do. There's just too much potential money. So if an owner lacks the resources, skills, or inclination to make things work, someone else will try. For example, Sugarman lacks the resources. He can't pour spare money into projects that would develop the Union because he doesn't have it. But a potential buyer would see there's more opportunity for growth in Philadelphia than in another market.

 

All these things are great. But one owner passes away. Team gets sold to another Precourt. What seem like big investments today may not seem very big 10-20 years from now.

In 2000 Columbus seemed like one of the strongest franchises in the league. They've even led the league in attendance before. Their $28 million investment into a stadium was also amazing and unprecedented at the time. And yet here we are today.

Positive vibes today are a poor indicator of what the trends will be 20 years from now. Someone in the league will always be last in "business metrics". There will always be teams that are below average. If this is MLS's solution to fixing problems then you can bet that this will happen again.

You can say a lot of negative things about leagues abroad, but at least this doesn't happen in most of them. I'd rather see my club kicked down into an amateur 4th division than have them relocated 1000 miles away. This is probably the most fundamental aspect of the relationship between club and fans. It's like being in a marriage where the spouse is allowed to move away and live with another man. There's a lot you can work out in a marriage, but that seems to be unworkable. At that point it's probably best to not get married in the first place.

 

Good points. You do however see clubs going bankrupt and vanishing that way (though often the club re-forms) in a pro/rel system. My point here is that each system has its flaws and benefits.

 

Yes, but it's hard to really see what the US pros are from a fan perspective. From an owner perspective, sure. You buy a share of the overall league so your investment is not as vulnerable to local instability. And relocation is always a convenient escape valve is "business metrics" start to suffer.

One thing you can say about American major leagues is that they really know how to drive franchise values up by closing the system. I fully expect MLS to be one of the top leagues in the world sooner than we realize.

But for me there is such a thing as the pendulum swinging too far into one direction. For example the Premier League to me has become unwatchable. Just full of shiny foreign toys. No identity at all. If you combine that with the American tradition of taking cities hostage and pitting fanbases against each other you could really end up with a first rate monstrosity like the NFL.

I don't judge people for supporting the NFLization of MLS. Whatever floats your boat. As long as people are aware of what they're supporting.

 

All true (though that "low crowds" issue couldn't have been said last offseason, which shows how quickly it could be turned around) and all a concern. The difference though, between Columbus and Colorado, is that the Rapids are still owned by somebody with significant financial stake in Denver. Precourt has no ties to Columbus, and apparently no interest from the start of staying there. Kroenke owns a whole sports operation in Denver that the Rapids are a piece of, and one not so easily replicated if he were to move the team somewhere else.

 

DG jealous of Columbus business support for the NHL team?

 

Kroenke own the Rams. I wouldn't put anything past him. I bet he looks at Precourt's moves with envy.

 

While Kroenke owns the team, it's staying in Denver. If he owned the Broncos and not the Rams, they stay put. And it's not hard to imagine a buyer thinking the team can succeed there, as Kroenke hasn't done enough to market or develop the team. I'm certainly of that opinion. The threat is someone shopping for a team specifically to move it to a certain place, as may be happening to Columbus; the Rapids would be their first call.

 

Two issues here. I feel MLS has made a huge error trying to be like the NFL--and that's both owners and players, as the players union got a lot of advice from the NFL players union--not all of it to the benefit of the fans. That said, their model in general (and it was their model before they tried to be like the NFL) allowed for the league to survive, albeit barely, if rumors are to be believed (the irony is that Lamar Hunt saved the league--and one reason was the potential he saw in Columbus where he built the first true MLS stadium with his own money). That's a benefit for US fans in general. A serious pro league. I'm old enough to remember the life and death of the NASL. Now I'm not at all fond of current machinations (I'm from Columbus after all). But single entity did allow the league to survive.