He’s a passionate MLS fan who constantly posts conspiracy theories. One reason, a big reason, I’ve never gotten into the NBA is that in my opinion the refereeing is very biased in favor of superstars. I don’t deem it a fair competition. Why waste my time? I’ll watch the Finals because he two teams are on equal footing. I would end by pointing out he never explained why he roots for a team in a fixed league. That combination makes no sense to me.
you are still missing what I am saying. Every team has an average attendance. It has nothing to do with overall league attendance. Seattle averages 40000 the crew average 15600. Those two numbers have nothing to do with each other, other than how many people show up. What I have asked is Does a new stadium grow that number? And would it grow that number by 5000 which would put the team in the 10th or 11th place of overall average per team attendance? (I use that number (5000) as it is basically a full sell out of the current stadium every night.) that is the question I am asking. Or is the market kind of apathetic? That is all I am asking. I do not care and nor should you about seattle or atlanta.
The meme that nobody in Columbus was interested in buying the team in 2013 is nonsense. The team wasn't for sale then. HSG was looking for local investors to take a minority stake. Many of the obvious candidates had been burned as minority investors in 1996 so it's no surprise there was a lack of interest. Precourt was originally introduced to Clark Hunt as a potential minority investor but then offered to buy the whole shebang. At the time, MLS was trying to get down to one team per owner so the deal sailed through. But owning the team in its entirety, plus the stadium and SUM share is a much better offer than simply owning 10% of a money losing team whose profits flow to the stadium and whose main revenue sources come from SUM. https://www.ohio.com/akron/sports/columbus-crew-sold-to-group-led-by-anthony-precourt
Watch this: 3 young international DPs cap hit 200 k 8 bought down DPs at 650 k each. 4 million in TAM buys them down to 150 k So far only 1.8 million budget spent. Spend 2 million in change across the nine remaining senior roster spots. 250ish k per player. Add in some high level HGPs and you have a killer team.
In case you missed it, conspiracy theories are all the rage in 2017. Many people, including most the mainstream media, are consumed with the idea that a recent election was fixed by a conspiracy involving you know who. And their adversaries are consumed by the idea that there is a Deep State swamp conspiring against the will of the People. Nonetheless, whether on the right or the left, I don't question anyone's patriotism or ask why they have not already moved to Canada. We can be patriotic Americans and still criticize our government for secretive shenanigans. Likewise, we can root for our respective MLS teams without being fans of the league, and we can also say Don Garber and his ilk are not wearing any clothes without losing our bona fides as fans.
Here's a concern I see when you combine the Crew debacle with the new TAM rules. Owner doesn't spend TAM (yes, I'm thinking about my Rapids but also about Salt Lake, New England, Columbus, Dallas, etc.) Team becomes less competitive in the new lower-parity MLS Team starts to fall in those "measures" Garber references about the Crew Team leaves town Repeat for the next "small" team. Now I don't actually believe MLS is going to start moving teams every 2-3 years, but their whitewashing of what's happening with the Crew sure can lead you to that conclusion.
It was my conclusion right away. Not isn't it terrible they're moving the Crew, but who is next? Might be Colorado, to be honest.
That he may be. All I remember is in the women's CBA thread we had on here how he basically treated us like we were all idiots and that the USSF was in big trouble and he fought EVERYONE on it tooth and nail. Course he was wrong on every account but, you know, we should just believe everything he says because reasons.
@don gagliardi just compared our government to a form of entertainment, a sports league. I’m starting to think he isn’t trolling.
If you don't know that there was already a clause in the sale allowing him to move to Austin at the time, it's sort of believable that he wouldn't want to sound desperate to sell the team back then, even if he was. But now it's impossible to believe anything the guy says. For example, I guess "did his due diligence" means "received assurance that he could move to Austin in a few years".
It's been noted elsewhere that one thing MLS did was force the local investors that were still around to divest in favor of Precourt.
Well, all I can say is that I vouch for Don Gagliardi, and he is super generous and a super sports fan. You’d have to be to keep rooting for our Quakes. He played a key role in bringing the Quakes back to San Jose. He is supporting #SaveTheCrew because we know what it is like to lose one’s team. So if he’s ticked you off in the past, maybe give him a little bit of a pass, cuz it’s the holidays, guys. And who vouches for me? Probably nobody. But trust me on this!
I watched the MLS Cup on Unimas. During a pre-match interview, Garber mispronounced the common last name "Vazquez". Hint douchebag Don, in Spanish "qu" sounds like the English "k". In other words, the "u" is basically silent. The Commissioner of a league trying to convert Latino-Americans to its inferior futbol should know better. Hell, almost everyone knows better. What a tool. What a fool. Save The Crew.
I hadn't heard that. Is there a link to it somewhere? If that's the case, how does nobody call out Garber on his BS when they interview him?
Was there a better deal available, tho. People keep saying that Precourt signed a crappy TV deal, but if the alternative was no TV for the Crew, was it really that crappy?
Good question. The deal they jettisoned was with Fox Sports Ohio, who wanted to renew, and for pretty comparable money supposedly. Noone claimed then - although I;m sure Lyin'Don would now - that they left over money. The main thing they said was that TWC wanted to do a half hour pregame show which FSO didn't do. Which is nice for sure but what good is a pregame show that nobody can watch?
And it was at the time that TWC was trying to corner a couple of sports markets for their sports channel (the LA Dodgers was the other team they were successful on getting on board). But the truth is *we don't know*. Either way. As is well know MLS is very closed-mouthed on its deals (which does make one surprised that the "Crew to Austin" thing actually got out).
That sounds a lot like relegation in other leagues. Unfortunately there wouldn’t be a reasonable promotion mechanism to accompany it.
I just watched the 2H of mls Cup, and in the HT show they showed Taylor Twellman straight forwardly grilling Garber about the Crew move. Garber was squirming. And after that, Alejandro Moreno questioned whether owner was tanking the club. Too bad Kasey Keller then went back to the “business metrics” excuse. But I was shocked that ESPN included all this, I thought they would sweep it under the rug.
I will give credit to the MLS-focused talking heads on both ESPN and Fox for one thing: They recognize the obvious facts that this proposed relocation is as popular with MLS fans in general as a fart in an elevator, and that there is really nothing to be lost by questioning why this is happening. Now, the league might complain to their national TV partners about this, but what can they do? They aren’t the NFL. There aren’t TV networks lining up, ready and willing to throw money at them and swallow whatever BS they want to dish out.
Let's put the 2017 attendance to the side for a second. This is their trajectory over the 5 years leading up : 2016 : 17,125 2015 : 16,985 2014 : 16,881 2013 : 16,080 2012 : 14,397 2011 : 12,185 That's right folks ... they were over 17K just last year. And that attendance had been increasing each season for 6 straight seasons. It just so happens that the attendance drops off the year they decide to relocate. Coincidence? Going back into Crew history, they averaged over 17K several times when they still had that new stadium effect. The all time high was 17,696 back in 2000. Throughout MLS's history the Crew was known for consistency. They were the club that almost never had attendance below 10K. Something that was common everywhere else in MLS like New England, Colorado, Dallas, Kansas City etc ... Along with DC United and LA Galaxy, Columbus was one of the pillars that carried the league through the lean years. For anyone that's been to Crew stadium, there is no doubt that a new stadium would not be a lateral change. Their current stadium cost $28 million and it shows. Seats are uncomfortable. No shelter from rain or summer heat. Nothing to attract high spending customers. So if we all agree that a new stadium would be a big leap forward for the club, based on that 2011-2016 trajectory I would expect 18K attendance at a minimum. And it's important here to note that Columbus is the fastest growing population in the Midwest (and I'm using the broadest definition of Midwest possible). Just like their 2011-2106 attendance growth, this is another tiny detail that is constantly being ignored in this conversation. Here is where Columbus stacks up in the Midwest : 1) Chicago - 9,500,000 population + 0.55% growth 2) Detroit - 4,300,000 population + 0.03% growth 3) Minneapolis - 3,600,000 population + 6.04% growth 4) St. Louis - 2,800,000 population + 0.69% growth 5) Cincinnati - 2,200,000 population + 2.39% growth 6) Kansas City - 2,100,000 population + 4.74% growth 7) Cleveland - 2,100,000 population - 1.04% shrinking 8) Columbus - 2,000,000 population + 7.34% growth 9) Indianapolis - 2,000,000 population + 6.16% growth 10) Milwaukee - 1,600,000 population + 1.07% growth At these rates Columbus is leapfrogging Cleveland as we speak and should pass Kansas City and Cincinnati within the next few years.
< Ack > God, please, no. Nobody really buys this as credible do they?? It would make me sick if they avoided the topic altogether, but these Pravda style interviews with Garber are almost worse. Sure Don looked like he was chewing lemons in the interview - but remember he already embarrassingly bailed the last time he was supposed to "discuss" the Crew situation on air with Alexi and Rob Stone. (The Don got stuck in bad traffic!) It's a difficult situation to discuss at all without looking like the true-life Grinch he is... but Garber has his finely-tuned, P.R. team-prepared script ready, and just look at the set-up: Pre-recorded interview. Taylor Twellman, who is without question a shill for the league, lobbing softballs. Otherwise, there's no counterpoint in the room. "Let's hear your side, Don!" You've got 5 minutes of bartered air time to sit here and spin! Nevertheless it was still edited like some kind of Simpson's parody of fake news. If Taylor asked Don, straight-up, something like "But wasn't Austin part of the deal from the day Precourt purchased the team?" the interview would have at least been plausible, because then the bullshit starts to unravel. Then you get to ask "Why?" and "Was moving to Austin always the ambition? What do you say to fans who think that's the case and feel strongly that PSV have tried to fail here - or at least have failed to do due diligence on behalf of Columbus and its fans?" But Taylor didn't ask that stuff, or if he did it was cut. Because this was just league P.R. doing damage control.
Other worthwhile questions : 1) If this plot was cooked up 4+ years ago, why was Austin ever on the list of expansion cities? No ownership, no stadium plans and no history of supporting pro soccer. 2) Don't you think that having Precourt on the league's expansion committee presented a clear conflict of interest? 3) What do you say to San Antonio's expansion group? Doesn't presenting Austin as an expansion candidate suggest that San Antonio is supposed to be competing against Austin? One of the parameters of competition is that $150 million expansion fee. Kind of odd that one of the cities on expansion list gets a backdoor way to avoid that fee. Which takes us back to question #2. But alas ... we live in a country with no real soccer journalism. You pull this stunt in a country where soccer is the mainstream sport and you'd have a journalism bloodbath.