Where'd those goal posts go, anyways? It was the dumbest line in Reuter's article, right behind his speculation about what Savarese's desire to leave to Cosmos says about their continued viability. For the record, going into play this weekend, a "floundering 'MLS 2' team" leads the Western Conference. Second teams or hybrid affiliates hold half the West's playoff spots too. Rather than the MLS second teams, the real concern for the USL has to be Rochester. Some of the smaller market teams and operations like the Riverhounds could naturally fit in the USL D3 if it eventually launches. I'm not convinced that Rochester has any long term viability with the anchor of that large(r) stadium strapped to them. But the USL can afford to lose teams as they raise standards. Compare their history of recent expansions to the NASL's. It's not even close and a big part of why ten of the top twelve drawing second division teams in North America play in the USL.
Well, that's fair, then. But you aren't opposed to the idea, just their execution, right?* *Please don't bring out the John McKay line. He never said it.
I wonder how much of that was backed by non-Traffic people and non-Peterson/non-Edwards people (before he bailed) and how much was just saber-rattling. You aren't optimistic about Demba Ba's years and years of experience running successful clubs? Well, they already have one, and you know what that is.
Most of them are making "even a little revenue." Player development is the long game and one without a lot of history here to base early results on. It costs money. Teams know this. What, to you, would be an acceptable level of MLS2 team attendance? Why would someone schlep out to Montclair to watch RBNY? God bless 'em, play and develop. For the kabillionth time, you cannot simply roll out a ball and 22 players and expect tickets to watch that to sell themselves. Having put lots of money into the various levels of their development, those teams have likely done the math that to get to whatever your acceptable level of attendance is would require more investment that would likely not pay off. Because there are a number of people who will go to Galaxy II matches. It ain't 2,000 people and it ain't 5,000 people. And it's not going to be.
I think Rochester is toast. The current owners admitted it was not going to be easy (though they haven't sent out any "bring a friend" pleas) and they have not seen results at all. If USL's third division were starting next year, that would be a natural. Perhaps they'll go on "hiatus" for 2018 and come back in 2019 in that league. But I can't see them continuing in DII.
They had a good three months after they just survived when the stupidity began again. I get what Peter Wilt is trying to do, but the Cosmos owner, Miami Fc owner, SF Deltas owner confuse the hell out of me.
Wilt's great when he's concentrating on selling tickets and creating a culture around individual clubs. All this other stuff is, politely, a distraction.
I don't like to do predictions, but yeah, hard to see a way forward. Unfortunate Even more so because of all the "But they'd still be alive if we had pro/rel" pieces we'll have to read (that ignore what would have happened if they'd been relegated after a couple years in D1). And because the true believers will latch on to it as some sort of example of "the USL is just as unstable as the NASL derp, derp, WAIVERS!!!, derp!"
He realizes that the NASL will likely need to have something that separates it from MLS and need to prove pro/rel will work in the country. He is ambitious, but unlike the other idiots he has a plan with targets for the next 4-5 years. It may not work but it's a lot better than the crap the other people are doing and the grandstanding from Silva. If each NASL team had a Peter Wilt, the league would be much better off.
Fun Fact: USL teams that have gone out of business since 2012 (5): 2017 FC Montreal (because Ottawa moved to USL from the NASL and Montreal affiliated with them instead) 2016 Austin Aztex (under the ruse of their stadium having been flooded) 2014 VSI Tampa Bay (still an inexplicable franchise) Phoenix FC (Arizona United, now Phoenix Rising, was a new franchise) Antigua Barracuda FC (had no chance) NASL teams that have gone out of business since 2012 (5): 2017 Fort Lauderdale Strikers (don't kid yourself, they're dead) Rayo OKC (also dead) 2016 San Antonio Scorpions (call it what you like, Hartman got out and they died) Atlanta Silverbacks (had been league-owned for a time) 2013 Puerto Rico Islanders (after a long illness) If Rochester dies and the Deltas' Companion Fare strategy doesn't fly, they'll still be tied.
And two years after their demise, cue up all the "let's put a team in Rochester. It's a perfect size market."
You forgot Wilmington, @kenntomasch. Counting folded teams reminds me of average attendance. I love looking at the USL in 2012, the last year before the MLS partnership began (and a certain New York team launched), versus today.
Wilmington didn't go out of business. They dropped to the PDL. That's the same reason I did not include Dayton or Charlotte, both former USL teams in DIII that dropped to the PDL.
Peter doesn't really believe that. He does believe that those left out of the next round(s) of MLS expansion could band together and form a competing D1 league. I do not believe they can. By that point, MLS will have a 25+ year head start, nearly all the markets you would want, all the media contracts, most of the players and clubs that are entrenched in their communities. You can't just replicate that. Unless someone were willing to invest multiple millions (like hundreds of millions) in infrastructure, competition for players and connecting with their communities for the very long haul, it would be really unrealistic. You can't just pop up a D1 league in this country like a pup tent.
When the Western League took on the National League, the National League only had 8 teams in 7 markets. In 1960 when the AFL launched, the NFL had just expanded to Dallas (13th team) with Minnesota scheduled for 1961. In 1967 when the ABA launched, the NBA had just added it's 11th and 12th teams (San Diego and Seattle). The NHL went from 6 teams in 1967 to 18 and back down to 17 before adding 4 WHA teams. The WHA launched in 1971 when the NHL was a 14 teams. What Kenn says is important. The earlier competing leagues had the benefit of large tracts of of the U.S. - and large, desirable media markets - available. MLS's move to 24 teams and soon enough 28 closes down almost all the low hanging fruit. The saturation point for the old big four was around 24 markets. The climb to 30-32 to has mostly followed the demographic shift as the population transitions to the south and west - mostly leaving the older teams in place and adding new ones. It's taken over 20 years to get a stadium in DC. Boston still doesn't have one. A run at MLS would mostly resemble the USFL. They might get some players, but they're going to have to rent and burn cash while MLS holds all the cards.
And, while MLS' salary structure lags much of the rest of the world (by design), it's still not like the opportunity the USFL had for a couple of reasons: 1) Unlike the vast majority of soccer players, football players could move the needle (and still can) 2) You could actually afford to outbid the NFL for players, as the average NFL salary was just around $90,000 then (about $234,000 today, or half the NFL minimum) 3) Gridiron football is still our most popular sport here 4) Playing in the spring helped Getting a couple of players here and there would not appreciably move the needle, those players would be under tremendous pressure to put butts in seats and produce and unless they're all going to sink stadiums in the ground from the get-go, the infrastructure is going to be a problem. And they would not be able to make it selling tickets only to the contrarians for whom bashing MLS in recent years has become a shibboleth for their soccer bona fides.
Cool article about the San Diego NASL team, of which Demba Ba is actually the majority owner. https://amp.theguardian.com/football/2017/aug/01/didier-drogba-eden-hazard-owners-us-soccer-usl-nasl Interesting paragraph about lower league teams making the jump. Maybe, and I emphasize maybe, puts to rest the rumor that Silva is joining Beckham's MLS Miami bid. "So will any of these player-owned, lower-tier clubs make the leap to MLS, as many of the league’s clubs, such as Minnesota, Orlando, Portland and Vancouver did? That’s exactly what Drogba’s Phoenix side are aiming to do. MLS has visited with the team, and Phoenix is now a fixture on the shortlist of rumored expansion teams. Silva has said elsewhere that he’d consider MLS for his Miami club if the league would change some of its rules." (Emphasis mine)
As other users pointed out, the USL losing teams is not that significant a blow as the NASL losing teams. Obvious statistics aside (without 2018 expansion, a USL team is just 3.34% of the lineup versus the 12.5% of an NASL club), the USL has plenty of regional outposts to utilize that means the downfall of a member won't harm the league as a whole, while NASL keeps Suffering body blows with every exit. Also, it feels like the league keeps reverting back to "addition by subtraction" as a necessity due to this. When Indy joined four years ago, I was expecting a 16-18 team league at this point. Now, they'll be lucky to keep 8.
Wilt has addressed this. Rumors of being lucky to keep 8 are exaggerated. However, the league offices lack of open communication is prohibitive. SocTakes did an interview with Tom Payne of Puerto Rico, and he goes off on the league a bit for not addressing these kind of things to put rumors of death to, well, death.
It's real easy to go on the defensive in these situations, but without actual assurance, these rumors will persist.