News: NWSL general news and info

Discussion in 'NWSL' started by Blaze20, Sep 14, 2016.

  1. MRAD12

    MRAD12 Member+

    Jun 10, 2004
    Chicago
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    What was NC's announced attendance tonight, Andy?
    3,400?
    Oh Boy, they really killed it in attendance tonight being a "USL-owned team"
    Give me a break!
     
  2. SiberianThunderT

    Sep 21, 2008
    DC
    Club:
    Saint Louis Athletica
    Nat'l Team:
    Spain
    Can we not try to "stick it" to fellow posters here? I definitely disagree with several of Andy's points, but writing angry posts doesn't help anyone.

    Specifically, I don't think NWSL needs "helps" from MLS/USL in a blanket sense. NWSL is already pretty solidified, in its seventh year and set to expand - which I'll address later. Granted, this was with USSF/CSA support, so switching from them to MLS/USL would just be trading one support for another, but I don't see the latter as being better than the former.

    Most importantly, considering that most of the MLS-backed teams have come on with the assumption that USSF/CSA were paying allocated salaries, I wouldn't be nearly so certain that they'd be okay with propping up the "wage gap" were allocation to go away. Houston certainly wouldn't be (based on their already-frugal history) and I bet NC might not either since they're a smaller organization. The independent teams would almost certainly not be okay with it and would either fade to the bottom of the table or fold altogether. Considering that independent teams still make up about half of the league, I don't think anyone wants that. Being under USL would also most likely stop any potential investment from outside MLS/USL, (no one would start an NWSL team unless they already had or simultaneously started a men's team,) and again, I don't think anyone wants that.

    Concerning expansion: I'm not questioning LAFC at the moment. Maybe it's just because of how much MLS expansion I've followed in the past, but I know that "ready to commit" and "ready to announce" are two different things that can have a large time gap between them. We have to remember that every NWSL expansion thus far has been surprising at how quickly they came together. ORL was the longest run-up so far and still was less than a year between first interest and first kick. The LAFC thing in particular could be messier than other expansion because it's supposed to be a joint effort between LAFC and FCB, and working out the agreement could take a while. They only semi-solid thing we've heard about LAFC/FCB was from two area journalists that said they were almost ready to announce in April, but something hit a snag and the announcement was delayed until "late summer/early fall". So they're not late yet.
     
  3. MRAD12

    MRAD12 Member+

    Jun 10, 2004
    Chicago
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    No one is sticking it to anyone. I do feel however like I constantly have to defend my team from people that I feel don't wish it well.
     
  4. MRAD12

    MRAD12 Member+

    Jun 10, 2004
    Chicago
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    CoachJon and blissett repped this.
  5. CoachJon

    CoachJon Member+

    Feb 1, 2006
    Rochester, NY
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Another Equalizer article on National Team Callups for the Tournament of Nations
    https://equalizersoccer.com/2018/07...yers-at-center-of-growing-nwsl-uswnt-tension/

    Riley said he contacted U.S. coach Jill Ellis two weeks ago to say that the Courage would not be releasing the three non-allocated players called in until after their game against Utah on July 20, but he says he never heard back. According to Riley, North Carolina has reached out to FIFA about the situation.

    The Tournament of Nations does not fall within an official FIFA window, which means clubs are not obligated to release players to their national teams. According to multiple sources, several other NWSL teams considered refusing to release players early for the Tournament of Nations, though right now, it does not appear that will happen.

    No other club in the world would release these players,” Riley said. “There’s not one club in the entire universe that would release these players. They would just say, ‘no.’ Simple as that. It’s not a FIFA window, they are not allocated players.”

    Bye the bye - it says 3 non allocated NC players were called. Zerboni? Mathias? McDonald? losing them plus allocated Dahlkemper, Mewis, Dunn & Williams would make it hard to beat anyone on July 20.
     
    chungachanga and blissett repped this.
  6. AndyMead

    AndyMead Homo Sapien

    Nov 2, 1999
    Seat 12A
    Club:
    Sporting Kansas City
    I think that's a straw man argument. I don't think anyone is suggesting that.
     
    sitruc and cpthomas repped this.
  7. MRAD12

    MRAD12 Member+

    Jun 10, 2004
    Chicago
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    #807 MRAD12, Jul 13, 2018
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2018
    You still haven't answered any of my questions I posed to you.

    Please explain this statement:


    How are Sky Blue, Chicago and Seattle an "issue" in your opinion. In fact skip the other two, explain to me, a ten year season ticket holder, why you feel my home team Chicago is an "issue".

    Also where do you get the facts that the "new money haves", whoever they are, are or will be subsidizing independent owners?

    Please answer those questions for me.

    And, are you cheering the "going away" of WNY, KC and Boston? If you are, shame on you because it affected many players, dedicated coaches and owners, and fans who have given their heart and soul as well as money, to supporting their team, like CoachJon here.

    CoachJon, how do you feel about your team in WNY "going away"?

    As you rep his comments, you can chime in on this as well cpthomas.

    Thank you.
     
  8. lil_one

    lil_one Member+

    Nov 26, 2013
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Not answering for @AndyMead as he can answer for himself, but I think all that is being said is that it is a money issue. Who has the money to pay the salaries of the currently allocated players if the tie with USSF is broken? Do teams turning a profit still share profits with the other teams (like they already do)? Do all of the teams have the money to pay for allocated players and a management office? And the questions go on.

    I'll also add that no one here is happy when any team folds. No one is hoping that ANY team folds.

    We all know that when running a team, having money, and lots of it, matters, and some are wondering how deep the pockets are of the independent teams. That's it; there were no comments on attendance, on all teams having to be owned by MLS, on any city not deserving a team, or on an owner's commitment level. Simply, how deep are the pockets?
     
    sitruc repped this.
  9. cpthomas

    cpthomas BigSoccer Supporter

    Portland Thorns
    United States
    Jan 10, 2008
    Portland, Oregon
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I'll chime in on two things:

    1. The Thorns have been providing a subsidy to the NWSL. That's well known and has been posted about several times over the last few years. So far as I know, the amount the Thorns have been providing is confidential. MRAD, I think you're aware of this. I haven't heard about any other team providing a subsidy, but it certainly seems possible that Utah will after this year.

    2. A critical question is player pay. The players -- all of them, including the national team players -- deserve better pay. Whether there's a long-term viable model that can accomplish that, across the board, is something we don't know. If there is, I would want that to be the highest priority.
     
    sitruc repped this.
  10. AndyMead

    AndyMead Homo Sapien

    Nov 2, 1999
    Seat 12A
    Club:
    Sporting Kansas City
    And attendance is absolutely not what I was talking about. I'm talking about the ability to absorb the losses of owning an NWSL team without breaking a sweat.
     
    sitruc repped this.
  11. AndyMead

    AndyMead Homo Sapien

    Nov 2, 1999
    Seat 12A
    Club:
    Sporting Kansas City
    What the hell, man. You should relax. My posts were analytical. Not emotional.

    I never want any team to "go away". Never. Not even DC United.

    My posts were 100% about ownership solvency and resources. If Chicago, Sky Blue, and Seattle's independent ownership are crazy wealthy and unconcerned about NWSL losses then party on. I haven't really researched into those.

    And you should go back and re-read my posts. I don't recall ever indicating that the new MLS/(NASL/USL) ownership groups are subsidizing anything to do with the older independent teams. I was just wondering if, to get the independent owners to go along with cutting the USSF/CSA umbilical cord, it would take the newer groups agreeing to bridge the budgetary gap. Of course if the independent groups aren't really in need of the Federation(s) money to stay afloat, then none of that really matters.
     
    lil_one, sitruc and Smallchief repped this.
  12. MRAD12

    MRAD12 Member+

    Jun 10, 2004
    Chicago
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    OK. Still didn't get some direct answers, but Thank You.
     
  13. CoachJon

    CoachJon Member+

    Feb 1, 2006
    Rochester, NY
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    As you know,I made a long post or two in the WNY Flash 2017 thread addressing the factors leading to the Sahlen's selling the team.

    On the personal side, I was extremely disappointed. I am really missing seeing the Flash and all the opponents live in Rochester. Rochester did not support the team nearly well enough, and so frankly, we did not deserve to keep the team. I made the drive to Yurcak for the two NC games this year. and to Boston for one NC game last year. BIG pain in the ass. Not sure being there supporting the visiting team is all that much better than watching on Go90.

    On the NWSL-supporter side, I am happy the team was bought by Steve Malik and is in a good home. I think attendance will grow there and be sustainable at the 5-6K level. There are many good aspects there, including: marketing, supporter's groups, and a fertile Woso landscape - not to mention the best team in the league. I am happy to get to watch "my girls" prosper on the pitch and living in an amazing supporting environment.
     
    Myrtle repped this.
  14. MRAD12

    MRAD12 Member+

    Jun 10, 2004
    Chicago
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    I appreciate your response.
     
    CoachJon repped this.
  15. luvdagame

    luvdagame Member+

    Jul 6, 2000
    ...hmm. trouble in paradise.

    yes coach riley, north carolina pays the unallocated players. but would they even have a team and a world class level league without the ussf fronting the allocated players and the management?

    ussf must find a happy medium. maybe get some but not all the players they want outside the fifa window. however, if they allow riley to start this fire, they'll probably never get unallocated players outside fifa windows from any other team ever again.
     
  16. AndyMead

    AndyMead Homo Sapien

    Nov 2, 1999
    Seat 12A
    Club:
    Sporting Kansas City
    "allow Riley to start this"

    You've got that backwards.

    It's USSF pulling players away from teams outside of the FIFA window. Teams are not required to release them. For years, USSF calls players up for meaningless friendlies outside of the FIFA windows. Perhaps it's time that stopped.
     
  17. luvdagame

    luvdagame Member+

    Jul 6, 2000
    if all players were essentially supported by their clubs as in the men's game, i'd totally agree. i believe that's where we're headed.

    but this is not yet a real league. i'd like it to be. but it's not. it's a system set up by the ussf to keep players fit for the still developing women's game, where ussf really makes its $$$ on international contests. it does not in the pro woso club game. in fact, in this enterprise we've gone from:

    ussf supporting the game by paying for just camp callups and international games during the year, to

    ussf supporting the game by paying for club games, AND camp callups and international games during the year.

    we're moving - not fast enough - but we're moving.

    still, not enough of us support the weekly pro woso game, and there's not enough fifa investment in it for fifa to call all the shots.

    like I said, ussf & the team owners will have to work this one out. ussf may have to settle for some but not all the unallocated players it wants outside the fifa window.
     
  18. AndyMead

    AndyMead Homo Sapien

    Nov 2, 1999
    Seat 12A
    Club:
    Sporting Kansas City
    I think change is already here. The new ownership coming to the league doesn't need the federation money. It's nice, but not necessary. Given the tradeoff of money versus actually having all their players under direct contract, I'm pretty sure I know which they'd pick.
     
  19. luvdagame

    luvdagame Member+

    Jul 6, 2000
    are they willing to spend enough to keep the best players in the game? it's growing painfully slowly, but weekly pro woso still has poor support among the populace.

    indeed.
     
  20. AndyMead

    AndyMead Homo Sapien

    Nov 2, 1999
    Seat 12A
    Club:
    Sporting Kansas City
    It's a business. The upside of marketing the "national team" players has long since faded. In 2015, I was in Portland when Portland and Kansas City were missing a combined 15 international players. Over 15,000 fans showed up to the game. Attendance is driven by marketing, not really on who is on the field. These are lessons every women's pro league has struggled with. MLS struggled with it for a very long time. Yeah, you can get a bump. There was a Marta bump, but just like Freddy Adu, Blanco, Carlos Hermosillo, and even David Beckham, those bumps fade back into the background noise. Winning helps, but presenting the game as something people should do rather than sit on the couch for another night works better - and is more sustainable. It's the same lessons that successful minor league baseball, hockey, and men's soccer teams employ.

    The rumors of the NWSL owners looking to park the league under the USL umbrella were not something I was expecting, but it makes sense. The federation contracts are a huge issue and barrier to further growth and control. I was particularly shocked that the new USWNTPA/USSF CBA not only continued the onerous clauses with regards to the NWSL, but seemed to further entrench them. That really had to be a slap in the face of the NWSL team owners. There is no way they were involved/consulted on that CBA - or at least the parts that involved the NWSL. It basically that the USSF really doesn't pay any attention whatsoever to the wants and needs of the NWSL itself, and that to the USSF the NWSL is just something for it to use. I'm pretty sure the team owners feel differently.

    And by pulling out of the federation deals, that's probably the only way they invalidate the NWSL sections of the USWNTPA/USSF CBA and take control of their own rosters.
     
    sitruc repped this.
  21. cpthomas

    cpthomas BigSoccer Supporter

    Portland Thorns
    United States
    Jan 10, 2008
    Portland, Oregon
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    However, there must be a good number of teams for the league to be successful. Although some of the teams might be willing to give up the USSF subsidy, the subsidy may be a necessity to keep the other teams alive. Until it isn't a necessity for those other teams, and so long as those teams are needed to have the right number of teams, I don't see any of the owners being willing to give up the USSF subsidy.
     
  22. AndyMead

    AndyMead Homo Sapien

    Nov 2, 1999
    Seat 12A
    Club:
    Sporting Kansas City
    Hence my earlier question as to whether the new money haves would step in and subsidize the rosters of the old money have-nots and replace the lost federation funds. Right now their are 9 teams Portland, Salt Lake, Houston, Orlando, and North Carolina are part of larger organizations. Sky Blue, Seattle, Chicago, and Washington are not. I'll assume the former five have the resources and are prepared to cut the umbilical cord. If any of the independent four are as well, you're at 2/3rds. I would assume any new ownership coming into the league as expansion teams would also be on board with ending the federation ties. In fact, it's quite possible that the federation control might actually be a hinderance to further expansion - much in the same way that the obligation to fund the league owned teams was a hinderance to expansion in MLS pre-contraction.

    The league would likely not have launched in the aftermath of the Dan Borislow lawsuit without the federation(s) involvement and investment.

    But I think the day is quickly coming (if it already hasn't) where the cost/benefit of the arrangement flips.
     
  23. luvdagame

    luvdagame Member+

    Jul 6, 2000
    if this is true the nwsl owners will soon have a better hand to play.

    but it still seems that the wnt games are the only ones that can charge huge ticket prices and still get a sizable enough crowd for ussoccer to make some $$. weekly pro woso mostly fails to do this, with the portland mindset seemingly an outlier rather than the norm.

    we need 6 or 8 portlands to get a top class league going that is not dependent on the ussf and that pays enough for the best women to stay in the game.

    we don't have that yet.
     
  24. MRAD12

    MRAD12 Member+

    Jun 10, 2004
    Chicago
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    blissett repped this.
  25. blissett

    blissett Member+

    Aug 20, 2011
    Italy
    Club:
    --other--
    Nat'l Team:
    --other--

Share This Page