Now before some of you go ape-shit by looking at the title of my thread, those who know my posting history here know that I'm a pretty hardcore MLS apologist. With that said I'm watching NASL highlights on YouTube, and seeing the crowds for Soccer Bowl '78 in Giants stadium is simply incredible. I'm pretty young (25), so I obviously wasn't around then, but I bet it must have been amazing to be a soccer fan in the U.S. during that time. My question is, do you think we'll ever get to that level of prominence with MLS in the future where we have teams consistently getting 70,000 people crowds? I LOVE the "slow-and-steady" approach that MLS has taken, and because of that I'm curious as to whether said approach will someday get us back to that level, or carve out our own little niche where we're not getting those types of crowds, but still are wildly successful on our own terms. Your thoughts?
Well, I am old enough to have been at 6 or 7 (non-Cosmo) NASL games. I know that's not a complete sample, but lets not imagine that the 70K+ at one Soccer Bowl was representative of a "normal" or "regular" NASL crowd. That's like wondering if MLS will ever regularly draw crowds like the 60K+ that showed up in NE for the Revs-LAG MLS Cup. Its not the right standard. In fact, for what its worth, most LAG home games that I go to have crowds larger than the Sting and Aztec games I personally attended. Again, I haven't looked at the historical records and am only judging by my experience. 70K is a pretty steep standard. I don't think the EPL or Bundesliga 1 draw crowds that large on any regular basis. I am always cautious about saying "never" - but I will say 70K as a regular crowd size is not going to happen during my life time, and unlikely to happen during yours. Remember, that would (at minimun) involve replacement of all the new soccer stadiums that have just been built.
Okay...taking the 70k away for now, what was the media coverage like during the NASL years? More than now? If so? Could MLS ever reach that level of prominence in the American sports landscape (this of course is pending on the answer to the previous question)
So I was living in Houston during the Hurricane's sad displays. MLS, in my opinon, is WAY better than NASL already.
If your asking if MLS clubs will ever reach the level of the cosmo's then no. If you are asking the league vs. league then i think it is already above that level. No MLS club in my opinion will ever reach that cult status and attendance following, however as a whole all of the subparts of the MLS are already equal or above IMHO.
There are many different measures for what is the better league. I may be an ocean away, but at 44 I remember seeing quite regular NASL clips on TV over here, and having an added interest because of the ex. Derby County players who played in the old league, aswell as the world stars such as Pele, Moore, Beckenbauer etc. Yes the Cosmos did draw some huge crowds, but this wasn't all the time and I'm only guessing here, but I'd say there were a lot of pretty poor crowds aswell. Kenn Tomasch would be the man to ask about that. As far as the standard of play is concerned I'd say MLS is much better. The imports may in general not have the talent of the star imports then, but they're mostly still young and hungry. Your Peles and Neeskens had done it all by then and were relatively winding down their careers, on that point remember that modern training and medical techniques mean players can play until they're older now. The American players are more numerous in the new league and again, the common belief is they are better technically. The only real way the NASL seems to have had an advantage is in the number of teams, but then again, that all imploded, so MLS is probably right again with the slower, more considered expansion.
So, would you argue then that NASL news back then was primarily centered around the Cosmos instead of the league as a whole? I'm seriously asking these questions because I wasn't around then...so I'm not sure exactly how "relevant" the NASL was in relation to the national consciousness.
Sorry as im young i am was not around for NASL. However talking to people who followed the Portland Timbers, as well as my Father who all were around during NASL days I have gotten this view.
Gotcha, and thanks for the excellent contribution Did the NASL get newsclips on BBC or other news organizations over there? I'm curious as to the level of media buzz that the NASL got versus MLS currently.
On Saturday lunchtimes "and at this point I'll point out we only had three T.V. channels over here at the time BBC 1, BBC2 and ITV" there were two soccer magazine type programmes. Football Focus on BBC and On The Ball on ITV. Most weeks during the NASL season at the time the Cosmos were big, George Best was in The States and Rodney Marsh was at The Rowdies there'd be a few clips on these programmes. The written soccer press would also carry reports, but it was still seen as part retirement league, part experiment and part mutation even though the old players still had the skills it was obvious their legs had gone. Back in the seventies there was a four team international tournament in The States. England and Brazil played, I think Italy were the third team and The US because their home grown players were considered not up to the level, was represented by Team America which was Bobby Moore and a group of the other aging ex. internationals who played in the NASL. Compare that to now when your national team "last WC notwithstanding" can get a result against anyone and you'll see how The US as a whole has improved as a soccer nation.
IIRC, the top Cosmos stars were better paid than any MLB players. I am less certain about stars in other US sports.
I couldn't answer your question. In some respects, MLS has already passed NASL. In others, no. 1. Level of Play. MLS is more intense. Overall quality is about equal. NASL had some great games and teams, but so does MLS. The Cosmos were obviously a top team, but there was a big drop-off after that. The worst NASL teams were worse than all MLS teams. So, neither Yes/No. MLS is already there. 2. Number of teams. At it's peak, NASL had many more teams. But that didn't last long. But I suppose MLS could reach that level someday, so Yes. 3. Salary. Adjusted for inflation, I don't think MLS top salaries will reach the top NASL salaries. I don't know what everage or minimum salaries in NASL were. So, I guess, No. 4. Longevity. As far as I'm concerned, MLS has already surpassed NASL. I know that some form of NASL was around since the 60's, but the Dips weren't around that long. So neither yes/no. MLS has already surpassed NASL. 5. Marketing exposure. NASL did get some coverage; a goal or two after a game, etc. I don't watch TV now, so I can't compare. I get my news from the internet and the online Washington Post. The Post coverage is better. So I can't answer. 6. American players. MLS has way passed NASL. Neither Yes/No. Already there. So there. I couldn't answer the poll question. Sorry.
MLS has already eclipsed the NASL on so many levels. People only remember the Cosmos and think that they were a reflection of that league. Truth be told the Cosmos were a sideshow and if you take them out of the equasion the NASL was about the same or worse than MLS in attendances and far worse in the infastructure and financial departments. NASL was a total failure and if it wasnt for Steve Ross it would that league would have wandered around in reletive obscurity. He brought the attention but the league was not stable and financial sound enough to support it. MLS has NASL whipped. We are building multi million dollar stadiums, signed muklti million dollar multi year TV contracts, have a stable foloowing, strong infastructure and good domestic talent, we have extremely rich ownership groups, and all signs point to progress in the future. Case closed.
Not even close, not even 1/10 of the coverage they get now...... Coverage was non-existent in most areas of the country.. There weren't many american players, americans basically wasn't interested in the NASL... except for a few pockets.....
Just so we have numbers some here. (Google search) Cosmos attendance: 1971 - 4,517 1972 - 4,282 1973 - 5,782 1974 - 3,578 1975 - 10,450 1976 - 18,227 1977 - 34,142 1978 - 47,856 1979 - 46,690 1980 - 42,754 1981 - 34,835 1982 - 28,479 1983 - 27,242 1984 - 12,817 League attendance: .......(including Cosmos totals presumably) SEASON No.of games No. of teams Attendance(avg.) 1971 24 8 4157 1972 14 8 4785 1973 19 9 5974 1974 20 15 7841 1975 22 20 7597 1976 24 20 10361 1977 26 18 13584 1978 30 24 13006 1979 30 24 14163 1980 32 24 14440 1981 32 21 14060 1982 32 14 13156 1983 30 12 13387 1984 24 9 10659
Ah....THAT'S what I was looking for! It's not just the attendance alone per se, it's the level that soccer in general was at in the country at the time; and how the NASL contributed to that and competed with other American sports. I want to make it perfectly clear that this is NOT a "gosh I wish MLS was like the NASL thread". It's merely a thread to see where the NASL was in terms of TOTAL popularity and media coverage, and how MLS is performing relative to that and if they've already surpassed that or if they haven't. Some of the responses in this thread, like this one....have really answered my question and opened me eyes to exactly WHERE the NASL was within the general American sports landscape. Thanks hipityhop
The peak of NASL was late 70's. In 78, 79, and 80 NASL had 24 teams and league attendance was over 4 mil, peaking in 1980 at over 5 mil. (See http://www.kenn.com/sports/soccer/nasl/index.html) Obviously, MLS has not reached that level of national footprint. However, I expect MLS to get there in about 20 years. At that point, these types of threads will be history.
The NASL had many teams that had terrible attendance, but, if you looked at the last ten years of the league, the top 5 teams averaged much higher than the the top 5 teams in the MLS over the last ten years. I believe the NASL had twice as many instances of teams averaging 20,000 or more.
My understanding is that the local newspaper coverage of the NASL Earthquakes was much better than it was for the MLS Earthquakes. I think at times they even had special season preview sections with many pictures, etc. I've seen some old photos of those papers. But I think the difference in coverage in the local newspaper (San Jose Mercury / News) was mostly just reflective of a change in focus of the newspaper from steadfastly local to a more regional (Bay Area wide) focus. Once you start focusing on the whole Bay Area, you've got 2 MLB teams, 2 NFL teams, an NBA team, many college teams, etc. Professional soccer is going to get the back page treatment most of the time. I wouldn't be surprised if the same thing happened in some other markets, particularly the smaller ones. Sort of a move away from the local and more of a global, homogenized focus for local media (everyone's reporting the same stories, etc.). But anyway, as far as NASL goes, for me it's all about one thing, and as a Rapids fan I'm sure you'll agree: the Caribous of Colorado, and the fringe baby, the fringe! Cowboy soccer y'all!
Okay, 2 things: 1: Thanks for the insight in regards to news coverage. If newspapers back then carried as much as they do now, we could make a strong argument that the coverage of the NASL quakes may not have been any better than the MLS quakes. 2: Dude I have to go to bed in an hour or so.....I really DON'T need you giving me nightmares by posting up horrible pictures like that
For a bit of a warped perspective here. When my family moved from St. Louis to a small rural Iowa town in 1982 almost no one here knew there was an NASL. Fast forward 24 years and you see MLS merchandise on the streets here, a soccer park where the little league baseball fields were, and non-MLS but the world cup had everybody talking this summer. Like was said in a previous post. The NASL might have been bigger in some pockets of the U.S. And media coverage might have been bigger in some cities. But as far as a national footprint I think MLS has passed the NASL.
I lived in Chicago in the 70s and 80s and the Chicago Sting were pretty big for a couple years, and general got good coverage - more than the Fire get now. The Sting won the SoccerBowl in 81 - around the baseball strike - and their popularity grew a ton then. Also, it wasn't "The Cosmos and then everybody else". The Sting were very good, so were the Rowdies, and plenty of teams regularly smoked the Cosmos. MLS will get to NASL levels coming up.
As well as an NHL team. It's absolutely true about how much more coverage the NASL Earthquakes received than the MLS Earthquakes did. KNTV Channel 11 in San Jose was also much more locally-focused back then (it's currently the Bay Area's NBC station) and the NASL Earthquakes very often lead off each evening's sports news coverage (particularly in 1983 when the Quakes had a 20-10 run), even ahead of the San Francisco 49ers in the early years of their NFL dynasty. In any case, I don't subscribe to the apparent groupthink here that the NASL did everything wrong and that the only lessons to be learned from it are what not to do. The league certainly wasn't perfect, but there was still a buzz about it that MLS has still yet to match. -G