Where's Archer's blog about that? They should have gave the kid a Beckham-ish deal. Manchester City? Come on, who wants to live in dumpy Manchester? See he played in Madrid and the only city in the world more attractive than Madrid is Columbus, Ohio. $50 Million would have brought Robinho to the Crew and not a peep from Archer. Shameful.
I don't like talking soccer in the MLS forums for the same reason I avoid the politics forum so I'll do my soccer opinions here. By the way if I pay for a membership will I get my own guestbook? I need one instead of hijacking Archer's. MLS has been a mixed bag this year and I am glad the Euroleagues are getting started. We need more stars here. Sorry if you disagree but there are too many mediocre players and the Concacaf Champions League has been disgraceful. I am wondering if Figo would do well in MLS next year or if he is too old. Inter is one of the best clubs in the world (perhaps THE best at times) and if he can play for them why not MLS? I honestly thought Robinho would be a realistic target for MLS. No joke. I thought maybe New York could have signed him for a one year multi million dollar contract. Who else? Oliver Kahn retires from the DFB but still plays in MLS? Ronaldo (the older, bald, tranny loving one) next year? I know he and Figo are never healthy but if they were....Ronaldo could still score 30 goals in MLS if he was healthy. Again, if he is good enough for AC Milan he is good enough for Red Bull New York. Thierry Henry has stated interest. He should be fine to come here when the Red Bulls open their stadium. Shevchenko should come here next year, his wife is American and he won't get a game in Milan. Who else?
While adding more star power wouldn't hurt, I think decent Euros/name Brazilians dont get you as much return outside of a super name like Ronaldinho. What we need is more Mexies of note. The Blanco Bump is measurable (much moreso than the Chivas USA bump), and that's where the money is. More Mexicans means more money either Univision or Telemundo/NBC is willing to pony up.
Speaking of MLS attendance, marquee players, etc., I did a project on MLS attendance for my regression class last quarter. I uploaded the pdf file here, if you're interested. Take the results with a grain of salt. Elsewhere, someone pointed out that the season ticket sales for Seattle's expansion team have already beaten my predicted attendances.
I think both would be good....more Mexicans and more stars. There are so many people who love soccer here in the US but don't watch MLS. I have no idea what the problem is. I prefer European soccer since I have no rooting interest in a local MLS club since they folded the Fusion.....but I still watch MLS, especially when Beckham is on. Why don't these other people? I think bringing in Henry, Shevchenko and Ronaldo next year would increase attendance. Bring in a couple of high profile Mexicans too.
In short, I looked at the historical data and ran calculations (well, Excel actually ran the calculations) to determine which factors affected MLS attendance. Marquee players did, indeed, lead to bumps in attendance. None of the results were too surprising--high-quality soccer-specific stadia, double-headers, marquee players, the first season of play, and weekend games all had positive effects on attendance; sharing the sports market with a baseball team had a negative effect on attendance. I examined several factors related to population (total population, total population squared [to look for nonlinear effects of population changes], Hispanic population, Hispanic population squared) and found that most had no effect on attendance. The ratio of total population to Hispanic population, however, did. What was interesting was that the effect reversed itself depending on whether the models included outliers, such as double-headers involving the Mexico national team. In other words, Hispanics appeared to turn out for the big games but not for the regular games. I'm simplifying things here, but this is more or less what the models suggested. * * * * Marquee players definitely attract crowds, but my models revealed that a really, really good soccer-specific stadium (LA, Chicago, etc.) can have nearly the same effect and might be a better long-term investment. I would love to see Henry play here, but if Seattle managed to sign him, they'd get two or three seasons, tops, of gradually declining play out of him . . . all while playing in a cavernous and probably expensive stadium.
I don't think Henry wants to play for them, does he? He's always mentioning how much he loves New York and he's a Knicks fan. I guess I could be way off since I don't read the MLS boards. Seattle doesn't need a star anyway for the reason you mention, it's their first year and will get big crowds anyway. I think marquee players come in two shapes: a. the kind that will increase attendance and b. the kind that will increase the quality of play. Beckham, Adu, Luis Hernandez and Blanco helped attendance. Juan Pablo Angel did little for attendance but helped in quality of play. I think Ronaldo (again, the Brazillian) could help in attendance because he was the biggest name in world football from around '98 to '02 and joe sixpack even knew who he was, he even was in an episode of the Simpsons. Figo would not help with attendance. I am not Henry would help much either unless it was in New York.
The Henry-to-Seattle bit on my paper came from rumors on these boards. I can't recall how well sourced they were, but it was kind of moot anyway, as I was looking at hypotheticals and also repeated calculations for Seattle without Henry. I think Blanco helped play as well, although between parenthood and business school, I haven't been able to follow soccer, well, pretty much at all, so I can't say for certain. I agree that Figo wouldn't help with attendance. Ronaldo might at first, but he could also just be another Lothar Matthaus. Is he still playing well?
So I watched the MLS match on ESPN2 last week. It was FC Dallas and Colorado and I was suprised that it was a decent match. I saw the Galaxy a few times and Beckham is the best passer MLS has ever seen (yes, better than Valderrama in my opinion) but that Galaxy team has no middle class! Beckham, Donovan and Buddle are great but then they got guys who look rec league at several other positions. I would have kept Xavier too. Lewis and Vanney are ok too. But pretty much everyone else is utter crap. The Crew are apparently the best team in MLS but I havn't seen them play yet this season. I've been too busy dating super models and just generally being awesome.
by the way, I think Blanco and Beckham did both, increased attendance and quality of play. Beckham's thru balls and crosses are amazing and Blanco makes some pretty crazy passes too.
I realized I'm not a good speller. And also that I am a libertarian when it comes to sports. Meaning I hate salary caps and single entity and I think signle entity is communism if it means buying into a league and making sacrifices for the good of the other teams. How Aristotle of me! I would rather have only 8 teams if it meant less restrictions on the cap and if it meant better soccer. David Beckham should never have to pass to Alan Gordon. Never. Shouldn't happen. In real life I think Libertarians are silly because they don't believe in regulation even when it's needed and they seem to refuse the idea that our health care system is failing. But in terms of Sports I am with them in idealogy
I watched the Crew and Red Bull New York tonight. The Crew were excellent in attack. Very good match. The red card on the new york defender was outrageous! On the replay it showed the defender kick the crew player and I thought "wow that was pretty crappy to kick him like that" but that wasn't even the red, he kicked him again more blatantly.