It is a problem. But my question is, are they good enough to play pro? We have a very small number of players in the K-League and outside maybe one or two, they're not starters.
Why can't we increase the number of players playing without needing a massive budget increase (i.email. make r league mandatory and perhaps make a u19 and u21 r leagues that play every bit as frequently as the classic/ have their own coach etc)
Anyone know how much it cost to get the R League running? Why do I feel like all you need to start the R League is an assistant manager and an empty stadium?
I disagree - I think most of the players who do come out of HS are good enough to play pro. Are guys like SMW + HIB the exception? Not quite. Even this season the new boys like Han Chan Hee and Kim Gun Woong are doing fairly well, and given consistent game time they can definitely hit their full potential. Hitting their full potential, imo, is where the K League fails. Remember when we played the Suwon JS cup? In that last match against Japan a good number of those kids were playing for J1 first teams. If our uni players can beat them, then they are good enough for the K League
The real "problem" isn't all that stuff you guys mentioned. Lack of quality TV coverage is the problem. People not watching because the football quality is low? Pffffft that's a load of BS. They get plenty of people watching KBO. Do you think some how the ppl of Korea are all football experts? how do you explain the popularity of J-League, CSL or other SEA leagues? It's all about culture (most Korean men like to go out drinking, go to net Cafes or go sing at karaoke) and lack of media coverage. If you see KBO crowds, you'll realise that most of them are women - when it comes to "buying power" in Korea, women > men. They tend to attend concerts, sporting events, festivals etc. People there are different
^I agree wholeheartedly - there really is lack of exposure and moreover, the majority of ppl in Korea label their own league as a sh** tier league and would rather watch European games Making the k league more entertaining and marketable and appealing is huge
Someone made a good point that KBO is not the same as watching baseball elsewhere. Koreans don't just go to KBO because of inherent love for the sport but because the experience is enjoyable. Imo, K-League and K-League fans need to do something like that instead of just trying to import ultra culture.
What they should do is get white collar ajusshis to go to a football game after work instead of making them go to a restaurant and drink till they drop. It'll be a way healthier life style and if they can bring their kids it'll be better. More family time instead of getting super wasted.
So, how do you explain this: Naver airs both KBO and the K-League for free. Naver pays to air the KBO. Naver does not pay to air the K-League. On any given game day, there will be 10,000+ viewers watching KBO. But on any game day, you might get 1,000 for a K-League match, tops. The issue isn't media coverage. The K-League gets plenty of media coverage. For instance, KBS-1 is nice enough to actually air K-League games as charity, for free. It's just that nobody cares. The issue also isn't culture. At one point, KBO was never culturally the norm but now it is. The issue isn't a sexist one either. The issue isn't about TV stations not using fancy camera work. BUT The issue is that the country has too much Korean football when nobody wants it. There are too many players, too many teams and none of it is meaningful. The issue is that the KFA is not in the position to actually sell broadcasting rights. The issue is that nobody cares. Why? Because the league isn't making any money. And it's not making any money because football was a free commodity; nobody is going to pay for something that was always free. Simple as that.
Yea, the KBO experience is a distinctly a Korean one. It's enjoyable whether you're a baseball fan or not. You can enjoy it, regardless of age, gender or color. This is why the league is almost successful (its got problems of its own, but compared the K-League, this is a professionally run, revenue-generating league). But football is distinctly meant for losers and f@ggs. You've got a supporters group calling themselves Frente Tricolore. LOL. What is a Frente Tricolore? Are they French? If so, why are they singing songs from River Plate? The funnier part is that Frente Tricolore is a union between the Grandbleu and the Commando Ultra Skull Crew. So, you've got Frente Frapuccino and Commando Skull Fracture. What does any of this fcking mean? And they expect the game experience to be mainstream? I swear to god, I am not making this up. Gotta get rid of these clowns. I've said this before, but once I take over, the first thing I'm doing is to get rid of these clowns. These are repeat customers that don't spend a lot of money. They are the equivalent of kimchi btches spending 4 dollars on a grande Frente Frapuccino but stay at my cafe for 5 hours. Gotta get rid of them.
This topic in general is something I scratched a bit of the surface on earlier this year when I wrote a series of Things K-League Can Learn From MLS. The main ones coming to mind in this discussion are marketing, supporters sections, and foreign investment. However, for the here and now, I think it's a lot simpler: the fan experience at the game sucks. Outside of Jeonbuk, Suwon BW, and Seoul, the in stadium atmosphere makes the league feel small time. As someone who regularly attends Jeonnam Dragons games, I can tell you sitting in a majority empty stadium with about 12 ultras trying (and usually failing) to make some noise doesn't exactly get me up for the game. However, I do think the quality of the league is pretty good and thoroughly enjoy the on field product. There's room for improvement, but that's not my gripe. What I've watched of JLeague, CSL, and the ASEAN leagues has shown me that K-League's as good or better. The difference in getting new fans is what it's like at the game. Just a few weeks ago I was on holiday in Japan and took some non-sporty friends to a Yokohama game and they had a blast. Said they were likely to go back. And it wasn't that the quality on the field was spectacular, nor that it was a high scoring game (1-1 draw), but the in stadium atmosphere was insanely enjoyable. For comparison, here's the crowd in Japan vs a Dragons game a few days later. Those stadiums were nearly the exact same size, and again, the quality on the field wasn't drastically different. However, taking someone to that Dragons game definitely wouldn't come with a guarantee that they'd want to come back. So, to put asses in seats, I think K-League should do ₩5,000 seats for a year. It's a low enough price point that people wouldn't hesitate to buy a ticket just to try it out. More importantly for the league, it's not an out and out giveaway like Suwon FC did in their home opener, so they'll still make some money. Basically the thinking is I'd rather have 10,000 fans at ₩5,000 a pop then 5,000 fans at ₩10,000 to make the same amount of money. I mean... it's not like K-League stadiums don't have the room to fit more people. Another easy variation on this, is a buy one get one ticket system, or 1+1 as we'd lovingly call it here. Buy one regularly priced ticket and your friend gets in free.
Ryan, great points. Agree overall but I don't think we have enough data to conclude that cheaper tickets will increase attendance. The K-League already gives out enough free tickets as it is. Overall, there needs to be a value proposition for ticket holders and they're going to have to pay up. Purely providing football is not enough value in my opinion; you can have teams stacked with european star players and that will be no guarantee for higher attendance. Unlike Japan, the K-League is streamed for free (legally) - so for pure footballing reasons, people can simply watch online. The question is, how can one create more value? I'd rather charge additional by creating premium seats as an example. I'd strip out the supporters sections (hence, forcing them out completely) and install spacious food zones (chicken and beer?) similar to the KBO. FC Seoul also started to play club music on their East stands with a DJ after the game. Buy a higher price point ticket and you can enjoy a club-like atmosphere with having a dedicated bar (a number of free drinks, perhaps) and a bus shuttle service to Hongdae. A parallel that I frequently draw are Korean mobile phone applications. American apps simply do one thing and that one thing is what they're intended to do. Korean applications offer a suite of tools and are really designed to do everything. Message your friends, pay for a cab, pay your bills and get your pizza delivered. The average Korean consumer wants a one-stop shop for multiple value streams. The KBO is a restaurant, an outdoor karaoke, it's got scantily clad women, it's got K-Pop stars, and it's got some baseball. What does the K-League offer? In this respect, I don't think the K-League has a foreign league that it can benchmark. It's a unique market with a unique set of customers. But unique doesn't mean it's difficult.
Also, my post above is beyond the scope of the KFA. The KFA can't control how individual teams go about their business. Professional teams are not actually professional. They are not liable and accountable for their performance from a management perspective. Losing money? Get a tax write-off from the central government for promoting sports, leisure and cultural activities. No ticket sales and low attendance? No problem! The regional government will still charge a fixed, flat rental rate regardless of attendance. It's all tax-payer funded, anyway. Koreans in general don't know how good they got it. Everything is free and tax-payer funded, or at least subsidized. Privatization is frowned-upon and is considered taboo. FC Seoul could easily own their own stadium but there's legal issues and red tape that prevents them from doing so. But even if they legally could, would they? It's all funded by the taxpayer, so there is zero liability. There are heavy regulations that govern the sporting industry that needs resolution. If there's anything that the KFA can actually do, it's to leverage Hyundai to lobby the policy makers and congress to submit amendments to existing statues that will place liability onto these so called professional teams. But unlike the United States, lobbying and political grants are strictly illegal (although it happens anyway).
more like none. Doan with few mins for Gamba & Keita with Marinos but that's about it. all were playing for reserves...
I do have to ask this question. Historical data tells us that the likelihood of a highschool player making immediate impact in the K-League is close to 0%. The exceptions are Lee Chung-yong, Ki Sung-yong and Lee Dong-guk. Other than these three individuals, I can't say that highschoolers were ever good enough for the K-League. And there really is no data to indicate that overall player quality has improved since the inception of the league.
some had few mins & some played more after the tournament but otherwise, most were playing for reserves or J3 (the 2 GKs were from College & HS). edit - btw, commentators in general are clueless except for their domestic league/players + stars from Europe.
So lets assume that these guys are as good as Lee Chung-yong, Ki Sung-yong, and Lee Dong-guk. That's 3 highschool players out of how many? My point is that it's unlikely that highschool players are good enough to play pro. But this shouldn't be a reason for them to go to college.
That doesn't say anything about other high school footballers. No-one goes to a football match because they want to watch football, you can do that on your TV or your computer. It's all about the match-day events and atmosphere, just as you might go down to see a weekend market fair. The price doesn't matter as it's already quite low anyway. Also, note that over 50% of the crowd in K-League Challenge and 30% of the crowd in K-League Classic entered for free.