I don't know if everyone on a soccer forum would know, but there will be a new women's hockey league in America next year: The NWHL. The article I read on was titled "What the NWHL can learn from the NWSL", but I think they may have reversed that. Just from that short piece it seems as though the creators of the NWHL have a good head on their shoulders about how to sustain and grow a new women's pro sports league in America. They have a lot of the same policies as the NWSL, but have done things like localize the league to shorten travel and give players 15% of their jersey sales. Are there other things the NWSL should learn from this, or other leagues? And my other thought was do you think there would be opportunities for these leagues to work together in at least promotional ways?
I'm not saying it's a perfect model or that the league will be a guaranteed success, but the jersey thing immediately sticks out to me as a good idea for the NWSL. I think it's interesting to see how these professional women's leagues are sprouting up and the new tactics they're using to ensure sustainability. As the NWSL works towards being consistent and profitable, what's the harm in at least humoring ideas other leagues have come up with? Is there a problem with dealing in hypotheticals like that?
Some of the NWHL details: http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-p...eague--promises-to-pay-players-145034940.html Each of the league’s four teams are given an operating budget for which all players, team staff (coaches, GM, etc.), and other expenses will be paid. The NWHL sets a salary cap for each team at $270,000. Spread evenly across all 18 roster players, it comes to about $15,000 per player; however, like the men’s pro leagues, GM’s are not required to give the same contract to every player. The player is responsible for her own contract negotiations. Players are treated like employees, where taxes will be withdrawn from their paychecks just like everyone else. It’s meant to be a part-time job, and with this association, the NWHL will be able to work with international players to secure work visas, something the CWHL cannot do. Something else it’ll do that the CWHL struggles with: Not have their players pay for their own gear. “Nope, this a professional league. The women will have their equipment provided to them. The equipment, tape, sticks, the necessities to play will be given to them,” said Rylan. (Rylan, incidentally, sees the NWHL co-existing with the CWHL.) Starting in May 2015, free agency will begin. Free agents are considered college seniors and any player no longer in college, be it actively playing or not, it’s up to them to find a team and negotiate their contract terms. In June comes the draft for college juniors. The drafted players are given a year to finish their NCAA eligibility while their rights are retained by the team that drafted them, just like the guys. Once they’re done with their NCAA obligations, the women are free to then sign a contract with their team. Unlike women's soccer, there is no established market for women hockey players elsewhere (I assume there are leagues in Europe, but would guess most is semi-pro at best). The NT players get direct support from their teams.
To me, right now, NWHL sounds like it has some great ideas, but until we see how those ideas play out, I'm definitely reserving judgement. You can't say the sharing of jersey profits, while definitely a good method to get more money to the players, will "ensure" sustainability. (If fact, if that's money not going to the teams themselves, it sounds almost counter-productive to the bottom line, even if it does help the players make a living and less likely to try finding better jobs.) Not to mention that women's professional team sports in general are still in a fairly nascent stage, so trying to compare across sports is like trying to compare apples and swingsets. We've finally seen that women's pro basketball is relatively stable, and as such the salaries are much higher there than in WoSo or women's hockey, but there's still good competition for salary dollars elsewhere (Russia, mainly). WoSo as a sport is pretty damn stable in the club picture worldwide, but professionalism is not, so clubs that are backed by rich men's clubs dominate in both salaries and on the field. Women's hockey is still pretty untested outside of national team competitions, so even if the NWHL does eventually expands enough to become the pinnacle league, (like the NHL is in men's hockey and the NBA in men's basketball - with just four teams, there's nowhere NEAR that yet), I'm not sure simply expanding and having top international talent will be good enough for sustainability. What really matters will be each team's bottom line and the attendance/attention they get. Localization is great, but it kinda flies in the face of calling it a "national" league, and also really hinders the possibility of getting national TV dollars unless they do eventually spread across the country. Right now, the league seems more like a mom-and-pop shop that does very well locally and treats their few employees very well, but is quite far from a national chain store and will likely have to overhaul itself if they really want to go national.
So what you're saying is the NWHL is already folding? Because they already started this year. Yeah, and it's rather hard for someone like me to be interested in it when the closest team is even further away than in the NWSL. I understand hockey has it's traditional markets and whatnot, but it's not really national when there isn't even a team in the central time zone.
Oops! Shows how much I know about the league. And that's a good point. They strengthen themselves in a way by staying localizing their teams, but it does lose a lot of legitimacy at least as far as national leagues go. It's more of a regional one.
The jersey thing is interesting but I can see that backfiring. Does the money go specifically to the player the jersey is sold of? So for example, if USWNT players make up 80% of custom jersey sales, are they the ones that get the 15% of those sales? As I would rather see that money go to raising the lower end of the salaries than those already making the most in the league or at least being split among the non-allocated people who aren't making the max salary.
Apologies for the thread necromancy, but while simply doing some Wikipedia surfing today, I noticed this from a month ago: http://www.thefourthperiod.com/columnists/pagnotta/dp161118.html So the minimum is dropping to just $5k. (Not to mention that one of the four teams - yes four, there's been no expansion for year two - has already had to relocate.) This, in contrast to the news that hit Twitter last week that the NWSL minimum is set for a significant increase. The league commish has publicly stated there won't be public statements about the cuts: http://www.nwhl.zone/news_article/show/730896?referrer_id=2748687 And yes, that comment about "Fritzy" is one instance of several recent instances of players either retiring or moving to a different league.
Honestly, it's good they did the salary cut now rather than just keep over-paying what they can afford and shutting down the league (though maybe that wouldn't be so bad if a couple of the teams joined the CWHL, they still have a Boston franchise, so it wouldn't be too big a deal to add a few more US based teams). I think it was fairly over-optimistic to be paying them the salary levels that are being reported. I wouldn't say moving from an arena in Brooklyn to one in Newark is exactly relocation. Sure it's a different state, but it's the same metro area. They now play in the Devil's practice arena, which isn't necessarily a downgrade. Boston also moved from Harvard to the Bruin's practice arena. Sure, they have smaller capacities, but they have nicer amenities for the players. Unless you mean the Connecticut team, as I guess moving from Stamford to North Branford isn't in the same metro area. But it's only an hour and a half away. (And surprisingly they moved to a larger arena)
For a fan, its logistically light years away. If you think a fan from say, Nassau or Suffolk county, the two higher income suburban locales, is going to hop two trains , a subway, and a bus to get to Newark, you are delusional. And to lots of fans, going into Newark is still a bit like going to the South Bronx. That conversation ain't happening. That thinking is why Sky Blue has its attendance issues.
Newark is a very different location than Piscataway Township. Newark is still in the NYC metro area. Piscataway Township is not. Brooklyn to the Prudential Center is about an hour of travel, with the arena being a 12 minute walk from Newark Penn Station. Brooklyn to Yurcak Field is 2.5 hours (with a 32 minute walk from the nearest station to the stadium). Their old arena location wasn't exactly the most convenient for Long Islanders either... Taking public transit from Hempstead to Aviator Sports and Events Center is 1 hour and 46 minutes with 3 changes. Hempstead to Prudential Center: 1 hour and 41 minutes with 3 changes. It's basically a wash. The people most negatively impacted will be those that live in Sheepshead Bay, Coney Island, etc. Basically as far away as possible from Manhattan as you can be and still be in the Borough of Brooklyn. Those that live closer to Manhattan won't see much difference in travel time.
I somewhat lean with Clive that the jump from Broklyn to Newark, while still in the same metro area, is still talking about the freaking large NYC metro area. It's still a pretty significant move. However, the point I was more trying to make with that comment was that from what I could quickly glean from the WoHo blogosphere, the NY team's move - unlike the CT team's move (I was unaware of the BOS team's move) - sounded like it was a move out of necessity, i.e. the team needed a cheaper option. I mean, moving the league's flagship team from a 2,500+ arena to an 800 arena seems pretty drastic. I could have missed or misinterpreted things, but that was the read I got earlier today. Now, just in the past fifteen minutes, I found this site (and Twitter feed) which normally covers CWHL stuff but has been documenting tailspin after tailspin concerning the NWHL for the past eight+ months... With a lawsuit or two going on, I'm thinking that the league surviving to the end of even the current season might be a surprise.
Yes, let's just ignore the facts about actual travel time... Yes, I think all the teams that moved needed a cheaper option. They don't publish their attendance anywhere I can see, but I've seen numbers like 600 tossed around. So if a team is averaging under 800, it makes financial sense to move somewhere smaller and more affordable. Plus being able to use the same professional facilities as a NHL team uses can't hurt. I think Loonie Puck has a subtle anti-NWHL bias (I think the CWHL and it's supporters weren't happy with the way the NWHL was launched and what was purported to be in contrast to the CWHL). That said, there have been quite a few controversies with the NWHL, especially concerning the Riveters. And it certainly deserves a lot of the criticism it has received. Which is why I said if the league folded and a couple teams joined the CWHL it wouldn't necessarily be the worst thing. But I don't think them moving to Newark is that big of a deal, all things considered. Their other option would've been the Islanders (the Rangers practice facility does not have spectator seating), but their practice facility is out in Syosset, NY. That'd be an even worse location.