When will the MLS be top 4?

What we see here is that MLS is number 7 or 8 among listed football leagues, and that while the J-league has a slightly higher median, much lower average, meaning the squads might be top to bottom stronger but fewer stars, the gap between the next highest paying league, the Scottish Premiership, is massive. MLS has a much higher average, much higher median, and gap between the top spenders in MLS to the bottom is 4.6 to one versus 17 to one in the SPL. Now, the report appears to leave out the Ered and the TSL. Still, it is encouraging.
We knew this, but the top heavy nature of the SPL (which is representative of most euro leagues) makes MLS look better than the actual numbers.
Given the increasing use of gam tam bam etc it appears MLS is on the verge of really opening up their salary structure. the movement this winter has indicated that is already underway.
This report is quite encouraging for the level of play increasing in MLS, though no more encouraging than what we can see happening with the league.
OTOH, on the original thread topic, the answer is no more clear.
I could easily check but am way too lazy. If the meaning was top four US leagues, the answer is HAHAHAHA, sorry, what was the question? It requires a complete collapse by the NHL, MLB, NFL or NBA.
If the meaning was top four football leagues, this report puts the Bund at 4, though nipping at the heels of Serie A. But the Bund just got a gargantuan new TV deal and will be increasing spending, and has a bit of a lead on MLS in any case. And Serie A seems to be coming out of it is mini financial slump, while the Prem is so far over the horizon so as not to be a part of the discussion and La Liga is also beyond the means of MLS as a league. We can, at some point, smash the minnows, but their giants are giant enough to more than make up for the difference. So again, when do we pass them? HAHAHAHA.
Still, going by any other metric, it is quite encouraging news.

 

I originallyposted this bit o´deduction in the SKC forum, but it does apply here.
As MLS moves forward, the deep pocketed will spike salaries beyong their own club.
The following numbers are from 2016, using Forbes and MLSPA ( i got the idea from an article on the topic, but it didn´t quite address what i wanted):

Psr club total spending total revenue % on players % rank

2 NYCFC $21,127,776.63 from $34m is 62 percent 1

1 TOR $21,798,508.57 from $46m is 48 percent 2

6 COL $8,493,586.54 from $19m is 45 percent 3

4 ORL $11,554,420.83 from $33m is 35 percent 4

10 VAN $6,490,602.91 from $20m is 32.5 percent 5

3 LA $18,105,736.04 from $63m is 28.5 percent 6

13 RSL $5,956,899.50 from $21m is 28.5 percent 7

9 MTL $6,741,008.84 from $25m is 28 percent 8

15 PHI $5,674,323.96 from $25m is 22.5 percent 9

17 CHI $5,600,172.50 from $25m is 22.5 percent 10

12 NE $5,980,837.58 From $27m is 22 percent 11

16 HOU $5,674,161.08 from $26m is 21.5 percent 12

5 SEA $10,728,811.09 from $53m is 21 percent 13

18 CLB $5,531,162.34 from $26m is 21 percent 14

19 DC $5,205,661.76 from $25m is 21 percent 15

8 KC $6,752,450.44 from $36m 19.5 percent 16

11 SJ $6,409,400.25 from $34m is 19 percent 17

14 NYRB $5,829,850.32 from $32m is 19 percent 18

7 POR $6,833,543.97 from $44m is 16 percent 19

20 DAL $4,323,732.00 from $30m is 14.5 percent 20

In many cases these are non sustainable numbers. For one club, NYCFC, they were spending more than they should and that always ends in tears. For many of the rest, they were and generally are spending way less than they should and that will change as the new aggressive owners up the level of play. We know that spending more than 50 percent of turnover is a bad idea, but spending 40 to 50 percent is rather normal and clubs can be very succesful in that range. MLS has room to expand spending quickly, and i believe this winter is moving in that direction. For example, SKC could triple player spending and remain in the normal zone, a bit on the highish end, but still. Their spending this winter will leave them with a record, for them, seven or eight players earning above $650k. DC, before the revenue boost of the new place, could double spending. In the new place, they will be motivated to do so.

 

well it´s Italy, where under reporting income and earnings is expected...
How on earth can a club spend as much on talent as LAG did and have such a complete hot mess is the bigger point

 

I'm not among those suggesting that MLS should follow the exact same model as the NFL. After all, we've got single-entity ownership whereas the NFL does not. But I do think certain American principles are ultimately good for the league in the long-run, even if they differ from the rest of the world.

That includes things like salary cap rules to ensure competitive balance and carefully manage growth, having a closed system (vs. pro/rel) to incentivize and protect the major investments we need to foster growth, choosing the calendar that best aligns with our climate to maximize attendance, and making expansion decisions based on financial metrics like ownership wealth and ambition, size and nature of the media market, stadium deal, etc.

I'd also argue that holding playoffs is another American idea that ultimately helps MLS. Without it, 2/3rds of the teams in the league would be rendered irrelevant by June.

So, while I think there is a ton we can learn from the rest of the world about the game of soccer, I think we've got some proven concepts about how to best run a pro sports league that we should be careful not to abandon.

 

I tend to agree in general, but keep in mind that some clubs are carrying a ton of debt from recent investments in new stadiums and/or training facilities whereas others are not. The bond payments on those facilities could be as big or bigger than the player payroll.

 

of course, but during the next decade, and for many clubs, now or very soon, that debt will be paid off. And then, unlike in other leagues, we are talking about an entire league with brand new stadia, new training facilities, etc

 

I apologize for ony using English teams. The numbers were at hand. I did go through several leagues in another thread, including CSL, and EPL payroll/revenue is not untypical.

Psr club total spending total revenue % on players % rank
Swansea 85%
Crystal Palace 79%
Liverpool 69%
Everton 69%
Southampton 69%
Bournemouth 68%
Chelsea 67%
Leicester 62%
2 NYCFC $21,127,776.63 from $34m is 62 percent 1
Newcastle 62%
Arsenal 55%
Man City 51%
Tottenham 48%
1 TOR $21,798,508.57 from $46m is 48 percent 2
Man Utd 45%
6 COL $8,493,586.54 from $19m is 45 percent 3
4 ORL $11,554,420.83 from $33m is 35 percent 4
10 VAN $6,490,602.91 from $20m is 32.5 percent 5
3 LA $18,105,736.04 from $63m is 28.5 percent 6
13 RSL $5,956,899.50 from $21m is 28.5 percent 7
9 MTL $6,741,008.84 from $25m is 28 percent 8
15 PHI $5,674,323.96 from $25m is 22.5 percent 9
17 CHI $5,600,172.50 from $25m is 22.5 percent 10
12 NE $5,980,837.58 From $27m is 22 percent 11
16 HOU $5,674,161.08 from $26m is 21.5 percent 12
5 SEA $10,728,811.09 from $53m is 21 percent 13
18 CLB $5,531,162.34 from $26m is 21 percent 14
19 DC $5,205,661.76 from $25m is 21 percent 15
8 KC $6,752,450.44 from $36m 19.5 percent 16
11 SJ $6,409,400.25 from $34m is 19 percent 17
14 NYRB $5,829,850.32 from $32m is 19 percent 18
7 POR $6,833,543.97 from $44m is 16 percent 19
20 DAL $4,323,732.00 from $30m is 14.5 percent 20

Premier League numbers from https://www.theguardian.com/football/2017/jun/01/premier-league-finances-club-by-club

 

But they can write them off.

 

Yep. In fact, you could argue that as the new stadiums come online in LA, DC, and eventually Minny, MLS will have the best collection of stadiums in the world. Maybe EPL or Bundesliga would be comparable or better, but certainly not La Liga, Serie A, or Ligue 1. There are a lot of old, cheap, run-down, half-empty stadiums in those leagues. We will have truly exceptional venues all over MLS.

 

Jeebus. At the top end, when there are clubs with €400m turnover, the math is probably different, as 75 percent still leaves a club with €100m for non player expenses, and that is a fair bit.
So it takes both a lot more income and a lot more insanity to hit with the big boys. This is undoable for most MLS owners, IMO. I cannot imagine any of this bunch going in at a Swansea level of spending. Wow, amazing perspective on MLS numbers.

 

It's even more stark when you consider Jason Levien co-owns the Swans and the Eagles.

 

And the Swans are in peril of relegation. It will be interesting to see what that will do to their team salaries when it happens.

 

gotta mean a clear out. at least a decade back even it would have meant that. Too many are trying to hold on to players and bounce back before the parachute fails.

 

They only have 6 players out of contract in the summer and they're going to get nothing for any of them.
Renato Sanches 30.06.2018 - £19.80m
Tammy Abraham 31.05.2018 - £9.00m
Sung-Yong Ki 30.06.2018 - £6.30m
Andy King 31.05.2018 - £2.70m
Leon Britton 30.06.2018 (one year option) £900k
Ángel Rangel 30.06.2018 - £900k
Kenji Gorré 30.06.2018 - £225k
£1 = $1.41

 

Well three of those are on loan. They wouldn't get anything for them whether they are in or out of contract.

 

MLS will never be top 4.

 

Thanks for the input.

 

Is Canadian NHL revenue split between all 30 teams?

 

I believe those TV contract numbers for the NBA, NHL, and MLB are the national TV deals. The teams in those leagues also have substantial local TV deals. Baseball, in particular, has some huge local TV deals. Most MLS teams get little to nothing in their local deals.

 

The NFL should not be used as an example for MLS or analogous to anything regarding soccer for the simple fact that soccer is a game of 90 minutes with no commercials and American football is a game of 3 hours with at least half of that being adverts.

 

By that logic, you probably couldn't include baseball either, as a 3+hour game has about 18 minutes of action, according to a very generous estimate. https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323740804578597932341903720

But comparing these leagues was the premise for the thread. MLS is clearly following the NFL business model, so it seems pretty relevant to me. If you don't want to compare them, feel free to not read the thread.

 

What’s the nfl business model? And how is MLS copying it?

 

-multiple teams share owners and stadiums with NFL
-commissioner is an ex-NFL executive
-Limit the number of franchises
-attract more prospective cities than there are available franchises
-ask for public money for stadiums; if they don't provide it, threaten to move/choose a different expansion city
-restrict movement of players
-draft
-parity
-salary cap
-playoffs culminating in one major TV event
-all star game (admittedly the Pro Bowl is probably the least popular of the all star games, but it exists)
-salary rules designed to maximize tv revenue and profitability instead of letting teams compete freely (e.g. designated players instead of building a solid team)

Some of these are common to other American sports, but if I had to choose one league that shares the most features with MLS, it would be NFL.

 

I think all but the first two of those apply to the nba and nhl as well. They’ve pretty much copied the American pro sports business model.