promotion and relegation*

Discussion in 'MLS: Commissioner - You be The Don' started by MetroZebra, Jul 27, 2002.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. soccerreform.us

    soccerreform.us New Member

    Mar 12, 2009
    Denver
    Club:
    Fulham FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States

    I think the Galaxy would have found a way to stay up, w/o the attendant salary caps and squad size limits that enforce mediocrity in the closed single entity MLS. With the crowds they were drawing, and money they were making, shame on them if they couldn't.

    TV seems to be fine with the NCAA basketball tourney, shelling out millions for a tournament that has little regard for including teams from large markets.

    Beckham in a relegation battle? There's ratings there, my friend. Certainly more than LA finishing dead last with the best support in the league. (no offense to other supporter groups)

    Becks played against some dubious MLS competition, which will go unnamed. I hardly think the Rhinos are a step down. Another great example of a club that would prosper if their future was ever unlimited.

    Let's see how much support they draw. If Syracuse can field a top NCAA basketball team year in and year out, upstate NY must have something going for it.
     
  2. WhiteStar Warriors

    Mar 25, 2007
    St.Pete/Krakow
    Club:
    FC Tampa Bay Rowdies
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    but yet only 4 clubs are making a profit. So does the expansion fee support the other clubs?
     
  3. RichardL

    RichardL BigSoccer Supporter

    May 2, 2001
    Berkshire
    Club:
    Reading FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    Digging out an old Rothmans Yearbook (because I can't be arsed to look it up on the internet) shows that of the 92 league clubs that year (1987) 49 of them formed before the football league, let alone pro/rel, even existed.

    That's because Manchester United, for example, weren't formed by a businessman looking to make a profit on an investment. They were formed in 1878 as Newton Heath Lancashire & Yorkshire Railway Football club - a works team.

    Like pretty much all clubs in England, they started life a literal "football club" - a club where people would go to play football.

    The story is the same across Europe and the world, although you often also saw many clubs forming as municipal sports clubs.


    The leagues then formed around organising these clubs that already existed into an organised structure. They didn't just create pro/rel in the hope that people would suddenly start creating football clubs.


    The game's record worldwide for attracting investors is actually hopeless as the game isn't geared around making profits.

    No, that's complete nonsense. A club will nearly always draw more fans than it would in a division below.

    ...except that they don't. The only investors attracted to lower division clubs are those that look round the stadium and think that with a little imagination, it'd make a really nice supermarket. Other than that, you are spot on.
     
  4. Yoshou

    Yoshou Fan of the CCL Champ

    May 12, 2009
    Seattle
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Revenue sharing is what is used to spread the hurt. So a portion of the Sounders success is going to lessen the blow of KC's losses.

    It's also not like any of the teams in pro/rel leagues are making a profit either. Teams are constantly driving themselves into receivership in order to jump up to the next level or prevent themselves from falling down to the level below.
     
  5. soccerreform.us

    soccerreform.us New Member

    Mar 12, 2009
    Denver
    Club:
    Fulham FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I appreciate your candidness, and your well thought out response. I believe that everyone in here wants to see a better, hotter product than MLS is providing. I believe that most people in MLS want to provide a better product, and of course make more money doing it, whilst being exposed to as little risk as possible.

    Unfortunately, we believe they took a wickedly wrong turn when Alan Rothenberg and US Soccer granted them this uniquely messed up system of intense league control that is the antithesis of what great soccer is all about. Open unlimited competition in which owners are exposed to as much risk as the players they send out on the field. Where supporters play a huge role in the success and failure of clubs. Where outcomes are not controlled at the league level. Where no league is more powerful than the clubs that play in it.

    It's bizarre that franchise values have spiked. Under the current circumstances, where average attendance records from the inaugural season still stand, despite the incredible happenings in Seattle, and the arrival of boy band Beckham, and with viewership inching up in the hundreds, I think we are in an MLS bubble. How does anyone justify the quadrupling of franchise value in the midst of a deep recession?

    I'm not saying that every lower division club is built for promotion. Of course, they can't be. But I am certain that promotion will benefit every lower division club. Talk about giving the supporters reason to support - how about giving them the power to lift their teams to a higher division? If a club doesn't see a spike in supporters when their future is unlimited, they are headed for the trash heap. Which is fine, because other clubs, and other investors, will jump at the chance to turn a paltry investment into a drive for the first division.

    Apparently this is where we disagree?

    As a former MLS season ticket holder, I am convinced that this slow, conservative growth curve, the billions spent on facilities, without a comparable amount being spent on the football, is more about finding a way, once and for all, to force this game into the closed, tightly controlled model that American owners feel entitled to than bringing us great soccer. In their minds, when they are unsuccessful, they will again blame the game of soccer, as their failed closed league predecessors did. They will not accept responsibility for jamming it into a model that dictates quality of play, enforces mediocrity, and leaves our top clubs hapless in international competition.

    We can't afford another forty years in the wilderness. When the ASL went from the second most popular American sports league in the roaring twentied, to reorganization within five years, we didn't get a fresh start until the summer of love. Soccer got defined as a game of immigrants, in a time when if you weren't an immigrant yourself, both your parents had an 80% chance of being one.

    Even Garber admits, MLS fans are usually passing through to other leagues. I've seen it happen dozens of times myself. Core support is very small - and why not? Supporters want to believe they are changing the fortunes of their club. In MLS, aside from their screaming, banner waving, and attendance - their impact is negligible. By losing that, you are losing a critical part of the game.

    If the FA would have adopted this kind of single entity scheme in the 1880s, I doubt we'd be here talking about it today. That American club soccer survives in it at all is a huge testament to the depth and breadth of support for the sport - since the majority of fans are not paying any attention. You can't compare our market to any of the nations you cite. We dwarf them in every way. We have more total fans, players and potential supporters than many of them put together.

    It's not like promotion and relegation are theories. The proof is in every corner of the globe. It's not like measuring the speed of light, or looking for quarks.

    American exceptionalism is not so great that we can't acknowledge the success of promotion, relegation and independent clubs. It's just that the entitlements of the closed league model, and all the juicy breaks of the single entity monopoly, are just too good to pass up.

    And therein lays the choice.

    Continue on with a system that will never allow the lower divisions to fully develop, debilitate our top clubs in international play, not allow world class support that clubs like Seattle are receiving to translate into the acquisition of world class talent.

    Or, follow the proven model of the larger industrialized nations, in which the meritocracy of promotion, relegation and independent clubs are used to stimulate investment in clubs at every level, in which great clubs are allowed to develop when and where they can develop great reservoirs of support.

    For us, the choice is clear. Try and form our club soccer more in the image of the EPL than the NFL.
     
  6. soccerreform.us

    soccerreform.us New Member

    Mar 12, 2009
    Denver
    Club:
    Fulham FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Despite my anglophile appearance - here is where I critique the queen's football:

    England is a small market compared to the US, and one in which the game has settled out into the situation you are describing.

    As a resident of the largest economy on the planet, I can tell you that our open league shake out will be much more exciting than England's. I can see how hope doesn't spring as eternal as it once did in Scunthorpe, but it will spring up in American cities like Santa Fe, Sarasota, and St. Louis.

    The effect will be real. We've got a lot of sorting out to do.
     
  7. soccerreform.us

    soccerreform.us New Member

    Mar 12, 2009
    Denver
    Club:
    Fulham FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    The fact that four clubs make a profit in a league in which match outcomes are tightly controlled is good news, not bad. Give supporters a chance to raise their clubs, and the scenario changes.
     
  8. 4door

    4door Member+

    Mar 7, 2006
    Chicago
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    i think these lines might be telling. first of all we should be clear that not only is the NFL the biggest and most successful sports league in history, but these has been talk of europeans soccer teams emulating this model in a euro super league. The G14 was actually very interested in before they were forced to break it up. The simple reason is because it is unmatched as a business model, and if indeed the G14 or G18 formed a closed league it would have probably overtaken the NFL as the biggest league in the world. This is a fact. The problems with your arguments is that you compare leagues together that are hundred years apart and completely different in revenue streams. Even comparing the old First Division to the EPL is completely wrong. Revenue streams are completely different, and are almost all tied into sponsorships and media contracts. That is where the money is, before it was ticket sales and that was it. American sports have been the unquestioned global leader in sports business and the rest of the world has continued to follow our model not the other way around. Pro/rel is one little piece of it, but revenue streams is another. And when you close off competition and drive up demand you create incredible wealth for your clubs, this is what American sports has done, and if they were allowed to do it, the top Euro teams would do the same. Remember even the biggest clubs are drowning in mountains of their own debt, to drastically increase their media and sponsorship deals would be a god send, Man United would sign onto a euro superleague quicker than you can say single entity. Hell they'd even give up 51% stock in their company if their value would be going up 400% in 5 years.

    That leads me to MLS. The thing that people don't understand is why people own teams, and why billionaires spend millions on them. First is the team value, it is NOT revenue alone. They want their values like stocks to always go up. Imagine you could buy into a mutual fund owned by a private group that almost guarantees that each year it will go up because it controls the market. Now imagine a different fund that could go up 1000% or down 1000% in any given 5 year period. Where would you put your retirement fund? It is a no brainer why this system would be difficult to invest in? Why? Because beyond franchise value, the team itself is used to broker real estate deals that makes the owner millions or hundreds of millions. The truth is that if you have a 'pro sports' team, you can go to some cities and negotiate incredible city bonds or low taxes or other benefits just for introducing a pro team in that market. Because you are paying for it through gov't bonds and getting tax breaks over the course of the stadiums loan payment you may save 100M and that whole time, scheduling other events in the stadium making additional tens of millions. The entire club is an investment a way to negotiate other deals that allow you to make even more money. Once cities begin to learn that you won't be a 'pro' team forever, that one bad season your attendance could drop, that stadiums wouldn't be as filled and there would be less positive economic 'impact' then the stadium gov't gravy train is over. All those SSS you see are gone, except Columbus. If owners want a 200M stadium they need to pay it 100% themselves, no gov't assistance that includes building infrastructure and paying for roads and city workers around the stadium. Costs go up, loan deals cost more, value of going into the soccer business in this country goes down...LESS investors not more. The reason why you don't see that is because you see a 16k attendance in 97 and 16k attendance in 09 and think they should be 'about' the same. When in fact 2009 club is worth 800% more than it did in 97. The issue is that you don't see how sports business works in this country, but one thing you can't deny is that when it does work it works better than any country in the world. Our franchised sports are worth more than any other teams and league on the planet. It is 100% proven model. And it has brought us 400% growth in 5 years IN A RECESSION. That is pretty damn good. And once the economy bounces back those numbers will continue to go up. And the free market will force the league to open its pockets not petitions. The truth is that owners are now seeing that they can make real money on this sport, and will look to begin real investments. These guys are not dumb they come from other US sports backgrounds with huge salary caps and 30+ franchises. They know the plan, they are going to keep expanding and keep raising the cap but also stay financially strong. They are going to let the global leagues continue to swim in mountains of debt until there are no more oil billionaires willing to happily loose 150M a year, and you are going to see a natural regression with the biggest global leagues and a natural progression from the US/Asian leagues. And one day probably 20+ years from now you will see a more balanced global market. This is the plan, like it or not we must all agree that the past decade has shown incredible growth on this side of the pond and incredible debt on the other side. All signs point to one day there being a balance, and once that balance happens you will see those lost american fans begin to be connected again to their american clubs. but it will take time.
     
  9. blazindw

    blazindw Moderator
    Staff Member

    Jul 30, 2007
    Washington, DC
    Club:
    Real Madrid
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Again, apples and oranges. The NCAA Tourney focuses on big NAMES, not big cities. Do you want to see a tourney filled with SE Wichita State A&Ms or Dukes and UNCs and Syracuses? The NCAA favors those big schools who are big draws and will bring in a ton of money. MLS wants the same.

    No one watches teams that are terrible in the U.S....not in soccer, basketball, hockey, badminton, chess, nothing. I don't think Americans want to watch two teams fight to see who makes the drop. I think you overestimate that. A ratings boost that will never be.

    Do I want to see pro/rel in MLS eventually? Sure. But eventually for me is like 20-25 years, once we build up MLS, we build up the 2nd tier and 3rd tier so that these leagues are strong as well. I also think that MLS should have reserve teams and academies and that new stadiums should be built for all teams that don't have them. However, until that happens, pro/rel cannot be sold to TV networks nor should it. There is a laundry list of things that MLS needs to do to improve its product. Pro/Rel is #3000 on that list.
     
  10. soccerreform.us

    soccerreform.us New Member

    Mar 12, 2009
    Denver
    Club:
    Fulham FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    People don't watch MLS because a system in which match outcomes are carefully controlled through a system of enforced mediocrity is bogus. In open leagues, outcomes are not controlled by an overarching league. Supporters and owners are allowed to take their clubs as far as they can go.

    Has this been posed to you in a language you understand? Not only does the league you defend not use the tried and true system of promotion and relegation, it controls outcomes of matches in order to avoid using it - to replace performance with planned parity.

    Am I making headway?
     
  11. soccerreform.us

    soccerreform.us New Member

    Mar 12, 2009
    Denver
    Club:
    Fulham FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    You still haven't answered this simple question, unless I missed a post:

    How does it make you feel that the league controls how good the Sounders can be, no matter how awesome their levels of support, and no matter if they get Bill Gates himself on the ownership team.

    Are you really happy taking the hit of enforced mediocrity to support what amounts to an exhibition league? Is it any wonder the average US soccer supporter isn't paying attention?
     
  12. blazindw

    blazindw Moderator
    Staff Member

    Jul 30, 2007
    Washington, DC
    Club:
    Real Madrid
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    People who don't watch MLS decide not to because they don't enjoy the talent on the pitch, not because of what you stated.
     
  13. soccerreform.us

    soccerreform.us New Member

    Mar 12, 2009
    Denver
    Club:
    Fulham FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I couldn't disagree more. Maybe randomizing outcomes of the NFL helps that league, being that it is one of the few remaining American football leagues in the world. It doesn't work for a global, open sport like soccer, where there are many alternatives for fans that drift away.

    People don't want to see sports in which the outcomes are carefully managed - except maybe for pro wrestling....

    I don't care if our clubs aren't the best in the world. I just want them to be the best they can be, and I want them to have the freedom to build for their own goals.
     
  14. DavidP

    DavidP Member

    Mar 21, 1999
    Powder Springs, GA
    No.
     
  15. soccerreform.us

    soccerreform.us New Member

    Mar 12, 2009
    Denver
    Club:
    Fulham FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    So, despite the fact that nobody can come up with an open league, featuring promotion, relegation and independent clubs that has gone bankrupt and/or out of existence, and despite the fact that at least a half dozen notable American closed leagues have, and despite the fact that our owners have to resort to a system of enforced mediocrity to force soccer into a domestically focused closed league...

    MLS has got it right with their wacko exhibition league, in a world where even they are getting more fans per game than some smaller footballing nation, but are still too fragile to give clubs any measure of autonomy?

    curious - do you think globetrotters games are real too?
     
  16. JasonMa

    JasonMa Member+

    Mar 20, 2000
    Arvada, CO
    Club:
    Colorado Rapids
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Cite?

    Cite?

    I know what you believe. What haven't seen is anything to back up the claims you are making. You are claiming people aren't watching due to the lack of pro/rel. Now you're claiming the league is controlling the outcome of matches. Cite some sources to prove your claims or STFU.
     
  17. RedRover

    RedRover BigSoccer Supporter

    Aug 15, 2007
    So I come back on this thread about 26 hours later to discover how many pages it has grown to. I go back to do a count and discover that soccerreform.us has made 31 DAMN POSTS ON THIS TOPIC!!! Many of which are of the long winded variety. :mad:

    Dude, seriously, you have completely gone off the deep end with your pro/rel nonsense. You are the guy in the yellow jump suit with the tin foil hat on your head. Get a life.
     
  18. CleveGuyOH

    CleveGuyOH New Member

    Aug 11, 2009
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States

    1. I could care less that some entertainment beats soccer. It beats baseball, basketball, hockey, tennis, and bowling too. It's ENTERTAINMENT. The movies draw tons more people every week than any sporting event too, but I don't see that being used as your comparsion

    2. I have not yet decided if I want to contribute or not. Your webiste says very little if any of what you just mentioned. Please answer the following questions about your orginazation

    -How many people contributed in the past 12 months?
    - what percent of your expenses go towards expenses and operating vs the cause?
    -you claim to be about meet ups and grass roots, why can I not see any of this on your website
    - what is your 501c3 Tax ID number? I would need this to research your group, and for tax purpouses
    - besides this message boad, what are you using to get your message out and grow your goup?

    Again- thanks in advance for your response about your group.
     
  19. CleveGuyOH

    CleveGuyOH New Member

    Aug 11, 2009
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States

    1. You are great at twisting numbers. I could say that numbers for most clubs in the EPL are nowhere close to where they were in the 50's. In fact, look at most clubs attendence records, and tell me how many have been set in the last 30 years?

    Look deeper into the numbers, 1996 was the "honeymoon". It was like having 10 expansion teams. It was new, it was trendy. Then attedence declined as the "newness" wore off, and has in recent years began to uptick again. Look at average att. now vs what it ever was in the NASL, and realize how much more talent and name players there was in the league.

    2. I'd be willing to bet that if the EPL were to close the league after this season, and say you are either in or out, that very little would change. another poster mentioned a Euro G14, or G18 league, where the teams would stay the same year in year out. If this was the league with the top teams and top players, do you think people would really care that it was the same 14 teams each year? as long as they got to see the top players ply their trade, they would be fine.

    Look at a typical non-league, division 6 club in England. DO you really think that people are going to those games cause hey- in x years this team could be in the prem? No - they go cause they love soccer, and want to see their team win. How many teams that were non-leauge 50 years ago are now playing in the prem? How many of the prem in 50 years from now will be teams currently playing non-league?
     
  20. 4door

    4door Member+

    Mar 7, 2006
    Chicago
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    for all the people who want to see radical changes to US soccer and feel that minor league soccer is somehow the key to endless amounts of future revenues, and that the millions of people not interested in MLS is turned away not by the lack of quality but the lack of pro/rel and more 2nd, 3rd, 4th division clubs...let me put it as simply as I can.

    In the next 2 years we will add 2 more franchises at about $40M, for a combined value of 20 team with an average value of 40M-100M so a total of Near 1 billion. Throw in a 150M adidas contract a 40M+ ESPN contract and dozens of additional sponsors to bring the overall value of MLS somewhere between 1.5 BILLION.

    Throw in the fact that we will have built between 12+ SSS with a combined value of about 1.2-1.5 BILLION (depending on real estate market)

    This means that the evil empire of MLS and their 'single entity' which is destroying the game here has created A 3 BILLION dollar soccer economy in the US within 15 years (much of this during a recession of historic proportion and during a time when fans can almost as easily watch EPL games as they can MLS games). This is after 100 years of failed leagues and endless bankruptcies. Yes they need to open up their pocket books, yes future CBAs need to let individual clubs spend more of their own money, yes we need academies. Yes we need more cities involved in this sport, we need to connect to more fans and realize that we can not be judged like other soccer leagues with 1/10th of the population. We will not stop expanding. In another 15 years we could have a 30 team league with a combined value well into the billions. The sky is the limit. No one wants the league to stop growing as long as the quality can grow with it. The owners will not sit on their profits because the market won't let them. If they fall too far behind the rest of the world in quality they won't be able to continue this kind of growth. But some people on this board has gotten delusional about the reality of the game in this country. We have taken enormous steps forward, I don't think any league in the world has grown at our rate during the past 5 years. We are doing well, and we need to demand more from our league and the owners, but to think that we need complete reform and to get off the track that has led us from zero to 3 billion worth of pro soccer economy in 15 years is nuts.
     
  21. blazindw

    blazindw Moderator
    Staff Member

    Jul 30, 2007
    Washington, DC
    Club:
    Real Madrid
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Repped.
     
  22. DCU1996

    DCU1996 Member

    Jun 3, 2002
    N. VA
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    Korea Republic
    the realistic limit is right there with that model. 30 teams at most. with all thsoe history and traditon, today NHL and NBA are often criticized for over expansion,and being stagnant.
    stadiums don't get filled. And they are the very top of the line league in the world by far.

    I don't think it's good idea at all to dilute your top league like that when there are better international competitiors.
     
  23. RichardL

    RichardL BigSoccer Supporter

    May 2, 2001
    Berkshire
    Club:
    Reading FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    off the top of my head, Oxford, Wimbledon, and Wigan were non-league 50 years ago, and have spent time in the top division.

    Oxford, Carlisle and Luton have all been in the top division, and are now non-league.

    There actually wasn't any pro/rel between Division 4 (as League Two was known) and the divisions below until 1987.

    but no, fans of Basingstoke Town in the Blue Square South aren't thinking that they could be welcoming Man Utd for league games any day soon.
     
  24. 4door

    4door Member+

    Mar 7, 2006
    Chicago
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    it is a bit off topic, no one knows where expansion will go I was stating where it could go. the soccer reform guy is trying to convince people that MLS is just so far behind the world because it is a closed model and that we are drastically slowing our own growth and if we open it up we will see unbelievable growth. What I was trying to point out was that the 'single entity' has led us from an economy 15 years ago of about zero dollars for professional first division soccer in the US and 15 years later the entire soccer economy is probably around 3 billion dollars. All this during huge recessions and technology offering access to bigger and better leagues around the world. The point, is to not go crazy here, to look at the reality of how far we have come, to make realistic goals on making it better, but to assume that every league that is 'open' is doing radically better than us, and that our 'closed' system is such a failure...then look at the numbers.

    As far as quality goes and size of the potential MLS markets, it is foolish to compare the league to any other US league. For several reasons, a) this is a global market with global talent b) our youth system is the biggest in the world without a single professional residence academy. The truth is that sports like basketball have millions poured into it by sponsors and teams because finding the next Lebron James is very profitable. We don't have that system yet for soccer. In this country you have to PAY to play, PAY to travel with your teams, PAY to be on a club team. Could you imagine if the NBA guys growing up in poverty had to pay to play basketball? A very high percentage of them would not play or drop out of the game. Not to hijack the thread but there are real reasons why our youth system is so far behind, but I think USSF understands this and so does MLS and in time we will get better. Once this happens you will see not only the quality go up, but the amount of quality players go up. We have not even begun to tap our own soccer resources in this country. It is impossible to see how expansive our league can be 15+ years from now until we really see how much talent there is here.
     
  25. soccerreform.us

    soccerreform.us New Member

    Mar 12, 2009
    Denver
    Club:
    Fulham FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Cite what, exactly? What do you think salary caps, squad size limits, and 51% league ownership of every team does? These are pretty straightforward facts, killer.

    If you think these measures give clubs the autonomy to strive for their own goals, turn support into better club, and strive for international success, I'd be real interested in your thought process.

    Cite to me how MLS, by enforcing mediocrity to achieve artificial parity doesn't hold well supported clubs back. If you want to see MLS withdraw from international play and just play in their little exhibition island, so be it.

    If you want clubs that can compete on the international stage, their Chilis-Hooters-TGI Fridays-Dennys-Chotchkies-Chuck E. Cheeses business model is for you!

    If you want clubs that will be free to grow to compete with the best in the world, they can't be subjected to the artificial league controls MLS uses to bring us some jacked up, crap shoot soccer.

    Nobody has yet to argue that point. Care to try?

    Here's a bonus question: Please name an open soccer league that has gone under.

    Stumped? Good. Get over yourself and try to have an intelligent discussion.
     

Share This Page