While I agree with the start of the post, I won't touch the Title IX bullsh. . . As a former lax player, fan of the game and someone that's been to a few MLL games, it's a great event. They have the same audience as much of the MLS. Let's not forget that many people consider soccer a suburban game as well. Lacrosse does not have the global support, but it's US base is MLS's base. My questions about possible doubleheaders regards field lines, not the condition of the pitch. Lax lines are completely different than soccer lines. How do you change lines on a field for a doubleheader? Also, someone said if MLL wants to give us money to help promote, we should take it. The MLL has no money. . .none. The owners investory are not Lamar Hunt. Should be interesting to see what happens.
Doesn't MLL and soccer have lots of the same demographics? Mostly male, college educated, upper middle class, etc. but without the soccer moms and the 'ethnic' contigent. Or is it because I'm in New Jersey?
And, interestingly enough, in the latest issue of Shameless Plug for the X-Games.....uh, I mean ESPN The Magazine, an article from Peter Keating entitled "Big Eyes" with the subtitle, "There's a simple recipe for taking a sport big time. Few have all the ingredients." He had me right up until the end. It's arguable that American soccer's "biggest stars" play in Europe (It was Donovan and Mathis who got the SI covers), but it is true that the game's biggest stars don't play in MLS. But the theory that there might not be a fifth major anytime soon (if at all) is, I think, a solid one.
MLS should do it's best to see that MLL dies. The sport is extremely appealing -- perhaps more so than soccer to the casual american sports fan, since it's basically hockey on grass. And as others have pointed out, the demographics are extremely similar, not just in terms of fans but in terms of the athletes you're trying to attract. I grew up in a town in nothern NJ that takes lacrosse very seriously, and I think the worst thing for MLS is that when lacrosse does take hold somewhere it tends to create all the same things soccer is trying to do, i.e. youth leagues and development from a very young age. Basically giving young kids a glimpse of lacrosse and then having them grow up tossing the lacrosse ball around and learning how to play that game isn't going to do anything but hurt MLS. I mean, personally I like both games, but if I were running MLS I'd see all other sports as competition, but an active, outdoor, summer niche sport like lacrosse more so than most.
"When lacrosse takes hold?" Okay. I don't think MLS has a lot to worry about from MLL, and in any case, I wouldn't advocate wasting time and resources trying to put a league out of business that the vast majority of people haven't the slightest idea exists.
Lacrosse does not have what soccer has -- a World Cup of such stature that it dwarfs all other competitions. Even the Olympics, which are so fragmented, with a plethora of diverse sports clamoring for attention, lacks the build to a big finish that the World Cup offers. In fact, one usually begins to wonder when the Olympics will finally end! Feeding the World Cup are several world class first divisions and hundreds of lesser leagues across the globe. If lacrosse ever got as big as hockey it still would not be a threat to MLS's survival. More kids playing lacrosse means fewer playing soccer, but also fewer playing baseball, hockey and other sports. Don't worry, it's a big country. MLS needs to work at building itself, not about undermining other sports and leagues -- not that it could.
One could argue that MLB and the NFL are more popular today than ever. And one could argue that the NBA and NHL are close to their most popular point. And one could then surmise that it probably would be very difficult for another sport to break through. While it is not a "team" sport, NASCAR has smashed the "Major" sport status barrier into pieces at a time it should have been very hard to do. Andy
Not true. 1983 - 138 programs across all divisions, 4,519 players. 2001 - 202 programs, 6,591 players. Lax has grown in pockets across the country. This year before the Final Four, the Baltimore Sun did a great article on its growth in Ohio and other midwestern states. The Lax Final Four is one of the highest grosssing NCAA chanpionships. Next year when it is at Ravens Stadium, I bet they will get a good 30-40K for the title game if a Baltimore team is involved. That hasn't translated to the pro game, where the Bayhawks are only averaging 3-4K at Ravens Stadium. Lax is in the same conundrum soccer is - participants don't make time to watch the highest level oftentimes. Lax is not a threat to soccer. If it were, soccer teams fro Maryland would not succeed on the youth level. Gary Gait, the Bayhawks' coach, talked about the similarities and overlap between the two sports in glowing terms on sports radio in Baltimore a few months ago. If scheduled right, an MLL team could be a nice tenant for a SSS.
Señor Cabral, I'm the type of person who think that there is room for all Sport in this country. If some investors put together a league like MLL, is due to the fact that there are hungry fans out there who want to attend game and watch them on TV. Lately, many kid's been practicing Lacrose all over the country especially in those places that some people already mentioned in this post. The big question is, how much money will Major league lacrosse will pay MLS or a MLS stadium to play in?.. $3,000 a game? I dont know. If MLL is hoping to grow depending on MLS success, then they will fail.
True, and I would very much like to read an account of how they've been able to do it (anyone know if anything written is out there?). It isn't a "team sport", as you say, and I think that sort of takes out out of the discussion, but it obviously has a very large (and very increased over ten years ago) popularity that can't be taken out of the discussion. I would put forward that part of that is its appeal to the working class, without which no sport in this country has been able to achieve true "major" status (part of soccer's problem as well). The misnomer of NASCAR as a "redneck" sport persists, though (I don't have the demographics handy, but I thought I remembered that something like 50% of NASCAR fans have college degrees). But a team sport? Unlikely to happen. A team sport without much appeal outside a specific region, without a whole lot to offer about itself that is truly unique (it's another one of the "object goes into goal" sports that we already have a few of), that a very small percentage of people either play or have played, and that has a relatively short history of being played at a high level in this country? Even less likely, IMHO.
I was talking about on the local level. There are a number of towns in NJ, and probably in upstate NY and other places where lacrosse is big, where it has established itself as the number one youth sport. Naturally that is detrimental to soccer, and if that success spreads then it becomes increasingly so. I didn't advocate "wasting time and resources," I just wouldn't rent any stadiums to MLL or seek to develop any stadium sharing deals with them.
Not to spin off on a NASCAR tangent, but it's interesting that at least one NASCAR demographic website boasts that NASCAR's TV ratings have increased every year since 1990, but if these stats (from motorsportstv.com) are to be believed, they're not appreciably higher now than they were then: Historical Winston Cup Broadcast Network Ratings Year....#..Rate.Shr 1990....4..4.5..14 1991....4..4.4..12 1992....4..5.3..15 1993....5..4.8..13 1994....5..5.3..16 1995....7..4.9..14 1996....7..5.1..15 1997....9..5.6..16 1998...12..4.8..13 1999...12..5.4..14 2000...12..5.0..13 The cable ratings may have, in fact, gone up, but at least the broadcast ratings have held fairly steady, and they are superior to regular-season baseball.
No they are most definitely not. Talk about apples and orangutangs. Baseball is extremely succussful on television. It's just that there are dozens of games on per week in the USA. No one game will have the viewership of the ONE Nascar race. Televised baseball is one of the most highly priced commodities, approaching one billion dollars per year.
MLS and MLL have a lot to gain from each other. Lacrosse is a very regional sport (alto its popularity is growing in the midwest and, to a lesser extent, the Denver and San Francisco areas), but it is popular in the Northeast--the region that also boasts the heaviest concentration of current and potential MLS franchises. Something that has been overlooked in this thread is that lacrosse is HUGE in the Philadelphia area. The Wings (pro indoor team) sell out the First Union Center every game, getting comparable attendance to the Flyers and Sixers. Mid-4-figure attendances for big high school games are not at all uncommon. Another interesting point to raise is that Doug Logan (yes, THAT Doug Logan) is heading up a group that is looking into creating a pro rugby league in the US. The point of all of this is that, the more potential tenants a stadium can have, the more likely the stadium is to be built. Not so much because there are more potential investors (Saint Phil has more than enough cash to build 10 22,000-seat stadiums), but because city councils are more likely to grant permission for the stadium to be built. Pitch a 22,000 seat stadium to a city council for an MLS team, and they might say no. But if you tell the city council that, altho the MLS team will be the primary tenant (say 20,000 fans a game), the stadium will also host a WUSA team (3-8,000/game), and a rugby and/or MLL team (probably 2-5,000/game), and your chances of getting permission to build are a lot better. Throw in a local college soccer team, open it up to high school soccer, lacrosse, and (during the MLS off-season only) pointyball games, as well as concerts and (again, during the MLS off-season only) outdoor fairs/trade shows, and you're set. If MLS expands as I expect it to, by adding teams in Philly, New York, Rochester, Houston, St. Louis, and Seattle over the next 10-20 years, a number of potential joint sites emerge: San Jose: MLS, WUSA, rugby, lacrosse LA: MLS, WUSA, rugby Seattle: MLS, WUSA, rugby Colorado: MLS, rugby, lacrosse Houston: MLS Dallas: MLS, rugby St. Louis: MLS, WUSA, lacrosse Kansas City: MLS, rugby New England: MLS, WUSA, rugby, lacrosse Rochester: MLS, lacrosse New York City: MLS, WUSA, rugby, lacrosse Newark: MLS (Metros), rugby Philly: MLS, WUSA, rugby, lacrosse Chicago: MLS, WUSA, rugby Columbus: MLS, lacrosse DC: MLS, WUSA, rugby, lacrosse There you have 4 strong leages: MLS (16 teams), WUSA (12 teams--9 above plus currently existing franchises in San Diego, Carolina, and Atlanta), rugby (12 teams), and NLL (8 teams). Some of the rugby and lacrosse teams might have to find another place to play until MLS gets the stadiums built, but it will work. Alex
Why should MLS care about a game when no one knows about it, nor cares about it, west of Pennsylvania and south of Virginia?
Well first of all, people do know about and play it in certain regions west of pennsylvania and south of virginia, as other posters have outlined. In fact, the game is growing, again as other posters have pointed out. To answer your question, sports is a competitive market, and although some argue that there are gains to be had from working with lacrosse (or rugby), I would argue that MLS should try and look to the long-term, and not seek to strengthen leagues that are ultimately going to develop into competitors. Lacrosse is small now, but then again, hockey was small once too. I believe that if in the future lacrosse develops into a sport with a functional league that draws thousands of spectators per game in the same markets as MLS, MLS will be worse off for it. MLS can survive with lacrosse, of course, but in my ideal world it won't have too.
Is this thread for real or have people gone completely insane? I'm just wondering. Yeah, MLS worry #100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 MLL
NLL's different, and not part of the discussion. Indoor league. Marketed and presented like the MISL was in the 1980's. Does really, really well in some cities (like Toronto and Philadelphia) and crap in others. The outdoor version has limited appeal outside the Northeast. Doug Logan's trying to start a rugby league? What, does he speak Australian, too? "This is the season of no excuses, mate!" BTW, I caught some Aussie Rules on Saturday on FSW and I was reminded of how much fun that game is to watch.
But in reality, holding steady since 1990, is incredibly good since almost every other sport has seen their ratings dip. It is just like the stock market, if you had the same amount of money invested today as you had in May of 1999, you would be WAY ahead of the game, even if you just held steady. Andy
The what? Seriously, lacrosse just barely exists in the South and West. It's not even on the radar screen.
Having to play in 80,000-seat NFL stadiums for huge rental fees will hurt MLS a lot more than competition with lacrosse or rugby. My point is that, if a stadium can't get built just for an MLS team, why not throw a rugby team and/or a lacrosse team into the equation? The more teams can play in a stadium, the more likely it is to get built. Alex
Or how about venturing with WUSA teams to get the job done? If the Power and Metro join forces, United and Freedom, etc, you're looking at a minimum or 25 soccer related dates. Throw in friendlies and cup competitions, high school events and concerts and you have a great package.