What makes soccer hype-proof in the US in a way that hockey or basketball are not? Because those sports haven't really been played anywhere else? Enough of an effect to cause a team in Arizona? The guy was a damn good hockey player but he wasn't superman. I just don't buy this particular argument. Oh, and how has the NBA done post-Jordan? The blue collar appeal and the tradition was confined to the northeast US and Canada until very recently. I think you're closer to the mark with "owners with money". Gretzky was doubtlessly imporant, but he's been gone for far to long to explain why hockey has grown as much as it has. Don't make the mistake of deifying Gretzky and minimizing smart marketing and the willingness to spend on a decent TV package until you get big enough to start getting paid for your TV product. Agreed. I only went to games in Chicago. I remember the indoor Sting and the Power. Sadly, I wasn't going to away games on my own in KC or San Diego at the age of 15. I have no reason to question this. I also have no reason to belive that things couldn't have been at least a bit better had they been managed properyl. Again, not NFL or even current NHL level. But better. I hate to keep harping on this, but so was hockey. Nobody south of Chicago or West of Minneapolis knew about hockey or gave a crap about it unless they were Canadian. Basketball limped along for decades before hitting the bigtime in the late 1970s. [exaggeration for effect]Artis Gilmore could have shaken hands with each fan personally after Bulls games.[/exaggeration for effect] How times have changed. Again, see hockey. Anyway, we disagree on the relative portions of blame for the failure of the indoor game to develop in the 1980s. So be it. It's all cool. Agreed. Thank heavens for Peter Wilt. Agreed. The first thing the league needs is stability. People have to know their team will be around next year. After that, get on TV with as high a production value and with as current games as you can. After that, best of luck.
Also, if a player had talent on a level analagous to Gretzky or Jordan, he wouldn't have been playing indoor soccer in the United States.
Because Americans don't like soccer. That's simplifying it, but that's the basic cause of most of our problems. He's credited with causing the one in Anaheim, and, pretty much most of the Sun Belt expansion/relocation, including, yes, Arizona. There's been a ton written about this. Attendance was up this year (not in Washington, where he last played). They didn't have their TV deal slashed to the bone. They're going to outsell the NFL in merchandise this year. I think they've done fine. Look for yourself. See when the growth happened, and what the trend has been the last few years when you talk about hockey growing "as much as it has." See the growth in the number of teams in the league from 1990-99 and where they are today when you talk about hockey growing "as much as it has." See where their TV numbers have gone lately and where their TV revenues are likely to go in the immediate future (if they have an immediate future). The NHL's been getting paid for its TV product for years. In fact, they made the mistake of chasing the money when they went to Sportschannel America way back when, which gave them more money but less actual exposure. And if I was the only one "deifying" Gretzky, maybe you'd have a point. But there has been so much written on the effect he had on the growth of the NHL in the period from 1980-90, especially, that I don't think his handiwork can be overstated. And I have brought up the other possible factors.
The original MISL was on USA Network because USA Network started out as a cable sports channel. The league was on ESPN for awhile in the mid-80s too.
The original name of USA Network was Madison Square Garden Network (not to be confused with the MSG we all know and love today). The MISL also had some games on CBS back in the 80's (finals games, mostly).
The original MISL was on WGN Superstation for a few years after USA and ESPN dumped it. WGN didn't have the national subscriber base back then. The MISL time-buy contract on FOX Sports World has expired after 2 seasons. I wondered why MISL did the TV time-buy in the first place. The majority of the FOX Sports World audience didn't care. MISL didn't get much if anything in return for the money spent. MISL is what it is: a relatively cheap entertainment option for families with kids on a Friday night or Saturday night in smaller markets, and TV programming filler on cable-exclusive regional channels (such as CN8 in Philadelphia and Baltimore, Metro Sports in Kansas City, and COX 4 in San Diego).
I think that the MISL, if I am not mistaken Kenn, is attempting to develop a larger footprint in the country, by expanding. Most of the markets it has been in have been extremely small markets. I have heard rumors of Chicago and a couple of other larger cities rentering the fold in the next couple of years. Indoor was always supported here in Chicago the Sting would draw some pretty decent crowds back at the old madhouse on Madison. It would do the league wonders to forge a closer relationship with MLS over the next few years and maybe offer a dual league contract for certain players to play indoor as well as outdoor. It would overlap only slightly and would help develop interest in the league again. We shall see. Hopefully the new SEM structure that MISL runs under will allow it the stability that it sorely lacked and use that a spring board to grow it back to a respectable league again.
I was told a year and a half ago that MISL teams were moving in the direction of keeping their guys "indoor only" as much as they could. They wanted to keep a presence in the community, do camps, etc. But with the Milwaukee "merger" and so many others pulling indoor/outdoor duty in the MISL and A-League, I don't see it happening. If the MISL wouldn't play such ridiculously long playoffs, I'd have no problem with the MISL/A-League double. I'm less inclined to support an MLS/MISL double -- players in a top-flight league shouldn't miss preseason play and the first two weeks of the regular season to finish up indoor duty.
It would really be cool if something like this could happen. A couple of years ago I was watching this show called "Futbol Mundial." There was a piece about the German Bundesliga and how some of there teams will play indoor or futsal" during there off season. I am pretty sure that it was the same players involved on both teams but I guess not the major stars. Just players from their reserve, bench and youth teams. If MLS and MISL did something like this it would be interesting. Not use the stars but use borderline players.
Been done...the 1979-80 North American Soccer League indoor season was pretty much star free. As you might expect, there was not a lot of excitement over paying to watch the scrubs play inside. Crowds lagged far behind the MISL. The NASL indoor average was 4,872, with only Minnesota and Memphis drawing over 8,000 per match; the MISL averaged a bit higher, but I don't have the number in front of me right now. Times are different now, though; I wouldn't mind some MLS regional futsal tourneys, like the NASL did in 1975 and 1976. Don't treat it as a league, per se, but as a wintertime get-together for MLS fans. Marketed correctly, it might be both fun and profitable.
Still haven't been able to find anything on that. Here are some MISL broadcast highlights I was able to find in the 1991-92 MSL Guide (the last one): June 7, 1979 - MISL announces cable television package with Madison Square Garden network. The network broadcasted the first MISL Game of the Week in the 1979-80 season into five million homes in 48 states. September 29, 1980 - MISL announces two-year cable television deal with USA Network. May 7, 1983 - MISL makes network television debut on CBS-TV as network carries Baltimore at Cleveland playoff game. An estimated four million homes tune in. June 2, 1984 - CBS-TV broadcasts Game 3 of MISL Championship Series (Baltimore 5 at St.Louis 2). May 25, 1985 - CBS-TV broadcasts Game 4 of MISL Championship Series (San Diego 14, Baltimore 2 at San Diego). November 3, 1985 - ESPN broadcasts of 15 regular-season MISL games debuts with Minnesota defeating Baltimore 4-3. November 12, 1986 - MISL announces agreement with ESPN to televise 18 games during 1986-87 season, to be produced by Bud Sports. October 6, 1987 - MISL announces two-year agreement with FNN/SCORE to televise Friday night Game of the Week starting on January 8, 1988, the All-Star Game, selected playoff games, the entire MISL Championship Series, and a weekly highlights show. January 17, 1990 - MISL announces a nine-game television package with ESPN, including the All-Star Game, three regular-season games, and five playoff games. February 3, 1991 - The MSL and SportsChannel America begin a two-year television package with a Sunday Game of the Week schedule, 15 games including the All-Star Game, regular-season and playoff coverage. So cable coverage as far as I can tell: 1978-79...None 1979-80...Madison Square Garden Network 1980-81...USA Network 1981-82...USA Network 1982-83...USA Network 1983-84...USA Network 1984-85...(Don't know) 1985-86...ESPN 1986-87...ESPN 1987-88...FNN/SCORE 1988-89...FNN/SCORE 1989-90...ESPN 1990-91...SportsChannel America 1991-92...SportsChannel America
WGN is Chicago, right? Maybe he's confusing a local Sting deal with a national contract. I could check my Sting guides later, if Kenn doesn't have the info at hand.
What I've been able to find is the Sting was on WFLD-TV 32, which is now the local FOX affiliate, and on SportsVision cablewise, which is no longer with us. Outdoor Sting games were on WGN Ch.9 in 1978 (at least six of them). I don't have complete TV info. But I don't think the MISL ever had a league-wide deal with WGN.
I actually visited FNN/SCORE's studios right when I got out of college, when I was looking for a job. They were in Santa Monica, CA. I've heard they eventually morphed into CNBC. But Time Out For Trivia ruled. I wish I still had my old tapes of that show.
Here I go. The person who stated that 'indoor soccer' might be better off if it didn't have the word "soccer" in its title was Gordon Jago. (1985: "Maybe we should call it 'human pinball', or something that doesn't mention 'soccer'.") In 1984-85, there were cable | satellite "superstations", including WGN, and WWOR, which carried indoor soccer games frequently. 1984 was also the first year for SportsTime, a regional cable | satellite channel, financially supported by Anheuser-Busch, which carried MISL games of teams based in its main viewing area {If you have a good, good memory; you might visualize that its logo was a map of the U.S.A. with its covered states outlined.}. This channel was unencrypted on C-Band, so Arno's Place (Arno Steffenhagen's tavern on N. Lincoln Av.) would show one of its telecasts if requested. Moving the MISL telecasts to FNN/Score was not necessarily a bad move. FNN/Score had gotten into the top flight of sports when it obtained the 1987 Canada | U.S.S.R. ice hockey competition. (I've forgotten the name. Was it, "The Canada Cup" ) This forced many cable operators to pick it up. Plus, at that point, the MISL did not have much choice. ESPN had turned it away. Even the American Indoor Soccer Association had managed to get a contract with Tempo TV, and it had only four teams. I have a Score T-Shirt here which comes out of the drawer sporadically. In the mid-1980's, there were more anti-Quentin Dailey protesters outside the Chicago Stadium for Bulls games than there were ticket-holders inside. I do not know exactly what is the problem. But in the four seasons I hung out with the BarnBurners, I could not get them to even acknowledge that there had been soccer in Chicago prior to 1998, professional soccer in the USA prior to 1996, or any soccer prior to 1994. (They had hazy recollection of the 1990 World Cup.) The majority of the people in that booster club are cliquish and, despite what their creed states, definitely politically correct. If they want to ignore history, they can go ahead. Until it reappears and bites them in the neck. Their "attitude" is the major reason I attend more A-League games in Milwaukee than FIRE games in Chicago. Can indoor soccer revive? You know; I believe so. But it will require a dramatically different tack than the majority of franchises in the M.I.S.L. are currently undertaking. The League may have teams from Newark, NJ. to Stockton, CA., but it needs to recognize that it will not become a "top 4" sport. {Well - maybe - if the National Hockey League immolates.} I have an eight-page article on the hard drive here which was (understandably) rejected by the Soccer Solidarity newsletter. I will not self-publish it in "Incendiary Words". It delves into depth of the differences between 2003 and 1983 in the scope of the entertainment world. It compares how indoor soccer managed to publicize itself in 1983, and what has changed since. Its underlying message is that indoor soccer cannot attempt to compete on the financial level with other entertainments which throttle the marketplace. When even an absolute clunk of a movie like that Bobby Jones golf movie can get thousands of screens (venues), and command substantial ads in media, that should illuminate what indoor soccer is really up against. The media expects all entertainments to spend on the level of even this clunk golf movie. And indoor soccer cannot possibly be profitable, much less survive, if it has to spend at this level in order to be learned about. Why are we chasing the sliver of the audience entitled "families", when we are up against these multi-national entertainment corporations which can sneeze $300,000 out of their noses? It is time we ceased trying. Let's make a play for people who aren't being enticed by something else. We need to redirect our marketing at those who are dissatisfied with the entertainment choices today. They may not necessarily be sports fans. We need to generate a mystique about indoor soccer: To refer to it as, "What they don't want you to know about." We don't need a forty-game season. We need fewer games during the season. We should not bother trying to play indoor soccer during the gridiron season. Start in January. If you want to send a message to outdoor soccer (and their cliquish supporters), go to one division, and play everybody else just twice - home & away. Have only the top four teams make the playoffs. Seeds #1 & #2 host; one game; and then a best of three Finals.
Interesting post -- nice historical look. I might argue that indoor soccer is better when it doesn't try to emulate outdoor. (I simply cannot watch futsal.) The people who made fun of the MISL's 2- and 3-point scoring system were often the people you described, those who aren't likely to go to an indoor game anyway. Back to another post -- I do kind of like the idea of seeing some low-key MLS indoor tournaments in the offseason. As in Germany, it'd just be a conditioning tool. If anyone's interested in watching it, so much the better. An indoor Open Cup for MLS, MISL and any other interested teams might be fun, too. Fun idea, but it'll never happen.
Yes, it was the Canada Cup. I remember my friends and I finding the one bar in the area that had bothered to pick up FNN/Score so we could watch the games. You'll find that the lack of knowledge of any pre-MLS soccer is not exclusive to Fire fans. Don't be so hard on them. Uh oh...now you've done it. I'm taking cover...
He may have, indeed, said that, but that wasn't the quote to which I referred. The quote I was thinking of was in the June 1984 issue of Inside Sports: Doubtful that MISL spokesman was Gordon Jago, who was not yet in the MISL at that time. Good luck with that. As soon as you call it "soccer," you lose a portion of those people, and you know that's true. And there are people who are dissatisfied with some or many of today's entertainment choices, but I doubt you'll find too many people dissatisfied with all of them (or enough of them to make a difference). People still go to the movies - they're still a billion-dollar enterprise. For the railing about reality TV, people still watch. People still go out to eat, they still pony up for football and baseball and basketball and hockey games and surf the internet and all the other entertainment options out there. You can try to get the dissafected and disenfranchised, just be prepared to spend a boatload more money than they've got right now.
WOW! Ok. Im going to jump in here having only read half of the thread. Some of these posts here are just MONSTER posts and its going to take me a while to read through all of it. First off, alittle background on my knowlege of the subject. I have grown up loving, and playing Ice Hockey. I lived it, ate it, breathed it every day of my life since I was 8 years old, and still do to this day. Even before then I was always attracted to that game. I also grew into being a soccer fan mostly through playing some in elementary/ middle school, and following my HS soccer team which won several state champs. I also have played some indoor soccer as well, but only several games, and that was several years ago, just for the fun of it. While I have had Caps season tickets most of my life, I also have attended many OUTDOOR soccer games, mostly with D.C. United starting in 96 to present, and a few Dips games when I was a kid. I also ended up going to alot of Baltimore Blast games in the mid-late 80s, and I am very familliar with MISL. Firstly, I would like to say that MISL and outdoor soccer of anykind, to me, are basically two different sports. MISL is much faster, higher scoring, and is played on a "field" that is obstensibly the same size and shape as an ice hockey rink, it also seemed to me to be quite a bit more rough, and overall higher speed than outdoor.I guess it is "chipper" and "edgier". Those things alone were an attraction to MISL for myself, and quite a few other hockey fans. However, while its called soccer, myself, and most of those I knew and went to Blast games with never really considered it "Soccer". They are just to different sports that have lots of similarities and are played with the same ball, and similar principals, but that is about it. The actual games, and talent involved in MISL vs any outdoor soccer, to me are totally different. The look, feel, appeal, etc.. of each is much different. I wasnt as much attracted to MISL for its "soccer" per se, as much as I was the fact that it appeared to be somewhat of a "hybrid" sport. It was something I found interesting just because it seemed to take the elements of 2 sports and sort of combine them, and those would be hockey, and soccer. Basically MISL has always been to me... soccer in style... and almost more hockey in technique. Outdoor to me is just a different game alltogether. Im not saying its any better or worse or anything like that, its just DIFFERENT period. Oudoor is very flowing, graceful, and seems to rely more on individual skill/ ability. Im not knocking MISL players at all, just saying what I see. I know that for me, I used quite a bit more of my hockey skills (and yes there are in fact crossover skills) in indoor soccer than I ever did in outdoor. I really cant see where there would be really a whole lot of crossover from outdoor to indoor myself just based on what I remember seeing at Blast games. IM not even going to get into MLS here. MISL did have a great chance, but didnt have the same things going for it that hockey did. As has been pointed out, hockey was, and still a good portion of it is.. a blue coller sport, and it was marketed as such, to that segment of society up until about the early 90's. It also had a very LONG and storied history that the MISL did not. Having been going to Washington Capitals games since the late 70's, I can most definately tell you that it is now a much much more "white coller" or "yuppie" type crowd that hockey is marketed to.. and attends the games. That to me was one of the mistakes of the NHL, was basically shutting or pricing out the fans that made the league what it was up until that point. Those things alone were more than MISL had going for it. Not to mention that the NHL made itself much more fan friendly/ accesible to newcomers in the early 90s. The NHL really did good when it finally got its breakthrough TV contract with FOX. Not only was it being exposed to millions of new people, but it set itself up in such a way that made newcomers feel welcome, and even went to greath lengths to teach its new fans all the rules and aspects of the game, both on TV, and out in the community. Countless street leagues sprang up which were NHL team sponsored and were desgined to teach kids the basics and rules, in hopes of getting them interested in the ICE version of the game, and it did work. One of the biggest things the NHL did to make itself more visually friendly to newcomers was to allow FOX to insert a computer chip in the puck, which would give it the red "comet tail" on TV, thus making it much easier for the untrained hockey fans eye to follow. I personally hated it, but then again, back then i was a hardcore fan, that fully understood every aspect of the game, and thought it was rediculous that anyone couldnt follow a puck on a TV screen. But it worked. I dont ever really remember MISL pushing itself, getting itself out there in the spotlight, and marketing itself as a new brand or hybird or anything like that, anything even close to what the NHL did. MISL could have gone down lots of different avenues, but it seems to me that it chose to coast. YEs it was on TV some, but its exposure was very limited to me. Before the NHL ever had big TV contracts, we were all pretty much relegated to listening to most of our teams away games on AM radio, with maybe 10 or so games a season being broadcast on a local non major network (or back then independant) station such as what would now be UPN. I do remember the Blast having some games on HTS (back then Home Teams Sports was the local cable sports channel)( now its Comcast SportsNet ... CSN). I dont think it was the entire season, but there were a good portion of the seasons games (both home and away) broadcast live on HTS. I do remember it on FNN/Score, and I think there might have even been a few games (maybe playoffs?) on ESPN, but other than that, thats it. As far as I know, MISL never really even attempted to make any sort of big jump to a bigtime network. Personally, I would like to see the MISL succeed, but Im not too sure that there is a market large enough to sustain that league at a level that would be much more competitive than with single or double A basball, or even the UHL, or ECHL. I dont think it could ever really compete, even with the topflight MINOR hockey leauge , the AHL. I think its crossover from outdoor soccer is just no where near what it probably hopes, and its crossover from hockey is no where near what it needs for that... Bottom line at least to me, is I think the MISL has enough interest to stay in existance as a league, however it just had some pretty sizeable limitations it faces in all aspects from getting players, much less ones that can step up and be marketable "superstars" if there even is such a thing for indoor, to fans / interest. If the MISL could deal with playing in venues that have capacities of maybe 4-6000 or so, then maybe it can still do OK. Hell, I dont even really know what the capacities of most MISL venues are anymore. I know in the past, some were large, some were small. I know the Baltimore Arena holds about 11,000. There were times when it was almost full, but not every game, and that did seem to start g oing back down. I have to give MISL props though, for sticking around for so long, sticking it out.. and ...for not g oing the way of the old MILL (Major Indoor Lacrosse League). GO WAVE GO!!! LOL!!!! I admit it.. I was a Washington Wave fan while they were here. Hey, I was born and raised in Maryland, and love Lacrosse, both playing, and watching!... ok sorry.. off topic. On the NHL... A couple of the things that has led the NHL to its down turn NOW is money, and marketing. The NHL never had million dollar players, at least not until Scott Stevens was let go by the Capitals to free agencey back in the late 80s, and that was because the Caps ownership didnt want to pay him 1mill/ season, and didnt want to be the first franchise in the NHL to start that trend. Scott Stevens was given his million dollar contract by I belive St. Lous Blues, and thus set the ball in motion to move the NHL into the big leagues with MLB, NFL, and NBA. Now we have the BIG FOUR, where there once was the big 3. Fortunatly for the NHL, at that same time it was starting to gain popularity, and it got its first major network deal, and the economics didnt get all out of whack. Well, as fate would have it, all that has finally caught up with the NHL now. One big mistake the NHL made was in its marketing. The NHL chose to all but thumb its nose at the long time fans who were from largely blue collar type backgrounds, and went for marketing itself to the much wealthier white collar crowd. Along with that came drastically increased ticket prices, and for a while the appeal worked, but now were seeing the backlash. Most of the fans that left the NHL did come back, but they are now starting to leave once again, this time for the minor leagues. Hockey has somewhat morphed itself in to a game that really is very very different from that of 20 years ago, and its not to the leagues advantage either. Rules have been tinkerd with, and the overall style of play has diminshed to something more akin to most players playing more for thier paychecks than for thier love of the game. Hockey has reduced itself from having a fully exciting, hard working, passionate season, to something that resembles the NBA in that it really only gets exciting down the stretch drive at the very end, and in the playoffs. part of that is due to the lengthend season. (which is now being reduced) The NHL is now so prohibitively expensive that lots of its fans have a hard time affording it. Couple that with a decline in the overall product put forth to the fans, and the economic turmoil that the league now faces because it did not bother to really look too far into the future at the LAST CBA, and you have what you are seeing happen now. Something close to 80% of total league revenues go into paying player salries, and that economic model has absolutely ZERO chance of surviving long term. The NHL while it made great strides to grow, also made some glaring mistakes, and were seeing the result of that only just beginning. Leave the rules alone, dont model if after the N B A (thanks Betteman) and let hockey be what it always has been and always should be, and the NHL will most definately be fine! Sorry if that seems rambling.... im a bit worn out and need to hit the Sack.