There has been a lot mentioned of the MISL teams/owners point of view and the direction they want to go. What do the PASL teams/owners have to say? We've heard from Dallas, and so forth. What about Sacramento? Turlock? Illinois? Las Vegas? What are their opinions? I would like to know what they plan to bring to the table with this merger.
Regarding the name, I'm not 100% sure, but I hear they'll use a NEW name. IMO, I think the "MISL" name does carry some weight, but only in certain cities. Personally, I'd like the name to have either "Major" or "National" in it...and I also think it needs to have "Indoor" or "Arena" in it. I'm not sure you could call it the National Arena Soccer League, since the NASL is already in use by the North American Soccer League. Regarding arenas, I don't like the idea of taking a team that plays in a legit arena (5k-10k) into a venue that has 4-5 rows of bleachers on one side for a PRO game. I think it's a slap in the face to the players and to the organization. I think the minimum standard should be an arena like the CompuWare Arena (cap: 3500) in Detroit (or Plymouth, MI). The problem is, there aren't a ton of those arenas that exist.
Yeah, over and over and over and over and over and over and over. Yet no one thinks it's the product. That potentially the heyday of the product is over. There have been some terrible business people run teams over the last 20 years (but not just in our sport). But when 33 of the last 37 teams that have sprung up at the top level in the last 20 years have failed (I'm counting the Roar as a failure for purposes of this discussion), there's something more afoot. And 22 of those 37 (59%) have lasted two or one years. That's more than just getting incredibly unlucky in picking bad owners.
Well, My Men's Team went 8-0 and won the Championship at Du Burns Arena. (In front of possibly 100 people.. if you include staff, janitors etc... ) can we join the PASL now if we pay our "dues" to Milliken? YOU HAVE TO F ING HAVE SOME STANDARDS BLEACHERS AND SHIT TEAMS DRAWING A FEW HUNDREDS ARE NOT PROFESSIONAL How the hell will any of them even afford road trips? Air or bus?
Kenn, what I was trying to point out was that most smart business people who have been under the impression they had the knowledge/expertise to succeed at the indoor soccer business have failed. Not saying they were all necessarily bad owners, but they all missed the fact that the product isn't what it used to be. Trying to run an indoor soccer team as if it was still 1984 is a recipe for failure, no matter how good an owner might be. The PASL seems to recognize this fact. So maybe, at least for the moment, they shouldn't change the formula. And when they do change it, maybe change it slowly and carefully.
A question: how many of the twenty current PASL teams have been around since the beginning in 2008? How many have been around as long as the current Comets team? When answering these questions, please do not include teams that have changed names/owners but have shifted some of the players from the previous team onto the new team. That is the same rationale that people who extend the current Blast legacy to the beginning of MISL I use because when they had a new owner and changed names to the Spirit they kept many of the Blast players. My point is that no one has figured it out, certainly not the MISL/USL and certainly not the PASL because if either business plan was rock solid there would not be so many teams churning in and out of both leagues. If a truthful tally of folded teams from both leagues was kept starting in 2008, I would imagine that at least as many teams have folded as are playing. I'm hopeful that whatever takes place next season does work and includes changes to both business models as changes are needed.
What you can look forward to next year is that the PASL will make changes, but it will be things that have to happen for the general good of the game, not to fit the demands and / or fantasies of a select few. When there is something to be announced, it will be announced. Enjoy your summer.
It APPEARS as if Detroit is the only one. Even San Diego didn't come in until the next year. http://www.kenn.com/the_blog/?page_id=5777
And my point was this: what if it can't be done? As with many leagues, there seem to be "leagues within a league." One "formula" seems to be to reduce expenses, but connect to the community with a brand that can resonate with fans, authentically present themselves and attempt to sell tickets and market themselves. The other "formula" seems to be to just be cheap in everything and eke out an existence for as long as you can.
I like the idea of keeping the smaller venue teams around in their own league, if they want to keep playing. And I guess if some of these teams stick around and show growth, they could conceivably move up with the bigger boys, but Illinois won't have that chance. Not sure about some of the other smaller PASL teams, but the Piasa don't really have a bigger place to ascend to. I know some have poo pooed the two tier system, but I think it would work fine. For the guys in the smaller places, it would be just like any other business owner who decides whether to expand or not take that risk. The smaller clubs could even maybe make some extra money, if say a team like the Ambush wanted a player from the Piasa. Kind of like a minor league, but with a long term (if desired) possibility of becoming "major." And new owners might be easier to find, if they know they can start out small and learn to grow, instead of jumping in and losing a bunch right off the bat.
The problem is not in having two levels. It's in having performance-based promotion and relegation between them. That won't work. There is no incentive to move up, only a disincentive to do so. But, just like in the current outdoor environment, if you choose to pay the freight to move up or save money by moving down, you can do that. A two-tiered league makes sense. Performance-based promotion and relegation between them does not.
That is nothing more than a Europoser's foundest, um... pipe dream. It's not even in the dining room, much less on the table.
I almost typed that the incentive would be for an owner to move into a larger building, with the possibility that they would sell more tickets/sponsorship and therefore, make more money.....but then I caught myself.
There are a couple of options I think for names that would be legit and still respect both sides of this. If the MISL teams just simply join the PASL, then you should leave the PASL name in tact. However, if the teams create a two-tiered league, not pro/rel just two levels, then you could use "Major Arena Soccer League" (MASL) for the top tier and leave PASL for the lower level. This might help the teams with smaller attendance keep their identity in their communites with the league they have been in. I was going to suggest the top level be called the Arena Soccer League, but realized having your league named the ALS wasn't probably to kind to those with the disease.
Arena Soccer League would be ASL, not ALS. There is an (outdoor) ASL. And American Sign Language is referred to as ASL, so you might confuse the deaf.
A few years ago, Steve Paxos was trying to create an Arena Soccer Association that would be the governing body of an Arena Soccer League. There is still a page up at arenasoccer.net.
Sorry, put that backwards. I meant to say "Arena League Soccer" like "Major League Soccer". Either way someone, whether those with ALS or the deaf, will be offended.
Until they decide on a name I propose that we refer to any theoretical new league as "MILPAS." It seems appropriate somehow since we are burning down at least one other league in hopes of growing something new.