Crystal Baller

Discussion in 'MLS: News & Analysis' started by scaryice, Oct 20, 2004.

  1. scaryice

    scaryice Member

    Jan 25, 2001
    One of the most frequent topics on Bigsoccer is the struggle of MLS to become one of the top leagues in this country. I think most people on this site think that it will happen someday, and it’s just a matter of when. I agree with that belief, and with this post I’d like to try to look into the future and give some realistic projections on where I think the league is headed.

    I see the league’s struggle as taking place in three phases. We are currently in the middle phase. MLS has been around for nine seasons now, and it’s not going away anytime soon. A few years ago, the entire league’s future was in doubt. The actions since then have been very encouraging, and the Adidas deal shows that others believe in MLS outside the I/Os.

    Phase One: A Rough Launch (1996~2001)

    MLS started out in 1996 doing better than anticipated, but went downhill in the following years. They didn’t learn from the mistakes of the NASL, and tried to Americanize the game. Why go after the potential soccer fans instead of pissing off the ones you already have? Thankfully, when Don Garber became commissioner, things started to improve, at least on the field (no more shootouts, clock counting down, etc). But the economic situation was still bad, and the I/O situation was unsettled. Let’s not forget the player’s lawsuit as well. Continuing to hemorrhage money, the league contracted Miami and Tampa Bay after the 2001 season; the future was in doubt for the whole league. This is the low point of MLS’ existence.

    Phase Two: Consolidation and Growth (2002~late 00s)

    The league had survived the rough start, showing that there is a market for soccer in this country. Also, for the first time in the league’s history, every team had an owner, even if AEG owned 6 of 10 teams. Now, the number of owners has doubled from 3 to 6 (or 7 when the San Jose situation is decided) in two years. The key to this phase, and the overall future of MLS is stadiums. Next season, there will be 4 of 12 teams with stadiums, and more will be on the way. During this time period, years without new stadium openings may be rarer than years with them. Every current team will likely have its own stadium before 2010, with the possible exceptions of Kansas City and New England, since their owners also control the NFL stadiums. Thankfully, MLS will never allow a new team to permanently be in this situation again.

    The key here is profitability. I will consider this phase complete when it is achieved. Teams with their own stadiums break even at the worst. The Galaxy made money last year, and the Crew would have if they didn’t have to share the losses of the entire league. Once every team has their own stadium, the league will be making money. Until then, the money from concerts and other events helps out and makes the stadiums possible. It is then that MLS will be able to take off.

    Phase Three: Making the Leap (late 00s~???)

    Once MLS is making money, it is simply a matter of time. This final phase will be completed when Major League Soccer truly is a major league in this country. MLS is designed with the future in mind. Single entity and the salary cap have allowed the league to remain even and within its means. It’s hard to complain too much about it because without this structure, the league wouldn’t be feasible. Down the line, the salary cap will rise and single entity will cease to exist. This combined with profitability will attract new owners and expansion, creating a bigger national profile for the league, which breeds more media coverage and better TV ratings, which leads to TV money, more sponsors, more fans, better atmosphere, etc. All of these things are related; one of them isn’t just going to pop up out of nowhere. This process is a slow one, and I don’t expect it to be completed in only a few years.

    There are a few things that can help out the process, and see that it happens a little quicker. The obvious one is World Cup success. Soccer fans who aren’t MLS fans and sports fans who don’t watch MLS pay attention to the World Cup. There was a thread on here that asked people when they became a fan of MLS, and the World Cup had higher years of new fans. Any World Cup will attract new fans, but a successful run will attract more fans. By successful, in terms of the USA’s ability and increased media coverage, I would judge this to be at least the quarterfinals. People will discover the joy of watching soccer and eurosnobs would be impressed by the quality of the league’s players. (And even if they’re all in Europe, they were still developed here)

    Once phase three occurs, new owners should be easier to come by. Getting more owners will make the league better faster. However, now it’s kind of a tough sell, with a stadium required, and soccer being a lesser sport in this country. Also, guys like McNair in Houston have reservations about single entity. AEG has already said they only want to own two teams, so they and possibly Hunt will have to find some buyers. It should be made easier with new stadiums as part of the deal. A better economy in this country could also be a plus.

    Other Topics

    There are some other topics that are so enjoyably bandied about over and over here, that I’d like to discuss. First off, pure single table (without playoffs) and relegation. I don’t think they will happen by themselves, but rather together. The A-league will never be a part of this, either. I can only see relegation happening once the league gets to at least 30 teams (which would be big enough to split into two divisions). Even then, it’s unknown in this country and the economics are a big factor. Why make half the teams in the league worse off just because it’s traditional? Still, the purist fan in me would like to see it become a reality. One idea is that expansion teams could start out in the second division. It could happen, but way down the road.

    In regards to single table, without relegation it’s not as exciting. However, I could see single table being implemented, but only if the playoff system is kept. But when eight teams make the playoffs, the conference races and playoffs between conference rivals make it more exciting. With 8 of 12 making the playoffs in single table, it wouldn’t be as exciting. And if you’re going to play single table, with each team playing every other team twice in a balanced schedule, then the playoffs seem less important, and they’re not going anywhere soon. Once there are 16-18 teams, single table could happen, since a 30/34 game season would be perfect, and realigning conferences every year would be a pain. I wouldn’t mind seeing it, especially if 7 teams made the playoffs instead of 8, giving the single table winner a bye as a reward. Way more likely than relegation.

    The playoff format that exists currently is a winner. The schedule and dates can be planned ahead of time, resulting in better attendance and TV scheduling. Although home advantage isn’t as big of a factor with two legs, the top teams are still going to go through, just as they did last year. The one game conference final playoffs give a real reward for home field advantage, and a one game final is essential for creating an event. It’s a compromise between international and American tradition, and it’s a good thing.

    I feel that eventually American teams will compete in the Copa Libertadores, once the fan interest is there and the level of the league is higher. I have no doubts that MLS clubs could compete right now. None would be favorites to advance past their groups, but I don’t think any would go 0-6. Conmebol will have no problem allowing MLS teams in, if the money’s there. They have already allowed Mexico their own places. We have enough trouble now with the US Open Cup and the Champions Cup, so this will be a while from occurring.

    Another issue will be attracting more fans. As MLS becomes bigger, it’s easier to attract more fans. But now there is still the trouble of making soccer fans MLS fans. If every soccer fan in this country was a MLS fan, then the league would be huge already. Even though it’s a problem, this is a main reason, other than the economics of it, that I am very optimistic about the league’s future. It’s just a matter of earning their respect. Hispanics are key here. They showed that they could come out for an American product in 1996, but they didn’t stick around in big numbers. They will be a big part of the success of MLS, especially since they will become a bigger percentage of this country’s makeup. Chivas and Club America could be a big shot in the arm towards achieving this. They will be attracted more and more as the quality of play improves. Other factors include more Hispanic-Americans playing in MLS and more Hispanic-American kids of foreign parents, who would be more likely to support MLS and the USA. Also remember that this is the first year that the rules on the field in MLS are the same as the rules worldwide, a point of contention for many.

    Attracting quality players will be easier as the salary cap rises. There are plenty of good players who would play in MLS if the salaries were higher. Already, players from the Caribbean and Central America want to play here because MLS pays more than their home countries. The average first division/Championship player in England makes $273,000 per year. If that was the average salary in MLS (currently around $100,000 for the 18 roster players), we could get some high quality foreign players. I think MLS has gotten pretty good quality among the senior internationals so far considering the salaries they’re offering. We would be able to get young players in the prime of their career rather than the older, falling stars. The SI limit will probably increase, but should be limited so we don’t end up with an Arsenal situation. Four or five tops, plus the younger exceptions.

    MLS may not be up to the level of the Euro leagues yet, but we’re already in the top 15 in the world after only a decade. Of course, for the quality of the league to get better, the average American player has to get better, and that has been the case since the league started. As the kids who grow up watching MLS become pros, that should continue to be the case. Also, more players coming straight to the pros without going to college can only help. Guys who come out of college are already 22 or 23. Chris Gbandi was touted as a future national teamer, but he’s already 25 years old now. There will always be some great college players who become stars, but the best players are good enough to play right away.

    On this site, people always talk about 10-20 years down the road as a good timeline for the league to break out, and that seems fair. We’ll definitely host the World Cup again, probably in either 2018, 22, or 26. It should tie in perfectly with the establishment of the league as a force. I’m 22 right now, so if MLS becomes major league by the time I’m 40, that’ll give me 40 whole years to enjoy it. I can’t wait.
     
  2. SgtSchultz

    SgtSchultz Member

    Jul 11, 2001
    Parts Unknown
    Good post. When it come to quality players, I am pretty sure once reserve teams are in place we may not need an influx of young foreigners in their prime.
     
  3. NattyBo

    NattyBo Member+

    Apr 30, 2004
    Nunya
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    --other--
    For the last time, promotion and relegation cannot and will not work in a country the size of the US with the type of ownership we have here. Get over it, folks.


    Single table? Maybe in a few more years when we have 14 or 16 teams.
     
  4. somaside

    somaside New Member

    Aug 17, 2004
    killumbus o-hi-er

    People also said that the United States wouldn't work without a King and obviously that statement has changed. The ideas behind promotion and relegation are actually ingrained in popular television today. Promotion-relegation consists of losing teams dropping off of the table, which is a bit similar to “survivor” based television shows with losing contestants being dropped off the show. Not only COULD this work in this country but it is working in this country right NOW. Basicly, if the people want it, then the ownership must provide.
     
  5. Stevedm

    Stevedm Red Card

    Jan 19, 2000
    Chicago
    I have to agree. So WTF, lets say MLS went to relegation promotion next year, do you think this would cause an increase in attendance or increase in revenues for the league?? NO

    Anything that doesnt increase revenues or profitability of MLS isnt gonna happen anytime soon. No should it. If I popped 100 million into an MLS team and stadium and then they instituted promotion relegation, I would want out.
    So would most owners, not all but most.
     
  6. oscarm

    oscarm Member

    Oct 31, 2000
    Fairfax, Va
    a good post, my thoughts:
    * i wouldn't say that MLS would never allow another NFL owner to join the league and have another team play in a huge stadium. If it's a profitable partnership, they have to consider it.
    * i don't ever see single entity going away. Why would the all the owners agree to get rid of it?
    * growing to 30 teams: didn't mls state they were targetting 18-20 teams for the final size of the league?
    * promotion/relegation: again, why would any owner who pours millions into the team and a stadium agree to this?
     
  7. NattyBo

    NattyBo Member+

    Apr 30, 2004
    Nunya
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    --other--
    The odds that promotion and relegation will be dropped from the European systems are much better than the odds that they'll be added to the MLS.

    Sorry guys, its not just going to happen. There is too much money involved


    And for the record comparing a reality TV show to a multi-million dollar buisness venture is quite possibly the worst analogy Ive ever heard.
     
  8. ElJefe

    ElJefe Moderator
    Staff Member

    Feb 16, 1999
    Colorful Colorado
    Club:
    FC Dallas
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Indeed. Look, there are a couple of dozens NFL owners who control their stadiums, but only use them 10-15 days a year. They'd probably like to have another 20 dates in their stadiums, but they haven't gotten into MLS because of that whole "almost nobody makes any money being involved in an American professional soccer league" thing.
    Indeed. I could understand owners' wanting to get rid of single entity if MLS truly were a single entity, and if the league office ran EVERYTHING. But MLS' single entity is just barely a single entity and doesn't extend that much farther than player issues. In other words, other than player issues, AEG gets to run the Galaxy as it damn well pleases and HSG gets to run FC Dallas as it damn well pleases.

    It's incredibly owner-friendly, other than the whole "not making money" thing, which is really all that potential investors care about.
    Well, I wouldn't take that as gospel. Several years ago, the NFL stated that they weren't too interested in expanding beyond 30 teams. Now they've got 32.
    About the only way that I could ever see promotion and relegation in MLS would be if MLS started its own second division, single entity were still in place, and things were arranged such that MLS2 teams received the same share of league revenues as MLS1 teams.

    But even that is a long shot.
     
  9. somaside

    somaside New Member

    Aug 17, 2004
    killumbus o-hi-er
    Yeah...television or entertainment in general has nothing to do with soccer? are you insane? What is soccer anyways…well it’s a sport but that’s not how businesses view it…it’s multimillion dollar entertainment…actually a live competition just like a reality TV show pumping millions of dollars into this hoping to receive a gain…granted they don’t pump millions into just one contestant BUT the idea is that they’re pumping mass of amounts of money into what people WANT to watch.
    Common if you’re going to bash my statement please give me a proper argument against it…
     
  10. NattyBo

    NattyBo Member+

    Apr 30, 2004
    Nunya
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    --other--
    I said it was bad as an analogy, not that soccer had nothing to do with telveision and entertainment.

    Maybe you should practice reading comprehension.
     
  11. somaside

    somaside New Member

    Aug 17, 2004
    killumbus o-hi-er
    Funny coming from someone who apparently does not know what an analogy is...here's a good def...analogy "similarity/parallel, working on a more or less continuous signal-Webster’s...now what you said "not that soccer had nothing (should be anything) to do with television and entertainment." Should I go further or should I continue to insult your high school education?
     
  12. swedcrip34

    swedcrip34 New Member

    Mar 17, 2004
    right now any of Lurie (Philly), McNair (Houston), and Allen (Seattle) would have a MLS team in a heartbeat if they put up the expansion fee and gave a reasonable deal on using their NFL team's new stadium.

    I actually think there is a difference between using a new NFL stadium and an older one (Arrowhead, Giants Stadium)

    I can't think of any other markets MLS would want in for sure without a firm SSS commitment. Not sure if the new stadiums in Detroit and Atlanta are suitable for soccer (width). Maybe the new Phoenix stadium and St Louis as the other NFL teams I could see MLS considering partnering with.

    Not saying its ideal but if a NFL owner showed he's in for a long-term commitment to the league I think MLS would take most in. There statements over the last few years seem to be targeting Seattle (Allen not interested but willing to partner with the Sounders group), Houston (McNair lukewarm interest so pursuing Chivas in Robertson), and Philly (Lurie lukewarm, Temple football in the way though once out of the Big East I question its viability)

    2/3 long term owners in MLS are NFL and AEG has been eyeing LA for some time for NFL. Definitely not an anti-NFL group.
     
  13. scaryice

    scaryice Member

    Jan 25, 2001
    I think that the league needs stadiums, and since they've done a pretty good job so far in getting them built, they would be stupid to settle for NFL stadiums. It makes the league look second rate, and hurts the experience too. I really don't think we'll ever see an expansion team permanently in an NFL stadium again.
     
  14. swedcrip34

    swedcrip34 New Member

    Mar 17, 2004
    I agree stadiums (SSS) is the most pressing priority. I agree MLS wants them as part of expansion team plans. But they almost put a team in Seattle next year without such plans. I think for a few markets I wouldn't be surprised if MLS settled for NFL stadiums. Hope not, but wouldn't be surprised.
     
  15. NattyBo

    NattyBo Member+

    Apr 30, 2004
    Nunya
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    --other--
    Grammar smack, last resort of someone who cant take the fact that their idea just isnt going to work :rolleyes:
     
  16. somaside

    somaside New Member

    Aug 17, 2004
    killumbus o-hi-er
    Actually, I was correcting your grammar but I was "smacking" your logic, or lack of in your case. What I was trying to say but that clearly you could not "comprehend" was never say never. Case in point Red Sox beating the Yankees tonight (reverse the curse baby!). More or less history tends to shows us that things change, which you obviously have no grasp of.
    On another level...if we took promotion-relegation and observed it on a fiscal matter we would find that it is much safer to buy a lower team than one in the top league. Owners who buy a team in the bottom league have to front less money than they would at the top (meaning less of a risk). Then as the team continues they can determine whether they would want to put more money into the team so to appeal to more people. We're talking a gradual increase of money rather than an all or nothing thing. So really which makes more sense?
    Now back to my other topic, Americas like "survivor". This is an undisputable topic. But what is disputable is whether they would like to see teams being dropped out of a sports league which I say they would be in favor of. Entertainment is entertainment. The ideas are in place in popular culture and even though soccer is not some reality television show it still appeals to the same people. So not only does this make more sense financially, it makes more sense culturally as well, which basically is what your talking about whether you realize it or not.


    Soma out!
     
  17. dcc134

    dcc134 Member+

    Liverpool FC
    May 15, 2000
    Hummelstown, PA
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Promotion/Relegation - good for fans, bad for business. Right now MLS needs all the business help they can get. Not going to happen.

    Expansion to 30 teams - FiFa wants first divisions with no more than 20 teams. With the number of games on the schedule as it is, there would be no way to schedule a home and home for every team. A league where each team doesn't at least play every other team twice, doesn't have an even playing field. We complain enough about getting a single table.
     
  18. somaside

    somaside New Member

    Aug 17, 2004
    killumbus o-hi-er
    it would be bad for teams already in the league to some extent...but it wouldn't be bad for teams just entering the league as i explained in my comment above to el doucho. If the league got enough original teams at the current level...then certain teams got huge then we may have justification for doing promotion/relegation but I'm pretty sure it will never happen in my lifetime.
     
  19. Clint Eastwood

    Clint Eastwood Member+

    Dec 23, 2003
    Somerville, MA
    Club:
    FC Dallas
    Promotion and Relegation just can't happen for a long time if at all. I think people who say they want promotion aren't intimately involved in the A-league. There seem to be only 5 or 6 stable A-league teams. Syracuse made the semifinals of the playoffs and finished 3rd in attendance at 6k a game. Yet we here in Syracuse aren't sure there's even going to be a season next year. Financial stability just isn't there. Just THIS year it looks like Edmonton, Calgary, Syracuse, Cincinnati, Charlotte, and one other team may drop from the A-league. Look at the attendance figures. Cincinnati had less than 400 people there per game.

    This year the Montreal Impact would have been promoted. What do we think of a Canadian team in MLS. That would open up a can of worms. Dallas would have been relegated. So we want to take away one of the biggest TV markets in the US and replace it with a French-Canadian city. Doesn't make much sense any way you look at it.
     
  20. Rommul

    Rommul Member

    Aug 26, 2003
    NYC
    What leads you to believe this?
     

Share This Page