Review: Don Garber is Back, As MLS Will Look to Solve Its Greatest Problem: Television

Mixed bag...

Bottom Line: He solidified a struggling league by getting stadiums built and selectively bringing in star players (Beckman and Messi). It's hard to argue with a league that is second in attendance world wide and future is no longer questioned.

The article mentions a few of the challenges (Columbus move and pulling out of the US Open Cup), but didn't cover the competitive problems with single entity, nor the move of the Quakes and teams who are no longer around (Tampa, and Chivas USA).

Due to the Quakes move and overall handling of move/team coming back, MLS is dead to me. I continue to be a Quakes fan, but don't watch or care about any other games (haven't watched a MLS Cup Final since 2005).

Rules changes seem more be business focused than on the field focused. Of course, my team doesn't take advantage of them...which leads to my sour grapes.

 

From that article:
When all is said and done, Garber will be regarded as one of the most important sports executives of all time — a person who inherited a league that was DOA and somehow, against all odds, managed to make it not just survive, but thrive.

But like all great sports teams, a star player can only take you so far. Eventually, you need to think about the future, and the next commissioner — whether he or she as Garber alluded to in his State of the League address — will need to take MLS to the next level.

That new commissioner will likely need to be an executive with a proven track record in television viewership and the ever-changing landscape of digital streaming services. This is someone who can truly tell MLS’ story to the masses and, most importantly, make people care about watching MLS games.

For nearly 30 years, the league has tried big stars, local talents, and various strategies to attract fans. While the league has moved beyond survival mode and is thriving in almost every area except television, Garber’s re-signing will give the league’s owners ample time to consider their next steps.

It’s time to move MLS from niche to mainstream once and for all. In order to do that, that executive can’t think soccer, they will need to think television.

 

I haven't yet read the article -- but that's never stopped me before, so here goes . . .

Garber's had his critics, there are many heard here on BS with legit gripes like that expressed in comment #2. Whatever may be his faults or his miscues, they pale in comparison to his success.

He took the reins when the Galaxy drew 8,000 at the Rose Bowl, draws were settled with breakaways, and most people called the League "the MLS". Three guys -- Lamar, Kraft, and Uncle Phil -- wrote checks annually to sustain the entire operating fund. The league BOUGHT AIRTIME for ESPN to air a game-of-the-week.

We now have about 30 teams, several cool stadiums, some legit international stars (including Messi) and a tv deal at $2.5 billion.

They should bronze this guy and stand him in the lobby forever.

 

Seriously. If, around 20 years ago, you had told someone the league would be where it is today, they would have thought you were nuts. Garber has done a legendary job.

But I don't know about television. Where would the league go? The Apple deal is exclusive.

If -- I'm just throwing this out there for consideration -- AppleTV+ decided to branch out into cable and then broadcast select games to drive MLS Season Pass subscriptions, that might work. But does it make business sense for them to even get into the cable environment?

I'm not sure how that would work conceptually, let alone what the math would look like.

 

Season Pass isn't part of Apple TV+ though, it's a standalone subscription that lives within the Apple TV App.

One thing they could do, is sub-license a separate/different version of MLS 360 to be broadcast on a cable/linear network or its own channel (like RedZone Network). Similar to how there are different versions of NFL RedZone. One for those that have Sunday Ticket, and one for those who subscribe to the RedZone Channel

 

Good questions here, and I have a couple quick thoughts . . .

1 -- I see no point in apple getting into cable, dealing with the Charters and the Comcasts of the world when they already have a proprietary set-top device and a quickly expanding content pipeline and a global brand to boot. Plus their market-cap and free cashflow probably outstrips that of all major cable operators combined. I think they'll continue to market MLS basically as an Apple product, which is to say it's very much on their own plan and not dependent upon partnerships with other broadcasters etc.

2 -- I don't give a squirt of piss for what that guy at world soccer talk says in the article about what MLS needs to do next -- he never says anything good about MLS. I kinda think MLS has just DONE what they "need to do next" -- they just made a 10-year deal with the world's best-capitalized company, one that conveniently owns their own content and distro ecosystem and has a track record of changing global consumer habits about once every 10 years.

3 -- I'm not saying I have a blueprint for how it will happen, but I will not be at all surprised if MLS is THE most-watched soccer league, GLOBALLY, by the end of this 10-year deal. I simply don't think it matters whether Charles Barkley talks about soccer when Apple is the partner carrying your flag globally.

 

Season Pass isn't part of Apple TV+ though, it's a standalone subscription that lives within the Apple TV App.

I had forgotten about this. I went for the full smash so I could watch Foundation (and found a ton of other stuff I love in the meantime), so I was in full "take my money" mode.

If I'm a typical subscriber, that's north of $200/yr. Not bad at all for a league which couldn't get the time of day in the network environment a couple years ago.

I don't have cable, and I don't stream the NFL, so I don't know how NFL Red Zone works. I do know MLB, the NBA and the NFL all have their own cable channels, and I think the NHL does too. I have an MLB subscription and stream every Mets game and love it.

 

I think you're right about this. And it's worth noting, they cut the deal and stood up a network in about two months. It's only going to get better.

 

100%. Garber is no worse than 3rd all time among US sports commissioners.

 

That went away when Sunday Ticket moved to YouTube. Now the Scott Hansson RedZone is the only version.

 

Exactly. A streaming provider getting into cable would be like a CD maker getting into 8-tracks.

 

Good points made here.

Yes, and in fact the point is getting out of a dying industry. Garber asked himself rhetorically whether he'd pulled the trigger on this too soon, but probably not, given what Apple was willing to pay. (Plus, everyone was utterly convinced that Netflix got out of mailing DVDs and into streaming too quickly, and they did just fine.) Even not counting the direct payment, Apple's compensating Messi, which is huge.

Yeah no reason to put much stock in arguments made in suspect faith.

And the nexus of this two points is basing your case on things like the general sports talking head shows that are themselves mostly part of a dying environment. I want to know whether the soccer podcasts are doing well, whether anyone is watching the Paramount+/Golazo programming, etc.

But I will say this, it is true that MLS's remaining hurdles to the mainstream US mindscape would disappear overnight if it could create One Big Event. Like, NCAA basketball has completely devalued its regular season, and almost nobody follows it anymore, but nobody cares because the NCAA tournament is a bigger event than ever.

In all likelihood, MLS's Big Event would have to be the Cup Final, so a lot of work has been/is going into trying to make that into a Big Event, or as big as possible. (Also MLS should thank it's lucky stars that UEFA has thus far not able to ram through putting the Champions League on weekends. That's the type of premium product that would staked a claim on US television and made it much harder for MLS to grow.)

I think this is probably optimistic, but I could see it among the top leagues, and I just bolded your all caps because it's the key point. The Apple deal is a global deal. People say it's restricted the league's accessibility, but in many parts of the world it actually enhanced it. And talking heads like the ones here miss that Apple may not care a whole lot where the eyeballs come from. If MLS starts drawing a lot of eyeballs anywhere in the world, it's going to result in money coming in, which will result in better players, more eyeballs, more money etc etc.

 

Yeah, on the one end, for what they did to the Quakes back in 2004-2005, I've never really forgiven Garber or the rest of powers in charge, for that matter.

Bringing the team back seemed like a good sign at the time but despite the miracle 2012 season, I don't think they Earthquakes ever recovered from those series of moves in the mid 2000's.

Anywhere else in the world the powers that be will have been punished instead of revered.

I think he did sort of the same things with the Crew but not too many people talk about that.

Since 2008, the Crew have been to 4 MLS Cups winning 3 and losing 1.

On average, that is a positive result every 4 years.

There aren't too many MLS teams who can boast those numbers and it's a credit to the people in charge of that town and organization as opposed to Garber & Co.

On the other hand, I do give Garber a lot of credit for bringing the league back from what was the brink of extinction with expansion and all the stadiums that teams now built and own.

I was living in Europe in the early 2000’s, and I had no idea MLS was about to fold until reading about it years later.

The way I see it, most teams, along with the expansion fees and the stadiums they now own, are worth somewhere between $700 million to $1billion dollars.
Maybe they aren’t a billion today but with WC 2026 coming, I don’t see how that figure isn’t realistic.

No one would have ever predicted this could be possible from 2000 to 2013 and to see the league on such healthy grounds is great for the game.

With the exception of the top team in the La Liga, EPL, Serie A or the Bundesliga, I don't think there are many clubs or leagues who can claim these valuations.

When you take all this into account, you can't help but give Don Garber praise.

 

Well this settles it:

We have the most incompetent people running our league:

• They refuse to spend more to improve the quality.

• The calendar is a disaster, competing with the NFL and college football during our playoffs.

• The league doesn’t know how to market itself effectively.

• We… pic.twitter.com/QQbx4Fpbkt

— MLS Moves (@MLSMoves) December 14, 2024

 

Engagement farming.........

-Awful quality of play
-Top-heavy teams with awful defending
-70% of teams make the play-offs
-No pro/rel
-Fake tournaments (Leagues Cup)
-Refusing to participate in the Open Cup.
-Over-marketing 1 DP as the face of the league.
-Over-complicated, dumb roster construction…

— 11 Yanks (@11Yanks) December 13, 2024

Let's break this down:

The quality of play is not awful today. 10 years ago? Totally agree is was not good.

70% of teams make the playoffs.... can't quibble there

No Pro/rel - debatable that this makes leagues better, more compelling, etc. US & Canada are not at a critical mass of teams to warrant discussions of implementing a system of promotion/relegation.

Fake tournaments - Leagues Cup is one tournament, not multiple. Competitions all start somewhere.

Refusing to participate in the US Open Cup - No they haven't. This is patently false.

Over marketing Messi - Won't argue against this. La Liga certainly overly markets Real Madrid and FC Barcelona, The EPL is certainly not going out of their way to market Ipswich, Nott Forest, Wolves, etc.

Over complicated, dumb roster construction mechanisms - Have we ever tried to understand the NFL,NBA and NHL Salary Cap rules? How about MLB's myriad of roster rules and designations? MLS' rules aren't that complicated, AT ALL.

Refusal to spend - Patently false. FCC just spent $16M on a player. Messi is paid how much? Atlanta paid how much for their last DP? I often wonder when a lack of spending is brought up if those stating this actually watch teams below the top of the UCL? Now, are there teams that aren't spending a lot of money? Yes, because they aren't spending beyond their means.

 

They are all valid points.

 

Explain please.

 

I can. 18 of 30 is 60%

 

What's a "CD"?
- People under 25

 

Just what you posted...

I posted that Garber deserves a lot of credit for bringing the league back from what was the brink of extinction with expansion and all the stadiums that teams built and own.

Maybe those points are not all entirely his fault but there are many valid and important arguments on that list.

 

I think those “arguments” are all crap except for maybe the one about overly complex roster rules.

 

The USL has the Jagermeister Cup too.....

 

England though has longstanding traditions in place but unless teams get to the final stages, many top teams don’t take those tournaments too seriously as top players are saved for important games.

Also, those games are not played with the regular season games on hold for a month and are played midweek and in most cases, with teams using reserves.

What most clubs and fans care mostly about throughout Europe’s top five leagues anyway, are the Champions and maybe the Europa leagues.

They also care about what place their clubs come in during league play because qualifying for the CL or EL could bring clubs millions in sponsorships and TV money.

I’m all for more games and I don’t mind the Leagues Cup but not so sure MLS should be put on hold for a month to play it.