Philly News http://www.philly.com/mld/dailynews/sports/5748933.htm Toronto News http://waymoresports.thestar.com/NA...l_pageid=979619472127&call_pagepath=Home/Home Seattle News (yesterday) http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/sports/134685105_blaine29.html from the philly article- Garber said the MLS is "bullish" on Philadelphia, Houston and Seattle, which all have new stadiums. i think mls really wants those big cities compared to the smaller markets like the 2 in OKL and Rochester. that being said, there really seems no way things will move along fast enough to have any of those 'big 3' in for the announcement we were told that will happen by seasons end. houston possibly will gain steam after usa beats mex next month. philly just seems like wishful thinking at the moment as is seattle.
oh and more from the philly article- The Eagles are known to be negotiating with Temple to have Temple's home football games played at the Linc, and those talks are thought to be close to an agreement. In the past, the Eagles have felt MLS dates would probably conflict with Temple dates. i guess the eagles feel theres more money to made from Temple football than MLS soccer. it would def. be easier/less of a headache for them to deal with temple compared to ownign a soccer team.
Exactly. Temple is going to do what they, Bob McNair, Paul Allen, the Glazers, and everyone else who brought up potential MLS teams as a selling point for their NFL stadiums really wants from pro soccer, and that's pay rent and give them all kinds of ancillary revenues. One would think that after the league pulled the plug on the Buc's tenant that NFL owners would realize that their pals' Lamar and Bobby K. have the right idea. Actually running the soccer team will result in more revenue long term, especially when the MLS FO isn't willing to just get reamed on a stadium deal anymore. That Lurie is hemming and hawing shows that Philly ain't getting a team this go-round. It'll take something a McNair or Allen to make the Kraft-like jump to get Jeffie into the ownership mode of thinking.
Weeknight MLS games at the Linc in September and October might be a tough draw, what with the weekends reserved for college and pro football. I wish it all well, but... Wary of MLS publicly sucking up to NFL owners. Deja vu... Free rent, but the plug could be pulled on a whim (Count the NASL teams snuffed by their NFL, MLB, major arena owners). Ideally, better to have potential owners with a genuine desire (and 10 mil burning a hole in their pocket) for an MLS franchise, and its success as their primary concern. Sounds more like the case in Toronto, according to what's been in print. We'll have to trust Garber & Co. know what they're doing regarding successful expansion.
That's another good point. If Temple ends up at the Linc, then it's Giants Stadium all over again, just without the bad turf. It's a shame the shared-stadium effort with Temple never really got off the ground... Yeah, but those guys were spending (and losing) a lot more than they would running an MLS team now (a la, once again, Uncle Lamar). McNair, Lurie, and Allen need to be schmoozed because they are potential investors, just like Express Sports or the Rhinos people. I agree that I'd rather see an OK City-type situation than a KC/NE situation, but investors are investors.
Temple football averaged 19,077 a game last year (thanks to a 33,169 crowd for the Miami game) and 18,440 the year before. I don't know what Temple charges for football tickets, but if they have (usually) 6 home games a year and average 19k, that's 114,000 tickets. When I went to school, students got cheap tickets (back in the dark ages). Temple has 32,000 students, and, I would guess, a bunch more alumni in the Philadelphia area, and obviously they don't all go to the games. Let's say that with fat cat seating and student tickets balancing each other out, it's $15 a ticket for Temple football. That's $1,710,000 in football ticket revenue. Which limits what they can pay in rent to the Eagles, obviously. Let's say an MLS team plays 15 games and averages 15k at $12 a head. That's $2,700,000 in ticket revenue, or a million more. And the Eagles would keep it.
Well, they probably figure that Temple would draw better at LLF than at Vet's. And owning an MLS club rather than renting to one makes sense to you and me, there's gotta be something about the economic realities of the league that making Lurie hesitate and made ethe Glazers kill their slightly-tarnished golden goose rather than buy into the Mutes when they had the chance.
Yeah, but how much better? Somehow I think the thing that's keeping Temple football at 18-19k wasn't the Vet. I'm sure they would at first, and maybe for the whole first season. But there's a certain level of demand for the product, and, while I don't know for sure, I'm willing to bet the Vet isn't the biggest factor keeping it where it is.
I think it might be put into effect this year, but I believe the NCAA has said if a 1-A team averages under 20,000 for two straight seasons, they get relegated to 1-AA, and this is Temple's last year in the Big East, they become an independent next year. San Jose State might be in the same boat also with the attendance.
Yes, which is why anyone who is convinced that MLS will expand in 2005 is an idiot. MLS might expand in 2005, but it's far from being a done deal.
Based upont the couple of Temple games I went to at the Vet a few years ago (my son was in the marching band), they'd have a hard time filling the Burn's new digs with the number of fans who show up. Maybe I just went on bad days, but some of the projections earlier in the thread sure don't jibe with my experience. I think you're being too kind. You must not be from Philadelphia... My guess is that Temple pays more attention to education than it does to football...too bad there's not more of that going on in colleges these days.
NCAA Rule 20.9.6.3 Football-Attendance Requirements "The institution annually shall average at least 15,000 in actual attendance for all home football games. (Revised: 4/25/02 effective 8/1/04)" Doesn't say the process by which they'd lose you as a Division I-A school, or how long that would take.
I know better than to argue with Kenn's numbers, but I'm sorry...emple is doing some serious book-cooking to claim 18,000+ a game, even with Miami. NOBODY goes to Temple games, unless there's a rock concert or something afterwards. Anyway...your second point is the more important one. Even assuming Temple draws that much, there is a good chance a Philly MLS team would draw close to that amount, and Lurie would get to keep all the revenue. Not a bad deal.
Those numbers seem about right, but do not measure how much would flow to Lurie's bottom line. Depending on lease terms, most or all of the hypothetical $1.7mm on the Temple lease goes to Lurie. On the other hand, the $2.7 gross from a Philly MLS team goes to the Single Entity, and how much of that is returned to Lurie depends on how much is lost in other venues. So, even a modest profit from Temple (at least in the short run) could be more attractive then sharing the losses at MLS in hopes of an ultimate big score.
I went to two of the Temple games at Franklin Field this year and as high as the numbers are, I suspect they are true. Temple also played Oregon State this year, which attracted 20K+ IIRC. Games against schools like Syracuse with big alum populations tend to spike attendance as well.
people should also keep in mind that with temple- they are just getting their money and not doing much for it. with a philly mls team, they have to do all the work of putting the front office together, putting a team together, marketing, etc and all the stuff that creates headaches. the Eagles could be thinking its worth it to deal with temple jsut b/c its garunteed money, philly-mls isn't.
There is entirely too much logic at work with those who advocate the Philly team in MLS. It is entirely possible that Lurie just doesn't like soccer. It is entirely possible that he sees getting into MLS as just getting into bed with Anschutz and Hunt, and doesn't want to. Both of these are probably compelling enough reasons for Lurie to decide against cutting a $10 Million check. He knows MLS needs him a lot more than he needs them, until there is an investor in Philly, who could build them a SSS. Obviously, there is no such person just now, so MLS's negotiating position is damn near non-existent. Also, the point above, that the Eagles would get to keep the revenue, is wrong. They would surrender all of that revenue under SEM, and that is yet another reason for Lurie to be wary. There is an article cited in the Seattle thread which says, in effect, the only way that an MLS team in the new Seahawks Stadium would make sense is if Paul Allen owned the team. The same principle would seem to be the case in Philadelphia.
Gee, thanks, Mr. Obvious. Technically, the Eagles wouldn't keep it, it would go into the MLS LLC coffers, so I'm wrong there. But Whatever Corporation Gets Benefit From Having the Eagles at Lincoln Financial would likely get more out of having 15-18 MLS games (and ancillary events, like potential World Cup Qualifiers or other friendlies) than having 5-6 Temple games, depending on the terms of the lease with Temple. And, if MLS approaches profitability (which, as we keep hearing, is not only a goal, but could potentially happen), that would help.
Lurie is a soccer dad. Next, he specifically had his architect design his new stadium to have sufficient width for international football. lastly, Lurie sees himself on the social cutting edge in the advances of sport in this country. ps... he needs to fill a lot of open dates in his stadium hence pursuing Temple football... and mls, in a very quiet way... he's very secretive in what he does as Eagle fans will attest. also Temple is getting kicked out of the Big East, and is probably moving to Conference USA... now if their basketball team follows, that's more interesting
If Lurie wants an MLS franchise, he'll get one (It doesn't matter what the Eagles fans feel). If not, then Philly loses out. End of story. But from what I've read about the Philly/Eagles fans, is there just total hostility to soccer in Philly? Why should Lurie fear/care about the backlash from Eagles fans if he thinks he can get soccer fans to come see MLS in his stadium?
I would think he wouldn't. The Eagles will always be the prime tenant and an MLS team wouldn't encroach on them, so I don't know what Eagle fans would have to be pissed about (unless they're just generally frustrated for losing the NFC Championship Game at home).