http://www.washtimes.com/sports/20030916-114722-4842r.htm Just like Brandi in '99, WUSA loses its shirt By Tom Knott THE WASHINGTON TIMES Goodbye, WUSA. It was fun while it lasted, all three seasons of it. There never was a market for a professional women's soccer league, just a feel-good moment that supporters felt compelled to shove down the throats of America. The WUSA was like asparagus. It was good for your humanity... (Text of copyrighted article removed)
Some good thoughts You could see the writer was digging a bit but I think he made some good points. "The WUSA investors swallowed the hype that enveloped the U.S. women's soccer team during the World Cup in 1999 and came to regret it." ..." The buzz, however genuine at the time, was transitory instead of transcendent, as proclaimed." " ...Title IX works as a charity of the federal government, not as a business model, and this could not be more self-evident following the collapse of the WUSA. The WNBA, the sister league of the WUSA, survives as the principal charity of David Stern and the NBA. "
This is my first, and probably last, post on the WUSA forum, but the news brought me over here. In response to your post. To a die hard fan of any league, that article would seem mean-spirited and obnoxious. That doesn't take away from the fact that its entirely true.
to what extent is an opinion piece ever "entirely true"? it's the WAY he expressed them that's an insult (or should be) to all soccer fans, and especially women. that kick-em-while-they're-down attitude is sickening.
Oh really now? The point of the article is that soccer will never succeed in the US, and he's not just talking about the WUSA. The soccer bashers are having a field day with this. Let them. Ignore them.
This is where the author shows his ignorance. If there were no market for a professional women's soccer league, it wouldn't have drawn the attendance it did.
knott clearly WANTED the league to fail, and is now gloating. one would think the guy was somehow hurt by women playing soccer...just shameful.
From the Article "The sports marketplace, aside from football, basketball, baseball, hockey and NASCAR, is crowded with this or that. Yet soccer, no matter how many leagues come and go, persists in following the business model of the well-established sports leagues. The overhead inevitably exceeds the grasp of soccer, the men as well as the women." I guess this guy is not aware of the Home Depot Center. While this is a sad day for soccer, it is a reminder of what an excellent job MLS is doing in a difficult situation. Hopefully lessons learned by the quick failure of WUSA and the slow but steady progess of MLS can be used to make sure that the next womens league is a success.
The tone of the article aside--and it should be offensive to all US soccer fans, since women and men are paintedwithnthe same brush --certain, harsh realities must be faced. The last MLS Cup saw 61,000 at The Big Razor. That is a healthy attendance for a league championship, even by Euro standards. The WUSA championship drew only 7,106. That is simply unacceptable for a league that claimed so much --best women's league in the world, excellent product, quality on the field: all those things we heard and read over and over. Where were the fans? Something as good -- and as 'empowering' for women -- as WUSA should have commanded a far, far larger following. So the reality is that, as good as we imagine WUSA to have been, there was only modest support for the league. That must be faced when the time comes to have another try.
I know what the point of his article is, and it can't be denied that soccer (mens or womens) has had a rough ride over the course of the last 50 years. Sure the last 10 years have been incredible, but we're not out of the choppy waters yet. He's basically correct in that so many kids play the game, but it doesn't stick as they become adults. And thats the main thing leagues like MLS and WUSA have to conquer. I do ignore them, thats why articles like this one that I read about soccer all the time don't even get my attention. They're almost funny in a way. Heres the deal, and let me just say I really dont want to get into one of those damn threads where its me against a whole lot of people that disagree with me because I know I'm in an area of BS thats a little touchy right now and I dont want to be that guy. But many soccer fans (again, both men and women) have this "us against the world" attitude. And they seriously need to stop. The thing is, the rest of the world doesn't care about the topic as much as soccer fans let it get their panties in a bunch. You see, its kinda like when the dork in high school worked up the courage to go up and talk to the hottest girl. She brushed him off and crushed his feelings, but a couple hours later she had forgotten all about it. Thats what WUSA and MLS are to the rest of the sports, and regular, public. The dorky kid asking for attention, when in reality they should just enjoy who they are and not worry about what everyone else thinks. Cause in the end, its often the dorky kids that turn out to be pretty cool adults. It may not be a perfect annalogy but the point is clear. Soccer fans need to enjoy their sport and not let jackasses that write these articles get to them. I get tired of hearing (or reading) the comments like this: "it's the WAY he expressed them that's an insult (or should be) to all soccer fans, and especially women. that kick-em-while-they're-down attitude is sickening." or "it was mean-spirited." Who cares how he said what he said, it seemed pretty darn accurate to me. Like I said, it just stings more when you're the fan of the league that got shut down. And Spartacus, theres a difference between league and event. The same conversations came up when the Champions World Tour pulled in so many people. Getting attendance for a one time event is MUCH easier than filling a staidum every other week for 4-6 months. If anyone should realize that fact is a USWNT or WUSA fan, just like most MLS fans realized during the CWT. So no, he wasn't really showing ignorance with the statement you quoted.
the question i have is, can any league in any sport remain afloat w/ modest support? mls seems to be hanging in there, but subtract a couple billionaire benefactors and what exactly do you have?
You're absolutely right (I've pointed out that distinction many times on my home boards) and that's where WUSA went absolutely wrong with its business plan. I think there was a confusion with front-running during an event translating into week-to-week interest. The boom success of WWC99 was just too heady and someone should have moderated the expectations. However, to make a blanket statement that "there never was a market for a professional women's soccer league" is just outright wrong. There is a market for it if the business is run correctly. That's where the ignorance of all these columnists is brought to the fore. If they knew the situation in its entirety they'd know that it was the business plan that failed, not the game. Unfortunately, they've only read the headlines and, as someone posted a few pages ago, smelling blood, applied their own interpretation of the situation...which is so far removed from the truth it ought to be run on the fiction pages.
Spart, you and I sure think a lot alike. Is that because we occupy the same stadium several times a year? There's nothing wrong with the game and it's not the fact that it's the women's segment of the game that took a hit (it is construed as a hit against the game by the soccer haters but that's it). If the powers-that-be take a realistic look at what was done wrong in the business plan and rectify those mistakes, I don't see why it can't take off again.
To be fair, keep in mind that the host team was involved. MLS has done well on both occasions this has happened (RFK sold out in 1997 for United). A better comparison would be the other five MLS finals (about 34, 51, 44, 34, 20K), though this still tops WUSA easily (21, 14, 7K). While the article was clearly mean-spirited, it was largely true as well. There are not many fans of women's soccer in this country, but plenty of fans of having an excuse to wave an American flag and chant U-S-A, U-S-A. Nonetheless, if WUSA management and founders had ANY clue as to what they were doing, I think they could have succeeded. Among the mistakes were gross overspending in Year 1, spurning a working relationship with MLS and other entities that had a good deal more experience at this thing than they did, a general arrogance that turned some fans away, and an over-pursuing of kids/families that drove still other fans away. If no one else steps forward, I think MLS will in two or three years when they have enough of their own stadia to make it profitable. I think they will do a better job of it as well as Don Garber sees the big picture a heck of a lot better than anyone in WUSA ever did.
Ben, I agree with much of what you said, but what about the quote I cited from the article: "Yet soccer, no matter how many leagues come and go, persists in following the business model of the well-established sports leagues. The overhead inevitably exceeds the grasp of soccer, the men as well as the women." Doesn't that show a complete lack of understanding about what is going on in MLS right now? Which other league uses single entity as their Business model? The completion of Crew Stadium and the Home depot center and future SSS have specifically targeting the problem of overhead. This guy obvioulsy thinks MLS will go the way of WUSA, and I don't think it is complaining to much to at least hope he could get some basic facts correct.
No, this guy wants MLS to go the way of WUSA...he's using "the grasp of soccer" as a scapegoat for the WUSA demise, not poor management. Whereas we just want writers like him to just go away. What is it about soccer that American writers find so threatening? No American sports columnist writes in such disparaging terms about NASCAR, lacrosse, whatever burgeoning sport is on the horizon...but soccer seems to be a scourge on the collective psyche of the American sports journalist.
I agree with you. There are many moron writers out there that think this way. They think that MLS is running like the NFL, when in fact its not at all. I'm not saying this writer is right about every single thing, but his article was mostly true while arrogant and mean at the same time.
And many are under the frame of reference that for a league to be a "success" they need to fill grand stadiums with 70-80-90,000 for every gate opening...just like the NFL does. And if you can't do that, then it's not worth doing.
It's threatening because 1) it is dominant in every country in the world (those were not baseballs US troops were handing out to kids in Iraq as seen on TV last night), 2) to pay serious attention to a sport, it must be a sport in which the United States dominates. If there were no such sport (as the Big 3, or now Big 4 are ) the United States would have to invent it (NASCAR is almost pure American, or at least pure Southern, lacrosse is barely in the viewfinder); and 3) a tremendous amount of psychic capital (and money) has already been invested in the Big 3 and that is what the US sportswriter/columnist knows. Those are the basics as far as I see them right now.