Considering there's no way we could know and likely no way we'll ever know how MLS would draw with an 82-game season, I think there's no reason to discount our current attendance figures in this way. I'm more interested in the fact that if attendance stays around the same level, it'll be the first time (to my knowledge) we've ever beat those leagues in average attendance, which is a great thing. And, even though playing a longer season would help, hopefully some more advertisers see those attendance figures and see the potential here, too.
Passes it to who? Are they handing out free CFLs? Can I get in on that? Wait...why is MLS distributing free lightbulbs?
Given the size of our stadiums, enjoy a nice hibernation. As for more realistic goals, I'd be pretty happy to see us pass those two North American leagues.
The fact that the MLS needs no other events of any kind, a Saturday night game, and all the other excuses that are rolled out actually does prove that the MLS attendance would be much lower if played over an 82 game season. A typical NBA/NHL team plays roughly 25/30 out of their 41 home games on weekday nights....typically nights when MLS fans say "oh crap don't expect a big draw it is a school night after all." I mean FRIDAY night is seen as a low drawing night in the MLS! Give me a break.
The difference in popularity is not as big as it seems, except maybe for the CFL title game which has a 98 year history. Their entire league has about 72 regular season games (funny to think 3 Canadian MLS teams will have more games than the entire CFL next year). It's not that hard to have good attendance and ratings over that few games a year. Also, when you have a 4 month season and have the luxury to start in late June you don't have to worry about games in freezing weather which is bad for walk-up sales, especially for early season games. Having only 8 teams also make me take the league less seriously. It's not too hard to have good support in only 8 markets. The more you add after that the worse it gets and the more troubled franchises you're likely to have. There's a good reason after all these years of existence CFL can't get more than $8 mil out of their expansion teams. BTW, CFL regular season TV ratings were not too much better than MLS' for a long time. Only very recently after the change in Canadian TV ratings system that they started to pull away.
...what are you talking about? They have their business models, we have ours. You're not going to find a single soccer league in the world that plays most their games on weekdays (unless you count CL, which is a different story altogether), so I don't think making a big deal out of the days games are played is relevant. It's one factor in an apples-to-oranges comparison - if our average attendance beats the NHL and/or NBA, it doesn't make our league "better" or "bigger" that those other sports leagues, it just represents a nice sign of growth and hopefully a data set the league can use to help add to its financial backing down the road. There's other pieces of the puzzle (ratings, for example) that need to grow, too, before we can make any other kind of proclamation.
It does show signs of growth that our attendance is increasing as a league. I just don't like the term, "passing" because we aren't passing anyone. It is an apples and oranges comparison. You said there is no way to know what our attendance would be if we played 82 games because I claimed it would be lower. Therefore there is no point in comparing them in the first place. I understand what you are trying to say though.
That's why I never used the term "passing." In that sense, anyway. I disagree that there's no point in comparing them - as long as it's recognized for what it is, instead of trying to make it apples-to-apples.
I suspect he meant to say NBA doesn't need special events, Saturday games, or any of the other excuses tossed out for low attended MLS games to get their attendance. *shrug*
Ha, I see. If that's the case, he must not be familiar with all the special event gimmicks the NBA run to get butts in seats, nor familiar with this article accusing the NBA of misreporting their % capacity stats some 17%, nor ever watched a Charlotte/Sacramento/Minnesota/Washington game. And also he finds a way to ignore that half the excuses for people not attending soccer games (weather) will never apply to the NBA. The league has the same problems we've had, in some degree. Anyway, since this is an MLS thread, I'm going to leave it at that.
DING DING DING. Thanks for bringing up the point that RapidStorm blithely loves to ignore when comparing MLS versus NBA or NHL attendance. It's a rather stupid comparison (like my CFL one).
I think he meant, as an excuse for poor attendance, that people make the statement that there are other events siphoning fans on any given day. A better way of stating this would have been: The fact that an MLS team needs to play on a night with no other events in town, needs a Saturday night game, etc. does provide that MLS attendance would be much lower if played...
This is one reason why I like when there are midweek games: less down time for these kind of debates to spring up. - 1st leg of NCC Final tonight, TFC @ Vancouver. Hopefully a good turn out.
With the Canucks playing at home in the Western Conference Finals, at the very same time as the NCC game I doubt it. Horrible luck in scheduling.
I agree with this. In fact, one could argue that in the medium and longer term, average attendance would go up with more games in the season, say if the season had twice as many games. One thing that drives attendance is hype and familiarity. If games were twice a week, then MLS would probably get a fairly good TV and likely to have some good national exposure. TV execs are looking for programming to fill air time. Getting more press then drives more interest and discussion. Though the initial increase in games would probably depress the average, the medium term would probably mean an increase in game sales. Obviously all hypothetical and it means squat because players can't play twice a week over a season. However, I see no reason to think there would be a significant decrease in ticket sale per game average over the medium/longer term with more games in a season.
It's not a point I'm ignoring - it's just not a discussion worth going into, as comparing attendances cross-sport is already so apples-to-oranges to begin with. We could go into 800 different directions about the minutia that makes the raw numbers not comparable, and waste both of our times doing so. However, if you take the numbers for what they are, a sign of growth in MLS attendance, then it's a comparison to make. Also, from the point of view of, what's going to bring advertising dollars, and so on, to MLS: a league that is playing the number of games that it is and averaging less than those other professional sports leagues is going to look a lot less attractive proposition than a league that is in the ballpark/exceeding the average attendance numbers of those other leagues. If advertising people want to dig further into the minutia (and I'm sure they would), they can...but fact is we'd need the numbers to continue at this pace for them to even take a good hard look in the first place. I'm not attempting to distort the numbers to say anything beyond that.
the only thing i compare is 'game experience' as a fan. i go to sport events only in the ny area, but i do get to a good number of mlb, nfl and nhl games, as well as mls. the size of mls crowds doesn't equal mlb or nfl, but it isn't below some nhl (or nba) crowds. the fan experience is at least comparable to certain islanders games (or, i'd guess, nets games). it doesn't match rangers games. the make-up of the crowd is also noticeably different. obviously there are far more 'ethnic' fans at mls games (in ny, this means a much wider range than just hispanic). the quality of the product (which triggers the fan response) imo isn't as high for mls as for the other teams i attend. i've come away more often thinking i just saw a good sporting event even from an islanders game, than i have from a rbny game.
Sports Business Journal takes note: MLS Attendance Up 6% Through May 16; FC Dallas Up Nearly 53% At Home
Exactly. Every now and then someone makes a comparison of MLS attendance vis a vis the NBA or NHL, and there's invariably a backlash, often even an angry backlash, of people saying "that doesn't mean MLS is more popular than the NBA or NHL!", even though I've never read anyone on these threads say higher per game attendance does mean MLS is more popular than the NHL or NBA. The reasons are obvious, and need not be elaborated on. MLS having a higher per game attendance than the NBA or NHL means just that - it's getting more fans in the stands per game than those leagues. It doesn't mean anything more and I doubt anyone would ever claim otherwise. Nonetheless, this is a mark the league has not (to my knowledge) achieved before, it is an easy, "understandable" stat to people who follow other sports, and is kind of neat for some of us who've followed the league a long time.