Well, after such a poor weekend for MLS attendance, I decided to look at the attendance numbers for the year. While the mean attendance (15423) looks good, and the median for the year so far (13271) is respectable, I noticed a disconcerting pattern of instability. Look at the breakdown of attendances below: (The numbers in parenthesis indicate # of games with attendance under 10,000) .............................Below 12,000.........12,001-19,999.......Above 20,000 Kansas City....................5(3).....................0...........................4 Dallas............................8(6).....................1...........................0 Colorado........................4(4).....................3...........................2 San Jose........................7(6).....................2...........................0 Metros...........................4(2).....................3...........................2 Chicago..........................3(1)....................3...........................3 New England...................5(3).....................3...........................0 LA..................................0.......................2...........................8 DC..................................0.......................6...........................3 Columbus.........................0.......................7...........................1 TOTAL.............................36....................30..........................23 If MLS had a very stable fanbase (which it will hopefully establish soon), the bulk of attendances would be in the middle category (12,001-19,999), right around the mean and median figures. That would demonstrate an ability to consistently draw a decent-sized crowd to standard league games (no big promotion or doubleheader needed). Yet the attendance breakdown shows more attendances are down below 12,000 than in the stable middle range. Of 89 MLS games played this year, 36 (40.4%) have been played in front of crowds smaller than 12,000, and 25 (28%) have been played for less than 10,000 fans. Thus, teams like the Metros, Rapids, and Wizards, which sometimes draw these low attendances, have to compensate with big events (doubleheaders, fireworks shows) in order to get attendance to a decent mean. The result is instability - a reliance on foreign soccer or non-soccer events to try to help MLS soccer attendance. My beloved Wizards are the model of this type of inconsistency. 5 games below 12,000 fans, 4 games over 20,000, and ZERO games in between. Most discouraging of all, the biggest game in the first half of the MLS season, LA @ KC, couldn't even draw in 10,000 fans this weekend. Granted, the weather was poor, but if there was an MLS game to go see on value of MLS soccer alone, that was it, and because there was no special promo or incentive to come, attendance was a letdown. The Rapids are similar to KC, relying on a crowd of over 30,000 for Freddinho and a 4th-of-July crowd of over 40,000 to keep attendance numbers in the respectable range. If there is a bright side to be found in these figures, it's that LA, Columbus, and DC have succeeded in establishing STABLE soccer fanbases. I'm particularly impressed by the small-market Columbus Crew, the model of consistency. While teams in Chicago and the New York area are drawing under 12,000 every second or third game, the Crew has yet to have a single game with under 12,000 tickets sold this season. And of course there is LA, the market that really is 10 years ahead of the rest of MLS. With almost every game drawing over 20,000, the Galaxy are the only team whose attendance median is higher than its attendance mean, and the LA median is close to double that of every other non-DC MLS team. It's easy to note that two of the three stable fanbases, LA and Columbus, share one thing in common: a soccer-specific stadium. Question for anyone who knows: were the fanbases this consistent before the SSS's were built? I'm sure LA's was, but what about the Crew? Also, I have no idea what these numbers were like for seasons past, this is the first time I've broken attendance down in this way. Anyone know if the instability is a new pattern or have crowds in markets like Colorado, KC, Chicago and NY/NJ always fluxuated so much?
It's really pretty simple. The three most stable teams, attendance wise, are the two with SSS and the one with the fetus starting at striker. The Metro will do much better once they have their own stadium (they are in a major metropolitan area, but the Meadowlands is not really convenient for public transportation. The new stadium is supposed to come near a new PATH station). Dallas alienated their fans with the year in the high school stadium, and hopefully they will rebound when Frisco opens. I'm most surprised by the dips in NE and Colorado. Those teams had been relatively stable before this season, but seem to have dropped off considerably this year.
I can't speak for NE, but when KSE took over the Rapids, they let most of the ticket staff go, figuring that their organization could handle it. This was a dumb idea because the Nuggets are on the way up and Avalanche are local gods. The Rapids became an afterthought within the KSE organization. Couple this with a totally unexciting team without any real stars that plays boring ball and which couldn't score if the other teams keeper was in a wheelchair. It's actually fairly easy to understand the Rapids drop in attendance. This is probably only a temporary situation, since KSE is still on-track to build a SSS. They have a record of leaving the present staff in place until they get their bearings in a new market. Expect wholesale changes.
I think the MLS should spend a little more time building a real fan base and not, just trying to sell seats. It cheapens the experience and drives away the potential fan. I brought over 40 people to the Metro game this weekend, most enjoyed the game, none enjoyed the experience. A good product ina bad wrapper..
Amen, I go to sporting events for the atmosphere, the experience. The game itself is not as important as those factors. While I am a huge fan of MLS-I have only been to 1 game. It was at Gillete Stadium and the Revolution beat the Fire. It was an enjoyable game but the experience wasn't all that great. Whereas I've been to a Rhinos game a few years back and I can't even remember who they played but that was a much better experience. All the more the reason for smaller more intimant stadiums, which bring fans closer together and a better experience. My girlfriend (who knows nothing about either league, but played game as a youth and is type of person MLS needs to further fan base) always suggests going back to rochester as opposed to New England. SSS will put this product in a better wrapper
And it would be had you not cherry picked your endpoints by making 12,000 the cutoff. If you had made it Below 10,000, 10,000-20,000, and 20,000+ there would be (by your numbers) 25, 41 and 23 in the three groups respectively. Multiple endpoints. Among my most hated pet peeves. When a baseball announcer says a player is 6 for his last 11, it tells you two things: he got a hit 11 at bats ago and he didn't 12 at bats ago. This is the same principle.
For the most part, these numbers are very comparable to what we've seen in past years. The main exceptions are On the negative side: Dallas: Southlake aftershock continues and NE: "create demand" ticket policy seems to be backfiring On the positive side: LA: promos and modest ticket price cuts have helped the Galaxy obtain a fanbase to be proud of
**But most people dont get this. they like to crunch numbers each week happy when a team draws 17 or 20 thousand or disappointed when they draw 10.. Its not the number, its the type of fans the MLS draws and the giantness of the stadium. i would rather watch a game in a small 20,000 seat stadium with 5000 real fans than in a giant one with 20,000 kids and soccer moms squealing when the furry mascot hits the field..
Don't be so certain on Columbus' fan base. Greg Andrulis is quickly driving people away (and wrecking the franchise as he does it) with his stupidity.
I have never been known as someone who is overly optimistic about Wizards attendance, but last week's Galaxy game was absolutely ruined by the weather. Many people who actually went to the game were called idiots by their friends and family because the weather was that bad. We're talking flash flooding and 50's in the middle of July. The night forecast was calling for more. This was torrential weather. I had 4 casual MLS friends all cancel due to the weather. I had been looking forward all week to taking them to such a great game. They just laughed when I asked if they still wanted to go. Easily wouldve been 12k+ with good weather. There was absolutely no promotion for this game either coming after 2 big weeks.
The mean MLS average attendance is between 15,000 and 16,000. 15,911 last official count I saw, though I'm sure it's dropped since last weekend (by my approximation somewhere around 15,500 now). At any rate, I didn't "cherry pick" any cutoffs, I took 16,000 as a rough mean and moved 4,000 in either direction. 16,000 middle, 16,000 + 4,000 = 20,000, 16,000 - 4,000 = 12,000. Although I guess I could've done 15,911, 19,911, and 11,911. I'm definitely no math major, but it seems to me going 6,000 below the mean on one hand and only going 4,000 above on the other would be "cherry picking" my endpoints. Anyone with a thorough knowledge of statistics, please feel free to correct me if my method was flawed.
I figure that MLS just needs to keep its head above water (or close to it) for the next three years. By then, not only will there be SSS's in Los Angeles and Columbus (and remember that Chivas LA attendance will also be 20K+), but in Dallas, Chicago, NY (hopefully) and Colorado. Judging from the past and with the oncoming production of good young, US born talent, these stadia will also be averaging at least 20K. That means that by 2007, the average league attendance I predict will be right around that magical 20K number, which is better than most leagues in the world. More and more players from MLS will be sold to European clubs throughout the next years as well, which should help offset to some extent the club's losses until that point is reached. Here's my 2007 attendance prediction: Los Angeles / 25K Chivas LA / 26K Dallas / 18K NY / 23K Colorado / 22K DC / 18K New England / 16K Columbus / 17K San Jose / 12K Salt Lake City (SSS?) / 15K Kansas City / 18K Chicago / 23K MLS average / 19,417
A better method would be to use your same methodology with the median rather than the mean. The mean is skewed away from the lower data points by outlying high-attendance events that have little to nothing to do with the strength of regular fan support for MLS teams.
Gees, Jacen I find myself disagreeing with you more and more often these days. What's up with that? I wouldn't call anything that happened with Columbus attendance good this year. They've had 2 crowds this year above 15,000 and haven't had a crowd larger then 13500 since May. Attendance is down like 4% from this time last year. The Crew is 7th in total attendance, I can't think of a time the Crew were ever 7th in league attendance at anytime in the season no matter what the other teams were doing. The moral of my story for all you other inspiring SSSers out there, build it and they will come only last so long. After a while it takes a good entertaining team at home and good strong marketing by the FO to keep attandance good. Of couse things could improve. If Wednesday is nice the Crew might get a few more people then normal interested in Szetela as well as dollar brats if he's still around Wed. Then there's the gimick game against DC the FO has spent so much time promoting at the expense of the rest of the year that is almoast sold out.
the attendence numbers are silly... They are so far off from the actual people that actually show up that its impossible to calculate anything using them. Its not the ticket sales thats goin to grow the league, its developing a fan base. Developing interest, not just finding warm bodies to sit in the seats.
Of course to an extent. The mean he already has. So if he calculates the standard deviation and sets the group as one SD from the mean, he should get three groups with roughly the same number of games in each. The only way he should expect more in the middle group would be if MLS attendance fit a normal distribution, and we already know that it does not (the median being significantly different from the mean pretty much kills that one from the start). What he'd need to do is compare MLS attendances with those of another league with a similar average like say Division 1 in England or the Eredivisie in Holland.
Yes, we'd much rather have fewer fans. That will solve all of our problems. "Hey, those people aren't like me - they're not here for the same reasons I'm here. So they don't count." MLS can't spend crusio's satisfaction.
I apologize for accusing you of cherry picking it. Nevertheless, it doesn't really matter whether you did it on purpose or not. What's the reason for using 4,000? Why not 6,000 instead? Or 3,000? Or 5,000? Just because you didn't cherry pick it, doesn't make 4,000 any more valid of a choice. In other words, there has to be a reason for the number you choose to add and subtract from the mean, otherwise numbers you didn't pick are just as valid as the one you did pick. So find out the standard deviation of the numbers and use that as the +/- from the mean, and you should wind up with roughly three even groups. My guess is you won't, that the last group will have fewer games than the first two. Then you'd need to compare your MLS results with the results of another league with similar attendance and see where and how it differs (compare standard deviations and so forth) and what that might tell us about attendance. Sorry for being short before.
Not really because you're more or less begging the question then. The difference between the mean and median in MLS is, in and of itself, a subject for dicussion and debate. How does it compare to other leagues, what does it mean to the stability of the league, and so on and so forth. Certainly knowing the median is helpful, but for looking at the numbers he wants to look at, the mean is the right number to use. When the median is significantly lower than the mean, that's going to evidence itself in those groupings.
Does anyone wonder why Minneapolis is never discussed as a new franchise for MLS? During the height of the NASL, the Minnesota Kicks frequently had over 40,000 people at their games. Seattle and Vancouver also had high attendance, and I was shocked (didn't remember this) that Portland averaged nearly 18,000 per game. Wouldn't these cities naturally boost attendance for the league if they were included in expansion? I live in Dallas, and I can tell you that when the Burn moved to Southlake, it alienated everybody, but especially the hispanic fans, who live very far away from Southlake. Add to that the fact that the Burn was terrible under a very bad coach last year, and that they are a lame duck team until they move to Frisco. No one in Dallas could even find Dragon stadium, and it was lined with football lines, which really offends soccer purists. The Burn (FC Dallas) once had strong attendance figures, and they will again, but they will build it mainly from a non-hispanic base that lives on the north side of Dallas. The area where they have placed the stadium is easy to get to for most of the non-hispanic crowd. The front office will have to come up with a way to entice the hispanic audience to drive all the way to Frisco. Anyway, Dallas will start producing decent attendance figures again, plus the team seems to be back on track now that the new coach has figured out what to do with Johnson, Pareja, O'Brien, and Davis.
Can someone explain why San Jose can't get a decent crowd, even though they've got Donovan and MLS Cup Trophies? I hate their stadium, which looks like a field for indoor soccer, it's so incredibly narrow. Why does MLS stick with San Jose, when it is obviously apathetic about supporting the team. I think they should relocate to Portland immediately, where there are many serious soccer fans. Apart from that, either Seattle or Vancouver, but at least there would be serious fans in any of these cities who would really get behind the team. Alexi Lalas is a smart guy. I hope he succeeds in moving the team to a place where it can flourish.
See, I didn't rip a newbie That was a long, long time ago. Different time, different place, different circumstances. Minneapolis-St.Paul seems to be a fine home for the A-League. If they had a place for an MLS team to play and someone willing to own the team, they'd be worthwhile. Ditto for Portland. But neither city has a potential MLS owner at the moment. And what they did back in the 70s and 80s has no bearing on what they'd likely do today.