The British Press is reporting that the English League are seriously considering playing regular season matches in both Asia and the USA. If true where are they likely to be held and what impact could they have on MLS attendances?
Yeah - the idea is laughable. I can't wait to hear about how the title was decided because ManU had to play Chelsea three times and Arsenal played Derby three times and the championship was decided by 1 pt. The beauty of a home and away is that the schedule is as balanced as you can get. If they are willing to get a team(s) to give up a home fixture - then it is far more workable.
Well, if things actually happen according to the current proposal (which is far from certain, since some important people will obviously speak out loudly against it), we're talking about 2 or 3 or maybe at the most 4 matches in January 2011. I can't imagine that this would have any impact whatsoever on MLS attendance. What makes you even mention that it might? I would assume that the games would have to be played in places like LA and Miami, since I can't imagine anyone wanting to play in January in someplace like Chicago, Boston, or New York.
Just to clear things up, the matches will be seeded, like 1st vs 20th, 2nd vs 19th etc, so Manchester United will not end up playing Newcastle three times while Arsenal play Derby three times and win the league because of this, all teams competiting at the top of the league will play those at the bottom of the league, which isn't great for a spectacle but at least it'll maintain some fairness. And they will be a 39th match, so no one will lose any home matches. The plan is for 10 games, so thats one match for each of the teams, I'm quite interested as to how much a mid table clash between Portsmouth and Newcastle would draw in Dubai...but anyways, the matches will probably be split between the Middle East, Far East, North America and Australia, I wouldn't be suprised to see New York, Philadelphia, Seattle, Miami and Los Angeles appearing regularly on the schedule. (Toronto and Chicago too if clubs don't mind playing in the cold, and it's never really bothered English clubs). Either way the fans response in the Uk was been crazy, everybody absolutely hates it, but it doesn't really matter as it will go ahead anyways, if the FA and the clubs want it, they don't give a damn what the fans think.
The problem with this proposal is that you won't know the seedings and site assignments until after the other 38 games are played. So this means that the games will probably played in late May, after the FA Cup final, which gives the promoters only two weeks to promote the matches once they are assigned to particular cities. Or, it pushes back the FA Cup final a week but gives promoters only one week to sell the game. Either way, the entire season gets pushed back another week... which national team managers hate given that every other year has either a Euro or World Cup in June.
Here's the AP story: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/07/AR2008020701374.html ----------- Premier League Matches to Go Overseas By STUART CONDIE The Associated Press Thursday, February 7, 2008; 12:52 PM LONDON -- England's Premier League could be going global. The league's 20 clubs agreed unanimously Thursday to examine proposals to expand the regular season and play 10 games overseas starting in 2010-11. The matches would be played at five venues around the world over a single weekend in January 2011. Each city would host one game on Saturday and one on Sunday. The international round would be in addition to the traditional 38 home and away matches each of the clubs currently play. "We can't escape the fact that globalization of sport is with us," Premier League chief executive Richard Scudamore said. "This is a response to that globalization. ... By design we have become a global phenomenon. We cannot go on manifesting that phenomenon as a broadcast proposition only." No potential host cities or countries have been discussed, Scudamore said. However, he said the league would avoid venues with potential bad weather conditions. That would appear to rule out the U.S. East Coast and Midwest. Despite protests from coaches that their players already have too many matches, the switch to a 39-game season would start in 2010-11 when a new television broadcast agreement is scheduled to take effect. The Premier League initiative follows the success of American leagues in staging football, basketball, hockey and baseball games outside of the United States. ------------ the write-up continues.
This does not seem finalized. The club owners in England appear to be at the stage of "examining proposals." Does FIFA (and its member Confederations) have to approve this? if the Premier League wanted to play league games in the US, I can't imagine that FIFA/Concacaf/USSoccer/MLS/SUM would be all that pleased with the idea. well, i could see Concacaf (and perhaps a few of the other organizations) going for it if they got some British pounds out of the deal. i think it would be in MLS/SUM's best interests (if they have any say or influence on the matter) to make it very "costly" for English Premeir League games to be played in the US.
I think SUM would be more than happy to help the PL plan and organize their matches here in the U.S. if the price is right. Especially in January since it won't clash with MLS play.
This is on top of their regular league? Aren't the English clubs always bitching about fixture congestion? How is this gonna help?
They said they will rule out any cities that may have 'bad' weather conditions. That sucks because I live in the midwest, and they will play these in January. But I bet that they will opt to have these in the larger NFL venues that have retractable roofs like Reliant, U of Phoenix, or the new Dallas.
If this happens, I don't see how this possibly harms MLS. We're not in season during January and if anything it just keeps soccer in the spotlight in a time of year (January) where there is little US Soccer to talk about. I'll bet you a dollar, however, that it never happens in this form.
I hope they make the mistake of having Bolton v Wigan in a 70k stadium. That would provide some good laughs. Or maybe since its January theyll schedule it in a football stadium thats hosting a playoff game. Could you imagine Arsenal or Chelsea playing a premier league match on football lines?
You could see that, but "10 extra matches at 5 venues" sounds like doubleheaders. So if one's Bolton-Wigan, chances are they'll balance it out with a match from the Big 4. (According to the current plan, the top 5 teams would get seeded to not play each other in these games, so it looks like it would be one each.) But there could be big competitive balance issues here. Supposing it was going on this year, and Wigan drew Arsenal, while Fulham drew Sunderland. That's essentially giving Fulham an extra game given the tiny likelihood of taking points off Arsenal.
The EPL would be wise to remember the ill-fated Champions World series of matches. It's possible to attract fans to a one-off with clubs that they haven't seen for years. But it's not going to work year after year. Once the novelty wears off, the attendance will go down quite rapidly. Should MLS be worried? They're probably laughing their asses off right now. EPL clubs would be lucky to draw 20k in warm-weather cities like Miami or Atlanta. And in cities like Houston, Dallas, or Phoenix, they'd do poorly unless they were playing Chivas or America. It's always amazing to me how much foreign teams overestimate the appeal of their brands in the US.
The 5 venues would be worldwide. I really don't think it would be much of a problem to keep finding places that haven't been overexposed. Plus the CW matches didn't count for anything, so you never knew what you'd get effort-wise. The money-making aspect is the easy part. Ironing out the competitive questions, and navigating the political opposition, would be the hard part.
Whilst this is a shockingly crap idea and nobody seems to want it to happen, I think this has more to do with making money in Asia and the Middle East than it does with doing so in North America. Forecasts show that the Premiership could well be making more money globally than the NFL by 2011 apparently. But FIFA should tell the FA Premiership to eff off if they consider hosting matches in countries where a professional football league is established. The A-League, MLS, J League and various others could probably do without this sort of nonsense.
I don't blame them. Hell, why not just divide 'em up into conferences and divisions, and have the big four play each other 37 times each (more big matches=more money!). Maybe they'll also drop 6 teams, expand to Glasgow, end promotion/relegation, and move Reading to Leeds.
Agreed and I posted something similar in this thread. Really this sounds like one of the new owners (either Thai or American) came up with this idea and the others, knowing how negative the reaction would be, let him make a fool of himself.
Interesting points, and I tend to agree that some of these games might not be especially compelling to international audiences. Timing also would have a huge impact on these games -- a mid table clash in the United States in January pitted against the NFL playoffs doesn't sound that easy to me, nor is a March game during the NCAA basketball tournament going to generate much buzz in the media. If they played now, in February, as several people have noted they would effectively lose most of the northern venues that might have otherwise drawn larger crowds in places like New York, Chicago, Seattle, Toronto and New England.
But give a damn about players who are not robots... This is just proposturous. Some EPL teams play on wed. then a game on sat.. imagine being in LA for agame and flying back..... It makes no sense to give up a home game toplay a game on a pitch you never played before in another country.....NO SENSE. 60,000 hard core fans or 60,000 fans of which 25,000 are fans and the rest don't care what happens who ever win its all the same. for a littlebit of money??? Most of the teams MAN U, ARSE, CHE don't need it that bad. And I don't think US fans will pay HIGH ticket pricess for a Reading= Derby game.