You'll find this on every team, regardless of the number of DPs that they have on their roster. It would be an interesting thought experiment to go through the MLS rosters and see what the median non-DP pay is and to see if there is a point per dollar relationship between the non-DP median salary and their points at the end of the season. Interestingly enough, prior to the latest CBA there were players in MLS that were getting wages that made them eligible for food stamps... Miami doesn't need to field all three with named DPs, they could put out 2 name DP and 1 "play" DP, or 1 name DP and 2 "play" DPs, where the play DP is someone that is making a million or less, or has a transfer fee applied against them. The Sounders have used all three of their DP spots on "play" DPs ever since they've had the option and they've had the second best record in the league since. It is all about the players that you put around the DPs, if Miami hits S. America hard they can find high quality players for an inexpensive price. They just have to be willing to pay for their own team scouting and not rely on the league scouting. NYRB and LAG are also the only teams currently in MLS that have the opportunity to field 3 really high paid big name players at the same time.. The Sounders and Timbers are starting to improve their international reputation with their crowds, but the turf they play on are going to prevent any name player to go there.. The rest of MLS? Name DPs are looking for a place to end their careers, they aren't going to want to spend that time in cities like Sandy, Columbus, or Frisco. They want the glitz of the big city and in the US that's NY, LA, Miami, and, maybe, Chicago. You don't have to make the choice. One of the beauties of having three DPs is that teams can do both. Miami can easily get one name DP to draw the crowds and 2 play DPs to improve the overall quality of the team, or if they want to hit two segments of the population, 2 name DPs and one play DP. It all comes down to what kind of sponsorships they get, to be honest. The Galaxy got the largest local TV contract in the league because of Beckham and promising to bring in big name DPs after he left.. And one of the highest prices for their shirt sponsor and stadium sponsor, plus all of the other sponsorships, the merchandise sales thanks to the DPs name on the back, etc and you're talking about some serious money coming in.. And that is before you even consider the number of people they bring into the stadium (both at home and away). If Miami is able to use their DP(s) to get better sponsorships then the DPs could pay for themselves before they even step on the field.
Wait, isn't that what many of the pipe-smoking Strikers fans around here have suggested since they damn well know MLS will never have a team in South Florida named Ft. Lauderdale? So you give the Strikers credit for "not wanting to disappear" even though they did but point to the Fusion's contraction as a reason why a Miami team won't work even though that club "didn't want to disappear"? Makes sense (if you're a biased Striker Liker).
This is so often overlooked by the short-sighted Strikers fans, that it is downright embarrassing on their part.
There is NOTHING that would stop the Fort Lauderdale Strikers, if in MLS, from signing the same type of players and getting the same type of sponsorship deals. DPs can be good for any team. That's not the argument. The pro-Miami crowd seems to think that those names alone will draw sellout crowds and make the team legit to the masses of Latin soccer fans. And they also seem to think that a "Miami" team, as opposed to a Fort Lauderdale one, would make it much easier to sign those players, and that's just downright ridiculous. If Frank Lampard or Drogba or whoever comes over, it would be just as easy to land a big sponsor on the front of a red & gold Fort Lauderdale shirt as it would be for a Miami one.
Except the city name.. Yes, it sucks, but Miami is the city with the name recognition, not Ft. Lauderdale. And yes, it is a seemingly trivial issue that actually matters quite a bit.
Sorry, not buying it. What player would not sign for DP money because of city name recognition? We're not talking Columbus, Ohio or Sandy, Utah vs. Miami here. If they want to party on South Beach they can easily do so, and they can even live there if they want and commute to training/games. For a player FTL/MIA makes no difference. For the overall well being of the club, location can and will make a huge difference down here as to whether people will actually support the team. Kendall in the summertime, on plastic, in front of 8-10,000 people won't be as enticing to players as a lot of people think it would be. And last I checked nobody is signing for Liverpool or Manchester United because of the beach or club scene. Team name recognition/tradition can be more important than where that team happens to be. Once you get past convincing said player to sign with the team, that opens up the sponsorships. Had Beckham signed with the Crew, they would have had the most valuable shirt deal in MLS. They would have gotten a great TV deal and gotten loads of exposure. The team itself(and everything that goes with it - history, fan support, players) is what matters, not the team's location, when talking sponsorship. Manchester or Green Bay aren't terribly marketable city names, but they do alright selling sponsorships for their pro sports outfits don't they? LeBron James and the NBA saw no less money and interest when he was suiting up for Cleveland than they do now with him in Miami. Put together an organization worth associating with and you can easily get your players, your sponsorships and your TV dollars. On the flip side you can be the Miami Marlins who have no players clamoring to play here, and the ones who do play here that are worth anything clamoring to leave. To claim that a Fort Lauderdale Strikers MLS team would have a harder a time attracting players or sponsors in any significant way vs. a Miami team is ludicrous.
Sorry but I do not agree with this. Just the name Miami carries a lot of weight in many peoples mind, people will ask where is Fort Lauderdale and agents will tell their clients is in south beach near Miami. As soon as they hear Miami they will get exited knowing that they would be really close to that city, but the selling point will be Miami. Just like Los Angeles is more of a selling point that Anaheim. Now maybe MLS/ownership group would do something crazy like the Angels and call it the Fort Lauderdale Strikes of Miami.
Wrong, wrong, wrong. There's a reason why players abroad repeatedly asked Grant Wahl when MLS would get a team in Miami. Not South Florida, not Ft. Lauderdale, Miami.
I can't believe a couple of you are still trying to cling to this completely, embarassingly absurd notion that the city name means any more than Jack Shite when it comes to a successful American pro soccer team in this market. MLS is running a business, not a city name popularity contest. Why is this so hard to understand? Sheesh. Business wise -EVERYTHING points to a far greater chance of success north of the Dade/Broward line. EVERYTHING. With this carrying on over the name Miami, all you're doing is ignoring every business and historical fact about the history of the sport and its support in this market and instead trying to make it be about something irrelevant. But then, anyone who is advocating for a team in Miami is doing this already anyway, so it's not something that soccer fans actually dwelling in reality in South Florida aren't used to dealing with. Players care about money, and winning. Some might have a minor care for history and tradition which is fine too. Owners care about money and winning. They couldn't give two craps about history, tradition, names, or even locations, except for how it affects their chances of being successful financially. When you cover up the names, put all the facts of each location on opposite sides of the ledger, and step back and look, it is insanely EASY to see where an American pro soccer team should be located in South Florida. And those are the things that owners and players care about. As for sponsors, they only care about one thing - exposure. How many eyeballs are looking at their product and ads. The ONLY thing that matters in this case is how many frakkin people are seeing and hearing the ads! It's doesn't matter if it's Donut Hole, IA or NYC. Whatever puts the most butts in the seats is what matters to them. If you guys really are too short-sighted to get these simple concepts, then carry on arguing about them, I'll be looking for better conversations around the forums.
Miami > Ft. Lauderdale to anyone who isn't familiar with America beyond a pop/cursory level. A special needs chimp could understand that. If Toronto's team was in Mississauga, it would still be called Toronto and that would matter. If Montreal played in Laval it would still be called Montreal and it would matter. A team in Surrey would go by Vancouver and that would matter. Nobody internationally knows about, or cares about, Ft. Lauderdale but Miami is a known destination spot. There's a reason the NFL doesn't have the Landover Redskins or the Arlington Cowboys.
And why teams that play in New Jersey want to be called by a different State name (yes I know is about the city). Same with the San Francisco 49ers, they will keep the San Francisco even after they move right next door to San Jose San Fran > San Jose in terms of name, plus they have history with that city name.
There are Fort Lauderdale Strikers jerseys new and old for sale all over the world and especially in Europe. Ask any proper soccer fan abroad about american soccer teams and your top answers will be Cosmos, Strikers/Rowdies, Sounders, Galaxy, Red Bull. We're not talking about vacationing here people. Were talking about soccer. Also, Fort Lauderdale is a MUCH bigger city than any of those suburbs you mention above. Fort Lauderdale IS NOT A SUBURB OF MIAMI. It's it's own very populous city with plenty of resources to support a MLS franchise on it's own.
The 2012 estimated populations (rank among US cities): Ft. Lauderdale 165,521 (141st) Arlington, TX 375,600 (50th) The Canadian cities I mentioned according to their 2011 census numbers: Mississauga 713,443 Laval 401,553 Surrey 468,251 Other than Landover the areas mentioned are MUCH larger than Ft. Lauderdale. Nobody other than fanboys see value in using the Ft. Lauderdale name instead of Miami which is an internationally known city.
Fort Lauderdale is as far from Miami as Baltimore is from DC. It's actually further from Lockhart in FTL to FIU Stadium in Miami than it is from RFK Stadium to M&T Bank in Baltimore. Fort Lauderdale is not a suburb, it has it's own suburbs. Population in a city proper is deceptive. There are 1.8 million people in Broward County which is the de facto Fort Lauderdale "metro area". That makes it much bigger than Salt Lake City's metro area, and about the same size as San Jose, Kansas City and Columbus. Portland is 400,000 bigger which is not a massive difference. And neighboring Palm Beach County has an additional 1.3 million people who would be much more likely to support(and attend games for) a Fort Lauderdale team than a Miami one.
I've already done all the US Census research that needs to be done. http://www.flight-19.com/2013/05/20/editorial-examining-the-south-florida-soccer-markets/
Gotta agree with RalphsMom, Fort Lauderdale is in NO WAY like any of those suburbs you mentioned, because it's not a suburb. It's 30 miles from Miami. It has it's own international airport(one of the 50 busiest on the planet), downtown skyline, a song by Elvis about it(lol), and is culturally distinct from Miami. Oh, and it's a historically well known and successful DOMESTIC SOCCER MARKET. Pretend Miami doesn't exist for a moment. Is Fort Lauderdale an attractive location for players and sponsors? YES. Does it have a large enough population to support a team successfully? YES. Does it have a history of supporting the local pro game? YES. If Fort Lauderdale was akin to Arlington or Landover, then the "Miami" Fusion would have had no problem drawing fans. But FTL is not a city that leeches it's identity off a larger city nearby. It has it's own culture, it's own history. Instead MLS treated Fort Lauderdale as if it was Chester, PA, and insisted on calling the team Miami, in the same stadium where the Fort Lauderdale Strikers had played 14 of the previous 20 years to a pretty successful degree. Comparing Fort Lauderdale to places like Carson, Commerce City or Sandy is ridiculous. So again, what difference does it make to a player? They make the same money and if they're so enticed to party in Miami they can do it(like some current Strikers players do, and they do it on a D2 budget while driving Corollas). And with the Fort Lauderdale Strikers the league would get a team that has decent crowds in the seats when they show games on national TV. Everybody wins. Also easily forgotten by a lot of people around the country when asking "hey why doesn't Miami have a team": THEY F#$%ING MOVED TO FORT LAUDERDALE BECAUSE NOBODY SHOWED UP OR GAVE A DAMN. And the teams before that ALL struggled and either did the same or went out of business.
The funny thing is for all the arguing you guys do, there's NOTHING saying Strikers want in MLS or vice versa. Strikers have actually said they want nothing to do with MLS. However, and this is FACT, Garber has mentioned Miami repeatedly and Beckham was exploring MIAMI as a potential expansion site. From where we all stand, Miami is more likely to land an MLS team in the near future. Go ahead, argue that.
None of us are arguing probability, because you're right, as it stands right now Miami is more likely to get an MLS franchise. The Strikers have made it known that they have no goal for MLS at the moment and this whole Beckham/Claure thing has taken center stage. What we are arguing is how ignorant it would be for MLS to disregard all the history of the area, the current stadium situation in the area, the current D2 team in the area (Having their best season attendance wise btw, while in last place), the current economical landscape of the area, etc. etc. The fact of the matter is that today I'm gonna board a 42 passenger bus with a bunch of other Strikers supporters and ride 4 hours to go watch one of the best soccer rivalries that American soccer has ever seen. Wether or not MLS finds that valuable is up to them. We are just voicing our opinion on the situation. ...And for the record, Seattle never said they wanted MLS either. They were bought by someone who did and look at 'em now. The Strikers are one of three teams that Traffic Sports owns and they are looking to sell 2 of those teams. Who knows where that road may lead.
Oh, one other thing about this inane comment. Soccer fans from Europe are completely irrelevant to MLS discussions at this time. MLS will be trying to get soccer PLAYERS from Europe, most of whom have little to no recollection of some random team from a small city in a league that failed nearly 30 years ago.
LOL. One of the current players on the Strikers Mark Anderson was asked about this a little while ago. His answer was, "George Best played for the Strikers. Of course we know about the Strikers back home. (Newcastle, England)" Personally I know of people and have spoken with people from England, Germany, Scotland, and Australia that know about the Ft. Lauderdale Strikers. Some of which actually planned trips to the US to come see a game. Strikers president Tom Mulroy once told me a story about a man from Germany on vacation that showed up to Lockhart Stadium wanting to see the field that Gerd Muller played on. The Cosmos/Strikers/Rowdies had some of the GREATEST players to ever walk this Earth. Pele, Chinaglia, Muller, Best, Banks, Beckenbauer, etc. etc. It's "insane" to think that they aren't at least somewhat known on a international scale.
This argument just drives me crazy too. MIAMI BEACH is your "destination spot" and is internationally known. NOBODY vacations in Opa locka, Hialeah, Kendall, Homestead, Doral, etc., etc. The closest a potential MLS team would be to glamorous Miami Beach would be a 25-30 minute drive. It's the equivalent of when they show b-roll South Beach blimp footage during Dolphins games instead of the actual stadium... STUPID.
True, good point, but it is the same for all cities, when people (Henry, Marquez) say they want to go to NYC they really mean Manhattan and not Queens, New Jersey, Bronx, etc.
That's all well and good. Henry probably has an apartment in Manhattan somewhere. And he plays/trains in New Jersey. He still gets paid the same money and enjoys the same market as if he was playing at Yankee Stadium. The same would apply in South Florida. If a player for the Fort Lauderdale Strikers wanted to live in Miami Beach there is nothing stopping them. The team could even use that as part of their pitch to coaches/players if they wanted. Attracting players would be no different in Fort Lauderdale as opposed to Miami. That's not the issue and never has been. The question is what MLS wants out of a Southeast Florida team. Do they want a team closer to the NE Revs? Or Real Salt Lake? They make that distinction based on where they locate and how they brand the team.
Are you blaming NE's lackluster FO on initial branding? Also, the league didn't know what an owners group that would advance soccer looked like in 2004 when SLC got the expansion bid, and they sure as heck didn't in 1995. The league brings in owners to operate their franchises. How they get run is out of their hands once they are accepted into the cabal.