Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Soccer in the USA' started by USRufnex, Nov 25, 2015.
the 88% of 1058 fans polled. Not 88% of American soccer fans.
Oh, the 88% from that Deloitte report again... and the majority of fans in the exact same poll said the US is not ready for pro/rel.
Was there something wrong with the methodology?
This seems an odd criticism on the face of it. ALL polls are based on sampling.
Shh...we're not supposed to talk about that part.
I saw the hashtag... I just have no idea what the hell it means.
Y'all this is why we had to start our own league
His stance is that it is "88% of American soccer fans"
He's saying the 1058 respondents are the entirety. It's a representative (as polls are) sampling yes. However, this comes from the TARGETTED Deloitte "report" that was funded by you know who.
Even for a poll it's skewed ... but the tag line that keeps getting repeated from the guy that says everyone else misrepresents identities in fandom here, is that this represents 88% of American soccer fans, period. It's ridiculous to claim it AND attempt to use it as a proof for the pro/rel narrative.
Oh, and he ALWAYS leaves out the part that the exact same poll/respondents said "but yeah no, we ain't ready for that"
Being targeted is certainly a problem. I was just saying--the fact that it was a sample of 1058 soccer fans in and of itself shouldn't be the problem.
oh, no ... and if it came off as THAT being the issue apologies.
First, I'd like to wish Sac Republic midfielder Ray Saari a happy birthday today! Born 24 years ago, after MLS had already been established, and one year before MLS played its very first games in 1996. I hope he gets his birthday wish. I hope he makes the roster if/when Sacramento is announced as an MLS expansion team.
Unfortunately, it literally doesn't matter how well or how poorly Sac Republic does on the field of play in USL. It's just as likely Sac's MLS roster looks nothing like their USL roster once they secure an expansion spot. And Ray, someone who has arguably made all the right decisions in his youth soccer/university/lower div soccer development in the system we have right now, could be stuck as a minor league journeyman....
But to answer your post, I myself would have responded to both Deloitte questions the same way as the majority of over 1,000 fans surveyed. It is not hard to do so, is not hypocritical, and is entirely logical. Answering affirmative to wanting Pro/Rel and thinking a transition to Pro/Rel could/would be beneficial, while at the very same time admitting we're not really ready for it right now.
However, that doesn't mean that I (and a solid majority of other American soccer fans) don't believe we shouldn't at least start moving towards a more open system in this country. Yet MLS seems to want to move in the opposite direction.
From Page 1 of this thread:
Because it's an important issue to alot of us.
Garber needlessly disrespected a reasonably viable soccer community.
A community that should be valued as potential MLS TV viewers, at the very least.
I'd hoped the conversation at that time in 2015 would have revolved around what an unlikely series of events would need to take place before KC could be "relegated" all the way down to playing in a largely amateur defacto-D4 summer league... and the equally unlikely series of events that would need to happen before CFC could "win its way" into MLS... but alas...
That happens in pro/rel leagues as well.
Show a study that shows this. There isn't one.
Garber pointed out a fact. Lower leagues aren't up to snuff. Kicking MLS teams down to play on Chattanooga's borrowed college football field or Louisville's shitty minor league baseball diamond isn't good for soccer and the owners aren't going to go for it. If that pissed of the few thousand people who go watch interns play in Chattanooga and the hipsters in Detroit who cares? Soccer in the US is thriving without them.
Except for some reason it's ok for FC Cincinnati to go to MLS in a borrowed college football field and for NYCFC to play on a shitty major league baseball diamond.
Never mind that half the top flight stadiums in Europe would not meet your or Garber's definition of "up to snuff" while the team's that play in them would crush anyone in MLS.
One last thing: unlike Cincinnati, Chattanooga FC isn't playing on a borrowed college field. It's a municipal stadium, that a college also rents.
FCC upgraded the current stadium they play in and are building a $200 million stadium stadium and a training ground.
I’ll agree NYCFC is a mess and shouldn’t be in the league. They’re also not crowdfunding their team then backing out of USOC because it’s too expensive the very next week.
So, I mean, if I had to guess based on your choice of a honeybee avatar, you seem to be some sort of hipster retro Chicago Sting fan? I mean, I loved the resurgence of vinyl over the 1980s/90s compact disc takeover of LPs as much as the next guy but... Look up average attendance figures for the Chicago Sting and compare those avg attendance figures from 1978 to 1984 for the too-small-for-MLS Tulsa Roughnecks and let me know what you find out...
Right, but clearly no harm is coming from them playing in Nippert this season. The Don didn't force them to be a traveling team out of embarrassment. How "major league" each club's stadium is should be pretty low on the list problems MLS is concerned with.
That's not why they dropped out of USOC.
Nope, it's a minor tribute to the Pittsburgh Stingers, the first soccer team I followed.
I should clarify... I'm not saying that any shithole stadium is good enough for MLS, but a state of the art soccer specific palace seems an unnecessary requirement.
You hear Atlanta United fans wishing they were back in Bobby Dodd all the time (they're wrong, but free to have wrong opinions). I have no doubt the same will be true with Nippert.
But where does MLS say you need a state of the art soccer palace? It seems to be the owners that are throwing money at stadiums and of course the Don is suitably impressed, but the important thing is that the MLS team has some control over revenues and that spectators can see both goals (which is a problem with Nippert I understand).
Audi Field will host XFL games from February 2020 until about a month later when the league collapses.
The revenue bit is key (regardless of league, honestly), but you've got to be kidding me if you think Garber would consider a team without a commitment for a "major league" stadium.
*City Football Group exempted, apparently
They seemed to have a plan at the time--having the Yankees on board certainly gave them some clout--and I can't blame the league for taking a chance on what seemed at the time like an opportunity to get a well-funded team in the city itself.
Sometimes plans don't work out. It clearly hasn't with NYCFC.