No, they're not - not right now, and not for a while. Those other teams in other sports get those TV dollars because there's intrinsic interest in the sport, expressed first as attendance and then as TV ratings (and the revenue that can be generated by them). I can't think of a team sport that has bad attendance but good TV numbers. If you're hoping that the Great TV Revenue Pumpkin is going to rise out of the pumpkin patch and save MLS, I would advise you not to hold your breath. MLS can do fine as a niche sport once it has completed the objective of funnelling all of the revenue streams in. But I don't think it's ever going to command big TV dollars.
And I think MLS can grow enough without going after the top TV dollars to eventually command top dollar. And an exciting new venue they are going after is the internet broadcast. Now if only they'd advertise their internet broadcast via AOL IM or another high use outlet.
I hope internet broadcasting becomes lucrative. If it does, MLS will have stuff in place already. I don't know that it will, but I don't know that it won't, either.
I like that. But that makes it difficult as a fan. There will be professional soccer in this country - and more than likely it will be MLS. But, as you say, it will not grow in a way in which we are accustomed, thus making progress harder for us to measure.
ken , If you are to look at soccer across the globe you will see that only a handful of leagues have attendace higher then MLS. If you cross out the top 10 leagues MLS would be top of the rest in attendance. You will ask yourself , How do those leagues make it with attendace number under 10 k and pay their player 2 and 3 mil a year. That is what i am talking about. One cannot deny the fact that lets say 100 mil/year in TV revenue wouldn't help MLS. Ultimately you cannot say that TV is not important, other soccer leagues survive becouse of it.
You've missed....my point. I didn't say TV wasn't important. Yeah, it would be nice to have that revenue. But, as I said, you only get TV money when you have proven interest in your sport, most often expressed first and foremost with people who pony up to attend games in person. European teams and leagues are losing scads of money and going into administration, are they not? I'm sure it's been discussed on here before, and I don't have the link, but I'd love to see the list of world leagues and their average attendances. More importantly, I'd like to see the list of world leagues and the revenue they generate and the amount of money the teams spend. Point being this: As I've long said, if you're hoping for that one big TV contract to save MLS, don't hold your breath. If it's going to come, it's going to come because the sport becomes popular as a spectator sport, and the amount of tickets you can sell is going to drive any interest from television.
Just to follow up on that, some European leagues and their average attendances: League.................G......Total.....Average German Bundesliga.....306..11,432,307...37,360 English Premier.......380..13,313,427...35,035 Spain La Liga.........359..10,426,760...29,043 Italy Serie A.........306...7,934,578...25,930 French Ligue 1........379...7,667,026...20,230 Dutch Eredivisie......299...4,906,425...16,409 English Division One..547...8,740,120...15,978 Scottish Premier......216...3,288,842...15,226 Portugal..............306...2,899,099....9,474 English Div. Two......556...4,191,051....7,537 English Div. Three....555...3,018,009....5,437 English Conference....467.....922,735....1,975 All from soccerstats.com. I can't find a good resource for leagues outside of Europe, though, so if you know of any, let me know. The other thing about all those other leagues is that the domestic soccer league is, by and large, the television sports property to have - it's not like they have a boatload of sports for networks to spend tons of money on. That lack of supply helps drive up the cost to the networks as well.
http://www.geocities.com/worldfootballrankings2003/Top125Leagues.html wasn't able to copy and paste but MLS is the 12th league in soccer attendance (stats seem to be from last season) 1.England 35,170 2.Germany 33,380 3.Spain 29,209 4.Italy 25,916 5.Mexico 21,928 6.France 19,433 7.Argentina 17,676 8.China 16,766 9. Netherlands 16,091 10. Korea 16,023 11. Japan 15,930 12. USA 15,852 13.Scotland 15,661 14. England 15,237 ( first div) 15.Indonesia 15,029 16.Russia 11,643 17.Algeria 11,210 18.Iran 11,199 19.Brazil 10,703 20.Germany 10,198 (second div) 21.Sweden 10,161 22. Belgium 10,148 others South Africa 10,068 Turkey 9,064 Colombia 8,714 Ukraine 7,629 Romania 7,139 Portugal 7,095 Denmak 5,667 Poland 5,326 Chile 5,281 USA indoor soccer 5, 068 A-League 3,037
Good stuff, thanks. I'd like to be able to find the numbers for some of those non-Euro leagues for the most recent season.
This doesn't really have anything to do with Rochester or Soccer, but since we are talking attendance and average... Here are some numbers I would love to see in MLS New England....70,469 Denver............70,880 Chicago..........65,255 Washington.... 75,372 Kansas City.....72,742 NY Jets...........73,113 San Francisco..65,646 Dallas.............66,981
And I'd like to see Molly Sims under my Christmas tree. Both are equally likely. Just to clarify, I didn't mean for me. I meant for the league. Soccer broadcasting's never going to be very lucrative for mic jockeys. That's not why we do it.
I have added an official counter for the number of days we have been waiting for the Rhinos final (hopefully) geology/hydrology report. Here it is... http://www.rhinosfan.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=540&highlight=
I don't understand how SLC has stepped in front of Rochester as a front runner for MLS expansion. I hate it.
Rochester would probably be ahead if the park was going to be done this year. In any case they're a "very strong candidate" for 2006, so what are you worried about? If Utah gets in, and they start next year, they'll be ramping up in a very short period of time and playing in a less-than-optimal stadium situation for at least a couple of years. If Rochester comes in after that, they'll have their organization in place, years of a track record and history, and a brand new stadium. So what are you worried about? That they'll get their team first? So what?
Rhinos management continues to say they are in close talk with the comissioners office. It seems likely they have informed him that PTP won't realistically open until June or July of next year, and HQ wanted a stadium available on opening day. Rochester just doesn't have any other stadiums that seat 20k and up, like SLC and Seattle already do. (A side note: Rochester is the largest metropolitan area in the US without D1 athletics or a major league team.) I would really like to see Seattle join the league and hope they can come up with an ownership group. Again Chris Economides the Rhinos GM has said it's really not a matter of IF anymore but when. And it is looking more and more like 2006 is when.
With the news today that a stadium in SJ is unlikely, does this add any credence to the 'Quakes franchise relocating to Rochester? What if the net gain for the western conference next year was only +1? Would people in Rochester cheer for that roster without LD?
And it would mean the return of Pat Onstad. And Jamil Walker would be returning to his hometown and would get warm welcomes IF he ever got any playing time. BUT could I ever cheer for Richard Mulrooney or Jeff Agoos or Craig Waibel? I'm not so sure.
Why is MLS overlooking Rochester. over 14,000 for a mid week friendly game and averaging around 10,000 in the A-league. I don't buy that small market crap. With Buffalo & Syracuse nearby Rochester can more than hold its own. MLS should be searching for investors for Rochester. Rochester (Soccer Town) for MLS 2005.
They aren't. Just not for 2005 because the stadium isn't done yet, and may not be done in time to start the season. But Garber said they're a viable candidate for 2006. In fact, here's everything Garber had to say on Rochester on May 19: "You know, every day they get more and more viable, it really is amazing what’s going on with their team both on and off the field. They compete well, they’re managed very well, Frank DuRoss the owner is a great operator, Attendance-wise they’re doing well. Rochester is a market that at some point, if not some point soon, that we need to be in. Now, again, it’s not a market that is going to help us as much as we need help in some of the large cities that we hope to be in from a television perspective, but we need more people supporting the game of soccer. At some point we’re going to have 20 teams and at some point we’re going to be in places like Rochester, so, now that they’re going to be in a facility in 2005, they go really high up on our list. Rochester is a viable candidate, not in 2005, but very likely in 2006." (Emphasis mine)
Well if i was the MLS i would naturally choose Rochester as it seems to me (being an outsider) a football city and with a team it will be a 'football capital' with it's support behind it.