I know people are already talking about this in the Attendance Prediction forum but I can't talk in there for 3 more weeks. So far, through 4 games (SJ/Met is still going on but since it's in San Jose I'm not holding out much hope that it'll be enough) the avg. is 11,002. That's horrible. After what I had thought was a steady increase in Dallas, they pulled in only 6,755. Wow. This weekend will definitly make the yearly avg. take a dive.
Ex-Freddy...even uglier... When the massive consumer-led recession hits in 2005 and maybe 2006, I sure hope MLS doesn't get its share...
When we get all the numbers would someone mind posting the yearly mean and medium after this week? I searched back through the forum and found the numbers from 2003 Week #6 w/ the same info.
7,500 in SJ? Sorry, but that's pathetic... MLS is such a rocky road....everytime you think a corner is being turned (Cleveland 'announcement'- what a joke...Adu signing, etc.), you then see this discerning- basically flat-lining of attendence. One has to question (a least a little) if things have changed much at all from the early 1980s NASL heydey when attendence were averaging in 12-14k range. That's basically MLS w/o the 4th of July, doubleheaders, etc. SJ is really weird. Move them to SD (Los Mexicanos love Landon!...that is, if he's still around) and still Chivas in SJ. 2 championships and the 2nd most marketable player in the league and attendence is a basket case...(don't start about the lost tech jobs- I don't see that effective SF Giants...
What can you do? Dallas had the Dragon debacle, and will win back fans by playing well, and smart marketing schemes. SJ AGAIN had offseasn churn in the front office. Any momentum they had from last season, was lost because of that. SJ's attendance will pick up in the second half, once the front office gets organized and starts selling tickets. Anyway, why was Lalas brought in? The last guy who was there seemed to love that team, and was pretty smart.
Attendance at the Burn game..... 47!!!! (Just kidding) But dude, what is going on in SJ? That is a surprise... unless maybe it has to do with the NHL Sharks doing well... Meanwhile Rochester of the A-League outdraws the Da... never mind, man...
Move San Jose to Colorado, move Colorado to Dallas, move Dallas to Kansas City, and move Kansas City to San Jose. Or better yet, you can either go help MLS with the league-wide attendance drop or just shut the f*** up. -G
Hey Goodsport, how come your thing says you're still a moderator. I heard from a little birdy that you were removed from that position?
Coming into this weekend the per game average league-wide was 13,660. After tonight it's 13,137. This weekend the average was 10,306.
What I see is increasing polarization between the league's haves and have-nots. I don't know if the bad attendance bred neglect or if the neglect bred the bad attendance.But I do know that it looks like a downward spiral. Maybe this league will have six teams in a few years and finally average 20,000 fans.
Last years week #6 attendance was 12,391. Bringing the 2003 average at the time to 13,925 median, 14,842 mean.
FYI - 3:00 games in Dallas are historically low attendance. In May all the kids and their soccer families have afternoon games of their own to play. We had almost an inch of rain in part of Dallas this afternoon (and we don't like hot and humid - we prefer dry heat). And, well - the whole last year is a making it a really tough sell this year. Not to worry - the faithful still attend and we're getting new people out every week - 7 years of grassroots efforts destroyed in one year, it will take us a little while to get back to a consistent level...work with us people, do your part - plan a roadtrip to Dallas!
While all this may be true, people on these boards act like bad weather was suspended last year. Maybe this turns around with the addition of new stadiums in the next couple of years. But looking at the way things are going, maybe not. This is the first time in years that I've really been worried.
This attendance drop-off is definitely a league-wide phenomenon, and each team involved (KC, Dallas, Colorado and SJ) has at some point in the past been the lowest-drawing team in the league, while even teams that have traditionally drawn well like Chicago or the MetroStars have smaller-than-expected numbers. I won't be such an a-hole as to proclaim that any of these teams need to be moved or contracted or whatever. Each market having an attendance problem now (i.e. basically, more than half the league) has its own unique problems and must be given time to overcome them. It's not like we have a choice anyway. Besides, some of those teams already have soccer-specific stadiums coming, while others are working at it. The attendances and revenues will definitely increase once those eventually come. -G
You're right-- but then people need to use their brains and compare apples to apples. In other words, compare the bad weather games this year to bad weather games of the past few years. Compare the early season to early season games of the past few years. You know what you find? That these numbers are nothing out of the ordinary. Not a bit. You want 8k in Colorado on a weekend? Check. You want 6k in SJ? Check. Want 8k in KC? Check. Want 7k in Dallas? Sure. And yet miraculously, the league manages to average 13-15k. Lots of things can affect single game attendance-- that is why we do an average. I agree that the numbers don't seem great-- but let's wait to press the panic button.
Though I agree with you for the most part, 6k in SJ would be a bit out of the ordinary. But still, overall point well taken. -G
To me the most concerning thing about this weekend is how flat the attendance is in so many markets. As someone posted earlier you can find these low numbers every year in these same markets. It doesnt seem like MLS is growing their fanbase at all. In many of these markets it seems as if there is not a promotion that night these teams will only pull in these low numbers. It really makes you wonder about the long term potential of these teams. My guess is that MLS feels the only hope in these historically low markets is that soccer specific stadiums will change things. I hope they are right. But what i they built these and still nobody comes, then what do you do?
Actually, my point is that, a few times every year, these teams will have poor attendances like this. These low attendances don't make up the majority of games (i.e. they're out of the ordinary in that respect) but they are nothing out of the ordinary year on year. As far as whether MLS will "grow", I think it's almost sure to improve on the medians from last year due to Soldier Field (we'll see if the Burn is able to recover from Southlake) and, more importantly, even if attendance is constant, I'm pretty sure that MLS is losing less money off of the same revenue than years past.
Well, sort of but not quite. No one team has had the lowest attendance for the entire eight full years of the league, and have not had the same attendance from season to season (for example, KC and Colorado, and to a lesser degree Dallas, went for lower attendance in the earlier years to higher in later years, SJ went from higher attendance in to lower in the later years - and all four are having trouble this year), and some other teams have unusually had problems this year too (like the aforementioned Chicago and MetroStars). I would imagine that the lack of promotion is the main culprit, as it doesn't matter if the team is defending champion or last year's bottom-dweller - soccer in the U.S. of A. needs to be continually promoted! There's no ands, ifs or buts about it! Soccer doesn't sell itself to the majority of sports fans here (the casual fans) like football and baseball do. Perhaps the front-offices of the teams that already have stadiums coming eased off the promoting pedal a bit and are now seeing the results. Hopefully they can get back on the promoting track, though it's likely that once the stadiums are completed, the teams will promote more to get more people to the stadium, and thus pay off whatever stadium debts they've incurred that much quicker. -G
Oh okay, I see what you mean. I agree. Yeah, the best thing for us to do is to be patient and see how it all straightens out. -G
No...instead, the NASL used Beach Boys concerts and the like to bump up figures for certain games. Overall, MLS is much healthier attendance-wise than the NASL ever was. The 14,000 the NASL averaged in its prime was inflated by clubs like the Cosmos (at 40,000 per game) and a small handful of other successful teams (Tampa Bay, Vancouver, etc.). At the bottom were teams with attendance figures which make Dallas' current figure look like a roaring success. The NASL's peak was a 14,440 average in 1980. The top 5: New York Cosmos 42,754 Tampa Bay Rowdies 28, 435 Vancouver Whitecaps 26, 834 Seattle Sounders 24,246 Tulsa Roughnecks 19,787 Great numbers. But check out the bottom five: Philadelphia Fury 4,465 Atlanta Chiefs 4,884 Houston Hurricane 5,818 Dallas Tornado 6,752 California (Anaheim) Surf 7,593 Quite a disparity between among the 24 teams in the league that year. This is why median figures are so important. By definition (and, I confess, I had to look this up), the median is the "middle value" of a list--the smallest number such that at least half the numbers in the list are no greater than it. In 1980 (again, the NASL's best year for overall average), the median was 11,113. It's best median ever was 11,465 in 1981. Meanwhile, MLS' lowest median was 11,871 in 1998. The 2003 median was 13,719, higher than the NASL's average attendance in all but three seasons. I know MLS has fewer teams which, arguable, helps the equation. But there you go. Sorry for the drawn out math lesson, but (and this is coming from someone who has spent a lot of time researching and writing about the NASL) I am tired of reading the whole "gosh, what is MLS doing wrong, let's-bring-back-the-Cosmos-because-the-NASL-drew-so-much-better" argument in every attendance thread. MLS is doing better. Accept it.