MLS Expansion

[whaler11]

I think in terms of market and revenue generation they are lagging.

MLS wants a league full of Atlanta, LAFC, Seattle, Portland, KC etc.

It’s a weird league that relies on sharing revenue to keep growing. I guess Columbus is holding them back somehow.

Which is also kind of dumb because Precourt hasn’t really put in a good faith effort. Considering that when he bought the franchise he had it written in that he could move to Austin, that ought to indicate why.

I don’t know how New England gets away with it.

I remember when Arena Football was a big deal. Now they have 4 teams - a 2-10 won the title and both teams in the Arena Bowl are owned by the same guy.

Hopefully when MLS imploed from
stupidity something valid rises in it’s place.

 

[DarthGrumpy]

I remember when Arena Football was a big deal. Now they have 4 teams - a 2-10 won the title and both teams in the Arena Bowl are owned by the same guy.

Hopefully when MLS imploed from
stupidity something valid rises in it’s place.

The two biggest money problems in my opinion with MLS is that 1) the league is living on Expansion fees, and 2) transfer fees are not use to help play for youth development programs such as they are in Europe, i.e. pay to play.

A couple of fixes -First, require that a % of any external transfer fee must must go back to the teams that helped develop said player. Second, if MLS wants to keep expanding, fine; but, cap the league to 24 teams and let the new owners start a team at a lower level and then earn their way up to the top flight like the rest of the world does, i.e. regulation. It adds incentives to owners to spend money on players and adds excitement to games at the end-of-the season involving bottom tier teams (nothing like watching a top flight Premiership team trying to rest in advance of a CL or Europa match having to deal with a desperate team trying to stave-off regulation).

As for stadiums, both NYC and New England needs stadiums now. If their owners are now willing to figure it out, i.e. invest their own money, then get new owners.

 

[UCFBfan]

MLS is crap, plain and simple. That transition from watching Prem soccer and having it end in May, then switching to MLS because I want to watch more, is awful.

They are trying to fit an American playoff system into a sport that doesn't need it. What it needs is pro/rel and it will never happen. There's no incentive for teams to get better because if you stink, you aren't going anywhere. EPL is exciting because even at the end of the season lots of teams have something to play for.

 

[upstater]

I keep reading this idea that in Europe there is no pay-to-play.

Talk to a current or former Euro soccer pro lately?

NEWSFLASH: there is pay-to-play.

In fact, one could argue it's just as expensive.

Average Spanish family earns $20k a year.

Year's tuition at a soccer club in Spain? $850.

If you're really good, and are identified, only then does your club sign you, and you play for free. But there are only a handful of such players per big club. The smaller clubs don't do that at all.

 

[ZooCougar]

I keep reading this idea that in Europe there is no pay-to-play.

Talk to a current or former Euro soccer pro lately?

NEWSFLASH: there is pay-to-play.

In fact, one could argue it's just as expensive.

Average Spanish family earns $20k a year.

Year's tuition at a soccer club in Spain? $850.

If you're really good, and are identified, only then does your club sign you, and you play for free. But there are only a handful of such players per big club. The smaller clubs don't do that at all.

Yeah, not really.

Far more opportunities exist to not pay than over here. American parents are basically suckers.

 

[upstater]

Yeah, not really.

Far more opportunities exist to not pay than over here. American parents are basically suckers.

What I wrote is the truth. I not only heard it from former Spanish pros, but a friend who played in Eredivisie, whose former club visits and runs a camp (5-10 players each year) in my area each year, and who was employed by Ajax after his playing career was over.

Far more opportunities exist over there because they are soccer mad.

My friend laid out the youth process like this: the club had about 50 unpaid scouts who scoured youth leagues in Holland on a weekly basis. Those youth clubs they watched were pay-to-play. Every couple of weeks, a scout would recommend the club invite 1 kid in for a visit (only boys, by the way). When 10 kids were invited, they’d hold weeklong tryouts, and if one kid was lucky, he’d get an invite to the academy, which was totally free. That began the process. With over 12 age groups in the academy, there were about 100 boys tops. And forget about schooling. He said the coaches and drivers would pick up kids at 11 am at their schools, shuttle them to the club for training! 7 year olds! Most often, even the club invitees were shunted aside after 3 or 4 years. He described the pressure on these kids and the impact on their futures as absolutely terrible. And he said Ajax can’t even keep their top players so in many respects they place even more emphasis on the youth academy as a source of revenue than they do for the actual Ajax team. 10 players sold could mean $100 million for them. Hundreds of players go through the youth academy, and only 1 to 2% pan out. Thousands are invited for tryouts, and 1% join the club. So 1% of the 1% who ever are recommended to the club ever pan out, and the rest go on into their lives (lacking an education) while the rest who are lucky enough NOT to be chosen get to do pay-for-play with their clubs. The kids are really nothing but chattel in this system.

Not one we should emulate IMO.

 

[DarthGrumpy]

What I wrote is the truth. I not only heard it from former Spanish pros, but a friend who played in Eredivisie, whose former club visits and runs a camp (5-10 players each year) in my area each year, and who was employed by Ajax after his playing career was over.

Far more opportunities exist over there because they are soccer mad.

My friend laid out the youth process like this: the club had about 50 unpaid scouts who scoured youth leagues in Holland on a weekly basis. Those youth clubs they watched were pay-to-play. Every couple of weeks, a scout would recommend the club invite 1 kid in for a visit (only boys, by the way). When 10 kids were invited, they’d hold weeklong tryouts, and if one kid was lucky, he’d get an invite to the academy, which was totally free. That began the process. With over 12 age groups in the academy, there were about 100 boys tops. And forget about schooling. He said the coaches and drivers would pick up kids at 11 am at their schools, shuttle them to the club for training! 7 year olds! Most often, even the club invitees were shunted aside after 3 or 4 years. He described the pressure on these kids and the impact on their futures as absolutely terrible. And he said Ajax can’t even keep their top players so in many respects they place even more emphasis on the youth academy as a source of revenue than they do for the actual Ajax team. 10 players sold could mean $100 million for them. Hundreds of players go through the youth academy, and only 1 to 2% pan out. Thousands are invited for tryouts, and 1% join the club. So 1% of the 1% who ever are recommended to the club ever pan out, and the rest go on into their lives (lacking an education) while the rest who are lucky enough NOT to be chosen get to do pay-for-play with their clubs. The kids are really nothing but chattel in this system.

Not one we should emulate IMO.

I can see both sides.

One difference, in at least my view, though is that European scouts go visit more urban, less-off areas across the Continent. That is less prevalent in the US where many urban areas lack the fields, programs, and community commitment to foster a pro-soccer environment. Thus, no scouts go into those areas to see what talent is there. Of the big urban areas in Jersey, the only strong soccer program that I am aware of off-hand is in Harrison (just outside of Newark) which can claim +25 State Soccer titles and several big-time players, such as Tab Ramos.

 

[upstater]

I can see both sides.

One difference, in at least my view, though is that European scouts go visit more urban, less-off areas across the Continent. That is less prevalent in the US where many urban areas lack the fields, programs, and community commitment to foster a pro-soccer environment. Thus, no scouts go into those areas to see what talent is there. Of the big urban areas in Jersey, the only strong soccer program that I am aware of off-hand is in Harrison (just outside of Newark) which can claim +25 State Soccer titles and several big-time players, such as Tab Ramos.

Agreed on your point about scouts and the inner city. In fact, we have a problem with field space in inner cities as well. Lots of basketball courts, soccer fields not so much.

I would also point out though that in Holland where you have a social safety net and not much poverty, the socioeconomic status of soccer players is similar to that of the US. Much of Europe is wealthy and socialist, so you don’t have poor inner cities. In Spain, it’s a different story, since you will find kids who can’t do pay-to-play, and Brazil of course is on another planet in terms of the poverty.

 

[ZooCougar]

What I wrote is the truth. I not only heard it from former Spanish pros, but a friend who played in Eredivisie, whose former club visits and runs a camp (5-10 players each year) in my area each year, and who was employed by Ajax after his playing career was over.

Far more opportunities exist over there because they are soccer mad.

My friend laid out the youth process like this: the club had about 50 unpaid scouts who scoured youth leagues in Holland on a weekly basis. Those youth clubs they watched were pay-to-play. Every couple of weeks, a scout would recommend the club invite 1 kid in for a visit (only boys, by the way). When 10 kids were invited, they’d hold weeklong tryouts, and if one kid was lucky, he’d get an invite to the academy, which was totally free. That began the process. With over 12 age groups in the academy, there were about 100 boys tops. And forget about schooling. He said the coaches and drivers would pick up kids at 11 am at their schools, shuttle them to the club for training! 7 year olds! Most often, even the club invitees were shunted aside after 3 or 4 years. He described the pressure on these kids and the impact on their futures as absolutely terrible. And he said Ajax can’t even keep their top players so in many respects they place even more emphasis on the youth academy as a source of revenue than they do for the actual Ajax team. 10 players sold could mean $100 million for them. Hundreds of players go through the youth academy, and only 1 to 2% pan out. Thousands are invited for tryouts, and 1% join the club. So 1% of the 1% who ever are recommended to the club ever pan out, and the rest go on into their lives (lacking an education) while the rest who are lucky enough NOT to be chosen get to do pay-for-play with their clubs. The kids are really nothing but chattel in this system.

Not one we should emulate IMO.

Why not emulate it? They chose to take that path. The process you described is the same for other sports like cycling as well.

And it’s really not the same thing as our dumb system.

The Ajax Academy is legendary. Most people who follow soccer are aware of it.

 

[upstater]

Why not emulate it? They chose to take that path. The process you described is the same for other sports like cycling as well.

And it’s really not the same thing as our dumb system.

The Ajax Academy is legendary. Most people who follow soccer are aware of it.

But the people inside of Ajax think it's perverted.

 

[ZooCougar]

But the people inside of Ajax think it's perverted.

One guy you met thinks that. John O’Brien went through the Ajax system and loved it.

How a Soccer Star Is Made

 

[upstater]

One guy you met thinks that. John O’Brien went through the Ajax system and loved it.

How a Soccer Star Is Made

John O'Brien?

He was way before the age of free transfers.

Apples and Oranges.

Ajax was actually good back then and could compete. Then the 2000s came, and with the new transfer rules, Ajax was toast. Their goal changed from developing top soccer teams to developing individual players for the transfer market. Night and day.

Besides, it's not just one guy. I was told that the scouts would laugh awkwardly at being assigned to watch kids who were still in day care, not even in school yet. I read a while back where a Fulham scout likened what his club does to a kind of slave trade. It's not that awful obviously because the parents control it, but you have to wonder if 7 year olds are fully capable of understanding the ramifications of 2 hours per school a day alongside 4 hours of training for years on end--all for what? The club's bottom line.

 

[upstater]

Besides, take the 100 kids at Ajax out of this discussion/equation. The fact is that for the vast majority of kids in competitive clubs, there is pay-for-play. In a richer country like Holland, with a robust social safety net, the disparity between income and tuition is not going to be so great, but in Spain with its much lower per capita, and in the American inner cities, the dysjunction is going to be greater. But that is a societal issue.

 

[ZooCougar]

John O'Brien?

He was way before the age of free transfers.

Apples and Oranges.

Ajax was actually good back then and could compete. Then the 2000s came, and with the transfer decisions, Ajax was toast. Their goal changed from developing top soccer teams to developing individual players for the transfer market. Night and day.

Ajax is still pretty relevant because they have such a strong Academy. Same goes for many of the prominent Portuguese clubs.

I wish we had 2-3 clubs doing the same thing over here.

I don’t care if dumb parents want to throw their money away. But when your top prospects are still paying then you have a barrier.

 

[HuskyHawk]

The two biggest money problems in my opinion with MLS is that 1) the league is living on Expansion fees, and 2) transfer fees are not use to help play for youth development programs such as they are in Europe, i.e. pay to play.

A couple of fixes -First, require that a % of any external transfer fee must must go back to the teams that helped develop said player. Second, if MLS wants to keep expanding, fine; but, cap the league to 24 teams and let the new owners start a team at a lower level and then earn their way up to the top flight like the rest of the world does, i.e. regulation. It adds incentives to owners to spend money on players and adds excitement to games at the end-of-the season involving bottom tier teams (nothing like watching a top flight Premiership team trying to rest in advance of a CL or Europa match having to deal with a desperate team trying to stave-off regulation).

As for stadiums, both NYC and New England needs stadiums now. If their owners are now willing to figure it out, i.e. invest their own money, then get new owners.

New England will get a new stadium eventually. There is no good place to put it. Right now, 90% of the fan base is suburban families, largely from the Boston suburbs along 128 and 495 and from Rhode Island. Sure, put it in Revere where exactly zero of those existing season ticket holders will travel for a game, and the local population has little money.

There are few solutions, but essentially, they can't put the stadium in Boston (no space and too expensive) and certainly not east of Boston, where the whole fan base has to travel through the city. If they are smart, they will put it in Providence, or on the site of McCoy stadium in Pawtucket, once the Pawsox move to Worcester. It would be surrounded by recent immigrants who love soccer, and accessible by car for suburbanites.

Expansion at this pace needs to lead to a relegation system. Good luck with that. And as for stadiums, the Crew abandoning one of the first soccer specific stadiums in MLA...yeah, that is going to encourage more to be built.

 

[LIuconn]

Revs should have built the Somerville stadium or somewhere on the water along the Orange line

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

As for stadiums, both NYC and New England needs stadiums now. If their owners are now willing to figure it out, i.e. invest their own money, then get new owners.

NY seems to think their 756th possible stadium site may be possible, but good luck forcing NY's owners and Boston's original MLS franchise owner to sell.

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

New England will get a new stadium eventually. Right now, 90% of the fan base is suburban families, largely from the Boston suburbs along 128 and 495 and from Rhode Island.

There are few solutions, but essentially, they can't put the stadium in Boston (no space and too expensive) ... If they are smart, they will put it in Providence, or on the site of McCoy stadium in Pawtucket, once the Pawsox move to Worcester. It would be surrounded by recent immigrants who love soccer, and accessible by car for suburbanites.

As if Foxborough's not bad enough, Providence or Pawtucket would be even worse for most current New England fans and what should be a Boston-area franchise. Fughgetabout many current Weston, Wellesley, Newton, Boston, etc fans driving to Providence/Pawtucket.

In Pro/Paw, the Revs might pick up more fans with less disposable income, but Boston-based fans are also unlikely to hop on the commuter line. Trade off: potentially more recent immigrants in exchange for lower average disposable income.

IMHO, Kraft & son prefer their current situation and will most likely avoid a Pro/Paw move. When the Krafts decide to sell the Revs, maybe the team will move from Foxborough.

 

[HuskyHawk]

As if Foxborough's not bad enough, Providence or Pawtucket would be even worse for most current New England fans and what should be a Boston-area franchise. Fughgetabout many current Weston, Wellesley, Newton, Boston, etc fans driving to Providence/Pawtucket.

In Pro/Paw, the Revs might pick up more fans with less disposable income, but Boston-based fans are also unlikely to hop on the commuter line. Trade off: potentially more recent immigrants in exchange for lower average disposable income.

IMHO, Kraft & son prefer their current situation and will most likely avoid a Pro/Paw move. When the Krafts decide to sell the Revs, maybe the team will move from Foxborough.

None of the wealthy people in Boston care about the Revs. Nor will they. The proposed sites east of Boston are in depressed areas, just like Pawtucket, but unlike Pawtucket, are unreachable from the suburbs. Train access is irrelevant to 95% of their current fan base. They'd need to hope new people could make up the difference.

It's a challenge to find a suitable location. Like it or not, unlike Europe and South American, Soccer in America is a sport followed and supported by upper middle class suburbanites. Best bet would be someplace like Braintree, that is reachable via the redline and by car.

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

None of the wealthy people in Boston care about the Revs. Nor will they. The proposed sites east of Boston are in depressed areas, just like Pawtucket, but unlike Pawtucket, are unreachable from the suburbs. Train access is irrelevant to 95% of their current fan base. They'd need to hope new people could make up the difference. Best bet would be someplace like Braintree, that is reachable via the redline and by car.

Then, something's changed as a huge chunk of the Revs' fans used to be upper middle income and higher from western suburbs. That's probably good!

Braintree/Quincy: Would have been good, but that ship's likely sailed absent a massive economic downturn, State State moving more business to other cities, etc.

Proposed E of Boston sites: Not happening, but we can agree to disagree. Not the easiest to access from W & S of Boston, but it's BS to suggest they were/are "unreachable" from W & S burbs. Plus, the E sites sat among among large recent immigrant populations (i.e., a la Pro/Paw argument).

In Boston (Eastie) or on its' door step, the areas remain accessible via MBTA + Uber/Lyft (millenials), are still easily accessed from N burbs, remain accessible for W & S burb resident who truly want to go to games , etc. Unlike Pro/Paw, they're near Boston where the franchise should have and should be located versus on the Rhody border or Pro/Paw. Unfortunately, the Revs will likely always be a non-Boston area franchise.

 

[DarthGrumpy]

None of the wealthy people in Boston care about the Revs. Nor will they. The proposed sites east of Boston are in depressed areas, just like Pawtucket, but unlike Pawtucket, are unreachable from the suburbs. Train access is irrelevant to 95% of their current fan base. They'd need to hope new people could make up the difference.

It's a challenge to find a suitable location. Like it or not, unlike Europe and South American, Soccer in America is a sport followed and supported by upper middle class suburbanites. Best bet would be someplace like Braintree, that is reachable via the redline and by car.

Pawtucket, Providence, and Worcester are in a heated battle over where the Sox's 'AAA team (Paw Sox) are going next. No talk of the Revs. Down south, last U saw, NYCFC's latest shot at a stadium was hijacker by the MY Islanders wanting a new stadium as their Brooklyn experiment has failed.

 

[kibblesnbits]

NYCFC and NE have the same problem. In exploding real estate markets any 10+ acre space that comes on the market has either major political/access problems (e.g. UMass-Boston, Flushing Airport, Columbia athletic complex, etc.) or can be developed for much more profit. The Somerville properties that Kraft was looking at are part of a $1B+ development plan. There's a reason NY (Newark) Red Bulls ended up on an industrial brownfield in Harrison. If the Revs ever seriously consider Providence they might as well take a look at an existing facility that's well-designed for soccer in little old East Hartford. I doubt either will happen as long as the owner can use a facility he already owns.

As for Columbus, I went to a game there about 15 years ago. It was a nice facility with very good sight lines and lots of parking. I can't imagine Columbus is an urban mass transit oriented area (as Boston, NY, etc. are) that would benefit from a downtown arena. The crowd had a lot of kids and seemed to be overwhelmingly suburban families.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Pawtucket, Providence, and Worcester are in a heated battle over where the Sox's 'AAA team (Paw Sox) are going next. No talk of the Revs. Down south, last U saw, NYCFC's latest shot at a stadium was hijacker by the MY Islanders wanting a new stadium as their Brooklyn experiment has failed.

Yeah, there has been no talk. But a Providence stadium could be in the city, and still be an easier drive for 3/4 of the Boston western and southwestern suburbs than a Boston stadium would be. It would obviously also draw RI people and southeastern CT as well. I'm just suggesting that it might provide a much better solution than an expensive location in Boston that is hard for suburbanites to reach. By the way, the Red Sox registered the trademark "WooSox". I think Worcester is going to win that battle, and it probably should. Really becoming a nice small city.

I don't agree with @Da_Aisijimo_Gou that the east/north areas of Everett, Revere, Lynn, are at all reachable on the average weeknight from the western burbs. The commuter rail runs sporadically, and mostly to South Station. And driving there...let's just say that I can get to Portland Maine more easily than there from my spot along 495 in Franklin. That's about a 2 hour drive with traffic. In summer on a weekend it could be worse. Due to starting in Foxborough, the Revs mostly draw from south of the Pike. Putting any stadium north of the Pike will kill the fanbase.

 

[kibblesnbits]

Everett, Revere and Lynn are non-starters for a stadium. Anything that requires access via Rt. 1 or Rt. 1A through that area is a pain to reach from the north much less the south. That's a key reason that the proposed Amazon HQ2 at Suffolk Downs has almost no chance of winning. The Somerville proposal to place the HQ at 4 consecutive Orange Line stations (essentially making the subway the campus shuttle) was probably more interesting because of its uniqueness.

Living in Franklin, Foxboro is almost perfect. I remember waking up at my grandparents house in Franklin to the sound of the bells from Dean College. We went a number of times to see the ill-fated New England Tea Men (not really named because of the Tea Party but because they were owned by the Lipton Tea Company) play before about 8,000 at Schaefer/Sullivan/Foxboro Stadium. When you don't have many fans it's easy in/easy out.

 

[ZooCougar]

None of the wealthy people in Boston care about the Revs. Nor will they. The proposed sites east of Boston are in depressed areas, just like Pawtucket, but unlike Pawtucket, are unreachable from the suburbs. Train access is irrelevant to 95% of their current fan base. They'd need to hope new people could make up the difference.

It's a challenge to find a suitable location. Like it or not, unlike Europe and South American, Soccer in America is a sport followed and supported by upper middle class suburbanites. Best bet would be someplace like Braintree, that is reachable via the redline and by car.

In some cities it is a sport followed by upper middle class suburbanites.

In other cities you are dead in the water if your stadium isn’t downtown. Move the Fire downtown and they would have better attendance. Move Portland outside of the city and they won’t draw flies.