Futbol Talk

[Henry Sugar]

Interesting Data Point

MLS games averaged more than 18,807 per game last season, more than both the NBA (17,274) and the NHL (17,455).

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

Interesting Data Point

MLS games averaged more than 18,807 per game last season, more than both the NBA (17,274) and the NHL (17,455).

In fairness NBA arenas only seat about 18-19k and NHL arenas even less because the ice is much larger then a basketball court (unless it doesnt share the same space as a basketball arena)

[jesmu84]

Some of the stadiums have huge capacity, but only when associated with football. Most seem to be averaged 19-20K. Either way, for them to basically be filling the stadiums is impressive in a sport thats the 4th? 5th? most popular in the US.

List of stadiums/capacities:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Major_League_Soccer_stadiums

[Pakuni]

Interesting Data Point

MLS games averaged more than 18,807 per game last season, more than both the NBA (17,274) and the NHL (17,455).

MLS average = 89 percent capacity
NHL average = 97 percent capacity
NBA average = ????*

Also, ticket prices:
NBA average = $48.48
NHL average = $57.10
MLS average = $26.15

* Can't find anywhere, for some reason. But 18 of 30 teams average 91 percent or better capacity.

[Henry Sugar]

MLS average = 89 percent capacity
NHL average = 97 percent capacity
NBA average = ????

Also, ticket prices:
NBA average = $48.48
NHL average = $57.10
MLS average = $26.15

Totally agree. Certainly there is more demand for NBA/NHL tickets. The higher prices provide one clear counter point for how MLS is not a bigger sport than the NBA/NBL right now.

While season attendance trends have been positive for MLS, who knows if they will continue to rise to the point where it is more competitive with the pricing of the NBA/NHL?

I was just surprised that MLS was averaging higher attendance. That alone was surprising.

[brewcity77]

Totally agree. Certainly there is more demand for NBA/NHL tickets. The higher prices provide one clear counter point for how MLS is not a bigger sport than the NBA/NBL right now.

While season attendance trends have been positive for MLS, who knows if they will continue to rise to the point where it is more competitive with the pricing of the NBA/NHL?

I was just surprised that MLS was averaging higher attendance. That alone was surprising.

The MLS teams have done a phenomenal job of building very loyal fanbases. While most people point to the fervent support for Seattle and Portland, I'm equally impressed by markets like Kansas City and Columbus, both of which have strong local bases. It's easy to build up fan support in a place like Chicago, LA, or New York simply because there are so many people that you are bound to find some that have an interest. But to see how dedicated fans are in the mid-size markets is really impressive.

All the more disappointing that Milwaukee screwed the pooch on the Park East Corridor, where Peter Wilt and others were trying to build a stadium to attract a MLS team. FC New York will be team #20, and the current plan is to expand to 24, with Atlanta and Minneapolis as the leaders for the next 2 teams. If Milwaukee got a bid together, I think they could put up a strong argument for one of those last two teams, but if they don't do it soon, we will likely never see a MLS team here. FIFA has already bristled at current MLS expansion and we would likely cost any shot of hosting a future World Cup if our top flight went beyond 24 teams. And without a promotion/relegation system in place (or likely ever coming, that was a screw-up from the start) I could easily see the league's expansion ending in the next few years.

[GGGG]

FIFA would hold it against the United States if MLS went beyond 24 teams?  What is their reasoning?

[jesmu84]

A little more data...

http://mlsattendance.blogspot.com/2013/09/week-28-attendance-update.html?m=1

holy schnikes Seattle

[GGGG]

A little more data...

http://mlsattendance.blogspot.com/2013/09/week-28-attendance-update.html?m=1

holy schnikes Seattle

You take out the disaster that is Chivas USA, attendance is actually up this year.

[brewcity77]

FIFA would hold it against the United States if MLS went beyond 24 teams?  What is their reasoning?

FIFA puts a lot of emphasis on leagues having a unilateral "look". Most European top flights are 18-20 teams that play a round-robin schedule, so 34-36 games. Some second tiers (England's Championship) have 24 teams, but that size league isn't really what they want at the top levels.

FIFA very much likes the home-and-away schedule structure, and our current model is pushing away from that. The notion of conferences also isn't something that they like. If we went to 30 teams, there is no way we'd play a 58-game schedule and conform with what FIFA prefers. Would they be okay with a 2-conference, 34 game schedule (2x conference opponents, 1x non-conference)? I don't know, but this is a very traditional organization and I'm not sure we want to chance it. I think running a 46-game schedule is better for us in regards to the long-term world recognition.

The real problem is that FIFA is still a European organization with European traditions. When we mess with our schedule, have a vastly different window due to when we play, use a post-season playoff to determine champions, and refuse to institute promotion and relegation, many of the voting types view it as us trying to Americanize the sport they love. And when it comes to landing a World Cup, these are the people we need to impress.

I know it's pretty much irrelevant now, but the biggest mistake MLS made was not using promotion and relegation from the start. They should have started with 12 teams instead of 10, a home-and-away schedule for 22 games, and immediately put promotion/relegation in place by offering the first spots to existing teams in the NASL and USL (relieving start-up costs).

They also should have put a relegation protection in for a period of time. Say 6 years, which would have not only protected the investment of the initial teams but also given the second tier sides time to build bigger stadiums (make 12,000 the minimum capacity for a top flight side, virtually all European leagues have similar requirements). Then set up the league for planned expansion allowing teams to be added to the top tier with a 3-year relegation protection so you could still expand teams into big markets without immediately relegating them.

It's all hindsight and would have taken longer for MLS to grow into a fully developed league, but in terms of world recognition and likelihood of getting a second chance to host the World Cup our odds would have been much better. Blatter has already condemned our league and expansion publicly, and while he won't be king forever, he represents a short-sighted, traditional way of thinking that is too pervasive in FIFA.

[GGGG]

Thanks for the explanation.

I just find it bizarre, that after all the missteps that have taken place with professional soccer in America, that they wouldn't view MLS as anything but success.  And frankly that has helped increase the popularity of the sport and helped lead to things like the EPL's recent contract with NBC Sports.

And yeah I realize that European soccer leagues have traditions like round-robin play, lack of a postseason, etc.  But American sports have traditions too.  I mean the last major sport without a postseason tournament (college football) is heading right down that road.  To keep interest high, they have had to conform to those traditions.  And I have my doubts that promotion/relegation would work here.  I mean, what if the LA Galaxy were relegated early in the league's existence.  You all of the sudden have the second largest market in the country without a team, instantly turning the media contracts less valuable, and potentially turning off a bunch of fans who aren't interested in watching a second-tier league.

Not to mention that the 1994 World Cup was the most attended by far in the history of the tournament, and would even be more popular now if it returned.  The television contracts that FIFA could get for that would be very, very lucrative.

[brewcity77]

You don't have to sell it to me. I think promotion/relegation would have worked here if instituted from the start, but as much as I think it would increase interest for traditional fans, the genie is out of the bottle now and there's no way you put a pro/rel cap on it.

There are things we can legitimately do, and the main thing would be to conform to the European calendar. Play games from September through May. Though in my opinion, I think the best thing to do would be to conform to an Eastern European calendar. Start play in August and run for 18 weeks to the start of December. In this span, make sure you get at least 20 matches in. For the first month of the season, play on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday with a few mid-week matchdays scattered in to get to 20 (probably 4 to avoid international breaks).

Then take a break for about 2 months. Mid-December through the first weekend in February. This allows the MLS to avoid competing with NFL playoffs, bowl games, and most important, the Super Bowl (though returning on Super Bowl weekend with games on Saturday and daytime Sunday, when not much else is going on, may be a savvy move). When you come back, make sure the first four weeks or so of games are mainly played at southern or west coast stadiums to avoid the worst of the weather (thinking Chicago, Columbus, and NYC) while also making sure all the teams are playing about 1.5 matches per week. Finish the season in 10 weeks, which gets you to the beginning of May so they can have their playoffs in May, finishing up before the NBA and NHL Finals start, and more importantly, with time left before any World Cup or other summer tournaments.

[Golden Avalanche]

Glad you had a positive experience with the Mexican fans.
Of course, Mexican fans have also been known to chant "Osama, Osama, Osama" at games against the U.S., drown out the "Star Spangled Banner" with boos, and throw bottles full of urine at opposing players (and their fans).
They're the best.
(note: No doubt every fanbase has its turds)

Just a handful of accounts:

http://deadspin.com/mexican-fans-drill-costa-rican-soccer-player-in-the-hea-512784144

http://www.uproxx.com/sports/2011/06/mexican-soccer-fans-are-boorish-animals-a-first-hand-account/

http://thebiglead.com/2013/03/27/mexican-soccer-fans-threw-beers-at-american-soccer-fans-celebrating-a-tie-chanting-u-s-a-at-azteca-video/

http://deadspin.com/friendly-mexican-league-match-in-las-vegas-gets-viole-667020550

Was interesting reading all the positive peace stories of Mexican fans. I had a piss bomb thrown on me by a seven year old at that 2007 Gold Cup final.

[brewcity77]

So if we draw either of our upcoming games against Jamaica or Panama, any hopes of this are probably off, but it's not impossible that the USA could sneak into one of the seeded positions for the 2014 World Cup. Teams in bold are already in the World Cup, teams in green are likely locked into one of the 8 seeded positions. Here are the current rankings:

1) Spain
2) Argentina
3) Germany
4) Italy
5) Colombia
6) Belgium
7) Uruguay
8) Brazil
9) Netherlands
10) Croatia
11) Portugal
12) Greece
13) USA
14) Switzerland
15) Russia

Okay...Spain and Germany aren't yet in, but both have a ridiculously easy road to winning their groups and assuring qualification and seeded positions. As host, Brazil is also locked in. With the Argies and Italians both qualified, that locks up 5 of the 8 positions. So the hope is that the USA can be one of the top 8 qualified teams. To get there, the USA must win both games. Here's what else to hope for:

• Colombia: They host Chile Friday, and the winner qualifies. They then play at bottom-of-the-table Paraguay, though Paraguay has earned 10 of their 11 points at home. Colombia must lose both for USA to pass them.
  
• Belgium: They are at Croatia then host Wales. If they go loss/draw, USA will be ahead of them.
  
• Uruguay: They are at Ecuador and host Argentina. Even if they lose both, they will be ahead of the USA. The best hope is for Uruguay to lose both games 2-0 and have Venezuela beat Paraguay 3-0, which would knock Uruguay out completely.
  
• Netherlands: They host Hungary and travel to Turkey. If they lose one or draw both they will be behind the USA.
  
• Croatia: If they beat Belgium, they will be ahead of the USA, but still likely going to a playoff. Lose there and their ranking doesn't matter because they won't be in Brazil.
  
• Portugal: Portugal hosts Israel and Luxembourg. If they draw Israel, they will finish behind the USA. Regardless, if Russia mirrors results with them, Portugal will go to a playoff and could fail to qualify regardless of their rank.
  
• Greece: Even if Greece wins both games they will fall behind the USA. That's what happens when you play crappy Slovakia and Liechtenstein at home.
  
• Chile & England: Both are behind us now, but if they win out, they pass us. Hope for Chile to lose at Ecuador and England to slip to a draw in either match.

.
Bottom Line[/u]

Cheer for Ecuador. They can't pass us but can help knock out Uruguay and Chile from seeding consideration. Pull for a Netherlands loss, an England draw in either match, and Croatia and Portugal to go to playoffs. A lot has to go right, but it's not unthinkable that we could be one of the top 8 teams come December's draw.

[reinko]

My money is on Belgium in WC 2014, currently sitting at about 18/1.  That's tasty.

[brewcity77]

Belgium's good for the money, but I like Brazil or Argentina to win it. Spain last cycle was the only European side to ever win the Cup not on European soil, and I just get the sense Belgium doesn't have the experience to win the whole thing.

[GGGG]

Brew, SI writes an article that says it is pretty much a near impossibility for the US to get a top 8 seed:

http://soccer.si.com/2013/10/08/2014-world-cup-draw-us-not-getting-top-eight-seed/

I will point out that a easier path to top a WC group might actually be to be drawn against a top seed like Uruguay or Croatia.

[mu03eng]

You don't have to sell it to me. I think promotion/relegation would have worked here if instituted from the start, but as much as I think it would increase interest for traditional fans, the genie is out of the bottle now and there's no way you put a pro/rel cap on it.

There are things we can legitimately do, and the main thing would be to conform to the European calendar. Play games from September through May. Though in my opinion, I think the best thing to do would be to conform to an Eastern European calendar. Start play in August and run for 18 weeks to the start of December. In this span, make sure you get at least 20 matches in. For the first month of the season, play on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday with a few mid-week matchdays scattered in to get to 20 (probably 4 to avoid international breaks).

Then take a break for about 2 months. Mid-December through the first weekend in February. This allows the MLS to avoid competing with NFL playoffs, bowl games, and most important, the Super Bowl (though returning on Super Bowl weekend with games on Saturday and daytime Sunday, when not much else is going on, may be a savvy move). When you come back, make sure the first four weeks or so of games are mainly played at southern or west coast stadiums to avoid the worst of the weather (thinking Chicago, Columbus, and NYC) while also making sure all the teams are playing about 1.5 matches per week. Finish the season in 10 weeks, which gets you to the beginning of May so they can have their playoffs in May, finishing up before the NBA and NHL Finals start, and more importantly, with time left before any World Cup or other summer tournaments.

The European calendar is one of the most critical reasons for FIFA's "displeasure" with MLS.  The great irony of all that is the 2022 "Winter" World Cup talk going on.  This is why FIFA is just insane, they criticize MLS for not following convention and then award a WC to a nation that even if played in the winter(non-conventional) would require cooling stoppages at the 30th and 75th minute.

[GGGG]

The European calendar is one of the most critical reasons for FIFA's "displeasure" with MLS.  The great irony of all that is the 2022 "Winter" World Cup talk going on.  This is why FIFA is just insane, they criticize MLS for not following convention and then award a WC to a nation that even if played in the winter(non-conventional) would require cooling stoppages at the 30th and 75th minute.

It make$ you $cratch your head and a$k..."What motivate$ FIFA to $elect Qatar?"

[mu03eng]

It make$ you $cratch your head and a$k..."What motivate$ FIFA to $elect Qatar?"

I $ee what you did there

[setyoursightsnorth]

Belgium's good for the money, but I like Brazil or Argentina to win it. Spain last cycle was the only European side to ever win the Cup not on European soil, and I just get the sense Belgium doesn't have the experience to win the whole thing.

I would never bet on them in any tournament ever. Have a great group of players but always underachieve. Too dependent on Messi. I would put my money on the Germans. Or anyone other than Spain for that matter. Time for a new king to be crowned.

[GGGG]

I would never bet on them in any tournament ever. Have a great group of players but always underachieve. Too dependent on Messi. I would put my money on the Germans. Or anyone other than Spain for that matter. Time for a new king to be crowned.

Argentina is a different team than they were last go around.  They have developed some good talent to go along with Messi (Higuain, Aguero).  But I am with you...if I had to pick a European squad, it would be Germany.

[brewcity77]

European teams don't typically have much success in World Cups outside Europe. Spain was the first Euro winner not on Euro soil. I would be surprised to see a second successive Euro winner on foreign soil when it never happened before 2010.

[jesmu84]

If our future is bedoya, diskerud and johannsson, I'm feeling pretty good about it.

Honduras won and qualified tonight. If USA wins, we win the hex. Mexico has to be pressured beyond belief right n ow.

[brewcity77]

Torn between flipping on gomarquette.com and Madness or Mexico/Panama.

In other news...Chile probably killed our remote seeded dreams when they squandered a 3-0 halftime lead to draw Colombia 3-3. That guarantees Spain, Argentina, Germany, Italy, Colombia, Belgium, and Brazil will finish ahead of us. USA's only hope is Uruguay losing a playoff with Jordan, the Dutch losing at Turkey, and a few other things going right. Though I did hear a rumor of 2 seeded pots (1-8 and 9-16) today...not sure if there's anything to that.