MLS has formally announced that NYC will be the home of it's 20th franchise.
Major League Soccer and Commissioner Don Garber made it official this morning, New York City will be the home of the league's next expansion franchise. The team, currently operating under the name "New York City FC" will be a jointly run venture owned by Manchester City in England and the New York Yankees. They are scheduled to begin play in 2015, and currently have no concrete stadium plans.
So there's the news portion of this entry, the rest is strictly opinion, and some folks at MLS aren't going to like it. Now keep in mind, I'm not a businessman, nor am I a New Yorker, so I don't pretend to be an authority on the issues that are involved here. What I am is a die hard MLS fan who pumps hundreds of my own dollars into my club and the league every year, and I believe that people like me should have a voice in the process. However, all the concerns raised by any number of fans or fan blogs have poo-pooed by the league, if they are even acknowledged at all. There are quite a few MLS fans, and potential MLS fans in other markets, that really feel railroaded by this whole process. If you don't believe me, take a look at twitter. The American soccer media has been running interference for the League on this all day, hald-assedly answering legitimate questions or just plain saying we have no idea what we're talking about, after all, this is NEW YORK baby!
Now I don't have an objection to New York City having an expansion franchise. It's true that all of the "major sports leagues" in the USA have a presence in/around NYC. I do have an issue with the timing. There are other markets that really are begging for MLS (Orlando) who at least have a temporary stadium in place, again, Orlando could play in the Citrus Bowl. It would be no worse than DC United playing at RFK. I'll also give MLS credit for not bowing to the Cosmos ownership group. The Cosmos are a brand, period, and bringing in a team just for the the brand is even worse than what they're doing.
This issue with a potential stadium in New York really bothers me. The Yankees participation in the project means that Yankee Stadium MIGHT be an option for a temporary site, but it's nothing but a stop gap measure. Garber has pursuing a plan to put a stadium on Flushing Meadows park land in Queens, but has met with heavy resistance from the locals, who don't really feel like giving up the park space that they already have. This has caused major issues, and by Garber's own admission, there is no plan B at this point. This is perhaps the biggest sticking point, and I'm sure the league and the new ownership group think that all they have to do is throw money at it and the problem will go away. I'm not sure that's going to be the case.
Plus, how does this affect the Red Bulls? Take a look at least weekend's nationally broadcast match between the Red Bulls and the LA Galaxy at Red Bull Arena. The Galaxy practically sell out every stadium, even without Beckham, yet the Red Bull logo in the stands was plainly visible between the sparse crowd of folks in attendance. Fact: the Red Bulls seem incapable of filling their stadium, despite the presence of world class players like Thierry Henry and Tim Cahill. Don't give me that "but they're all the way out in New Jersey" thing either. People drive to New Jersey to see Jets and the Giants at the Meadowlands, correct? Plus, we drive 45 minutes to an hour to see Real Salt Lake every match too, and we're season ticket holders. Obviously SLC traffic is a whole different ball game than getting from NY to Jersey, but if people want the product badly enough, they'll go, hence the NFL situation. Plus what chance will the Red Bulls have of continuing to attract world class talent with the rich step-brother next door?
It seems to me that most of this is based on TV money, and I'm not sure the MLS TV model is on the right road. Almost every Red Bulls match is broadcast on either ESPN or NBC Sports, yet the league's ratings continue to be horridly underwhelming. Plus, the league continues to shove matches like Chicago vs Philadelphia at us because of the large market thinking. These matches tend to be total snoozers because the league's best soccer is not played in Chicago or Philadelphia, though the Union seem to be heading in the right direction and have an outstanding stadium and fanbase, so no offense. The ratings seem to show that the large market bias isn't working particularly well for MLS. What can be assured is this: the New York/LA centric MLS TV coverage is just going to get worse with this development.
In the final analysis, I'm not sure this is the best move to grow the league in the long term. It's a money grab, period. MLS will get 60 million more in an expansion fee from this franchise than they would get from an Orlando market or elsewhere. Money talks, and the execs listen. They don't listen to the fans though. They don't listen to the fans who have already said they don't give a hoot about New York games on TV. They don't listen to fans who say they don't want one of the league's flagship franchises to be a farm team for a free wheeling EPL club. They don't listen to fans from other markets who are literally crying out for this sport. Now, if they are going to expand further, they're going over FIFA's 20 team limit, not that MLS has ever cared about anything FIFA does, which costs teams their best players every time an international date rolls around.
They're going to do what they're going to do, end of story. I'm not saying it isn't going to work. I love MLS, and for the sake of the league, I really hope they know what they're doing. I'm just not sure that a venture between a bunch of oil rich dudes and the baseball team that kept firing and rehiring Billy Martin over and over again is the best idea in the world when competitive football already exists in other markets.
Just my two cents.
No comments:
Post a Comment