Soccer has been a popular youth sport in the US for over 30 years. It has not translated into television and live attendance popularity at the professional level that would make it truly Major League. Investors have "bet the come" for almost 50 years in the US, and their payoff has been elusive for the last 20 years plus.
Regarding the concussion issue: I saw a headline this week in the Wall Street Journal for a story that the link between dementia and soccer is being studied, and awareness raised. I think the concussion risk in soccer is as high as, if not higher than, football, but the NFL had a more readily available revenue stream for American class-action attorneys to approach first. I think that is why boxing was never emphasized as a source of concussion, CTE and dementia...they hide their money better.
apparently it has been working like a ponzi scheme but the ones who really benefited from that system are the ten original founding teams and the part that doesn't add up is the fact that the last 15 or so expansion teams are led by solid investor groups who own some of the biggest, most iconic companies in the country and usually are billionaires. the atlanta team for example, is owned by the owner of the NFL's falcons and founder of home depot. what i'm trying to say is that those types of investors must do their homework intensively before they commit a penny to such business. they must have access to the league's accountability books and study revenues, expenses, risks, return on investment, profit, etc. because if they smell the bubble is about to burst i don't think they'd be too stupid to get on board with hundreds of millions on the line. i just don't think it's that simple. i imagine that what they see is a business that is about to make the jump to a new, higher level and they want a piece of the pie while it is still at factory direct cost. the sport is undeniably gaining in popularity and the new generations from the millenials onward are more open minded about a global cultural diversity where soccer is clearly the sport that unifies the most people in the world, like how the world cup is the big deal worldwide compared to a superbowl for example. but the point is, those penny pinching billionaires who are putting their money down for new expansion teams are doing it because they smell more green that make their efforts worthwhile so something interesting must be happening there.
that may be true but soccer in europe is a big deal, really. and it's definitely up there alongside the NFL as far as in place, live spectator audience, for example, when manchester united plays they fill their stadium with over 70K people in one single game. barcelona sells out their 100K stadium several times per season. and just about every large city in europe from munich to milan, liverpool, london, etc. plus you need to factor in that NFL games are broadcast and viewed primarily in the U.S and their ratings are outstanding but soccer reaches the whole world and therefore its audience multiplies exponentially to the billions of viewers.
With the incredible televisions and broadcast quality we all have in our living room now, staying home and watching a game in the comfort of your own home is more and more becoming the choice for many... this is true in every sport...
The true measure of popularity of sports leagues in the United States and around the world is the size of the television contracts...and based on that professional soccer in the United States it’s still a minor sport.
Annual revenue by league (U.S. dollars)
League Revenues TV revenue
National Football League $7.2 bn
Major League Baseball $1.5 bn
National Basketball Association $5.2bn
National Hockey League $600 m
Major League Soccer $90 m
Canadian Football League $40 m
i have friends that are huge soccer fans, have even made trips for last 2 mens world cups, and make a premier league game a year... but that's the thing... they walk European leagues and world cup, and say that they don't even pay attention to MLS... of the 9 of them... only 3 have even been to an MLS game. and isn't there a whole fight going on now where a guy on LA Galaxy is making fun of the best guy on LAFC, saying that he is in MLS in his prime, and that is why he is doing so good here, but when he was in his prime, he was in the Premier League??? so even the players know that MLS isn't even the top tier league for the local fans
I think jedicurt's anecdote is probably more representative of what's really happening in the US, as a soccer market.
It seems soccer is getting more popular, but that is not translating to the MLS getting more popular. More people are watching soccer in the US, but that doesn't seem to be helping the MLS. In fact, easier access to Premier League games is probably hurting the MLS.
MLS TV ratings slump 19% during regular season; Playoffs take a nosedive
Premier League Pushing Huge Viewership Gains for NBC Sports Group...soccer fans in the United States have access to better soccer from around the world that’s more accessible than MLS games. As a result, viewers are tuning out Major League Soccer and tuning into other leagues, clubs and competitions from around the world.
So, really, in context of this stadium being used for MLS games, it's not about soccer's popularity in general, but about the MLS's viability specifically.Nearly 10 million viewers have tuned in to NBC Sports Group's Premier League coverage since Aug. 17, leading to a 67 percent daily viewership increase for NBCSN, marking the largest cable sports network growth over that span. Meanwhile, mobile viewership continues its rapid growth; fans have streamed nearly 35 million minutes via NBC Sports Live Extra over that span.
yes, i think you've nailed it. it seems to me the debate got carried away and we were no longer comparing apples with apples.
so, contrary to a comment above, i do believe the NFL is the biggest, most profitable league, regardless of sport, in the world. according to forbes all 32 NFL teams are among the 50 most valueable sports teams in the world, including the detroit lions. however, if we compare sport against sport, and i am not "facting" the decline of the NFL, soccer has a bigger audience and fan base world wide numbered in the billions. the NFL as a league is growing richer every year with higher t.v contracts and soaring team values. in soccer the only league that may come remotely close to it is the english premier league. people outside the u.s do watch NFL games but football as a sport is not a global phenomenon like soccer is. and that's not belittling or "facting" the decline of football or the NFL at all.
I read this report every year. It's not exactly related to the discussion at hand, but is related. I'm sure many of you will find it interesting. The 2019 issue should come out soon. Global Sports Salaries Survey 2018
This is about having a public stadium that can be used for MANY things the citizenry is interested in, including soccer. If we could claim we could have a rodeo in it, it would probably be very popular. LOL. This isn't about the Funk's, rich athletes, soccer vs football. It's about having a multipurpose stadium befitting a city our size that serves its citizens. Even though I don't watch soccer, I still think this is important.
but i've yet to be told a need for this venue that isn't already filled by other venues we have around the city... soccer keeps getting brought up, because it is the one that everyone keeps saying it is needed for... yes it can also have outdoor concerts... we have plenty of outdoor concert venues... so what concert did we not get because we didn't have this type of facility? what are these other things that we can't use the new park, or any of the other outdoor spaces that the City already owns??? i have yet to hear what any of them are, except soccer... hence the topic of discussion.
It is just Insane to think that we are going to give the Funkhousers $30MM+ for a pet project soccer stadium when this city has stop lights that turn into stop signs during even modest rain storms (Memorial and Western this morning), and there's not a single god damn reflective mark on any road in the metroplex, causing the lanes to disappear during the aforementioned storms.
But let's make sure Bobby gets his minor league soccer field.
Sure, we didn't need the Chesapeake Arena either.. we could keep the Cox because it was a basketball floor. Or, we didn't really need a park...we have plenty. And we didn't need a library...we already had one. We didn't need a new ballpark...there are plenty of high school fields around the city. We didn't need the streetcar...we have plenty of cars and buses to take us where we want to go. We don't need any more restaurants.. there are plenty to eat at. We don't need anything... we can make due with what we have. Right?
But that's where you are wrong...we were losing arena events when we only had cox... So a new arena was needed and able to be justified... Libraries, that's irrelevant... And we didn't have a massive large single park for events like the new park, so again... Nope... Outside of soccer, what is the need??? You were the one who said the conversation needed to be about more than soccer, not me... So let's have that conversation... What events do you think will be there? Will they be new events? Will they be events that move from current venues?? I would like to know your thoughts..
And you bringing up the ballpark is a great example... It's under utilized already, when baseball isn't going on, and it could hold the same types of events as this new stadium, but it doesn't... Why not? Is there not a need?
IIRC, the justification for the Peak was the hope we could get an NHL franchise. If it hadn't been for Hurricane Katrina, we likely would never had been approved for an NBA franchise. I say that to say that targets need to be flexible. The Brick isn't suitable for either soccer, football, or most concerts. That is why it is empty for much of the year. A new multipurpose facility would chiefly be used for soccer but would be infinitely more suitable for outdoor concerts, HS football playoffs, and likely events I haven't even considered. I didn't see anything that would indicate the Energy would get to play there for free. Did I miss that?
What makes you think there is a market for HS football playoffs in the metro? Pete indicated earlier there is no pent up desire for this in the metro.Those playoffs are after the regular season games in college are over and they could utilize OU. OSU, or Central Oklahoma and they don't.
Concerts can be held in the new park. This is nothing but a gift to the Funks and construction companies. Bad use of funds when you can't keep the street lights lit.
I think people need to travel more and see the kinds of facilities that are common in most metropolitan areas of around our size and the ones we aspire to be like. It is true that no one will die if we don't do anything else on public amenities for the next 20 years. If survival is the only objective, join the tea party, cut more taxes, and let's not do anything progressive to make this a more livable and attractive city.
I also don't understand all the animosity towards the Funks. If anybody thinks the Funks need this to make their lives complete or fruitful, or even if they think they will actually make money on it, they are pretty unaware. Soccer in OKC is never going to be a big profit item. This stadium doesn't get them big money or big crowds. They will have to spend 100s of millions of $ to even have a chance to put OKC on the soccer big stage.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks