So in this video, fellow FanHouser IrishOutsider stopped to chat with a couple of members of Sons of Ben, the Philadelphia supporters group still waiting for MLS to give them a club to support. Right now, MLS is expected to decide between the Illadelph and St. Louis, and these guys make the point that their city is the fourth-biggest media market in the U.S., and they question why anyone would consider the 20th- or 28th-biggest media market instead.
That’s clearly supposed to be a dig at Missouri, but it’s funny that these guys specifically say “the 28th-largest media market,” which isn’t isn’t St. Louis or Kansas City. It’s Raleigh-Durham. And guess what? We’ve got a club, and we couldn’t really give a toss that it’s not an MLS franchise. Hell, we’ve beaten MLS franchises, and not just in friendlies. (Sorry, Tom.)
In fact, it’s kind of interesting to note how many media markets bigger than the Triangle have USL clubs — cities like Atlanta (8th), Minneapolis (15th), Miami (16th), Cleveland (17th), Pittsburgh (22nd), Portland (23rd), Baltimore (24th), and Charlotte (25th). Funny how some cities refuse to consider creating a club in the second division. I guess that’s what happens when you don’t have a promotion and relegation system.
It does beg the question, though — if MLS chooses St. Louis, would Philadelphia tell MLS to piss off and build a USL club? They would certainly have enough support for it, especially within a league looking for more national exposure. Or is USL too low for them, even after an MLS rejection? Would they prefer to lure the Wizards away from Kansas City and save us all from the phrase “Missouri Derby?”
Any Sons of Ben want to take a shot at that one?
(Video from FanHouse. Visit SoccerFanhouse.com for more fun stuff.)
9 responses so far ↓
1 Simon // Jan 23, 2008 at 7:19 pm
What the hell is a Media market? And why do MSL care?
2 Dave // Jan 23, 2008 at 8:06 pm
From your friend and mine, Wikipedia:
“A media market, broadcast market, media region, designated market area, DMA or simply market is a region where the population can receive the same (or similar) television and radio station offerings, and may also include other types of media including newspapers and Internet content. They can coincide with metropolitan areas, though rural regions with few significant population centers can also be designated as markets…. They are widely used in ratings, which are compiled in the United States by Nielsen Media Research (television) and Arbitron (radio).”
Simply put, in the highly unlikely event that Philly gets a USL-1 club, the league could go to FSC and say, “Look, we just added a major media market here. How about a little expanded coverage?” They start look less like a small fry when they add more big cities.
3 24 Jan. The News you might have Missed. « Kansas City Soccer Review // Jan 24, 2008 at 9:01 am
[...] Know Your Media Market That’s clearly supposed to be a dig at Missouri, but it is funny that these guys specifically say the “28th largest media market” which isn’t St. Louis or Kansas City. [...]
4 Simon // Jan 24, 2008 at 6:41 pm
Cheers for the explanation Dave, that’s cleared it up
5 joejoejoe // Jan 25, 2008 at 8:29 am
I wonder how much $$$ it would take to buy the USL umbrella and entice (with more $$$) the First and Second Division franchises to accept promotion/relegation. I’m guessing less than the cost of two MLS franchises for the whole enchilada. I think that concept would blow the MLS out of the water in less than a decade and really ignite soccer at the local level. Instead we get Flying Monkey FC in Seattle or some such nonsense from MLS.
6 Dave // Jan 25, 2008 at 12:03 pm
joejoejoe: The problem with that is some USL-2 clubs can’t really afford to play in USL-1. Richmond willingly relegated themselves to USL-2 to save money on travel costs. They couldn’t pay for all that air travel to Seattle, Portland, Vancouver, etc. It’s cheaper to take the bus to Baltimore, Wilmington, Charlotte, Pittsburgh, etc.
USL clubs would need to get a lot more cash out of their current TV deal, and as long as MLS stays in business, I don’t see that happening.
BTW, “Flying Monkey FC” sounds a lot better to me than “Emerald City Greens.”
7 a different Dave // Jan 25, 2008 at 10:06 pm
Mom always said you had to eat your Emerald City Greens before you could have your dessert.
Seriously, if they chose any name other than Seattle Sounders I’m going to be a little bit pissed off.
As to pro/rel, it can’t really work as things are structured now. I could see it happening within MLS, though, in the future when the league grows big enough. If every club is part of a single entity structure, the financial pitfalls of pro/rel don’t apply.
Imagine a future MLS with 32 to 40 teams, with an upper and lower division of 16 to 20 teams each, and pro/rel. That’s enough clubs to cover most of the major media markets, and also ensure that the really crappy clubs don’t stink up the joint and remain around in the top flight year after year, simply because they happen to be a “major media market”.
8 joejoejoe // Jan 26, 2008 at 3:07 am
Dave – Do you have any idea how much a USL-1 franchise costs? USL-2? I can’t find much about the costs online.
I think the USL could adopt a subsidized transportation budget that’s paid equally to all teams that would ease some of the problems associated with national leagues in the US (we’re a giant country). Let clubs run all of their own affairs but mandate participation in a league transportation plan. I think that could generate a lot of savings.
To be competive with MLS, USL could adopt more open transfer policies so that players eyeing a higher paying career in Europe would rather start in the USL because they have more control of their destiny. USL-2 teams could be the lowest of semi-pro leagues and maybe the league could sign a sponsorship deal with Lowe’s or something to give all the players P/T jobs if they want them. One of the problems with MLS is that it’s a closed system and if you screw up — you get a bad name all over US soccer. I see MLS as kind of like the NFL pre-AFL days. A league full of squares and business types. I think MLS needs to be cross bred with wilder, more creative types who love the sport and competition (and, yes, money) a bit more and to my uninformed eye the best way to do it would be to infuse USL with a bunch of money. The soccer equivalent of the old AFL.
I’m looking at the MLS payrolls and it seems you could pay 80% of MLS players in the entire league for less than the cost of an MLS franchise. So why not just pay for talent instead of the MLS brand?
9 Bryan - SoB // Jan 29, 2008 at 2:46 pm
I didn’t have the numbers in front of me but I wanted to make it clear that whether St. Louis wants to admit it or not, economics of the advertising sales delta between the #4 and #21 media market does matter.
St. Louis fans haven’t mobilized like us, and while they say soccer is more a part of their culture, Philadelphia has better sports fans.
And to get back to why Philly doesn’t have a USL team, it’s because potential investors in a USL club were told that an MLS team moving in would not have to compensate them for assumption of a market that they had cultivated. That is so typically Philly, that we were totally effed by a probability, oh well, back to your breaking down of an Elon grad’s performance.