LJ;1167757 wrote:You both say "soccer blah blah blah" but the Crew is in the bottom 1/3 for attendence in the MLS. That's bad, no matter what way you try to spin it.

As for the Clippers, they are actually near the top for AAA attendence.

Okay, but let's look at the location of other sports teams.

Chicago Fire - Chicago, one of the biggest cities and admittedly a great all around sports town, in the same class as New York, Boston, and Los Angeles.

Chivas USA - Suburb of Los Angeles, pretty big hispanic population. Typically people of Hispanic descent enjoy soccer more than the average non-hispanic white American. Helps to fill the stadium.

Colorado Rapids - Commerce City (suburb of Denver), another great sports town.

Columbus Crew - Columbus, Ohio (Not a traditional sports town, not the biggest city, nor a large Hispanic population.)

D.C. United - Washington D.C., huge population to draw from

FC Dallas - Texas, typically a football area, but huge hispanic population and that helps with the soccer crowd.

Houston Dynamo - see above

Los Angeles Galaxy - See Chivas USA

Montreal Impact - Honestly, I know nothing about Canadian cities or whether they like soccer. Maybe the French Canadians do? Who know, I have nothing to really say about Canada.

New England Revolution - Foxborough (read as Boston) as said above, just a great all around sports town

New York Red Bulls - Harrison New Jersey (but they draw from New York and Newark), as mentioned above. New York is just a great sports town. Such a large population matters.

Philadelphia Union - Another classic sports town

Portland Timbers - Portland, Oregon, have nothing to say about this, a pretty "white" town, not a classic sports town, comparable to Columbus besides location.

Real Salt Lake - Salt Lake City, see above

San Jose Earthquakes - San Jose, large hispanic population (soccer fans generally more so than the typical "white" American)

Seattle Sounders - Seattle, a decent sports town, probably a step below Philadelphia (it has a Baseball team, Football team, had a basketball team but lost it).

Sporting Kansas City - Kansas City, a decent sports town, on the same level as Seattle (baseball, football, no basketball).

Toronto FC - once again, no idea about Canada

Vancouver Whitecaps FC - see above

Now of course all of those teams have not been in existence since the beginning, such as Seattle, Vancouver, Portland, and Philadelphia have all been added in the past 3 years. But Generally Columbus has done fairly well in attendance.

Attendance rank in the league over the years:

1996: 4/10
1997: 5/10
1998: 8/12
1999: 1/12
2000: 5/12
2001: 2/12
2002: 4/10
2003: 3/10
2004: 5/10
2005: 9/12
2006: 9/12
2007: 9/13
2008 10/14
2009: 9/15
2010: 8/16
2011: 16/18

They’ve been towards the top of the league a fair amount of the time. But overall I would say they are pretty average, and they are going against some top tier sports towns/large cities or towns with a much larger Hispanic population (who tend to enjoy soccer more). I wouldn’t exactly dog the Crew’s attendance.

Edit: The one thing I noticed when looking at attendance figures is that the Canadian clubs are all new, the 2 with revious figures are pulling 20k+ but that will probably drop once "newness" is gone. Seattle apparently loves soccer. It's a new club (3 years old) But they are pulling 31k, 36k, and 38k in those 3 years.

As expected, LA and New York are typically towards the top.

Houston has done alright, but Dallas either has a small stadium or is really disappointing.

Another club that I thought would be doing better is San Jose, but they are typically one of the worst.

OSH;1167850 wrote:Depends on what you look at. The NFL and MLB are much higher in attendance. I would never argue that the MLS could get HIGHER attendance, EVER, than those two. But I would definitely argue that the MLS more popular than the NHL and NBA. I would also venture to say there is more upside to the MLS than the NHL and NBA. With the attendance numbers that international soccer and international club tours have in the US, it also goes to show that soccer is VERY popular.
...

I'm not looking at anything. I was asking you what you look at to determine that Soccer is not the bottom of the barrel.

I guess if I were to determine which is more popular I would look at thins like TV revenue and attendance. When V shares are being drawn companies will pay for the soccer product.

david beckham who i believe is the highest paid or close to it ...salary $6,500,000

Kwame brown salary...$6,750,000

case closed

Soccer just isn't that big in America and it never will be because the South only cares about NASCAR and the North cares about being employed.

It does have a loyal fan base though, mostly of people who aren't good at sports and played soccer as a kid.

More people in this country like the NBA more than soccer. Its as simple as that. To say otherwise is just stupid.

Fly4Fun;1167853 wrote:Okay, but let's look at the location of other sports teams.

Chicago Fire - Chicago, one of the biggest cities and admittedly a great all around sports town, in the same class as New York, Boston, and Los Angeles.

Chivas USA - Suburb of Los Angeles, pretty big hispanic population. Typically people of Hispanic descent enjoy soccer more than the average non-hispanic white American. Helps to fill the stadium.

Colorado Rapids - Commerce City (suburb of Denver), another great sports town.

Columbus Crew - Columbus, Ohio (Not a traditional sports town, not the biggest city, nor a large Hispanic population.)

D.C. United - Washington D.C., huge population to draw from

FC Dallas - Texas, typically a football area, but huge hispanic population and that helps with the soccer crowd.

Houston Dynamo - see above

Los Angeles Galaxy - See Chivas USA

Montreal Impact - Honestly, I know nothing about Canadian cities or whether they like soccer. Maybe the French Canadians do? Who know, I have nothing to really say about Canada.

New England Revolution - Foxborough (read as Boston) as said above, just a great all around sports town

New York Red Bulls - Harrison New Jersey (but they draw from New York and Newark), as mentioned above. New York is just a great sports town. Such a large population matters.

Philadelphia Union - Another classic sports town

Portland Timbers - Portland, Oregon, have nothing to say about this, a pretty "white" town, not a classic sports town, comparable to Columbus besides location.

Real Salt Lake - Salt Lake City, see above

San Jose Earthquakes - San Jose, large hispanic population (soccer fans generally more so than the typical "white" American)

Seattle Sounders - Seattle, a decent sports town, probably a step below Philadelphia (it has a Baseball team, Football team, had a basketball team but lost it).

Sporting Kansas City - Kansas City, a decent sports town, on the same level as Seattle (baseball, football, no basketball).

Toronto FC - once again, no idea about Canada

Vancouver Whitecaps FC - see above

Now of course all of those teams have not been in existence since the beginning, such as Seattle, Vancouver, Portland, and Philadelphia have all been added in the past 3 years. But Generally Columbus has done fairly well in attendance.

Attendance rank in the league over the years:

1996: 4/10
1997: 5/10
1998: 8/12
1999: 1/12
2000: 5/12
2001: 2/12
2002: 4/10
2003: 3/10
2004: 5/10
2005: 9/12
2006: 9/12
2007: 9/13
2008 10/14
2009: 9/15
2010: 8/16
2011: 16/18

They’ve been towards the top of the league a fair amount of the time. But overall I would say they are pretty average, and they are going against some top tier sports towns/large cities or towns with a much larger Hispanic population (who tend to enjoy soccer more). I wouldn’t exactly dog the Crew’s attendance.

They have been in the bottom half of attendence 7 out of 15 years. That is bad. A team that has won a championship and is a yearly contender should not be bottom half in attendence that often. Esp as of late.

10/14 the year they won the Cup? Miserable
Still bottom half the year AFTER? Even more miserable

Soccer has sort of a chicken and egg problem as well. They can't get any talented athletes because if you are a talented athlete you will go play a real sport that pays millions like MLB, NFL, or NBA. They can't get big salaries because no talented athletes go to play soccer.

I do enjoy watching soccer when there is nothing else on, but it'll be a cold day in hell before I ever choose to watch soccer over even golf or cricket.

Is it really that hard to figure out why the Crew don't draw that well? Ohio is a Football state, followed by basketball and baseball. Like Fly4Fun points out, Columbus doesn't have the large population like some other MLS cities. And when you look at the large large Hispanic populations of the MLS cities in the South/Southwest, and hipsters in the west/northwest it becomes clear Columbus will be in the bottom 3rd of attendance for MLS.

Cry4Fail;1167853 wrote:Okay, but let's look at the location of other sports teams.

Chicago Fire - Chicago, one of the biggest cities and admittedly a great all around sports town, in the same class as New York, Boston, and Los Angeles.

Chivas USA - Suburb of Los Angeles, pretty big hispanic population. Typically people of Hispanic descent enjoy soccer more than the average non-hispanic white American. Helps to fill the stadium.

Colorado Rapids - Commerce City (suburb of Denver), another great sports town.

Columbus Crew - Columbus, Ohio (Not a traditional sports town, not the biggest city, nor a large Hispanic population.)

D.C. United - Washington D.C., huge population to draw from

FC Dallas - Texas, typically a football area, but huge hispanic population and that helps with the soccer crowd.

Houston Dynamo - see above

Los Angeles Galaxy - See Chivas USA

Montreal Impact - Honestly, I know nothing about Canadian cities or whether they like soccer. Maybe the French Canadians do? Who know, I have nothing to really say about Canada.

New England Revolution - Foxborough (read as Boston) as said above, just a great all around sports town

New York Red Bulls - Harrison New Jersey (but they draw from New York and Newark), as mentioned above. New York is just a great sports town. Such a large population matters.

Philadelphia Union - Another classic sports town

Portland Timbers - Portland, Oregon, have nothing to say about this, a pretty "white" town, not a classic sports town, comparable to Columbus besides location.

Real Salt Lake - Salt Lake City, see above

San Jose Earthquakes - San Jose, large hispanic population (soccer fans generally more so than the typical "white" American)

Seattle Sounders - Seattle, a decent sports town, probably a step below Philadelphia (it has a Baseball team, Football team, had a basketball team but lost it).

Sporting Kansas City - Kansas City, a decent sports town, on the same level as Seattle (baseball, football, no basketball).

Toronto FC - once again, no idea about Canada

Vancouver Whitecaps FC - see above

Now of course all of those teams have not been in existence since the beginning, such as Seattle, Vancouver, Portland, and Philadelphia have all been added in the past 3 years. But Generally Columbus has done fairly well in attendance.

Attendance rank in the league over the years:

1996: 4/10
1997: 5/10
1998: 8/12
1999: 1/12
2000: 5/12
2001: 2/12
2002: 4/10
2003: 3/10
2004: 5/10
2005: 9/12
2006: 9/12
2007: 9/13
2008 10/14
2009: 9/15
2010: 8/16
2011: 16/18

They’ve been towards the top of the league a fair amount of the time. But overall I would say they are pretty average, and they are going against some top tier sports towns/large cities or towns with a much larger Hispanic population (who tend to enjoy soccer more). I wouldn’t exactly dog the Crew’s attendance.

Edit: The one thing I noticed when looking at attendance figures is that the Canadian clubs are all new, the 2 with revious figures are pulling 20k+ but that will probably drop once "newness" is gone. Seattle apparently loves soccer. It's a new club (3 years old) But they are pulling 31k, 36k, and 38k in those 3 years.

As expected, LA and New York are typically towards the top.

Houston has done alright, but Dallas either has a small stadium or is really disappointing.

Another club that I thought would be doing better is San Jose, but they are typically one of the worst.

tl;dr

LJ;1167869 wrote:They have been in the bottom half of attendence 7 out of 15 years. That is bad. A team that has won a championship and is a yearly contender should not be bottom half in attendence that often. Esp as of late.

10/14 the year they won the Cup? Miserable
Still bottom half the year AFTER? Even more miserable

Look at the cities they are being compared against. They are one of the more "least notable" cities on that list. Not only that, but as mentioned just above, Ohio is a very big football state. It's not surprising that the Crew is at best average as far as attendance. If anything, I'd argue that as a whole they are doing better than one would traditionally expect based upon population size, demographics, and the culture of the area.

Fly4Fun;1167891 wrote:Look at the cities they are being compared against. They are one of the more "least notable" cities on that list. Not only that, but as mentioned just above, Ohio is a very big football state. It's not surprising that the Crew is at best average as far as attendance. If anything, I'd argue that as a whole they are doing better than one would traditionally expect based upon population size, demographics, and the culture of the area.

I disagree. With being a charter team, the first soccer specific stadium in the country, being an annual contender and actually having a decent marketing team, their attendence has been falling. That shows that people in Columbus get bored with anything that isn't OSU football over time. The CBJ never saw a big jump in attendence from going to the playoffs, because people got bored with them (now compound the fact that they are a loser).

This city does OSU football in the fall, dabbled in some sellouts and decent weekend attendence at OSU bball games, and then Clippers baseball waiting for football to start again. Everything beyond that is secondary. In order for an NBA team to work here, they would have to win a lot, and win fast. Otherwise, people will get bored and see a fall in attendence like almost everything else. I just see it ending up like another CBJ.

LJ;1167917 wrote:I disagree. With being a charter team, the first soccer specific stadium in the country, being an annual contender and actually having a decent marketing team, their attendence has been falling. That shows that people in Columbus get bored with anything that isn't OSU football over time. The CBJ never saw a big jump in attendence from going to the playoffs, because people got bored with them (now compound the fact that they are a loser).

This city does OSU football in the fall, dabbled in some sellouts and decent weekend attendence at OSU bball games, and then Clippers baseball waiting for football to start again. Everything beyond that is secondary. In order for an NBA team to work here, they would have to win a lot, and win fast. Otherwise, people will get bored and see a fall in attendence like almost everything else. I just see it ending up like another CBJ.

Agree to disagree then.

Fly4Fun;1167853 wrote:Okay, but let's look at the location of other sports teams.

Chicago Fire - Chicago, one of the biggest cities and admittedly a great all around sports town, in the same class as New York, Boston, and Los Angeles.

Chivas USA - Suburb of Los Angeles, pretty big hispanic population. Typically people of Hispanic descent enjoy soccer more than the average non-hispanic white American. Helps to fill the stadium.

Colorado Rapids - Commerce City (suburb of Denver), another great sports town.

Columbus Crew - Columbus, Ohio (Not a traditional sports town, not the biggest city, nor a large Hispanic population.)

D.C. United - Washington D.C., huge population to draw from

FC Dallas - Texas, typically a football area, but huge hispanic population and that helps with the soccer crowd.

Houston Dynamo - see above

Los Angeles Galaxy - See Chivas USA

Montreal Impact - Honestly, I know nothing about Canadian cities or whether they like soccer. Maybe the French Canadians do? Who know, I have nothing to really say about Canada.

New England Revolution - Foxborough (read as Boston) as said above, just a great all around sports town

New York Red Bulls - Harrison New Jersey (but they draw from New York and Newark), as mentioned above. New York is just a great sports town. Such a large population matters.

Philadelphia Union - Another classic sports town

Portland Timbers - Portland, Oregon, have nothing to say about this, a pretty "white" town, not a classic sports town, comparable to Columbus besides location.

Real Salt Lake - Salt Lake City, see above

San Jose Earthquakes - San Jose, large hispanic population (soccer fans generally more so than the typical "white" American)

Seattle Sounders - Seattle, a decent sports town, probably a step below Philadelphia (it has a Baseball team, Football team, had a basketball team but lost it).

Sporting Kansas City - Kansas City, a decent sports town, on the same level as Seattle (baseball, football, no basketball).

Toronto FC - once again, no idea about Canada

Vancouver Whitecaps FC - see above

Now of course all of those teams have not been in existence since the beginning, such as Seattle, Vancouver, Portland, and Philadelphia have all been added in the past 3 years. But Generally Columbus has done fairly well in attendance.

Attendance rank in the league over the years:

1996: 4/10
1997: 5/10
1998: 8/12
1999: 1/12
2000: 5/12
2001: 2/12
2002: 4/10
2003: 3/10
2004: 5/10
2005: 9/12
2006: 9/12
2007: 9/13
2008 10/14
2009: 9/15
2010: 8/16
2011: 16/18

They’ve been towards the top of the league a fair amount of the time. But overall I would say they are pretty average, and they are going against some top tier sports towns/large cities or towns with a much larger Hispanic population (who tend to enjoy soccer more). I wouldn’t exactly dog the Crew’s attendance.

Edit: The one thing I noticed when looking at attendance figures is that the Canadian clubs are all new, the 2 with revious figures are pulling 20k+ but that will probably drop once "newness" is gone. Seattle apparently loves soccer. It's a new club (3 years old) But they are pulling 31k, 36k, and 38k in those 3 years.

As expected, LA and New York are typically towards the top.

Houston has done alright, but Dallas either has a small stadium or is really disappointing.

Another club that I thought would be doing better is San Jose, but they are typically one of the worst.

First, you have one chance to make a first impression. Columbus started in cavernous Ohio Stadium before getting their own stadium (they year they were first in attendance). The problem is every year new stadiums are opening that cause other teams to jump ahead of Columbus. And they're much nicer stadiums than Crew Stadium. Crew Stadium is as bare bones as you can get. Red Bull Arena, Livestrong Sporting Park, and the new BBVA Compass Stadium in Houston are astronomically better. It's like an NFL team playing at Stambaugh Stadium compared to Browns Stadium.

There's no contest.

Plus, these new teams are coming in when soccer is 'hip', the Crew joined MLS when soccer was purely a joke. And the product on the field wasn't good at all. That's changing.

Portland, Seattle, and Vancouver have had teams for decades. Montreal has their own stadium and will do well. Toronto does well despite a horrible team every year. FC Dallas' stadium is in Frisco miles away from the metroplex (I've been there, nice stadium, horrible location).

C-bus is waaaaaaaaaaaay too small.

Metropolitan area, Columbus isn't even top 30 in the country.

said_aouita;1168042 wrote:C-bus is waaaaaaaaaaaay too small.

Metropolitan area, Columbus isn't even top 30 in the country.

city proper is still 15th largest in the US. It's not like Columbus is some small podunk town.

said_aouita;1168042 wrote:C-bus is waaaaaaaaaaaay too small.

Metropolitan area, Columbus isn't even top 30 in the country.

I may be off by one or two, but aren't there ten or so NBA franchises in smaller markets?

Y-Town Steelhound;1168074 wrote:city proper is still 15th largest in the US. It's not like Columbus is some small podunk town.

That's pretty irrelevant. The size of the market is what matters.

I know for a fact that Mayor Coleman had talk with the Seattle Supersonics when they were moving. I know they currently have plans on ready for the Kings too.

But let's be honest, there are 5+ cities that would be better fits for an NBA team.

Las Vegas, St. Louis, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, San Diego, Louisville, Vancouver, Montreal, Seattle (with a new arena), etc.

It would be wiser for the NBA to go to two years in college, not increase the number of teams.

Also, no chance Columbus gets an NBA team.

sjmvsfscs08;1168092 wrote:That's pretty irrelevant. The size of the market is what matters.

I know for a fact that Mayor Coleman had talk with the Seattle Supersonics when they were moving. I know they currently have plans on ready for the Kings too.

But let's be honest, there are 5+ cities that would be better fits for an NBA team.

Las Vegas, St. Louis, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, San Diego, Louisville, Vancouver, Montreal, Seattle (with a new arena), etc.

It would be wiser for the NBA to go to two years in college, not increase the number of teams.

Las Vegas won't get a team anytime soon. The whole Tim Donaghy thing is too recent.

Other than that, it's just a subjective opinion. If I'm an NBA team, I don't want to go to Canada as NBA players generally don't want to go there. Columbus would be a decent spot as the City is pretty good, the Arena is nice. The weather isn't absolutely miserable.

As far as location goes (nothing to do with possible attendance) for the purpose of attracting players in FA, I feel like San Diego would be the best option of the ones you listed.

Columbus has something that most of those cities don't have. A stadium that is already built and owned by the city. Why do people think Cincy is better suited for a team when it's a smaller city who can't sell out their NFL Games.

The NBA has no plans to expand anytime soon. If they do anything they will be contracting.

sportchampps;1168146 wrote:Columbus has something that most of those cities don't have. A stadium that is already built and owned by the city. Why do people think Cincy is better suited for a team when it's a smaller city who can't sell out their NFL Games.

Don't blame the Bengals problems on the fans. That's on the owner.

But ya, having a relatively new arena owned by the city is why we are even having this discussion.

OSH;1167844 wrote:There are 13 of the 19 that play in soccer specific stadiums. The Seattle Sounders could almost qualify since they make moves to make the stadium more "soccer specific" during games.

Of the remaining, only Vancouver and San Jose are in the works of getting soccer-specific stadiums. New England and DC are the last two that don't have a soccer stadium and definitely hurt the attendance rates -- stupid Bob Craft.

Most soccer-specific stadiums are setting around 20,000-25,000. So...where does that conflict with the NHL and NBA? I should start blaming the NFL for having bigger stadiums too. Shame on them. Make them smaller so it looks better for the other sports!

Okay but those 6 that are in larger stadiums skew the numbers greatly. Bottomline is in TV ratings and merchandise dollars soccer is dwarfed by everything

Classyposter58;1168155 wrote:Okay but those 6 that are in larger stadiums skew the numbers greatly. Bottomline is in TV ratings and merchandise dollars soccer is dwarfed by everything

How when the 2nd highest average is 21k?

Also, the highest capacity (outside of Seattle) is 25k. They reduce the capacity with tarps and such for soccer in RFK, Gillette and so on.