Disqus - Latest Comments for Mr. Fish

Re: Why MLS is Deserving of Ridicule

Mr. Fish — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 16:52:43 -0000

More SSS = more flexibility with scheduling = fewer issues like this.

In 2009, 9 of 15 teams will play in SSS.
In 2010, 10 of 16 teams will.

Re: Would you pay $40 million for a minor league franchise?

Mr. Fish — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 13:44:58 -0000

Despite the intriguing title of your post, your screed against the league reeks of Eurosnobbery. No one's holding a gun to the cities who bid to join the league. If the market viewed MLS as unworthy of a $40MM investment, no one would have stepped up.

As more and more MLS clubs move into the black (LA, FCD, CMB, RSL next year), the outlay to join the league will seem like a smarter and smarter investment.

The $40MM fees, and the a new post-2009 CBA with the players union, will drive the league to increase team salary caps, allowing teams to bring in more quality players, therefore making MLS appear less "minor-league."

Remember, no one is talking about league solvency anymore, they're talking about relevancy in the soccer and US sports landscapes. That relevancy come with more teams and higher salary caps.

Krishnaiyer, I guess you'd consider ALL national leagues save England, Germany, Italy, and Spain as minor. That's leaving a lot of soccer "minor-league" soccer wealth around the world.

Re: Open Letter to the Newspaper Editors of America

Mr. Fish — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 17:05:25 -0000

These days, though, all it takes is picking up the AP feed. Tomorrow should be a relatively quiet sports day, save another steroids admission in baseball.

Re: Taking Shots

Mr. Fish — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 15:50:50 -0000

Ah, sir. The soccer blogosphere feels your pain. It seems that there's only bad news the days in the media, the economy, international politics, etc.

However, not all is as bleak as you portray.

Consider:
1. The news guys are breaking records. Seattle has sold 20k + season tickets, and the Sounders' home opener is a 30,000 + sellout.

2. More want to join the club. Even with the removal of Miami from the expansion list, Portland, St. Louis, Ottawa and Vancouver still are vying for MLS spots #17 and 18.

3. Barring an unprecedented collapse, the US will qualify for its 6th straight World Cup, and will play in compelling tournaments (Confed Cup, Gold Cup) this summer, providing lots to watch.

4. No one is talking about the MLS folding. Though the questions are more geared toward MLS relevance, the financial questions that dogged the league's early years are gone.

5. We have TWO all-soccer cable outlets to watch (FSC, GOL) and with ESPNU and CBS College Sports, more college games are available on TV than ever before.

If soccer fans allow haters or soccer-ignorant fans to ruin their experience, shame on them. The fact is, MLS and US Soccer continue to grow, Beckham or not. We have NOTHING to apologize for. Could the two be doing better? Sure, but be pleased for what we've got!

Re: The MLS Parity Question

Mr. Fish — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 10:58:01 -0000

Forced parity seems "un-American?" What about the NFL? They've figured out the magic formula that offers hope to fans of EVERY team that a playoff berth and/or Super Bowl win is possible.

Imagine being a KC Royals or Pittsburgh Pirates fan, knowing that if the cards fall the right way, your team COULD have a .500 season? Without a commitment to win from ownership, why would fans even attend these matches?

If you're a fan of an middling EPL side, do you hope for a 5th or 6th place finish? 'Cause there's no way your club is finishing above Man U, Chelsea, Liverpool, and Arsenal. Where's the fun in that?

I'm all for "forced" parity.

Re: A Open Cup Question

Mr. Fish — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 12:54:55 -0000

I disagree that the USOC needs to be put out of its mystery. I think there's something quaint about the small teams, and many cases, small crowds. The key to success for the Open Cup is to find a title sponsor that can help tell the tournament's story. Until all the MLS clubs have their own barns, the top-flight teams should play all their matches at the smaller sides' place, in order to increase the likelihood of an upset.

I don't see the value of an MLS-USL1 tournament. The underdogs angle (Charleston 08, Seattle/Carolina 07, Dallas Roma 06, etc.) is what makes the USOC special.

That said, with the advent of the Concacaf Champs League, I'd support the dissolution of the SuperLiga, though apparently the Spanish-language TV ratings will keep the MLS-FMF tourney alive.

Re: Success of American Women Still Hurts MLS

Mr. Fish — Wed, 27 May 2009 11:01:22 -0000

Nice to see such spirited responses here.

Can't say that I agree that the women's game in the US is hurting MLS. As noted by posters earlier, support for WPS and the US Women lags behind MLS and the US Men.

The larger problem for MLS is noted by Don Garber in his interview with Jeffrey Marcus on the NYT Goal blog: http://goal.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/23/us-soc...

Frankly, there are millions, that's right millions of US-based soccer fans that won't follow MLS due to the league's 2nd class status and perceived lack of quality of play.

It's hard to believe that the US Women's WWC win at the Rose Bowl was 10 years ago, but the visibility of the US Women among the sporting media and public has faded big-time since Mia & Co were on the field. Despite Nike's marketing $$, the general sports fan would be hard-pressed to name a single current US WNT player. Does Joe Sports Fan know any MLS players? Answers would probably be: 1. Beckham, (yeah, I know) 2. Adu (yeah, I know), and a distant, distant 3rd, Donovan.

As Jason, for a US culture that's "rejected" soccer, as Prince says, "Forever is a mighty long time." We're about to enter a fantastic summer of soccer in the US. Question is, "will MLS get any attention during it?"