Blue and White Army Posted January 3, 2005 Share Posted January 3, 2005 Considering there are Yank teams in the PCSL, that probably wouldn't work out so well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Posted January 3, 2005 Author Share Posted January 3, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Blue and White Army Considering there are Yank teams in the PCSL, that probably wouldn't work out so well. This brings up an interesting question. Why does the PCSL include U.S. teams in their league. Aside from geographical benefits and being good neighbours, why are the Hibernian & Caledonian and Skagit Rapids in this league? Do they provide financial resources, which are beneficial to the league's survival? Or do they help make-up the numbers needed to make the league attractive? What is the PCSL's agenda? Is there a vision to eventually be a participant in a Canadian product, an exclusive British Columbian product or is the PCSL content to keep operating in the future just as they currently are doing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 quote:This brings up an interesting question. Why does the PCSL include U.S. teams in their league. Why not? US teams have played in the PCSL since its inception in 1908. quote:Aside from geographical benefits and being good neighbours, why are the Hibernian & Caledonian and Skagit Rapids in this league? Do they provide financial resources, which are beneficial to the league's survival? Or do they help make-up the numbers needed to make the league attractive? No more, no less than any other club in the league. quote:What is the PCSL's agenda? Why does the PCSL need an agenda any more than any other league? quote:Is there a vision to eventually be a participant in a Canadian product, an exclusive British Columbian product or is the PCSL content to keep operating in the future just as they currently are doing? The PCSL has proven to be a very successful, popular and enduring league offering a high standard of play in the Pacific Northwest. If it ain't broke why fix it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Posted January 4, 2005 Author Share Posted January 4, 2005 quote:Why not? US teams have played in the PCSL since its inception in 1908.There was one year of pro soccer back then and that was the only year that there was any US participation until recent times. quote:No more, no less than any other club in the league.So they don't add anything that isn't there already. quote:Why does the PCSL need an agenda any more than any other league?It doesn't if it satisfies the box office. What is the average attendance and how much revenue does that bring in. I recall Ted making a recent claim that a $60,000 transfer fee to Victoria United would cover two years worth of expenses. If there is ambition to grow and develop players to the level where they can earn a dollar or two, an agenda might be in order. If everybody's happy with an amateur club that on a good day can draw maybe 200 fans, fine. quote:The PCSL has proven to be a very successful, popular and enduring league offering a high standard of play in the Pacific Northwest. If it ain't broke why fix it? Define successful, and I didn't say it was broke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-Man Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 Robert. Maybe the PCSL is happy as it is. Not everyone has your dream. To build a pro league with someone elses coin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Robert There was one year of pro soccer back then and that was the only year that there was any US participation until recent times.Care to share the source for this information? The PCSL is always on the lookout for relevant historical data. quote:So they don't add anything that isn't there already.They add an international flavour, does that bother you? Are you suggesting US teams be excluded - for what reason? Attendance varies, it is not unusual for some games to attract several hundreds of spectators, sometimes more. Some PCSL clubs depend heavily on their gate receipts, others on local sponsorship. You'll have to approach the clubs directly if you want information about their budgets. quote:Define successful, and I didn't say it was broke. What are your criteria for 'success'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Posted January 4, 2005 Author Share Posted January 4, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Richard Care to share the source for this information? The PCSL is always on the lookout for relevant historical data Interesting you should ask. My passion is to search for, collect and compile historical Canadian soccer data. Currently, I am working on the second draft of a certain part of British Columbia's heritage. I aslo have a second work in progress in this same field, which is currently on pause until the first mentioned gets printed. Since this will be a self-published effort, I will be more than happy to share this information with the PCSL or anyone else who is willing to buy a copy. If all of this bring's Dave Unwin's "From the Sidelines" to mind, I can guarantee that you'll really enjoy this accounting. quote:Originally posted by Richard They add an international flavour, does that bother you? Are you suggesting US teams be excluded - for what reason? Attendance varies, it is not unusual for some games to attract several hundreds of spectators, sometimes more. Some PCSL clubs depend heavily on their gate receipts, others on local sponsorship. You'll have to approach the clubs directly if you want information about their budgets. I am not knocking the PCSL, or any other soccer league in Canada, or any soccer league with a Canadian content. As a first and foremost Canadian soccer supporter, I am just very grateful they all exist. I am also not anti-American, although I sometimes critique and make anti-American statements. When I do so, I always have an alterior motive which favours Canada. Some people are get offended by these statements, but that is not my problem as I am entitled to my opinions and feelings. My only concern of American teams playing in Canadian leagues is that it eliminates the possibility of a true national championship. Is this really important? Monaco plays in the French league, there are Welsh clubs in English divisions and probably many more examples throughout the World. Professional sports leagues in North America have traditionally crossed borders. However, nations by their very existence enjoy identities, hence World Cups and Olympics. These competitions would change drastically if the national identities were to be removed. No flag, anthems, medal counts or national pride for starters. Is that good or bad? As far as attendances are concerned and having done some historical research, the number of spectators has not increased at soccer games in British Columbia during the past 100+ years. At certain times the numbers have been even better. This needs to be looked at when making soccer decisions in a business environment. The numbers are really down when one considers the British Columbia population of the 1890s to the numbers of today and the many other changes in our society from then to now. I also have an accounting background, which does not make me an expert. I just question quiet a few of our financial decisions (personally speaking, #1 on that list has always been Kevan Pipe. Talk about liabilities and depreciating assets. Okay. That's enough, Robert.) quote:Originally posted by Richard What are your criteria for 'success'? A going concern with a return. Staying in business, growth and satisfying the demands of soccer fans. Viva la PCSL. Would I like to see our youth earning a living here? Yes. What do we have to do to attain this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Robert willing to buy a copy Let us know when your books are ready for sale, email the PCSL too at info@pcsl.org. quote:Originally posted by Robert My only concern of American teams playing in Canadian leagues is that it eliminates the possibility of a true national championship. Well the PCSL does run the J. F. Kennedy and Kevin McAdams Memorial Cup tournaments which pit the Oregon and Washington state champions against the top BC based PCSL men's and women's teams based on league standings. US club participation in no way mitigates against deciding on a BC or Canadian champion. quote:Originally posted by Robert Would I like to see our youth earning a living here? We'll get there, eventually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJT Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 Robert, your misuse of the and [/quote ] tags are making things very difficult to read. I had to edit the majority of posts in this thread to restore the flow of the discussion. Please be more careful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
analyst Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 The PCSL fills a need, it provides a place for better than average players to play in the summer in BC, Washington and Oregon. Many players who play VMSL Metro division all winter, can't commit to serious soccer in the summer because of family vacations, and others play for the Whitecaps in the summer. As a result there are fewer high level BC players available to play in a serious amateur league in the summer. The PCSL has fewer competitive teams than the VMSL, but does include some US teams to help provide good competition and variety. Since the Whitecaps operate in the summer, it is difficult for PCSL teams to raise revenue from admissions. They can't make enough money to play against CPSL teams in Ontario. For years the Whitecaps lost money, even though it didn't pay great salaries, because of the travel costs. Any other effort to have soccer across Canada will fail financially. The title Canadian champ properly belongs to an A League team, until such time as we get a MLS team in Canada. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Posted January 4, 2005 Author Share Posted January 4, 2005 quote:Originally posted by DJT Robert, your misuse of the Sorry, I knew I should have asked for help. I'll try to do better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beachesl Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 quote:Originally posted by analyst The PCSL fills a need, it provides a place for better than average players to play in the summer in BC, Washington and Oregon. Many players who play VMSL Metro division all winter, can't commit to serious soccer in the summer because of family vacations, and others play for the Whitecaps in the summer. As a result there are fewer high level BC players available to play in a serious amateur league in the summer. The PCSL has fewer competitive teams than the VMSL, but does include some US teams to help provide good competition and variety. Since the Whitecaps operate in the summer, it is difficult for PCSL teams to raise revenue from admissions. They can't make enough money to play against CPSL teams in Ontario. For years the Whitecaps lost money, even though it didn't pay great salaries, because of the travel costs. Any other effort to have soccer across Canada will fail financially. The title Canadian champ properly belongs to an A League team, until such time as we get a MLS team in Canada. ..or until we have a truly National open cup competition like our friends to the south do. Just thought I'd add a little supplement to this excellent post I agree completely with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Posted January 4, 2005 Author Share Posted January 4, 2005 quote:Originally posted by analyst The PCSL fills a need, it provides a place for better than average players to play in the summer in BC, Washington and Oregon. Many players who play VMSL Metro division all winter, can't commit to serious soccer in the summer because of family vacations, and others play for the Whitecaps in the summer. As a result there are fewer high level BC players available to play in a serious amateur league in the summer. The PCSL has fewer competitive teams than the VMSL, but does include some US teams to help provide good competition and variety. Since the Whitecaps operate in the summer, it is difficult for PCSL teams to raise revenue from admissions. They can't make enough money to play against CPSL teams in Ontario. For years the Whitecaps lost money, even though it didn't pay great salaries, because of the travel costs. Any other effort to have soccer across Canada will fail financially. The title Canadian champ properly belongs to an A League team, until such time as we get a MLS team in Canada. The formats and structures implemented for Canadian and provincial soccer leagues have always failed. The size of the country and provinces, the distribution of population and the need to have a system in place where every party is of equal importance is a challenge which to this day has not been accomplished in a statisfactory manner. The popularity of the game itself has provided certain levels of success in various parts of the country. No one has yet come up with a compatible plan for a unification of these pockets where the game does flourish. Currently, there are three markets, which have proven capable of sustaining a long term pro team; Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver. There are two leagues, the CPSL and the PCSL which have in one form or an other been around for a while. I think that we can all agree that it is impossible to finance a coast to coast national league. All pro sports in North America are divided into regional compartments (divisions, conferences, sub-leagues, ect.). If this is the reality of North America, then soccer must also accept this. The European structure of have 18 or 20 teams in a single league will not work here. Therefore, why not let each region decide how they will determine their own championship and let the teams that win these championships compete in the United Canadian Soccer Leagues Championship. I'll leave the discussion of all the possible ways to accomplish this to the more creative minds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted January 5, 2005 Share Posted January 5, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Robert I think that we can all agree that it is impossible to finance a coast to coast national league. In Canada, yes. quote:Originally posted by Robert The European structure of have 18 or 20 teams in a single league will not work here. Is that not what USL Division One is doing in 2005? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ted Posted January 10, 2005 Share Posted January 10, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Blue and White Army I thought Victoria United were Canadian champs! They won the PCSL, after all..... [)] Actually I think we are N. American Champs since we won the John F. Kennedy Cup. Ted (ahhh, nice to be back in the swing of things.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ted Posted January 10, 2005 Share Posted January 10, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Robert This brings up an interesting question. Why does the PCSL include U.S. teams in their league. Aside from geographical benefits and being good neighbours, why are the Hibernian & Caledonian and Skagit Rapids in this league? Do they provide financial resources, which are beneficial to the league's survival? Or do they help make-up the numbers needed to make the league attractive? What is the PCSL's agenda? Is there a vision to eventually be a participant in a Canadian product, an exclusive British Columbian product or is the PCSL content to keep operating in the future just as they currently are doing? [The following are MY answers and MAY NOT reflect "official" thinking.] 1) U.S teams are there to provide the greatest number of competitive teams possible in a limited geographic area. Travelling to Washington or Oregon is faster, cheaper and easier than travelling to Prince George, Edmonton, Calgary or beyond. Our board here in Victoria recoils in horror at the thought of travelling outside our current boundaries. The idea is firmly entrenched that North-South is the only axis that makes sense for sport. 2)Vision? There is only a vision of a competitive league within the geographic entity sometimes described as Cascadia. 3) The future? I think no one involved in the league has had the time or inclination to think too much about the future. At the last AGM capping the number of teams at 12 was discussed but not, if I recall correctly, formally adopted as policy. That is about all the talk of the future I have ever heard about. It would be nice if the league had a plan or an agenda or even a goal beyond survival but as a totally amateur volunteer effort operating in a society that doesn't really embrace competitve men's soccer what choice do they have? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ted Posted January 10, 2005 Share Posted January 10, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Robert If there is ambition to grow and develop players to the level where they can earn a dollar or two, an agenda might be in order. If everybody's happy with an amateur club that on a good day can draw maybe 200 fans, fine. You have hit the nail on the head! I fervently believe in the former. I believe the vast majority of those running the league believe in the latter. MCM resigned from our Board of Directors because he believed as I do and was tired of beating his head against the brick wall. The thing is, how do you make people see that this league could be something greater when they have to spend their time chasing after $50 sponsors or taking the uniforms home to wash? Thinking about doing MORE almost becomes threatening when you are putting all your energy into surviving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ted Posted January 10, 2005 Share Posted January 10, 2005 quote:Originally posted by analyst For years the Whitecaps lost money, even though it didn't pay great salaries, because of the travel costs. Any other effort to have soccer across Canada will fail financially. [sTRAW MAN ALERT - STOP READING IF YOU ARE BORED BY THE TOPIC OF TRAVEL COSTS] The idea that "travel costs" are somehow responsible for the demise of any number of leagues is a straw man. The Whitecaps (and other teams/leagues) lost money because their expenses exceeded their revenue, not because one line item was larger than another. Teams have to travel in N. American Pro sport so frankly the point is moot. Any comparison to leagues in Europe is irrelevant. Various leagues send teams from New York to Seattle (4500km), a trip nearly double that from London to Moscow (2500). Even "regional" travel from L.A. to Seattle (1800km) is beyond any European league. The discussion should not be about what is essentially a fixed cost but about making those variable costs and revenues work out. The Whitecaps lost money becasue they failed to maximise revenue. They (and all the others) failed because they did not get people in the gate. They did not sell enough merchandise. They did not receive enough/any of the stadiums ancillary revenue. They failed to provide sufficient capitol to cover losses that ANY business can expect in it's start-up phase. Travel is a pain but travel costs, in and of themselves DID NOT cause any league or team to fail. Focusing on travel costs is like saying we failed to qualify for Germany 2006 because Pat Onstad made a couple of mistakes. Simplistic and inaccurate, such a thesis fails to address a complex set of factors thus making meaningful discussion pointless. Therefore: [] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ted Posted January 10, 2005 Share Posted January 10, 2005 quote:Originally posted by analyst For years the Whitecaps lost money, even though it didn't pay great salaries, because of the travel costs. Any other effort to have soccer across Canada will fail financially. [sTRAW MAN ALERT - STOP READING IF YOU ARE BORED BY THE TOPIC OF TRAVEL COSTS] The idea that "travel costs" are somehow responsible for the demise of any number of leagues is a straw man. The Whitecaps (and other teams/leagues) lost money because their expenses exceeded their revenue, not because one line item was larger than another. Teams have to travel in N. American Pro sport so frankly the point is moot. Any comparison to leagues in Europe is irrelevant. Various leagues send teams from New York to Seattle (4500km), a trip nearly double that from London to Moscow (2500). Even "regional" travel from L.A. to Seattle (1800km) is beyond any European league. The discussion should not be about what is essentially a fixed cost but about making those variable costs and revenues work out. The Whitecaps lost money becasue they failed to maximise revenue. They (and all the others) failed because they did not get people in the gate. They did not sell enough merchandise. They did not receive enough/any of the stadiums ancillary revenue. They failed to provide sufficient capitol to cover losses that ANY business can expect in it's start-up phase. Travel is a pain but travel costs, in and of themselves DID NOT cause any league or team to fail. Focusing on travel costs is like saying we failed to qualify for Germany 2006 because Pat Onstad made a couple of mistakes. Simplistic and inaccurate, such a thesis fails to address a complex set of factors thus making meaningful discussion pointless. Therefore: [] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 quote:Originally posted by ted You have hit the nail on the head! I fervently believe in the former. I believe the vast majority of those running the league believe in the latter. MCM resigned from our Board of Directors because he believed as I do and was tired of beating his head against the brick wall. The thing is, how do you make people see that this league could be something greater when they have to spend their time chasing after $50 sponsors or taking the uniforms home to wash? Thinking about doing MORE almost becomes threatening when you are putting all your energy into surviving. Ted, how would you propose the PCSL and its member clubs move beyond what it is today towards what you would like to see it be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 quote:Originally posted by ted The thing is, how do you make people see that this league could be something greater when they have to spend their time chasing after $50 sponsors or taking the uniforms home to wash? Thinking about doing MORE almost becomes threatening when you are putting all your energy into surviving. This is called "Lynx mentality" . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJT Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Richard Is that not what USL Division One is doing in 2005?No. The teams will be placed in one table on paper, but they won't be playing a balanced schedule. It's not the same as "the European structure" to which Robert is referring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ted Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Richard Ted, how would you propose the PCSL and its member clubs move beyond what it is today towards what you would like to see it be? Hi Richard! I should have known you'd ask the $64,000 question. To be honest I am not even sure what I want the league to be. Setting goals for five and ten years down the road is the place to start then we could talk about how to get there. What would I like to see? Well, I would like to see the league market itself in similar fashion to the baseball and hockey minor leagues. A league sponsorship deal that puts significant cash into marketing the league and it's teams. A deal with regional cable to broadcast a game of the week which includes short pre-game and half time shows. I would like to see the teams be run in a professional manner with a paid coach. I would like to see the players NOT have to contribute their own money to play in any division. I would like to see the creation of the U-21 division by the friendly merger of the current U-21 league and the PCSL. I would like to see every club represented in every division, Senior, U-21, Men, Women. I would like to see the PCSL and the Whitecaps* enter into a formal relationsip where the PCSL becomes a feeder league for them. I would like to see players moved up to the Whitecaps and/or "sold" to MLS or European teams by the Whitecaps with a fair division of the transfer monies between the Caps and the PCSL teams. I would like to see the Caps play friendlies against PCSL teams outside Greater Vancouver as part of the deal to promote themsleves and the PCSL. The path of development for a PRO player should be: rec leagues -> rep leagues -> PCSL -> Whitecaps -> MLS/Euro/etc. Then back down again as they age. In other words, I want the PCSL to be a real third division or minor league (depending on your reference points). Yup, a lot of pie in the sky, but more possible and perhaps more useful even than my dreams of a national league. * NOTE: It occurs to me that with teams in Washington State it might be possible to bring the Seattle Sounders (or whatever club ends up playing in Seattle) into the mix. Perhaps by dividing the clubs by nationality and support proportional to the unbalanced numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 Interesting and I don't disagree. Now we need to find somebody to do all this development work - you interested? :-) For all that many dream of a thriving national league, for the foreseeable future I think regional leagues are the way to go in Canada. They are the only types of leagues that have survived over the long term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 quote:Originally posted by ted I should have known you'd ask the $64,000 question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.