Jump to content

Canadian Players Need A Canadian League


L.T.

Recommended Posts

quote:Originally posted by ted

Yes. It says very clearly that no one has ever made a compelling case for a CSL2 to the board of MLSE.

Which, I suspect, may be because there isn't a compelling case to be made.

And possibly, that no one is really interested in doing so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 198
  • Created
  • Last Reply
quote:Originally posted by ted

Could you really make a compelling business case that would convince the MLSE BoD (and Greg Kerfoot for that matter) that a CSL2 would be more profitable for them and a more secure investment than the MLS option?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by ted

Interesting. I am saying that MLSE have never been presented with the option nor sought out any other options but simply said "Hey, let's jump on board this MLS thing."

My explanation can only be "patently false" if you know for a fact that they did examine other options. Were you present when MLSE was given a presentation by a pro-CSL consultant? Did you attend an MLSE Board meeting where the agenda item "Pro Soccer Alternatives to MLS" was thouroughly discussed?

You (and I) are making a lot of assumptions. My assumptions however, are that something did NOT happen so unless you can prove something DID happen in this regard please stop using terms like "patently false".

There is a reasonable case to be made that a properly structured CSL would be more profitable than a single MLS franchise in Canada. That is my opinion and you are free to disagree but then, that is your OPINION. :D

What is the reasonable case? You and others who are pro-CSL have yet to present it.

quote:The only reason MLSE or any other corporate entity would go for MLS instead of a new CSL is beacuse they are lazy and ignorant. Too ignorant to even know their are other options possible and too lazy to search out such options and build something.

That is the comment that I am calling 'patently false', and I stand by it. Try not resorting to name-calling and I'll try to stop using the phrase 'patently false' in response. Fair is fair.

I am neither confirming nor denying that the Leafs were approached with a CSL opportunity. I am not privy to that information. I am saying that they are hard-nosed businessmen who have chosen what they believe to be the most economically viable option, there is nothing lazy or ignorant about that. Can YOU prove the Leafs DIDNT explore the CSL option? If the Leafs weren't offered a CSL deal its not their fault. You CSL boosters don't have your act together thats all. If they were and turned it down, it proves the Leafs saw the CSL model as weak and chose the MLS option. Again, they are a business not a charity. Either way your claim that they are lazy and ignorant is still patently false.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca

Which, I suspect, may be because there isn't a compelling case to be made.

And possibly, that no one is really interested in doing so.

The first point may be a tough sell to ted who worked on putting together just such a proposal which, given its only partial exploration of revenue streams (they were apparently expected to deliver 8 billionaires and $100 million in guaranteed sponsorship on a shoestring budget and limted resources), suggests there is some viability to this.

The second is true and indicative of the total lack of leadership and due diligence on the part of the CSA. It may well be that the MLS option is the best, but I rest quite comfortable on the assertion that that the CSL/CUSL was never explored as exhaustively as it should.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by RealGooner

The pro-CSL sides continual blaming of the CSA for the lack of a CSL is really just a scapegoat to hide the fact that the CSL is not a viable model. Stop blaming the CSA. If FIFA themselves came and tried to set up a CSL it would still fail.

The CSA has a responsibility to do their due diligence on the matter. They have not, and as a result all of us are left with speculation and conjecture. I find the 3 team MLS scenario just as far fethced as you find the CSL model. I trust that you and the others advocating for MLS are not morons, and equally suspect that those of us on the opposite end of the argument are not either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by Gordon

The CSA has a responsibility to do their due diligence on the matter. They have not, and as a result all of us are left with speculation and conjecture. I find the 3 team MLS scenario just as far fethced as you find the CSL model. I trust that you and the others advocating for MLS are not morons, and equally suspect that those of us on the opposite end of the argument are not either.

Just as I do not think the folks at the CSA are morons either, which many here seem to believe.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by RealGooner

I am neither confirming nor denying that the Leafs were approached with a CSL opportunity. I am not privy to that information. I am saying that they are hard-nosed businessmen who have chosen what they believe to be the most economically viable option, there is nothing lazy or ignorant about that. Can YOU prove the Leafs DIDNT explore the CSL option? If the Leafs weren't offered a CSL deal its not their fault. You CSL boosters don't have your act together thats all. If they were and turned it down, it proves the Leafs saw the CSL model as weak and chose the MLS option. Again, they are a business not a charity. Either way your claim that they are lazy and ignorant is still patently false.

I have to say I agree with gooner on this ted [:0]. I expect that from a business perspective, for individual markets, MLS is a better option. The argos would do better in the NFL than in CFL might be a somewhat comparable example. Of course, I would never go so far as to argue that Vancouver, Toronto and Edmonton joining the NFL would somehow improve canadian pointy ball :D.

But there is a difference between viable and most profitable. Dragging out 20 year old circumstances doesn't magically make CSL unviable. Toronto doesn't have a stadium, therefore MLS is not viable. Well the absurdity of that seems apparent on first blush. Toronto might get a stadium, never mind that 2 proposals have failed and MLSE won't participate. But its still viable. Vancouver seems to have the stadium closer but Montreal's won't be up to MLS snuff. MLS has said absolutely nothing about either city and indeed at this point are not even considering them, but that doesn't make it unviable, because the possibility exists. Saputo has the cash (how about the will, or the desire to be part of single entity?) to upgrade his stadium so the possibility exists, (never mnd that he also had the cash to operate the Impact without the provincial government but did not). And if the possibility exists then it is viable. Never mind the reasons why an american entity might not want to load up on Canadian teams, because some people can concieve the possibility they might. I can respect that. I can see why some might think that the road to travel. Can't agree with it just yet, but can still repsect it. Sad though, that the same is not always reciprocated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by RealGooner

Gordon, could you or Ted please post this study that you say Ted worked on? As we have discussed the merits of the MLS ad nauseum with facts and figures lets do the same for a real CSL proposal.

Have we? Facts and figures for the MLS option. I must have missed those :).

Doesn't seem to be up at the CSA site for obvious reasons. And Ted's personal web site only has the link to the CSA site. Perhaps Ted knows where a link might exist. It was not without its detractors, however, the debate was much like this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by Richard

Just as I do not think the folks at the CSA are morons either, which many here seem to believe.

I don't think they are morons Richard, but I do think they have shown a lack of vision and leadership, a claim that can be made of many organizations, generally, especially when faced with daunting circumstances. CSL/CUSL is a good example. Equally though, I dont think they do every wrong, I don't think the TO stadium fiascos should be hung on them, and the U-19 Women's and U-20 Men's coming to Canada should be considered as successes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by Gordon

The CSA has a responsibility to do their due diligence on the matter. They have not, and as a result all of us are left with speculation and conjecture. I find the 3 team MLS scenario just as far fethced as you find the CSL model. I trust that you and the others advocating for MLS are not morons, and equally suspect that those of us on the opposite end of the argument are not either.

Gordon, the thought you put into your posts tells me you are not a moron, in fact you are one of the better pro-CSL posters, and thankfully you don't resort to name-calling as others do. I just think that alot of the pro-CSL camp spend too much time saying that we dont have a CSL because of the CSA. Not enough time is spent talking about the fact that the CSA can advocate a CSL all it wants but without wealthy investors a CSL will remain a non-starter. We all know why there aren't any, its got something to do with the CSL business model.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by Gordon

The first point may be a tough sell to ted who worked on putting together just such a proposal which, given its only partial exploration of revenue streams (they were apparently expected to deliver 8 billionaires and $100 million in guaranteed sponsorship on a shoestring budget and limted resources), suggests there is some viability to this.

There are three crucial differences though since then. This may go back before your time on this board, but keep in mind I was a supporter of the CUSL in its day, I desperately wanted to see it happen, partially because I didn't think turning the MLS into the new NASL seemed realistic at all back then.

Since the study for the CUSL was done any prospective investors have the stigma of another failed league attempt (the CUSL itself) and 2 more failed A-league franchises in Canada. That's going to make anyone who wants to invest in that kind of a league in this country a little more dubious about doing so.

Secondly, new privacy legislation introduced since then put a bit of a spanner in the works for the corporate Canada support - IIRC the problem became that corporations wouldn't be able to market directly to the players through the smart card process due to this new legislation.

Thidly, there's the stadium. Varsity is gone. I doubt there will be a new Toronto stadium without MLS, and MLSE is unlikely to invest in a team that has to play out of Centennial - how to they get their money back in that venue? Where do you put the people that have paid for private boxes at Centennial? There's one "private box" that I can think of, which the Ultras stand next to which you'll see if you are able to come to the next game (which I hope you do) - they will likely be adorning the box with "You smell, Hartrell!" signs, and that won't cut it (as you may soon see for yourself).

I'm not a business man or economist, but I have to figure these three things will make it tougher to make a case to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca

There are three crucial differences though since then. This may go back before your time on this board, but keep in mind I was a supporter of the CUSL in its day, I desperately wanted to see it happen, partially because I didn't think turning the MLS into the new NASL seemed realistic at all back then.

I am absolutely convinced that a viable quality Candian league would be your preferred option Gian-luca.

quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca

Since the study for the CUSL was done any prospective investors have the stigma of another failed league attempt (the CUSL itself) and 2 more failed A-league franchises in Canada. That's going to make anyone who wants to invest in that kind of a league in this country a little more dubious about doing so.

The past is always part of the due diligence of a new business venture, just as MLSE is undoubtedly weighing the history of the Blizzard, Metro-croatia and Lynx in figuring out if MLS soccer will fly in Toronto. The failure of the A-League in Edmonton and Calgary would be a definite warning flag, moreso than CUSL which was nothing more than a paper proposal that did not get support. I have been invovled in a perfectly viable business that went under due to poor management (I'll never again invest in a business venture in which I am in a minority position) . The guys in Edmonton and Calgary say that those teams were poorly managed and marketed. It could be so - its not a stretch for me, and the guys in Edmonton definitely were not prepared to give it a go. It does call for some due diligence though, absolutely. The same arguments can be made re: the Lynx and MLS (I think I may have made them from time to time :)) But you are quick to point out marketing, location, management, and business objectives as being relevant to the consideration and I would agree that those could indeed be major inhibiting factors. Its possible the same is true of Calgary and Edmonton, no?

quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca

Secondly, new privacy legislation introduced since then put a bit of a spanner in the works for the corporate Canada support - IIRC the problem became that corporations wouldn't be able to market directly to the players through the smart card process due to this new legislation.

Yes, I suspect that you are correct in stating that part of the marketing proposal for CUSL would not be possible any more.

quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca

Thidly, there's the stadium. Varsity is gone. I doubt there will be a new Toronto stadium without MLS, and MLSE is unlikely to invest in a team that has to play out of Centennial - how to they get their money back in that venue? Where do you put the people that have paid for private boxes at Centennial? There's one "private box" that I can think of, which the Ultras stand next to which you'll see if you are able to come to the next game (which I hope you do) - they will likely be adorning the box with "You smell, Hartrell!" signs, and that won't cut it (as you may soon see for yourself).

I'm not a business man or economist, but I have to figure these three things will make it tougher to make a case to them.

Those are all problems for sure, and require work to overcome under either the MLS or CSL options. The TO in MLS dies if Toronto can't get its act together on a suitable stadium too as MLSE has been clear that they would not build one. CSL though, is definitely not possible in the next year or two. What is your sense on the MLS suitable Toronto stadium? Is it going to get built?

Still 50-50 on the Rochester game. It was 80-20 positive until my sister called from Toronto last night. Their plans may change which in turn effect our plans :( But a possibility for Puerto Rico the following sunday emerges as a result. Where do you guys sit? Section U?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All in all, if you've had time to follow it, this thread has been pretty good. Bit of a blip here and there but more or less at least a good, interesting, read.

Personaly I can't say that I see CSL2 arriving anytime soon. Unless a White Knight shows up to champion the cause and brings his treasure chests, knowledgeble friends and a whole wack of energy and stamina with him/her I just don't see it.

That's not to say a CSL2 won't eventualy evolve on it's own but again I'm cynical. I'm more of the opinion Canada is only a couple of successful Division 1 clubs away from developing itself into a very important factor within the league. And that's as close to a CSL2 as we're going to get and maybe that isn't so bad.

I think just about everyone who envisions a CSL2 is assuming a Canadian equivelent of the current Div.1 will develope and I don't think that's so far fetched. And why not? Think a mirror of that league could be created very quickly especially if Montreal and the 'Caps joined on.

Dose anyone realy think that buying an MLS franchise is more economicaly viable than growing USL Div.1 or building a Canadian equivalent? Seriously? How far can you go with $10,000,000 USD and complete control over your future and direction? Oh, and never mind your share of the inherited league dept (God only knows what that is) that you get when you buy into MLS. If you're willing to take that on, buddy you've got some balls.

I keep writing this but I can't believe there isn't anything to it. With MLS all Hell bent on expansion and MLSE and MAYBE Kerfoot interested in MLS, I can't see the league continueing on as a single unity entity. If the expansion is a dept reduction exercise, IE to say expansion fees being used to reduce the accumulated depts and making a bigger pie(more teams) in order to split the dept around when the league dose move towards an independent structure, than fine. I can see the Canadian centres being interested. But as it stands, building a stadium, dishing out an expansion fee and inheriting staggering dept so someone else in a league office somewhere can tell you who can and can not play for your side and who owns the rights to the players you develope? Uh, no.

Dose that sound like something Kerfoot or MLSE wants to sign on to?

So unless something is up which effects the foundations of MLS's operations that isn't being made public, or I'm guessing some of the players involved here quite wrongly, MLS in Canada outside of Toronto is as much a fancyful dream as CSL2 springing to life.

At least in my humble opinion. And I've had a good long and entertaining read. So thanks to everyone. It's allways fresh through another set of eyes.

P.S. I don't care what anyone says. 1-5 Bombers rule. Argos suck. And Griz I'll find out some "facts" on the Bombers structure if I get a chance and post them eventually.

P.S.S. Wheh. That's a fu'k of a lot of typing. Especially with only one paw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by Gordon

Still 50-50 on the Rochester game. It was 80-20 positive until my sister called from Toronto last night. Their plans may change which in turn effect our plans :( But a possibility for Puerto Rico the following sunday emerges as a result. Where do you guys sit? Section U?

We are located at the south end of the stands (you likely won't miss us), the end where the Lynx players emerge from their dressing room and the same side of the field as the Lynx bench.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca

LOL! I know what you mean. This is record-breaking material! :D

Well since you and Rudi are Beavis and Butthead I think it was appropriate for your intelligence levels. Cheers :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why oh why did I reply to this thread! [:P]

quote:Originally posted by Cheeta

Unless a White Knight shows up to champion the cause and brings his treasure chests, knowledgeble friends and a whole wack of energy and stamina with him/her I just don't see it.

That pretty much sums it up.

TO RICHARD: I could make a great presentation if I had the money to pay for my time and research to back it up. I am a fan and a volunteer with a family to support and would need someone willing to invest $60-80K and give me a couple of months to make it happen.

TO REAL GOONER (et al): I am sorry but you still don't get it. "Ignorant" and "lazy" in regards to a corporation is just another (albeit rude) way of saying they are introspective and inflexible. Maybe MLSE is a dynamic, innovative company always building for the future or maybe they are not. The bigger a corporation gets the less flexible and forward-thinking they seem to become.

The ORIGINAL CUSL plan (not the smart-card dependant version 1.1) has never been presented to the MLSE board. I know this because I was part of the original group and I don't believe ANY presentations were made to any potential investors/sponsors until version 1.1 or later and I do not remember any formal presentation made to MLSE at any time by the CUSL team.

Look, my basic theory is this:

- A complete national league 8-10 teams would require start up costs on par with ONE MLS team.

- One MLS team will have one huge market to draw fans and thus sponsors.

- A complete national league would have that same market PLUS the rest of the country as well.

- 3 MLS teams would be at least three times as expensive to start up but would have the three largest markets in Canada. They are NOT however going to happen for 5-10 years. We might get one, maybe two teams by 2008 but given the number of larger American markets I fail to see a compelling business case for MLS to come to Canada AT ALL let alone give the next three expansion slots to CANADA over Portland, Seattle, etc.

Anyway, thanks for asking :)

Ted

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ted, I think you're dreaming in technicolour by attempting to pit a non-existent domestic league that carries the baggage of at least one failed CSL attempt against one or more MLS franchises. If for not any other reason, sponsors and advertisers will gain potential access to both the Canadian and USA markets via MLS, not so with a domestic Canadian league. Commercially it would make no sense.

If there was absolutely no prospect for MLS in Canada and our only hope for anything other than USLD1 was a third rate domestic semi-pro/amateur league then I might, just might, agree with you. But that's not the case. Whilst there is the prospect of one or more MLS franchise in Canada, there is little hope for any Canadian domestic professional league other than at some bush level and do we really want or need that? Remember, Canada has an economy and population smaller than that of California, spread over a a country with the second largest landmass in the world.

Handicapped before you even get to the starting line and even with $100k you would never convince MLSE, Kerfoot or Saputo to jump ship no matter how powerful you personally believe your presentation and case might be. Would you personally risk everything you have on a venture such as CSL2? I wouldn't and I have been in private business for 30 years. Clearly neither would the currently most successful Canadian sports business operators because I can assure you, even without a presentation from you they would be pursuing the CSL2 option if they thought it would be a better investment. The potential for allying with the largest market in the western world is just too attractive.

I can understand your passionate desire for a thriving Canadian domestic pro league but when it comes to professional sports, because of the amount of money involved, business and return on investment quite rightly trumps sport which is just a means to an end. If tiddly-winks could provide the desired return we'd see professional tiddly-winks played in purpose built facilities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by Richard

If for not any other reason, sponsors and advertisers will gain potential access to both the Canadian and USA markets via MLS, not so with a domestic Canadian league. Commercially it would make no sense.

Now who is dreaming Richard? ;)

Sponsors and advertisers who want access to Canadian and US markets will use vehicles such as the NFL/CFL, NBA, NASCAR, PGA, and even the NHL before any soccer league. Even in the U.S. MLS is a niche sport that is NOT in any way shape or form seen as providing wide access to these markets. Going by your criteria of the best business case MLS fails to make the cut.

But in regards a Canadian league, are you really suggesting that there is no interest in the Canadian business community in being associated with Canadian athletes and teams? No Canadian companies would be interested in using Canadian nationalistic sentiment to sell products? There are no corporations that would be interested in "access" to the top 8-10 Canadian markets?

Well, apparantly because I have not been in business for 30 years my opinion is worthless. Oh, and thanks for asking a question only so you could tell me that no matter how much time or money I might spend compiling data and making a presentation I am an idiot. [}:)]

Speaking of business savvy how can you suggest the MLS should come to Canada in the very same message you remind me that we have a population less than California? The same California which has three MLS teams, one of which is going tits up. The smart money would be to create an MLS team in any one of the 10+ US markets that is bigger than Toronto or Vancouver.

addition:

quote:Originally posted by Richard

...successful Canadian sports business operators... would be pursuing the CSL2 option if they thought it would be a better investment.

See here is what I don't get.

Why do you think that "successful Canadian sports business operators" have ever even given a thought to soccer and a new national league?

Are MLSE and other corporations perfect and all-seeing? Do you think they sit around all day reviewing every single sporting activity for potential as a business?

You mention tiddlywinks. Are you telling me they researched and analysed the options for a national tiddlywinks league and rejected it after careful consideration.

Why do you think that "successful Canadian sports business operators" have ever given any more thought to a new CSL than a tiddlywinks league? (OK, I'd hope they would have but our hopes are not actual facts.)

My guess is that any conversation within corporations about soccer in Canada goes something like:

quote:

INTERN: What do you think about sponsoring/creating a professional soccer national-league/team?

CEO: Didn't they all go tits up?

INTERN: but...

CEO: I've got tickets to the World Cup so I can watch my beloved Reds as they show what soccer should be anytime I look and anything less is just not worth my time. Now shut up and get me coffee.

- not an actual transcript

:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by ted

Why do you think that "successful Canadian sports business operators" have ever even given a thought to soccer and a new national league?

Are MLSE and other corporations perfect and all-seeing? Do you think they sit around all day reviewing every single sporting activity for potential as a business?

You mention tiddlywinks. Are you telling me they researched and analysed the options for a national tiddlywinks league and rejected it after careful consideration.

Why do you think that "successful Canadian sports business operators" have ever given any more thought to a new CSL than a tiddlywinks league? (OK, I'd hope they would have but our hopes are not actual facts.)

You are joking, right? Right!?

You are honestly trying to tell us that for example, Kerfoot and Saputo have never looked into this? I thought the A-League owners (Saputo, as it was before Kerfoot) were the ones who killed the CUSL?

As for MLSE, um, forget the tv channels and magazines and all that other crap like lacrosse, indoor football, etc., they are involved with developing some condo/retail thing beside the ACC, they were looking into investing in a race track complex expansion, and who knows what else they are involved with.

You are honestly going to say they have not looked into alternatvies? Maybe their hockey and basketball operations have their heads up their assess, but you think their business development people are the same?

And I really don't understand this argument that 1 MLS team will cost as much as 10 CSL teams. So what?? Is MLSE just going to walk into Montreal and Vancouver and launch their own teams? Or are they supposed to donate the money to clubs in the prairies?

I could understand if people said all MLSE cares about is money, and not about soccer or winning.

As its been said a billion times, if CSL made financial sense, I'm sure they would jump on board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by Elias

You are joking, right? Right!?

You are honestly trying to tell us that for example, Kerfoot and Saputo have never looked into this? I thought the A-League owners (Saputo, as it was before Kerfoot) were the ones who killed the CUSL?

As for MLSE, um, forget the tv channels and magazines and all that other crap like lacrosse, indoor football, etc., they are involved with developing some condo/retail thing beside the ACC, they were looking into investing in a race track complex expansion, and who knows what else they are involved with.

You are honestly going to say they have not looked into alternatvies? Maybe their hockey and basketball operations have their heads up their assess, but you think their business development people are the same?

And I really don't understand this argument that 1 MLS team will cost as much as 10 CSL teams. So what?? Is MLSE just going to walk into Montreal and Vancouver and launch their own teams? Or are they supposed to donate the money to clubs in the prairies?

I could understand if people said all MLSE cares about is money, and not about soccer or winning.

As its been said a billion times, if CSL made financial sense, I'm sure they would jump on board.

Do you actually think that MLSE really cares about building a serious national World-Cup development for Canada??? Do you really think with their 1 MLS bull-$hit team that MLSE will invest in the future of youth development??? I don't think so pal. They way you talk buddy, you sound like Kevan Pipe's mediocrate attitude of which he has always had for Canadian soccer.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:Originally posted by Elias

You are honestly trying to tell us that for example, Kerfoot and Saputo have never looked into this? I thought the A-League owners (Saputo, as it was before Kerfoot) were the ones who killed the CUSL?

Just to set the record straight. It was Vandale (Calgary - hmmm good business decisons there) and Bruno Hartrell who killed the CUSL. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:And I really don't understand this argument that 1 MLS team will cost as much as 10 CSL teams. So what?? Is MLSE just going to walk into Montreal and Vancouver and launch their own teams? Or are they supposed to donate the money to clubs in the prairies?

I could understand if people said all MLSE cares about is money, and not about soccer or winning.

As its been said a billion times, if CSL made financial sense, I'm sure they would jump on board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...