Canadian Premier League

[matty]

8 minutes ago, Ansem said:

Oh I agree. We need a MLS league structure single entity and no relegation as we're in North America and can't be like Europe in that regard. Didn't Paul Beirne implied that some level of reg/pro could happen in another thread?

However, the Sweden model makes sense to me specifically in regards to target average attendance, team location, stadiums etc. Emulating  the Sweden is more realistic. I don't see how our 500k cities can't have an average of 7k spectators to break even or make profits in the long run.

That's where I say let's drop the MLS examples as we don't have as many over 1 million metros as they do, hence we have to look elsewhere for something that works, like Sweden who can have a viable league at 9k of average attendance with years where it used to be 7k. 

CPL should be a hybrid of both approach but more heavily leaning towards Europe except for league structure

Empire Field

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empire_Field

 

Look to Australia not Europe. It's a better example I think as they're a mid sized nation with a fuck ton of land that don't give 2 shits about soccer generally and have an ok player base. The league is also closer the number of teams we'll see and attendance numbers.

Also that's the stadium I keep finding. WHERE IS THIS PEEL REGION STADIUM?

7 minutes ago, rob.notenboom said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empire_Field

that's the stadium I keep finding. WHERE IS THIS PEEL REGION STADIUM?

10 minutes ago, BringBackTheBlizzard said:

They have no plans for pro/rel. The Asian confederation were the ones pushing for that but have since backed off. The A League plans to expand the number of teams as they just got a better TV deal and having only ten teams was getting a bit stale.

Within the league there is a push to use the expansion to lead to 2 divisions and have pro/rel. Nothing is set but it is a possibility for them 10-15 years down the line

[Ansem]

4 minutes ago, matty said:

Look to Australia not Europe. It's a better example I think as they're a mid sized nation with a fuck ton of land that don't give 2 shits about soccer generally and have an ok player base. The league is also closer the number of teams we'll see and attendance numbers.

Also that's the stadium I keep finding. WHERE IS THIS PEEL REGION STADIUM?

that's the stadium I keep finding. WHERE IS THIS PEEL REGION STADIUM?

Within the league there is a push to use the expansion to lead to 2 divisions and have pro/rel. Nothing is set but it is a possibility for them 10-15 years down the line

Lol 

Empire field could be built for Peel Region. They don't have an adequate stadium at the moment

I'm down with Australia too, don't get me wrong and they consistently perform well in the Asian confederation 

[matty]

1 minute ago, Ansem said:

Lol 

Empire field could be built for Peel Region. They don't have an adequate stadium at the moment

I'm down with Australia too, don't get me wrong and they consistently perform well in the Asian confederation 

Oh blah (about the stadium). New Year's hangover is making me dumb dumb dumb. Yea it could. Might be a bit big still. I've said before the CPL cities that need to build stadiums should aim for Toyota Field which seats 8500 (atm) and only coast like $30m to build. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Field

[Complete Homer]

The US isn't the perfect model - they have much more summer competition with NFL, college ball, MLB across the board, etc. They have a huge swath of the native population devoted to Liga MX (to the point of creating large numbers of anti-MLS fans, not just people who are apathetic). They aren't used to seeing a small 8 team league on television regularly. They also don't have their three biggest markets taken up by an outside league. 

But they do have the same limited soccer history, began with a similarly shallow player pool, have at least somewhat similar interest in soccer, have massive distances between market, have had the same difficulties converting interest in soccer participation into soccer fandom, interest in euro leagues that exceeds interest in domestic soccer, etc. 

There's definitely reason to question any analysis that uses the American context as the only model with which to examine the viability of a Canadian league, but it's a lot closer than  Denmark imo

edit: Matty's point about Australia is good

[matty]

13 minutes ago, Complete Homer said:

edit: Matty's point about Australia is good

I think Australia is the best representation possible for what would work in Canada. Most of Europe is too small size wise and those who are similar to Canada (The US, Russia, China, Brazil) have massive populations. Australia is similar to us in a number of ways.

[Ansem]

25 minutes ago, matty said:

I think Australia is the best representation possible for what would work in Canada. Most of Europe is too small size wise and those who are similar to Canada (The US, Russia, China, Brazil) have massive populations. Australia is similar to us in a number of ways.

I'm with you. Whatever works for us.

I just can't stand hearing that "this market can't have a team because they aren't 2M people" etc...

It's being done elsewhere in the world where markets like Victoria, Saskatoon, Moncton or even St.John's can support a D1 team with a 7k average attendance.

Australia is good with me. My insistence on Sweden was due to the fact they play in the summer like we do and are just as Hockey crazies as we are but yes, Australia model is actually very desirable

[matty]

1 hour ago, Ansem said:

I'm with you. Whatever works for us.

I just can't stand hearing that "this market can't have a team because they aren't 2M people" etc...

It's being done elsewhere in the world where markets like Victoria, Saskatoon, Moncton or even St.John's can support a D1 team with a 7k average attendance.

Australia is good with me. My insistence on Sweden was due to the fact they play in the summer like we do and are just as Hockey crazies as we are but yes, Australia model is actually very desirable

I agree the 200k markets might work for the CPL but the league should and likely will play it fairly safe and keep to the larger areas for a while.

Since we agree the A-League makes sense as a comparison, only 2 teams are in the smaller Aussie markets and most are located along the most populated coast in Australia. 2 teams that operated in markets under 500k failed within a few years (even one that was one of the best teams in the nation). This doesn't count the NZ teams.

Canada is already dealing with handicaps in 3 to 5 markets. If we do see Hamilton, Calgary, Regina and Winnipeg as the tent poles of the league then it's likely we'll see very little building in tiny or risky markets. That isn't to say such moves won't happen, Halifax's mega ambition to join was the most amazing CPL news of the 2016 and makes me think they could be a 2018/19, but it'll be a slow process that we should buckle up for.

I think realistically we'll have a few select markets (Calgary, Winnipeg and Hamilton) that draw like 10-12k a game, others (Regina) will be mid level 4-7k a game draw and likely 2-4 (say Halifax, GTA, Moncton, Victoria) with at most 5k. The bigger teams along with a national TV deal, even with TLN, will keep this league's head above water for a few years while it grows

[Macksam]

On December 31, 2016 at 2:36 PM, 1996 said:

Like I said as long as the stadiums in the MLS Canadian cities are pretty well full and the it gets decent media coverage then I'm happy I'm like a Raptor fan who is happy that there is an NBA team in Toronto, I'm sure they are not staying up st night wondering about the future of the pro Canadian basketball league , is that league still around by the way?

So your happy with just the status quo? The development of Canadian soccer in the rest of the country doesn't concern you?

[Macksam]

On December 31, 2016 at 5:53 PM, Complete Homer said:

Just throwing this out here respectfully - I'm not trying to perpetuate an argument, I think your overall stance is reasonable. Just seen the "I have been around longer, therefore I am right" argument a few too many times in this thread

There's an interesting phenomenon in medicine where patient mortality drops significantly when senior physicians in a given specialty leave their hospitals to go to their annual conference, leaving inexperienced residents alone and in charge. The residents, lacking the experience of the senior physicians, are forced to lean heavily on evidence applied carefully within the context of each patient, and the research shows that they do much better than their superiors.

There is also a phenomenon that runs counter to this - "clinical gestalt" - in which physicians who have seen the same condition thousands of times manage to outpace the outcomes achieved by standard guidelines by making decisions on intuition rather than evidence. The theory is that the human brain, when exposed to similar scenarios thousands of times, is able to pick up correlations that we have never thought to study scientifically. 

My point is that "experience" is a double edge sword. As much as it might give you a premonition on the success or failure of an action if you have encountered the scenario thousands of times, in situations like this it is just as likely that "experience" is blinding you to possibilities.

I know I'm being a bit long-winded, and this isn't meant as a personal attack or anything, but I have to roll my eyes every time someone brings up that they have been around the block in Canadian soccer and are therefore correct...all it means is that you've  become entrenched and have difficulty seeing the path forward. 

That also doesn't mean you are necessarily incorrect either, just making the point that being around to see the old CSL fail doesn't make one's predictions on the chances of CPL any better - it actually probably makes it worse

Ah, good old tunnel vision. You get so good with something it starts blinding you to other decent solutions.  

[GuillermoDelQuarto]

On 12/31/2016 at 3:53 PM, Complete Homer said:

Just throwing this out here respectfully - I'm not trying to perpetuate an argument, I think your overall stance is reasonable. Just seen the "I have been around longer, therefore I am right" argument a few too many times in this thread

There's an interesting phenomenon in medicine where patient mortality drops significantly when senior physicians in a given specialty leave their hospitals to go to their annual conference, leaving inexperienced residents alone and in charge. The residents, lacking the experience of the senior physicians, are forced to lean heavily on evidence applied carefully within the context of each patient, and the research shows that they do much better than their superiors.

There is also a phenomenon that runs counter to this - "clinical gestalt" - in which physicians who have seen the same condition thousands of times manage to outpace the outcomes achieved by standard guidelines by making decisions on intuition rather than evidence. The theory is that the human brain, when exposed to similar scenarios thousands of times, is able to pick up correlations that we have never thought to study scientifically. 

My point is that "experience" is a double edge sword. As much as it might give you a premonition on the success or failure of an action if you have encountered the scenario thousands of times, in situations like this it is just as likely that "experience" is blinding you to possibilities.

I know I'm being a bit long-winded, and this isn't meant as a personal attack or anything, but I have to roll my eyes every time someone brings up that they have been around the block in Canadian soccer and are therefore correct...all it means is that you've  become entrenched and have difficulty seeing the path forward. 

That also doesn't mean you are necessarily incorrect either, just making the point that being around to see the old CSL fail doesn't make one's predictions on the chances of CPL any better - it actually probably makes it worse

fairly certain i've said this before but...

[yothat]

IS JOE PETRONE INVOLVED AT ALL WITH THE CPL????? i think steven sandor reported a few years ago he was working on a calgary NASL/USL team like 2014 ish

[SuperCanuck]

On 30/12/2016 at 7:14 AM, grasshopper1917 said:

The MLS champion would be viewed at the North American champion wouldn't they?

I don't think people in other North American countries would agree.

[SuperCanuck]

23 hours ago, rob.notenboom said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empire_Field

I know the facilities weren't as good, and it was way out in the northeast corner of the city, but being where the old Empire Stadium had been made up for the long commute and the look of Empire Field is sure a million times better than that toilet they play in now.

23 hours ago, rob.notenboom said:

 

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

20 hours ago, matty said:

...I think realistically we'll have a few select markets (Calgary, Winnipeg and Hamilton) that draw like 10-12k a game, others (Regina) will be mid level 4-7k a game draw and likely 2-4 (say Halifax, GTA, Moncton, Victoria) with at most 5k. The bigger teams along with a national TV deal, even with TLN, will keep this league's head above water for a few years while it grows

Is this based on anything other than what would be needed to generate the funds required for $1.5 million budgets through single entity revenue sharing? If you are going to throw a word like "realistically" into the mix, are there any precedents you can point to in the over 50 year history of Canadian pro soccer that provide support for this analysis of likely spectator interest? I can't think of any. 

[Macksam]

9 minutes ago, SuperCanuck said:

I know the facilities weren't as good, and it was way out in the northeast corner of the city, but being where the old Empire Stadium had been made up for the long commute and the look of Empire Field is sure a million times better than that toilet they play in now.

I have never been to BC Place but is it Rogers Centre (minus the decent hotel) bad or something else?

[Ansem]

21 hours ago, matty said:

 

I think realistically we'll have a few select markets (Calgary, Winnipeg and Hamilton) that draw like 10-12k a game, others (Regina) will be mid level 4-7k a game draw and likely 2-4 (say Halifax, GTA, Moncton, Victoria) with at most 5k. The bigger teams along with a national TV deal, even with TLN, will keep this league's head above water for a few years while it grows

I respectfully disagree.

I'm too lazy right now to repost the attendances at the Women's world cup for Moncton, Hamilton and Winnipeg...but you're way off the mark.

I think you're underestimating the potential fans as everyone underestimated the turnout for past world cup qualifiers, MLS playoffs, past minot world cups and latest women world Cup.

Moncton, Hamilton and Winnipeg were solid

[nstarsfan]

Winnipeg had about 35,000 for WWC.  However, the stadium was largely full of Americans.  Attendance dwindled as the Americans left.  Very few Canadians seemed to be in the stands and there was little buzz in the city around the event.

Having said that, I believe Winnipeg could support this if they got behind it more than they did WWC.

[Complete Homer]

2 hours ago, Ansem said:

I respectfully disagree.

I'm too lazy right now to repost the attendances at the Women's world cup for Moncton, Hamilton and Winnipeg...but you're way off the mark.

I think you're underestimating the potential fans as everyone underestimated the turnout for past world cup qualifiers, MLS playoffs, past minot world cups and latest women world Cup.

Moncton, Hamilton and Winnipeg were solid

While I don't subscribe to the theory that a lack of a precedent is good evidence for low interest, I don't think you can take world cup games as anything more than a soft sign of interest. They are a spectacle and can be sold without a massive interest in soccer 

[FC_Hali]

1 hour ago, Ansem said:

I respectfully disagree.

I'm too lazy right now to repost the attendances at the Women's world cup for Moncton, Hamilton and Winnipeg...but you're way off the mark.

I think you're underestimating the potential fans as everyone underestimated the turnout for past world cup qualifiers, MLS playoffs, past minot world cups and latest women world Cup.

Moncton, Hamilton and Winnipeg were solid

Moncton is a great event town because of it's central location in Atlantic Canada but many of the fans for the WWC were drawn from Halifax. They already have the stadium but I would worry about their ability to draw 3,000+ fans per game.

Local soccer in Saint John's is well supported and I would feel pretty confident they could fill King George Stadium regularly (4-5,000 capacity?).

[Ansem]

1 hour ago, Complete Homer said:

While I don't subscribe to the theory that a lack of a precedent is good evidence for low interest, I don't think you can take world cup games as anything more than a soft sign of interest. They are a spectacle and can be sold without a massive interest in soccer 

With all dof respect, Women's World Cup and U20 World cup aren't know to attract attendance in Europe or South America yet Canada smashed record after record.

Hopefully you understand why I beg to differ

 

[Ansem]

1 minute ago, FC_Hali said:

Moncton is a great event town because of it's central location in Atlantic Canada but many of the fans for the WWC were drawn from Halifax. They already have the stadium but I would worry about their ability to draw 3,000+ fans per game.

Local soccer in Saint John's is well supported and I would feel pretty confident they could fill King George Stadium regularly (4-5,000 capacity?).

There's 1.6M people within 3 hour drive of Moncton, not counting Halifax or Quebec nearby cities.

[matty]

3 hours ago, Ansem said:

I respectfully disagree.

I'm too lazy right now to repost the attendances at the Women's world cup for Moncton, Hamilton and Winnipeg...but you're way off the mark.

I think you're underestimating the potential fans as everyone underestimated the turnout for past world cup qualifiers, MLS playoffs, past minot world cups and latest women world Cup.

Moncton, Hamilton and Winnipeg were solid

Moncton did 11k~ in a 20k stadium i think

Hamilton wasn't involved but for panam some games were under 5k. 

You're also comparing them to a start up league which is unfair to them

My estimate is based around thr first few years and designed for growth and factor in the 5k average. 

[matty]

4 hours ago, BringBackTheBlizzard said:

Is this based on anything other than what would be needed to generate the funds required for $1.5 million budgets through single entity revenue sharing? If you are going to throw a word like "realistically" into the mix, are there any precedents you can point to in the over 50 year history of Canadian pro soccer that provide support for this analysis of likely spectator interest? I can't think of any. 

Pop + past events + sport history + current interest

[Ansem]

3 hours ago, nstarsfan said:

Winnipeg had about 35,000 for WWC.  However, the stadium was largely full of Americans.  Attendance dwindled as the Americans left.  Very few Canadians seemed to be in the stands and there was little buzz in the city around the event.

Having said that, I believe Winnipeg could support this if they got behind it more than they did WWC.

June 15 2015

26,191 in attendance in Winnipeg

Matches? 

China vs New Zealand and Germany vs Thailand.

That's news to me that Americans cared that much about anything that hasn't have anything to do with their own team. Not saying there weren't Americans in attendance that day but 26k for games with no Canada or USA team does show genuine interest from the local fans.

Let's assume that you weren't actually there counting how many Americans were in attendance yourself, I respectfully declare your comment as a perfect example of "Canadian Inferiority complex towards Americans".

-Pff, doesn't matter that Canada has the record attendance for a Women's world cup....couldn't have done it without Americans in attendance... it's just getting old reading Canadians apologizing or making excuses for accomplishment they should be proud of...

Don't faint....we can do better than them in some areas.

FFS...sigh...always find a comment minimizing or disregarding when Canadians actually succeed at something....worse if it's better than the US 

Shaking my head....try to back up your claims please

[Ansem]

11 minutes ago, matty said:

Moncton did 11k~ in a 20k stadium i think

Hamilton wasn't involved but for panam some games were under 5k. 

You're also comparing them to a start up league which is unfair to them

My estimate is based around thr first few years and designed for growth and factor in the 5k average. 

Pretty sure that I wasn't claiming we would have MLS level attendance bUT the 7k figure being mentioned to break even/turn a profit.

Still those are decent numbers for teams that aren't necessarily yours to cheer for. It shows an interest in the sport itself which is the foundation of generating interest for a local team and national league

Can we see the glass haft full once in a while instead of half empty?