RUMOUR: Ottawa Fury to leave NASL?

[BuzzAndSting]

Just now, ThatDaveCh said:

 

Exactly what I didn't want to hear. If these rumours were completely baseless they wouldn't address them. Because they have, there must be some truth. The fact that their statement it mentions the Fury will be around for future seasons but does not mention staying in the NASL also indicates to me that they will be leaving the NASL.

[Complete Homer]

3 minutes ago, ThatDaveCh said:

 

Sounds committal to not closing shop but completely non-committal to staying in the NASL. Really doubting they fold unless the owner has managed to bankrupt himself with non-soccer business

[jedinathan]

Considering the owner is a multisport group, I doubt they've run out of money.

[Zem]

14 minutes ago, shermanator said:

The players asked to leave because the club was not willing to pay a salary that they would have gotten elsewhere in the same league. If that is not a sheer gutting of what was a quality side then I don't know what is.

 

And the cost of that would have been very high. Perhaps PD's budget could have allowed him to keep most of the key players, but the team would have had kiddy pool depth. OSEG has a lot of money, but the Fury are the organisation's only unprofitable sports team so they're a small-money team regardless.

Moreover Dalglish put together a good roster all things considered, but the team has had a ridiculous number of long-term injuries this season. Most notably, the two forwards who were expected to lead the team, Dyego and Bruna were injured at the start of the season. Dyego is going to miss the entire season and Bruna has only recently begun practising again. The club had 11 players out injured last week, they might get a couple back on the bench tomorrow but it's hard to win games when you only have around a dozen healthy outfield players.

[mpg_29]

Now imagine a team from a smaller Canadian city in a hypothetical "CPL" trying to stay afloat 

[Complete Homer]

1 minute ago, mpg_29 said:

Now imagine a team from a smaller Canadian city in a hypothetical "CPL" trying to stay alfoat

Obviously some people have been pie-in-the-sky, but do we really need to twist this into shitting on the idea of CPL in yet another thread? I really doubt the Fury would have problems with a 1-1.5M cap (especially with the double digit attendance increases they are seeing year over year), I think they are moving due to lost confidence in NASL stability + salary inflation driven by the Cosmos and Miami, which is ironic considering how many of the anti-CPL crowd want us to throw our weight behind the NASL.

Do I doubt that a team in say Victoria or London (as I've seen proposed) could make it? Yeah, I do. Does that really hurt the idea of an 8 team league starting? Not at all

[mpg_29]

20 minutes ago, Complete Homer said:

Obviously some people have been pie-in-the-sky, but do we really need to twist this into shitting on the idea of CPL in yet another thread? I really doubt the Fury would have problems with a 1-1.5M cap (especially with the double digit attendance increases they are seeing year over year), I think they are moving due to lost confidence in NASL stability + salary inflation driven by the Cosmos and Miami, which is ironic considering how many of the anti-CPL crowd want us to throw our weight behind the NASL.

Do I doubt that a team in say Victoria or London (as I've seen proposed) could make it? Yeah, I do. Does that really hurt the idea of an 8 team league starting? Not at all

Well Ottawa would have to be a team that "over-performs" in order subsidize the smaller teams through revenue sharing.

[Complete Homer]

Just now, mpg_29 said:

Well Ottawa would have to be a team that "over-performs" in order subsidize the smaller teams through revenue sharing.

What I'm saying is that I'm not even big on smaller teams coming in, unless you mean Winnipeg, etc as smaller teams. If there is ever a team in Victoria, I see that as a distant future where the league has proven stable. 

But we're getting off topic, I just wanted to point out that Ottawa leaving isn't some kind of evidence that CPL would be unsustainable 

[Kent]

While we are speculating, regarding people talking about expansion fees for Ottawa using USL as a stop-gap measure before going to CPL. It might be possible that USL would waive expansion fees and as a result, cancellation fees (or whatever it's called when you leave the league) if Ottawa is just planning on coming for a year or two and then going to the CPL. USL might be fine with just accepting the damage it does to NASL.

I agree with people that the Fury's statement seems to add credence to the rumour by not stating they will be staying in NASL. Of course that doesn't at all mean that CPL would be the final landing spot for them, but that would be fantastic if it is.

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

1 hour ago, Michael Crampton said:

Ottawa joining USL Pro would open a far more viable path to one day having a stable Canadian league than staying in the NASL....

Might tie into Victor Montagliani's recent talk of a cross-border approach to getting more Canadian pro teams that tends to be ignored by people on here, who prefer to focus on what was said at the Hamilton city council meeting back in February.

 

[Michael Crampton]

3 minutes ago, BringBackTheBlizzard said:

Might tie into Victor Montagliani's recent talk of a cross-border approach to getting more Canadian pro teams that tends to be ignored by people on here, who prefer to focus on what was said at the Hamilton city council meeting back in February.

Yes, if Hamilton--the team that seems most ready to make a move and become operational--were to announce a USL start in 2017 or 2018 I think we'd know which way the dominoes are falling.

I'm all for it, and will just have a difficult time with divided loyalties: traditionally Hamilton, TFC SSHer, and moving to Ottawa!

[rob.notenboom]

A couple of things:

It seems to mostly escape notice, but John Pugh is on the CSA BOD. I'm just putting that out there. Says a lot to me, but maybe it doesn't mean as much as I think.

In terms of the potential other markets that could have a CanPL team, one of True North's owners in Winnipeg is listed by Forbes as the richest person in Canada with a net worth of 23.8 billion.

http://www.winnipegsun.com/2016/03/01/jets-co-owner-is-canadas-richest-person

The Jets part of TNSE properties is rated by Forbes to be worth $350M with annual revenue of $116M (this was November 2015)

http://www.forbes.com/teams/winnipeg-jets/

Also according to Forbes, the Flames are worth $435M with revenue of $130M

http://www.forbes.com/teams/calgary-flames/

Despite suffering a loss of $4.3M in 2015 (first loss in 8 seasons) the SK Roughriders still had revenues around $40M

http://leaderpost.com/sports/football/cfl/saskatchewan-roughriders/saskatchewan-roughriders-announce-4267935-net-loss-at-annual-general-meeting

It's not nearly as clear in the case of the Riders, but in Calgary and Winnipeg, if they were convinced to go ahead and were committed enough, I think they'd see the investment of $3M/yr as chump change in the grand scheme of things. They each have individual's on their payroll who make significantly more than that. Of course, that's a big 'if' ... not trying to gloss it over ... just saying that it's well within the realm of possibility for those organizations to get involved and be capitalized enough to weather the financial storm.

[ThatDaveCh]

Richie Ryan of Miami FC has taken to addressing the rumor. This thing has gotten a lot of attention.

[Complete Homer]

1 hour ago, BringBackTheBlizzard said:

Might tie into Victor Montagliani's recent talk of a cross-border approach to getting more Canadian pro teams that tends to be ignored by people on here, who prefer to focus on what was said at the Hamilton city council meeting back in February.

 

At this risk of furthering the diversion into CPL talk, I don't know why you talk about February as if it were some distant past. It was 6 months ago, I would really be quite surprised if the entire scope of the project had shifted so quickly. I could definitely see some ownership groups becoming impatient and getting permission to go ahead with new franchises in the meantime, which easily explains the snippet from Victor without ignoring the other evidence on the table 

I'm certainly not confident CPL will happen, but I don't understand your attempt to skew every piece of information to "prove" CPL is impossible when we simply don't have any new information, to the point of bitterly denigrating the people involve. 

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

14 minutes ago, ThatDaveCh said:

Richie Ryan of Miami FC has taken to addressing the rumor. This thing has gotten a lot of attention.

This has the potential to kill the NASL, because Minnesota are leaving for MLS and Rayo OKC look doomed and are probably using the $750k (?) bond posted with the USSF to see out the season at this point. The NASL need 12 franchises to keep D2 sanctioning without gaining a waiver from the USSF, who are very much aligned with MLS/SUM and unlikely to be inclined to be all that flexible with them, if USL is ready for D2 sanctioning next season. The NASL gain one new member next year in San Francisco but a loss of three franchises would mean a need to find two expansion teams over the next few months even before you throw in the possible implications of the 455 attendance for the Fort Lauderdale game this week. Struggling pro soccer franchises have often got crowds like that in the past, but they seldom announce them like that publicly until the end is nigh in terms of the owners deciding its time to throw in the towel.

[C2SKI]

2 hours ago, Complete Homer said:

Do I doubt that a team in say Victoria or London (as I've seen proposed) could make it? Yeah, I do. Does that really hurt the idea of an 8 team league starting? Not at all

After living in both cities, and being a season ticket holder for both clubs, I think Victoria would outdraw Edmonton if both teams were in the same league.

[Michael Crampton]

53 minutes ago, BringBackTheBlizzard said:

The NASL need 12 franchises to keep D2 sanctioning without gaining a waiver from the USSF, who are very much aligned with MLS/SUM and unlikely to be inclined to be all that flexible with them, if USL is ready for D2 sanctioning next season. The NASL gain one new member next year in San Francisco but a loss of three franchises would mean a need to find two expansion teams over the next few months even before you throw in the possible implications of the 455 attendance for the Fort Lauderdale game this week.

With the Chicago Wilt project announcing that 2017 is a no go, if they lose the OKC franchise--under the Rayo banner or not--they also lose the three timezone criteria they have been already getting a waiver for.

Arguably, that doesn't have to kill the NASL. I've made the suggestion elsewhere that there is a smart business case, for sanctioning purposes, to drop to D3 under the USSF criteria and consolidate there. Formal divisional status puts no limit on budget or roster for the few clubs who have the wherewithal and desire to be ambitious. The only tangible sporting downside is starting one round earlier in the US Open Cup. Which might actually be good for those teams, as it gives them an extra game as part of their cup run before having to face MLS teams.

Losing Minnesota, what is the NASL at this point? It's an East Coast regional league (or a Florida regional league) with some geographically isolated outposts elsewhere. Building out from what they have by adding teams in the mid-Atlantic and northeast, rather than pursuing western expansion could be good for their existing clubs. The problem is where that leaves Edmonton and San Francisco. Personally, I think the business case for either of them remaining in the NASL is disappearing.

Edit: p.s. Though I fully acknowledge that perceived prestige and ego probably makes the above unrealistic, no matter the business case.

[ted]

51 minutes ago, BringBackTheBlizzard said:

The NASL need 12 franchises to keep D2 sanctioning without gaining a waiver from the USSF, who are very much aligned with MLS/SUM and unlikely to be inclined to be all that flexible with them...

Given the current dispute between the two over the sanctioning rules (isn't there a lawsuit of some sort underway?) I can see no scenario where USSF gives the NASL ANY sort of leeway let alone a formal waiver for anything they don't have too.

Update: article from July mentions lawsuit here: http://www.angelsonparade.com/2016/7/27/12303200/nasl-southern-california-ownership-ussf-lawsuit-joe-sumner

[CDNFootballer]

2 hours ago, ted said:

Given the current dispute between the two over the sanctioning rules (isn't there a lawsuit of some sort underway?) I can see no scenario where USSF gives the NASL ANY sort of leeway let alone a formal waiver for anything they don't have too.

Update: article from July mentions lawsuit here: http://www.angelsonparade.com/2016/7/27/12303200/nasl-southern-california-ownership-ussf-lawsuit-joe-sumner

There is no lawsuit, only a letter of protest to the suggested changing of the D1 standards that USSF didn't go ahead and approve.

 

That article was also a rehashing of old info from earlier in the year making it look like it just occured.

[CDNFootballer]

6 hours ago, Michael Crampton said:

Further, Sacramento, Louisville, Oklahoma City and Cincinnati all show that professionally run, well marketed teams can draw just as well in a "D3" "reserve league" as good NASL teams.

Problem is there's 29 teams in Usl and many of them, unlike the 4 you mentioned, draw much less. They have half their league drawing less than FC Edmonton who's second from the bottom in NASL attendance at around 2200 per game. Usl has teams regularily drawing hundreds per game.

 

Ottawa would take a hit in attendance if the dropped to D3 Usl and there's the exit fee they would have to pay the NASL as well so a one year move then on to CPL in 2018 wouldn't make sense.

 

3 possibilities here :

 

1) The rumour is bs and Ottawa stays in NASL.

 

2) The CPL is launching in 2017 or 2018 and the rumour of leaving NASL is partially true but may be leaving this year or next year.

 

3) The CPL plan is dead, the rumours true, and Ottawa is moving down to D3 Usl.

[jedinathan]

The Ottawa Citizen also posted an article that also says that the Fury will be in the NASL next season.

 

I'm curious about what the cost will be, or if they will enforce a charge to leave and go to the CanPL. IMO the plan for Ottawa seems to be that they will be NASL in 2017, then move to CanPL if that is still a go. News of that should be coming this month or next from what I recall. 

[shermanator]

Here's the article in question. Seems to me that it's more of an opinion that they are likely to stay in NASL in 2017, not a statement.

http://ottawacitizen.com/sports/soccer/fury-expected-to-return-in-2017

Yep, there’s usually smoke where there’s fire. In this case, though, there’s a strong chance Fury FC isn’t going anywhere and will be back in 2017.......While there was a cone of silence thrown up from the FCers after the tweeting began, 2017 seems like a sure thing and from there, who knows?

[Gopherbashi]

18 minutes ago, shermanator said:

Here's the article in question. Seems to me that it's more of an opinion that they are likely to stay in NASL in 2017, not a statement.

http://ottawacitizen.com/sports/soccer/fury-expected-to-return-in-2017

 

 

As was mentioned in relation to OFFC's press release, what the Citizen's article doesn't say is far more important than what it does say.

Sure, the team "isn't going anywhere and will be back in 2017", but back in the NASL or simply back on the field?  Isn't going to another city, isn't going to disappear, or isn't going to another league?

The only detail really presented is that the team is losing $2m a year and needs another 1500 fans/game to break even, which seems like the perfect setup to "We have a fondness for soccer though we're hemorrhaging money, but the team will still be here, so come out and watch and pay no attention to the behind-the-scenes stuff like what league we're in."

[rob.notenboom]

50 minutes ago, Gopherbashi said:

As was mentioned in relation to OFFC's press release, what the Citizen's article doesn't say is far more important than what it does say.

Sure, the team "isn't going anywhere and will be back in 2017", but back in the NASL or simply back on the field?  Isn't going to another city, isn't going to disappear, or isn't going to another league?

The only detail really presented is that the team is losing $2m a year and needs another 1500 fans/game to break even, which seems like the perfect setup to "We have a fondness for soccer though we're hemorrhaging money, but the team will still be here, so come out and watch and pay no attention to the behind-the-scenes stuff like what league we're in."

But it doesn't say that the team isn't going anywhere. It says that 'there's a strong chance' that the team isn't going anywhere. Based on ...? Very odd article without a single source, besides the Fury's own press release which didn't confirm or deny anything in relation to the question as to whether or not they'd been in NASL next year, to back up the suppositions therein. 

[GuillermoDelQuarto]

10 hours ago, jedinathan said:

Does it make sense for Ottawa to pay another franchise fee, rather than sticking around the NASL for another year with a threadbare budget? Even being oh so close to the bottom of the league they're still getting good crowds.

Doesn't really add up to me either