CPL General

[Unnamed Trialist]

14 hours ago, Ansem said:

Spoilers****

Kurt Larson points out that CPL must avoid becoming the league who accepts MLS players who were cut.

My wrestling analogy to this, don't be the TNA to WWE...Be ROH (Ring of Honor) or Old ECW (with better management)

That is one of the dumbest comments if he really did say that. I mean, if a player is cut by a league, he seeks employment in another club. And then, tries the best he can find. Accepting to go down tiers if he can't. Including to CPL.

You can't just invent principles that have nothing to do with reality and go around pontificating with no basis in real practice. All lower leagues take players from higher leagues, and no one ever recriminates them for it. Only a seriously complexed mentality would even care. 

Name one lower league that would seriously say that they don't want to accept cut players from another league so as to uphold their image and reputation. You can't.

[Unnamed Trialist]

Since players will want to move up from CPL to MLS, they will pressure their clubs to allow transfers with low or minimal fees. You can't just say, hey, MLS, you have to get on board, however much they should. Because it would end up hurting players who are in CPL happily, but are eager to step up.

Be assured. If the CPL tries to impose a system of transfers, following strict FIFA rules, they are forgetting that  MLS teams can draw from NASL, USL, NCAA draft--apart from many other leagues now properly scouted. It is not like they will be at a loss for new blood. And CPL will end up with their collective butt in the air. If transfers are hard from CPL to MLS, we may lose player interest in being a league like that.

[Kent]

16 hours ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

That is one of the dumbest comments if he really did say that. I mean, if a player is cut by a league, he seeks employment in another club. And then, tries the best he can find. Accepting to go down tiers if he can't. Including to CPL.

You can't just invent principles that have nothing to do with reality and go around pontificating with no basis in real practice. All lower leagues take players from higher leagues, and no one ever recriminates them for it. Only a seriously complexed mentality would even care. 

Name one lower league that would seriously say that they don't want to accept cut players from another league so as to uphold their image and reputation. You can't.

I agree with you, and on top of that, what kind of team turns down players that could help their team win games just because they played in some other league previously? If Hamilton boycotts MLS rejects and settles for lesser talents instead, but Winnipeg accepts MLS rejects, then its advantage Winnipeg.

[-Hammer-]

On 8/10/2017 at 4:35 PM, harrycoyster said:

That's understandable in that they are competitors off the field, but any chance of the CPL competing with MLS on the field will have disappeared by 2022 when MLS signs their new TV contract. In an ideal world, the CPL and MLS are working together to develop Canadian talent and form a steady CPL to MLS to Europe pipeline.

Assuming that MLS's new TV contract actually grows. I'm to understand their ratings are still in the tank and are down 8% this season.

[harrycoyster]

40 minutes ago, -Hammer- said:

Assuming that MLS's new TV contract actually grows. I'm to understand their ratings are still in the tank and are down 8% this season.

TV ratings are down across the board in North America. It actually puts MLS in a stronger position as the MLS fanbase is heavily skewed toward the 18-31 male audience that are so lucrative to advertisers which is a demographic that companies like ESPN are losing. The NBA saw TV viewership drop from an average Nielsen rating of 3.1 from 2010-2013 to a 2.3 from 2013-2015 and had their TV deal triple in value in 2016. Why? ESPN desperately needs to maintain that audience. They can no longer play SportsCenter 8 hours a day and keep the attention of the 18-31 male demo, so they need to spend on content.

The only channels that MLS and the NBA overlap on is ESPN. The NBA averaged a 1.4 million viewers on ESPN this past season and have 2.6 billion dollar a year contract. MLS averaged somewhere around 375,000 and has a $90 million contract. MLS viewership was around 1/4th on NBA viewership and has 1/29th the contract. Obviously there are other factors in play (number of games, nonlinear nature of advertising worth), but you also need to take into account that MLS will have added teams in LA, Atlanta, Minnesota, and two more cities by the next TV deal. 

The MLS TV deal is expected to double, but unless a TV bubble bursts, I think it will close to triple.

Edited August 14, 2017 by harrycoyster

[Rheo]

Hamilton far from settled it seems 

 

[Gopherbashi]

2 minutes ago, Rheo said:

Hamilton far from settled it seems 

 

I keep feeling that this entire CPL project seems to have stalled.

[Pat Carrasco]

22 minutes ago, Rheo said:

Hamilton far from settled it seems 

 

People on Twitter are now up and arms over this subject. Some are even declaring the end of the Hamilton CPL franchise without getting all the facts. Can we please have some clarity?

Edited August 14, 2017 by Pat Carrasco

[Rheo]

Sorry was walking when I posted it and it didn't grab her first two tweets. These two came before the other two I posted. I'm not overly worried yet, just find it interesting 

 

 

Edited August 14, 2017 by Rheo

[Complete Homer]

Not a good look. Could seriously hurt chances for a 2018 launch if they were still gunning for one

[harrycoyster]

1 minute ago, Complete Homer said:

Not a good look. Could seriously hurt chances for a 2018 launch if they were still gunning for one

At this point 2018 feels rushed. Scrambling for teams like the NASL isn't a good look. I'd rather them wait a year if that's what it takes to do this thing right...you only get one chance at a first impression. 

[Rheo]

Spectator's early story https://www.thespec.com/news-story/7502176-city-of-hamilton-won-t-talk-soccer-until-stadium-lawsuit-resolved/

[Ansem]

4 hours ago, harrycoyster said:

TV ratings are down across the board in North America. It actually puts MLS in a stronger position as the MLS fanbase is heavily skewed toward the 18-31 male audience that are so lucrative to advertisers which is a demographic that companies like ESPN are losing. The NBA saw TV viewership drop from an average Nielsen rating of 3.1 from 2010-2013 to a 2.3 from 2013-2015 and had their TV deal triple in value in 2016. Why? ESPN desperately needs to maintain that audience. They can no longer play SportsCenter 8 hours a day and keep the attention of the 18-31 male demo, so they need to spend on content.

The only channels that MLS and the NBA overlap on is ESPN. The NBA averaged a 1.4 million viewers on ESPN this past season and have 2.6 billion dollar a year contract. MLS averaged somewhere around 375,000 and has a $90 million contract. MLS viewership was around 1/4th on NBA viewership and has 1/29th the contract. Obviously there are other factors in play (number of games, nonlinear nature of advertising worth), but you also need to take into account that MLS will have added teams in LA, Atlanta, Minnesota, and two more cities by the next TV deal. 

The MLS TV deal is expected to double, but unless a TV bubble bursts, I think it will close to triple.

Getting ahead of ourselves here

[Complete Homer]

2 hours ago, Rheo said:

Spectator's early story https://www.thespec.com/news-story/7502176-city-of-hamilton-won-t-talk-soccer-until-stadium-lawsuit-resolved/

https://giphy.com/gifs/3oriOaivTEk4PotVEQ/html5

[Gordon]

1 hour ago, Ansem said:

Getting ahead of ourselves here

The numbers are wrong. ESPN paid $37.5 million for package of MLS, USMNT & USMNT. $90 is the total amount paid by 3 networks for that package, although Univision didn't take all of the national team games. ESPN/ABC paid $1.4 billion for NBA rights, and average 1.9 million viewers last season. TNT paid $1.2 so the overall nba deal is $2.6 billions. ESPN/ABC will show 100 NBA games this year, 85% of which will be on ESPN. 

MLS TV viewership on ESPN was up substantially with placement on ESPN 1 & 2, as opposed to lower channels and the overall drag on ratings come as a result of a significant decline on Univision. The last numbers I saw for MLS on ESPN were about 320,000 average, not 375,000 but there may be more recent data available. The overall NBA average numbers also experienced a small decline, because TNT's addition of a Monday night game has not done as well as all of the previously existing evenings thus lowering the average. 

 

[harrycoyster]

9 minutes ago, Gordon said:

The numbers are wrong. ESPN paid $37.5 million for package of MLS, USMNT & USMNT. $90 is the total amount paid by 3 networks for that package, although Univision didn't take all of the national team games. ESPN/ABC paid $1.4 billion for NBA rights, and average 1.9 million viewers last season. TNT paid $1.2 so the overall nba deal is $2.6 billions. ESPN/ABC will show 100 NBA games this year, 85% of which will be on ESPN. 

MLS TV viewership on ESPN was up substantially with placement on ESPN 1 & 2, as opposed to lower channels and the overall drag on ratings come as a result of a significant decline on Univision. The last numbers I saw for MLS on ESPN were about 320,000 average, not 375,000 but there may be more recent data available. The overall NBA average numbers also experienced a small decline, because TNT's addition of a Monday night game has not done as well as all of the previously existing evenings thus lowering the average. 

 

I wasn't referring to just ESPN when talking about the deals. I just used ESPN for ratings since it is the only channel in both deals and therefore a better metric for ratings comparison.

The 320,000 number included games on ESPN2 and three games that were on ESPNews last season. I was only using ESPN1 numbers. 

 

[Ansem]

10 minutes ago, harrycoyster said:

I wasn't referring to just ESPN when talking about the deals. I just used ESPN for ratings since it is the only channel in both deals and therefore a better metric for ratings comparison.

The 320,000 number included games on ESPN2 and three games that were on ESPNews last season. I was only using ESPN1 numbers. 

 

I dispute your initial claim that MLS will triple their TV contract. Uhh...kind of premature to make such a claim.

MLS is nowhere near the NBA 

[grasshopper1917]

I would assume MLS is more of a regional draw similar to the NHL in the USA. For example if you live in Chicago you may tune in if the Blackhawks are playing or if the Fire are playing however you not likely to tune into a random game with teams outside your hometown.

Will MLS really ever progress pass the regional attraction sort of league? I don't know the NHL has been trying for decades with no success. Im not saying MLS will never progress past that - I just think at the very least it will take more decades of improving the quality of the league.

Im assuming that the CPL will be similar in nature. 

[harrycoyster]

26 minutes ago, Ansem said:

I dispute your initial claim that MLS will triple their TV contract. Uhh...kind of premature to make such a claim.

MLS is nowhere near the NBA 

Even if MLS tripled their contract they wouldn't have 1/9th the contract the NBA has. 

[marauder01]

4 hours ago, Pat Carrasco said:

People on Twitter are now up and arms over this subject. Some are even declaring the end of the Hamilton CPL franchise without getting all the facts. Can we please have some clarity?

Pat you goon - stop posting this drivel. You're literally the only one remotely saying this is "the end of the Hamilton CPL franchise".

[matty]

4 hours ago, harrycoyster said:

At this point 2018 feels rushed. Scrambling for teams like the NASL isn't a good look. I'd rather them wait a year if that's what it takes to do this thing right...you only get one chance at a first impression. 

I'm gonna say this again: they just just finished reviewing applications! 2 weeks ago they reached the publically stated 90 days they needed to do so. Can we stop acting like omg it's a failure.

Do people actually believe  they'd announce everything within 24 hours of 90days?

[harrycoyster]

9 minutes ago, matty said:

I'm gonna say this again: they just just finished reviewing applications! 2 weeks ago they reached the publically stated 90 days they needed to do so. Can we stop acting like omg it's a failure.

Do people actually believe  they'd announce everything within 24 hours of 90days?

I get that this is somewhat in line with their timeline, but for a league that wants to launch around this time next year doesn't it feel like we are getting pretty close to a tipping point? Facilities need to be built, land needs to be acquired, counsels need to vote on partnerships, 100s of players need to be signed and coaches are needed to sign those players. That's just the tip of the iceberg.

I think Spring 2019 may just be a better option than Fall 2018 at this point. This isn't a league that can afford a subpar launch. 

[matty]

1 hour ago, harrycoyster said:

I get that this is somewhat in line with their timeline, but for a league that wants to launch around this time next year doesn't it feel like we are getting pretty close to a tipping point? 

Yea we are but we're not there yet. I'd say sometime around the next friendly would be (Sept. 2) for is the tipping point for 2018. So Sept 15th = rational late tipping point

The issue is the rumoured England friendly really fucks up the tipping point for 2018, as that would be the best chance to make a real first impression. Ideally they'd use England for 2019 but because of how CPL stuff is done, there's still a weird 5-10% chance that's the proper announcement date for a ton of shit. I hope that isn't the case because fuck that would be a waste of 3 months of CPL promotion.

1 hour ago, harrycoyster said:

...100s of players need to be signed and coaches are needed to sign those players

While I agree the first part is massive, these ones will likely fly by.

Edited August 15, 2017 by matty

[BenFisk'sBiggestFan]

1 hour ago, harrycoyster said:

I get that this is somewhat in line with their timeline, but for a league that wants to launch around this time next year doesn't it feel like we are getting pretty close to a tipping point? Facilities need to be built, land needs to be acquired, counsels need to vote on partnerships, 100s of players need to be signed and coaches are needed to sign those players. That's just the tip of the iceberg.

I think Spring 2019 may just be a better option than Fall 2018 at this point. This isn't a league that can afford a subpar launch. 

I know that we are following this closely. But just because we don't know about it yet doesn't mean they aren't working on all that stuff already. Some clubs may just be waiting for an official launch to reveal all this stuff. The only clubs to reveal anything so far are clubs that have had to. Hamilton because of talks with the City, Winipeg because they are a fan owned club, sask because they need to find land, and Halifax because of the stadium stuff. 

That being said, if this Hamilton stuff gets in the way that could definitely stall a start up.

[harrycoyster]

25 minutes ago, BenFisk'sBiggestFan said:

I know that we are following this closely. But just because we don't know about it yet doesn't mean they aren't working on all that stuff already. Some clubs may just be waiting for an official launch to reveal all this stuff. The only clubs to reveal anything so far are clubs that have had to. Hamilton because of talks with the City, Winipeg because they are a fan owned club, sask because they need to find land, and Halifax because of the stadium stuff. 

That being said, if this Hamilton stuff gets in the way that could definitely stall a start up.

I agree to a point, but I think we'd know if there was a stadium sized piece of land bought, a shovel in the ground or a hearing on a counsel docket. This level of radio silence is concerning for the 2018 launch. I just hope they don't get caught up on the importance of that half-season. 2018 is ideal, but if six more months is going to get us better owners with better teams in better stadiums I'll happily wait.