(04-23-2023 08:10 PM)MattBrownEP Wrote:  

(04-23-2023 08:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  You have to have an audience to develop elite soccer. No bucks, no Buck Rogers! Bucks come from those willing to pay to watch. In the South boys play football, some play soccer, but girls play. Beyond High School you don't have an audience and the audience in high school would be parents mostly. Auburn has women's soccer and from time to time they are pretty good for SEC level play. No audience even in the good years. Meanwhile at Jane B. Moore Field the tickets are sold out and the stands packed on good weather nights with only some empty seats when it's too cold or hot. Women's softball sells.

Real Madrid doesn't run their academy system because lots of people buy tickets to watch their U16 team lol. They run it because they want to find good players for the ain club. Nobody is shelling out big bucks for tickets to watch youth teams nearly anywhere in the world...hell, even here. Lets not pretend high school football or high school anything is a particularly profitable enterprise.

What I mean what I say "we haven't developed as great mass participation elite system for soccer" is that our best soccer talent pipelines here are heavily concentrated in heavily expensive travel team systems. We price most of the poor and even middle class kids out of getting the homegrown talent development systems they need to be D1 or international caliber. Our talent pipelines for football and basketball are more egalitarian.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt for not comprehending what I stated rather than setting up a strawman. I said it's hard to develop a premier anything without an audience. High School parents aren't much of audience. The bucks are for the premier league, not high school.

And as to High School Football, it is still pretty popular in the South and Southwest with solid fan support. A revenue sport its not but a good many programs can cover their expenses if you consider the coach is paid as a teacher.

I get what you are saying about travel clubs. That's true of baseball in the South. And they are what they are, costly means for upper middle class families to showcase their kids for a scholarship. The money made there are by the sponsoring academies.

I'll just come back to market. When there is a monetized demand for the any sport you can have premier leagues and colleges supplying the future professionals. Baseball is going niche because of Summer Travel Leagues pricing out the poor kids. But both football and basketball are more popular with the poor. Basketball because it can be played anywhere, and football because equipment is supplied at the junior high and high school levels. Just buying a pair of cleats and a glove is too expensive for many. I donated equipment to get leagues set up in poor neighborhoods. Every year the equipment disappeared and the following season it was a total resupply. It was still worth it, but that's one reason it frequently is unsustainable.

We have two soccer goals set up in a park near my home. You could probably get into one of the weekend pickup games if you spoke Spanish. There are no Anglos or African Americans playing. Almost all of those who do play are working for local contractors building homes and apartments during the week.

No Bucks no Buck Rogers is an idiom way before your time which means if people won't pay for it you won't have it. They don't have to pay for it in high school. Beyond that they do. No market, no investors.

(04-23-2023 08:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  And Matt if your audience is women that played in high school, and they are busy with college, and then with family or career, where's your audience. And if you count the total number of them as compared to women who don't play how many do you have?

I don't think that's the audience. I only brought up HS participation because you said participation is a requirement for fanhood. I don't believe that's true, but if it is, well, soccer ought to have enough participation to have a real market.

As a professional sport, soccer *does* have a big market. 20,000 people go to MLS games all over the country, and hundreds of thousands watch not just our professional teams, but the best teams all over Europe. i don't think that is solely because of participation, but we do have participation.

To bring this full circle, like I said in my first post in the thread, I think the financial and participation upside for college soccer sucks. I think the evidence is much stronger that a whole slew of other sports (volleyball, softball, lacrosse, etc) have stronger upsides at the college level.

But that doesn't mean that there aren't lots of people in this country who really, really like soccer. That market has probably never been better. I just don't think the college system is built to take advantage of that...which is okay!

(04-23-2023 08:50 PM)MattBrownEP Wrote:  

(04-23-2023 08:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  And Matt if your audience is women that played in high school, and they are busy with college, and then with family or career, where's your audience. And if you count the total number of them as compared to women who don't play how many do you have?

I don't think that's the audience. I only brought up HS participation because you said participation is a requirement for fanhood. I don't believe that's true, but if it is, well, soccer ought to have enough participation to have a real market.

As a professional sport, soccer *does* have a big market. 20,000 people go to MLS games all over the country, and hundreds of thousands watch not just our professional teams, but the best teams all over Europe. i don't think that is solely because of participation, but we do have participation.

To bring this full circle, like I said in my first post in the thread, I think the financial and participation upside for college soccer sucks. I think the evidence is much stronger that a whole slew of other sports (volleyball, softball, lacrosse, etc) have stronger upsides at the college level.

But that doesn't mean that there aren't lots of people in this country who really, really like soccer. That market has probably never been better. I just don't think the college system is built to take advantage of that...which is okay!

I concede that people play in high school. We are nation of 320 million. 20,000 is a drop in the bucket and a few hundred thousand watching is too.

Lacrosse participation at the high school level is up, but compared to even soccer it is low, elite, and niche.

Volleyball and softball have a following which is growing. At some (think about 1/4 to 1/3) SEC schools' softball is in the black, not by much mind you but in the black. Volleyball is huge in the North. One of our daughter's other side of the family (mother in law) is/was (not sure if she retired) a Big 10 official for volleyball. Nice crowds. Women's gymnastics is a thing down here.

So Matt I get your point. I just don't think the zeitgeist is there financially for any big upticks for soccer. We'll see.

(04-15-2023 05:55 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  Which sport do you think will be more popular for college fans?

Anyone think either sport has a chance to become higher profile than college baseball?

Between lacrosse and soccer, the choice is easy. Soccer has the national, and even international, appeal. People everywhere have played the sport and are familiar with its rules. The more international a campus is, too, the more interest there is likely to be in the sport.

Lacrosse is more like hockey: a huge draw within a certain region. It's a great game and native to the US. I'd be thrilled to see it gain ground everywhere. I expect it will remain a regional sport, though.

Both soccer and lacrosse have men's and women's games, so the sports are easy for ADs to like.

It's hard to say how college baseball will go. Currently 8% of US adults between mid-30s and mid-40s in age say they are very interested in the game. Baseball is an international game and it's easy to imagine the college edition gaining followers. But at 8% it's also easy to imagine college soccer moving past it.

On top of this, of course, the pro structures that BruceMcF describes are factors in the picture. Soccer has multiple community and pro layers already and the MLB has its farm leagues. Lacrosse resembles American football in its straightforward college-to-pro structure. How much does that affect fan interest? We'll see.

(04-23-2023 08:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  You have to have an audience to develop elite soccer. No bucks, no Buck Rogers! Bucks come from those willing to pay to watch. In the South boys play football, some play soccer, but girls play. Beyond High School you don't have an audience and the audience in high school would be parents mostly. ...

The challenge for soccer is that, while there is the audience there that would support college soccer at the level of college hockey, where in its best schools & regions it is a break-even or better sport ...

... college soccer struggles to attract a substantial share of that audience because it is so many rungs down the ladder.

Many NBA fans worldwide only follow the NBA, but many also follow a team in their own national basketball league. The equivalent to those audiences in the US are mostly college basketball fans.

Since, unlike football, basketball, baseball, hockey -- and even lacrosse -- the US pro league is not the top level of the sport, the equivalent of those "top pro league and also my team in our own league" fans in the US are mostly following MLS, not following college soccer.

(04-23-2023 09:02 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-23-2023 08:50 PM)MattBrownEP Wrote:  

(04-23-2023 08:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  And Matt if your audience is women that played in high school, and they are busy with college, and then with family or career, where's your audience. And if you count the total number of them as compared to women who don't play how many do you have?

I don't think that's the audience. I only brought up HS participation because you said participation is a requirement for fanhood. I don't believe that's true, but if it is, well, soccer ought to have enough participation to have a real market.

As a professional sport, soccer *does* have a big market. 20,000 people go to MLS games all over the country, and hundreds of thousands watch not just our professional teams, but the best teams all over Europe. i don't think that is solely because of participation, but we do have participation.

To bring this full circle, like I said in my first post in the thread, I think the financial and participation upside for college soccer sucks. I think the evidence is much stronger that a whole slew of other sports (volleyball, softball, lacrosse, etc) have stronger upsides at the college level.

But that doesn't mean that there aren't lots of people in this country who really, really like soccer. That market has probably never been better. I just don't think the college system is built to take advantage of that...which is okay!

I concede that people play in high school. We are nation of 320 million. 20,000 is a drop in the bucket and a few hundred thousand watching is too.

Lacrosse participation at the high school level is up, but compared to even soccer it is low, elite, and niche.

Volleyball and softball have a following which is growing. At some (think about 1/4 to 1/3) SEC schools' softball is in the black, not by much mind you but in the black. Volleyball is huge in the North. One of our daughter's other side of the family (mother in law) is/was (not sure if she retired) a Big 10 official for volleyball. Nice crowds. Women's gymnastics is a thing down here.

So Matt I get your point. I just don't think the zeitgeist is there financially for any big upticks for soccer. We'll see.

A lot of people, if they find a game on television, see a sport they've played. Whatever happens, that audience is adding up.

One thing about a nation of 320,000,000 is that 'niche' can pay off. Those drops falling into into the bucket in North America are the size of some countries elsewhere.

The bottleneck effect at the media level is disappearing. Every niche attraction has a delivery system to reach its audience.

Potential exists, certainly.

(04-15-2023 09:31 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-15-2023 05:55 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  Which sport do you think will be more popular for college fans?

Anyone think either sport has a chance to become higher profile than college baseball?

Lacrosse.
Speed, agility and quick multiple scores will compete with football.

Baseball is being dismantled, and eventually the sport will look more like women's softball.

Soccer....meh. Doesn't do much for the shorter attention span generation.

Watching LAX on tv is like watching paint dry. Looks fun to play, boring for spectators, it will never compete with football.

(04-26-2023 08:37 AM)jacksfan29! Wrote:  

(04-15-2023 09:31 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-15-2023 05:55 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  Which sport do you think will be more popular for college fans?

Anyone think either sport has a chance to become higher profile than college baseball?

Lacrosse.
Speed, agility and quick multiple scores will compete with football.

Baseball is being dismantled, and eventually the sport will look more like women's softball.

Soccer....meh. Doesn't do much for the shorter attention span generation.

Watching LAX on tv is like watching paint dry. Looks fun to play, boring for spectators, it will never compete with football.

I disagree, the men's game is pretty fun. Very little stoppage too compared to football

I wouldn't be at all surprised if men's soccer is bigger baseball at some point. It already is in Bowling Green.