Could U.S. Soccer Eclipse Basketball and Hockey? $200M Adidas Pact Suggests Yes

CBS News ^ | September 2, 2010 | Jim Edwards

[MinorityRepublican]

Adidas (ADS.DE)'s $200 million sponsorship deal with Major League Soccer shows that the apparelmaker has noticed sports marketing's best-kept secret: U.S. soccer's audience is threatening to eclipse that of the National Hockey League and the NBA. The crucial thing to note in the new deal is that the $200 million pact is worth $25 million per year through 2018. It replaces, mid-contract, a 10-year deal for $150 million, or $15 million a year -- a 66 percent increase in annual value.

Why would Adidas make this expensive move? Consider: The MLS isn't broadcast to a large audience on TV (you have to pay for Fox Soccer Channel to see many of the games). The mainstream press's coverage of U.S. soccer is patchy at best and actively disinterested at worst (this means you, New York Times). And there's a cultural consensus that soccer just isn't important in America (ask any football or baseball fan).

Under that radar, however, the game that ought to be called American football is growing like mold. Here are some recent average attendance stats for the major American sports:

NFL - 67,508.69 (2009 season) MLB - 30,213.37 (2009 season) MLS - 18,452.14 (2010 season, as of 04/11/2010) NBA - 17,149.61 (2009/10 season) NHL - 16,985.31 (2009/10 season) Obviously, there's a caveat here: basketball and hockey teams play a lot more than once a week, so their total attendances are a lot greater.

[Alberta's Child]

You might be right, but I also suspect that soccer is less popular among the children of immigrants than it is among the immigrants themselves. Let’s face it ... one of the things that makes soccer so appealing around the world is that it’s so cheap to play it. Once immigrants get here and they find their way into the American middle class, I think their kids end up with many of the same interests as their American-born peers.

[LuvFreeRepublic]

Don't know if soccer will eclipse hockey or basketball, but I don't really care one way or the other. Glad to see some money flowing into soccer though. Love the game and I wish there was a close stadium that hosted some games where I now live. I used to go to lots of games when I lived in Southern CA. That is about the only thing I miss about not living there though.

[Colonel_Flagg]

I’d prefer Dempsey to stay with Fulham. I’ve never been a big Wenger fan and the Liverpool rumors I hear would be really disappointing as I have supported United for about twenty years now.

I’ve always said that if I were managing a national team and needed to win one game to save my life, I’d want Friedel between the sticks.

I also think Americans who want to excel in this game need to get to Europe. MLS isn’t good enough — yet — to develop our best players.

[dfwgator]

My dream would be to have Dempsey join Landon Donovan and Tim Howard in Everton.

[Alberta's Child]

The biggest problem with the NHL has nothing to do with marketing. It's the fact that hockey does not translate well to television at all.

I can remember about a half-dozen cases in recent years where I took someone (as an adult) to an NHL game for the first time in his/her life. In every case this involved a person who never liked hockey but was willing to give it a shot, and in every case these folks became instantly hooked on the game. One guy was an immigrant from Europe who had been a soccer fan all his life, and he's never been the same.

The thing that he finds most fascinating about hockey? The speed, first and foremost, but here's his money quote: "It's so neat the way the players come on and off the bench even while the game is going on and the puck is in play!"

[dfwgator]

But as more American players, like Clint Dempsey get big paydays in Europe, the sport will become more attractive to Americans, who realize there’s money to be made.....and there are a heck of a lot more professional soccer teams around the globe than for any sport.

[Colonel_Flagg]

Well, if the Liverpool rumors are true, Dempsey would never be welcome in the blue half of the city.

There’s also something to be said for club loyalty. Dempsey is a hero to those fans and he’s having his best year there. His goal against Juventus in the Europa League a few years ago was wonderful and I think cemented his reputation there.

[Dr. Sivana]

I may be wrong about this, but I seem to remember reading somewhere in the last few years that the Stanley Cup playoffs can generate larger TV audiences than the NBA playoffs when you include both Canada and the U.S. in the comparison.

Well, of course most of Canada tunes in, especially in those years when Edmonton, Calgary or Montreal is a real contender. There were a number of seasons when the NHL STUPIDLY sold the U.S. national cable rights to the Home and Garden Outdoor network or some such, because it outbid ESPN2 in dollars. Way to grow that base and keep your fans tuned in!

When the Bruins, Blackhawks, Rangers or Islanders are in the mix, then you can throw in healthy viewing from a major U.S. market.

Many of the best basketball playoff games are played VERY late (Lakers home games) and that has to affect viewership.

[bramps]

If they were able to bottle and market someone like this here in the U.S., then we might have something:

Lionel Messi, easily the greatest player of all time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrpBEmAxWYs

Watch and be fascinated by true athletic genius.

[dfwgator]

That would be disappointing if he goes to the Red Shite...

I would love it if Everton finished on top of them in the table, just wish they beat them in the FA Cup semi.

[dfwgator]

Lionel Messi, easily the greatest player of all time.

I like Messi, but greatest of all time? That's a stretch. Especially since he has yet to do squat for Argentina.

Cruyff is stil the greatest player of all-time, he literally revolutionized the game.

[Colonel_Flagg]

I am also a Howard fan so I agree with you regarding Everton and Liverpool. And as a United fan, Liverpool is sort of near the bottom of my list anyway :)

[Dr. Sivana]

It's the fact that hockey does not translate well to television at all.

I've heard that before, and I remember Fox's noble but failed experiment with computers to make the puck more visible.

I have never found hockety to be problematic on TV ... IF YOU HAVE GOOD CAMERAS AND A STATION THAT KNOWS HOW TO USE THEM.

I am a lapsed Kings fan from the Triple Crown era. I lived in CT. The Kings would typically get second place in the Norris division (behind Montreal), and the Bruins would typically win the Adams division. Around Round 2 the Kings would play the Bruins. The folks at WSBK-TV38 were exceptional with their coverage. But when I stayed up late to watch the games in L.A. (where the Kings wore those crazy Dr. Dentons) the cameras were largely obscured by PEOPLE SITTING IN FRONT OF THEM! This was in the old forum, but for some reason the Lakers games in the same building didn't have that problem. The cameramen (or the guy at the switchboard) could not antipate where the puck was going. No zoom-ins behind the net. Awful. You'd think a big city based famous for TV and movies would have done better.

Of course, it might be better now. I haven't kept up.

[Alberta's Child]

Having lived in both Canada and the U.S., I've made this observation about the NHL and its business prospects:

One problem they face is that there are really only nine NHL teams with solid fan support ... these include the Original Six, plus Philadelphia, Buffalo and Edmonton. When I say "solid fan support," what I mean is that any of these teams could get 17,000+ fans into an arena to watch a home game late in the season even if the team is out of a playoff spot.

It's kind of startling, really ... especially when you consider how many Canadian teams aren't included (Ottawa, Vancouver and Calgary). These are among the vast majority of NHL teams who rely heavily on casual fan support that tends to diminish substantially if the team isn't successful on the ice.

This makes it incredibly difficult for the NHL to build a national fan base. So much of the game's appeal is regionally based and tied to long-standing rivalries that date back many decades (Toronto-Montreal, Detroit-Chicago, Montreal-Boston, etc.).

[Ax]

As one who has stood on the Spion Kop with a red and white scarf at Anfield, the true Shrine of world footie, I place Everton on the same level as the NY Jets. That’s not a compliment.

[Alberta's Child]

I can't think of a single sport that grew a lot in popularity here in the U.S. just because Americans who played the sport had an opportunity to sign lucrative contracts in foreign countries. If anything, sports grow in popularity here in the U.S. as foreigners come here to play it. Hockey is a classic example of this.

Some sports even have local variations that are far more popular here in the U.S. simply because they have an American identity. NASCAR is a classic example. Look how thoroughly they've eclipsed both Formula One and Indy Car racing here in the U.S. over a matter of just a few decades.

[Controlling Legal Authority]

I think wide screen HD has helped hockey more than any other sport.

[Controlling Legal Authority]

I think wide screen HD has helped hockey more than any other sport.

[Controlling Legal Authority]

I think wide screen HD has helped hockey more than any other sport.

[Alberta's Child]

It's definitely better now, and I'll tell you something else: You should see what NFL broadcasts looked like back in the early days of televised games. NFL Films has a DVD collection that traces the history of televised football, and it's amazing how ridiculous things were back then. Jittery cameramen, cameras that didn't work well in cold weather, poor camera angles, etc. were some of the early glitches they had to deal with.

Now, the NFL has taken it to the exact opposite extreme. It's so oriented towards a TV audience that attending a game in person can be a boring ordeal.