IBC

How are Bretts last pick and his pick of Diaz eligible for this years draft if they've not yet signed with a team before Jan 1st? Wouldn't them signing in 2014 as international free agents mean they're subject to a 14 draft designation?

Not calling you out Brett, just looking for clarification on this because I didn't even have these guys on my radar to to my interpretation of the draft rules. I thought they'd be subject to next years draft as they'd not signed with a team by the start of our draft - similar to the Tanaka issue we were debating about because he hadn't signed with a team by draft time which would have forced him into next years draft.

Astros wrote:How are Bretts last pick and his pick of Diaz eligible for this years draft if they've not yet signed with a team before Jan 1st? Wouldn't them signing in 2014 as international free agents mean they're subject to a 14 draft designation?

Not calling you out Brett, just looking for clarification on this because I didn't even have these guys on my radar to to my interpretation of the draft rules. I thought they'd be subject to next years draft as they'd not signed with a team by the start of our draft - similar to the Tanaka issue we were debating about because he hadn't signed with a team by draft time which would have forced him into next years draft.

He shouldn't be eligible, but the ExCo hasn't updated the rules in 7 years, so it's not always as clear who is or isn't eligible.

Hey Bren... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEmS11bSHhY

Nationals wrote:Hey Bren... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEmS11bSHhY

hey Z, shouldn't you be off trying to sell women's curling tickets or whatever your favorite sport of the month is?

ExCo's responsibilities aren't all that heavy. You'd think that keeping the rules up to date would be something they could manage to do.

JP announced before the draft that Cuban and Japanese players who sign before the start of the season are eligible for the 2013 draft (and to be retained):

viewtopic.php?t=4895

The exco has already voted on whether to change the language for 2014 forward and will announce soon if any changes are coming.

Or MLS for the Crew. The fastest growing attendance team in the fastest growing sports league in the country and the fastest growing soccer league in the world. You know, that one whose attendance has passed the NHL & NBA. But I'm sure you won't watch the World Cup this summer...

lol

Nationals wrote:...fastest growing soccer league in the world.

It's easy to grow "quickly" from nothing.

MLS is, always has been, and always will be, a minor league.
The NBA and NHL are limited by arena size, with none larger than 22k, that's kind of a limiting factor on growth for butts in seats. TV however is where all the money is.
How many people watched the 2013 MLS Cup? About 505,000. That's not a whole lot more than watched game 1 of the WNBA finals (394,000). The difference in the number of people who watch the championship game for MLS (0.5 million) v. WNBA G1 (0.4 million) is a rounding error for the Big 4.

How many watched the last Stanley Cup (by most accounts an almost dead sport)? An average of 5.2 million viewers per game (topping out at 6 million). So TEN times as many people watched the Stanley Cup in the US as watched the MLS championship.

The MLS ONLY exists because FIFA would have pulled the US's ability to go to the World Cup if they didn't. Its operating profit as a league in 2013 was $34m. That's pathetic.

I'll probably watch some of the World Cup. Because that's GOOD futbol, not some shitty American 3rd rate soccer league.

Any way you measure it, the MLS stinks.

Padres wrote: It's easy to grow "quickly" from nothing.

There's an easy short joke here if anyone wants to take it.

You'll have to excuse Bren here Z. You work in a profession that requires people skills and that your potential buyers like you, he'd be eating out of garbage cans if that were a part of his job description

Nice research. Every stadium in MLS is limited no larger than 25k (except Gillette, CenturyLink, & RFK)...and CenturyLink is the only who actually draws into the stadium area. Gillette caps at 22k. We have a stadium with 10k capacity (San Jose), and a team (Chivas USA) that has essentially given up on selling tickets (drew 8k last year). #dosomeresearch

It's almost nearly impossible to grow from nothing. MLS is the only league in professional sports in the US that has successfully launched and grown since WWII.

Great last line, too. Especially considering that the USMNT will start more starters from MLS than any other league (Evans, Donovan, Besler, Zusi, Gonzalez, Dempsey, and Bradley), and the other starters (Beasley, Howard, Altidore, and Cameron) all got their start in MLS...and they are on the doorstep for being one of the 10 best teams in the world.

Candidly, television is a hurdle that MLS needs to crack...but even with a smaller audience, the new television contract will reportedly be almost 4x greater than this last go around. The SVP of Marketing for the NFL has said the only league in the US he's scared of is MLS...and the President of the Pac-12 Tv predicted that by 2030 MLS will be the biggest league in the US...right before he left to become the President of Business Ventures for MLS.

Rangers wrote:JP announced before the draft that Cuban and Japanese players who sign before the start of the season are eligible for the 2013 draft (and to be retained):

viewtopic.php?t=4895

The exco has already voted on whether to change the language for 2014 forward and will announce soon if any changes are coming.

What about Suk-Yin Moon, one of Pat T's picks. He's from Korea, hasn't signed yet - was/is he eligible?

Nationals wrote:a team (Chivas USA) that has essentially given up on selling tickets (drew 8k last year).

Yeah, that's a sign of a league to impressed by... MLS would have higher capacities if they had a product worth seeing. They cut back the capacities on their stadiums to keep the crowd from looking as pitiful as it is. Do any of the teams in the MLS even own their own stadiums?

Your argument that most of the American team has a pedigree through MLS doesn't mean much. The American team still isn't anything special and anyone worth a damn goes on to play in a different league. It's almost like they graduate from a minor league to finally play in the bigs...

People have been talking about pro soccer becoming a force in the US for decades. It still hasn't happened. When your net profit for 19 teams in your 18th year is a high of $34 million, you're not a successful pro sports league. Congratulations though on being less of a failure than the WNBA, Women's Soccer and the XFL.

Nationals wrote:MLS is the only league in professional sports in the US that has successfully launched and grown since WWII.

The AFL founders are calling, they take umbrage with your claim.

People have been talking about pro soccer becoming a force in the US for decades. It still hasn't happened. When your net profit for 19 teams in your 18th year is a high of $34 million, you're not a successful pro sports league. Congratulations to the MLS though on being less of a failure than the WNBA, Women's Soccer and the XFL!

BlueJays wrote:

Rangers wrote:JP announced before the draft that Cuban and Japanese players who sign before the start of the season are eligible for the 2013 draft (and to be retained):

viewtopic.php?t=4895

The exco has already voted on whether to change the language for 2014 forward and will announce soon if any changes are coming.

What about Suk-Yin Moon, one of Pat T's picks. He's from Korea, hasn't signed yet - was/is he eligible?

The more explicit description we've used is Cubans and then Japanese, Koreans and Mexicans playing in their professional leagues, so if he's playing in their major league and not being drafted out of HS, he is eligible to be drafted and tracked until opening day.

The update that we'll be making to the rules will lay that out in detail.[/img]

Good God man, no, they didn't. They didn't scale back, they built. There have been over $2 billion in soccer specific stadiums built in the US since Crew Stadium started the trend...and all of them have capacities similar to most stadiums you see in Europe. Having ownership of their stadiums is something most sports teams do...why is MLS scaling back when they do it?

The AFL isn't in existence right now. It lasted for 10 years with some pretty sizable issues in terms of maintaining their business, and was absorbed by another league.

The American team is something pretty remarkable. It has become one of the top teams in the world in a span of about 20 years, which is amazing. It's BEST players play in the US (Donovan, Dempsey, Bradley)...and most of them have left or spurned other opportunities with major clubs overseas (Donovan has turned down multiple moves to Everton, Dempsey was starting for Tottenham, Bradley was a major player for Roma, etc.).

You're clearly arguing to just be a dick...and it's working. I'm getting angry at your apparent stupidity. Or you clearly have no idea what's happening right beneath your nose. The USMNT is gaining popularity (TV, merch, exposure, etc.) every year. The USMNT players are making MLS the league of choice more and more every year (Dempsey, Donovan, Bradley). The USMNT is getting better every year (nearing top 10 world wide, one of only 4 teams to qualify for each World Cup over the last 20 years, etc).

Please show me an article written in the last 3 months that outlines why soccer is not making it in America...and I'll be happy to keep my mouth shut. On the same note, I'll let you know about the ESPN study that showed pro soccer is the 2nd most popular sport among 12-24 year olds in the US behind the NFL. Maybe you can, for once, shut the fuck up when you don't know things.

Don't feed the trolls...

Im also pretty sure that the AFL he was referring to was the Arena Football League, 27 years and going strong

Okay, I read the post but didn't really bother clicking the link to the past ruling. I suppose I can accept responsibility for that. But cmon guys.. The rule should have in fact been updated some time ago. Because I referenced the actual rules link. And the rule is pretty black and white. It's kinda BS to follow a rule that's apparently not in date. I'm fine with the current rule, and not asking for brett or pats or anyone else's picks to be made ineligible. Just asking for the rules link to be updated. It's overdue.