I don't think I could deal with a third year in a row of "it's the last day of the season and the Timbers need to win to get into the playoffs". The fact that that game this season will be in Seattle is extra icing on that particularly disgusting cake, but hopefully by then the Timbers' fate will already be decided, one way or the other.
while waiting til the last day isn't ideal, if it happens to be "loser of this game doesn't make it to playoffs" given the Timbers recent record in Seattle it would be a nice way to spoil their season. Although that means yet another year of terrible soccer only to get kida hot in the end, which I'm quite frankly tired of.
There's no reason to think he'll play more than a handful of home games; he didn't play away games most of last season. He also didn't play on turf.
if David Beckham wanted to recreate teams from his European glory days, he should have put together a celebrity five-a-side team or something. What he's doing in (and to) Miami is dumb as hell from a soccer perspective, and if I were a Miami fan I'd be really fkin annoyed.
I have a feeling he'll opt out of/be "injured" for a loooooooot of away games. Especially since Inter Messi is doing an insane preseason tour to Saudi Arabia and Japan. By the time late July rolls around, for example, does anyone think that Messi will make the trip to Cincinnati? Nobody wants Skyline Chili THAT much.
Soooo-just where is a game with Miami and Messi? As a season ticket holder once again, I was told by the Timbers that we'd be playing Miami this coming year. Apparently, that's not the case. False advertising?
Same here. I don't ever remember being promised that in any email or elsewhere. Maybe there were some "I wonder if we'll play Miami given the PN connection" conjectures going on by some fans, but not the club. I know other teams used that as bait but they were eastern conference teams.
I did the math. There are 15 teams in the East and current schedule format we play each one at home every 5 years, on the road every 5 years and we alternate (so on average actually play them every 2-3 years. We last played Miami in the road in 2022, at home never.
I always assumed it would be 2025 (though there was an outside chance of 2024), was never promised anything different.
MLS is all about Messi now. Every game is a "Messi match" even if Miami isn't playing in it. So in a sense, we are playing against Messi in every match in MLS's eyes.
I personally am glad we aren't playing Miami this year. The Messi obsession has made me like MLS a lot less, with the US Open Cup snub adding to my disgust.
Between Alll Messi All The Time and the Leagues Cup, it's clear that MLS is trying to be a Big Time League now. And financially, it's working. But just like when the PL invented soccer in 1993, something valuable is lost in the transition from what it was to what it is and what it wants to be.
MLS isn't nearly as fun now as it was; it's not a scrappy lil upstart league any more. I still enjoy the games themselves, but the vibe of the league as a whole has...grown up? Corporatized? I don't know how to put it, but it's very different than 15 years ago, for sure.
"financially, it's working" is it? Where's the evidence of that? Other than outlier games boosting the signal, is MLS raking in the money by hiding all their games behind a paywall?
I like most people in the US, already have access to ESPN, FS1, etc. I already pay for it (through YouTubeTV) so the chances of me cancelling it to get a single service are low. Casual fans won't see games and out of sight = out of mind. Going to a single paid access plan will ensure that the fanbase will at best stay the same size. If MLS is happy being 4th or 5th I'm US sports I guess it's a good plan. I paid for 1 month last year and got the first month free. It sucked missing games but it probably sucked watching the team lose over and over too. Last year was the first year since 2011 that I missed more than 1 game. I'm a fan so I can imagine that casual fans will be completely interested in signing up, especially if the team continues to flounder around the bottom. Messi probably helped the sales a lot at least for a couple months until people realized he was done playing for the year. Maybe they'll come back, or maybe they won't
It will be interesting to see if the "cable" sports channels stay afloat with the new economy of streaming. I would not be shocked if they balkanize even further and you have to pay extra for "ESPN-NFL", "ESPN-NBA", "FS1-CFB", etc. because the amount they get from YouTubeTV is less than half of what Cable was paying them.
One easy measure: MP bought the rights to the Timbers for $35 million in 2010. The entry fee for San Diego was $500 million. The minimum salary for a rostered player has increased from $24K in 1996 to $85K last year, and the average salary last year was $530K.
And yes, the Apple deal is pretty big, but it's not as much of a financial gamechanger as it sounded like: 10 years, $2.5B. So that's of course $250M/year, divided among all 29 teams, but MLS also is paying all the production costs of the broadcasts on Apple TV, so on a per-team basis it's not a hugely significant amount of money.
So by any real measure, yes, MLS is "working". The problem lies in the question "working for whom?". The league is growing, expanding, and raking in the money, absolutely. Which is what their aim was and is, and will continue to be. Don Garber has done a hell of a job growing the league, and from a business perspective he deserves a lot of credit.
But in doing so, MLS is distancing itself from what made it a fun league in the first place, its relatively small scale and relatability.
It is. I hate what I might call the NFLization of the league's media promos: ads featuring continual graphics of screaming players, bombastic music, and huge crowds of young people in a 9:1 male-to-female ratio holding beers.
I feel the same way to the nth degree about women's soccer. As in, I want the players, teams, and leagues to succeed, and especially for the players to make better wages. But if/when that happens, it will become more like the circus that is men's soccer in Europe, or the NFL here, and that will take away a lot of what I like about WoSo in the first place.
I don't think I could deal with a third year in a row of "it's the last day of the season and the Timbers need to win to get into the playoffs". The fact that that game this season will be in Seattle is extra icing on that particularly disgusting cake, but hopefully by then the Timbers' fate will already be decided, one way or the other.
while waiting til the last day isn't ideal, if it happens to be "loser of this game doesn't make it to playoffs" given the Timbers recent record in Seattle it would be a nice way to spoil their season. Although that means yet another year of terrible soccer only to get kida hot in the end, which I'm quite frankly tired of.
Luis Suarez to Miami confirmed. Lol. Retirement league.
Miami is a retirement team. The rest of the league isn't doing this, not even close. This is a total joke of a team.
My favorite part of the Suarez move is that by his own admission, he can barely walk:
https://twitter.com/ESPNFC/status/1732101737606009263
https://talksport.com/football/1666951/luis-suarez-lionel-messi-reunion-inter-miami-transfer-news/
There's no reason to think he'll play more than a handful of home games; he didn't play away games most of last season. He also didn't play on turf.
if David Beckham wanted to recreate teams from his European glory days, he should have put together a celebrity five-a-side team or something. What he's doing in (and to) Miami is dumb as hell from a soccer perspective, and if I were a Miami fan I'd be really fkin annoyed.
What makes anybody think Messi will play a full MLS season this year?
He didn't stay healthy for even a half-season last year; a full summer of heat and high mileage travel will take a bigger toll on an even older body.
I have a feeling he'll opt out of/be "injured" for a loooooooot of away games. Especially since Inter Messi is doing an insane preseason tour to Saudi Arabia and Japan. By the time late July rolls around, for example, does anyone think that Messi will make the trip to Cincinnati? Nobody wants Skyline Chili THAT much.
I actually don't care about seeing Messi play. What bugs me is the false promise made to me by the team.
Soooo-just where is a game with Miami and Messi? As a season ticket holder once again, I was told by the Timbers that we'd be playing Miami this coming year. Apparently, that's not the case. False advertising?
Just curious - when were you told that? We are STH as well and we never got the impression that Miami was coming here.
I'm curious too. Never got that message.
Same here. I don't ever remember being promised that in any email or elsewhere. Maybe there were some "I wonder if we'll play Miami given the PN connection" conjectures going on by some fans, but not the club. I know other teams used that as bait but they were eastern conference teams.
Yep. Me neither.
I did the math. There are 15 teams in the East and current schedule format we play each one at home every 5 years, on the road every 5 years and we alternate (so on average actually play them every 2-3 years. We last played Miami in the road in 2022, at home never.
I always assumed it would be 2025 (though there was an outside chance of 2024), was never promised anything different.
MLS is all about Messi now. Every game is a "Messi match" even if Miami isn't playing in it. So in a sense, we are playing against Messi in every match in MLS's eyes.
I personally am glad we aren't playing Miami this year. The Messi obsession has made me like MLS a lot less, with the US Open Cup snub adding to my disgust.
Between Alll Messi All The Time and the Leagues Cup, it's clear that MLS is trying to be a Big Time League now. And financially, it's working. But just like when the PL invented soccer in 1993, something valuable is lost in the transition from what it was to what it is and what it wants to be.
MLS isn't nearly as fun now as it was; it's not a scrappy lil upstart league any more. I still enjoy the games themselves, but the vibe of the league as a whole has...grown up? Corporatized? I don't know how to put it, but it's very different than 15 years ago, for sure.
"financially, it's working" is it? Where's the evidence of that? Other than outlier games boosting the signal, is MLS raking in the money by hiding all their games behind a paywall?
As opposed to the paywall of Root, FS1 and ESPN?
I finally cut the cord last year and save a TON of money with Apple TV / MLS package.
I like most people in the US, already have access to ESPN, FS1, etc. I already pay for it (through YouTubeTV) so the chances of me cancelling it to get a single service are low. Casual fans won't see games and out of sight = out of mind. Going to a single paid access plan will ensure that the fanbase will at best stay the same size. If MLS is happy being 4th or 5th I'm US sports I guess it's a good plan. I paid for 1 month last year and got the first month free. It sucked missing games but it probably sucked watching the team lose over and over too. Last year was the first year since 2011 that I missed more than 1 game. I'm a fan so I can imagine that casual fans will be completely interested in signing up, especially if the team continues to flounder around the bottom. Messi probably helped the sales a lot at least for a couple months until people realized he was done playing for the year. Maybe they'll come back, or maybe they won't
It will be interesting to see if the "cable" sports channels stay afloat with the new economy of streaming. I would not be shocked if they balkanize even further and you have to pay extra for "ESPN-NFL", "ESPN-NBA", "FS1-CFB", etc. because the amount they get from YouTubeTV is less than half of what Cable was paying them.
One easy measure: MP bought the rights to the Timbers for $35 million in 2010. The entry fee for San Diego was $500 million. The minimum salary for a rostered player has increased from $24K in 1996 to $85K last year, and the average salary last year was $530K.
And yes, the Apple deal is pretty big, but it's not as much of a financial gamechanger as it sounded like: 10 years, $2.5B. So that's of course $250M/year, divided among all 29 teams, but MLS also is paying all the production costs of the broadcasts on Apple TV, so on a per-team basis it's not a hugely significant amount of money.
So by any real measure, yes, MLS is "working". The problem lies in the question "working for whom?". The league is growing, expanding, and raking in the money, absolutely. Which is what their aim was and is, and will continue to be. Don Garber has done a hell of a job growing the league, and from a business perspective he deserves a lot of credit.
But in doing so, MLS is distancing itself from what made it a fun league in the first place, its relatively small scale and relatability.
It is. I hate what I might call the NFLization of the league's media promos: ads featuring continual graphics of screaming players, bombastic music, and huge crowds of young people in a 9:1 male-to-female ratio holding beers.
I feel the same way to the nth degree about women's soccer. As in, I want the players, teams, and leagues to succeed, and especially for the players to make better wages. But if/when that happens, it will become more like the circus that is men's soccer in Europe, or the NFL here, and that will take away a lot of what I like about WoSo in the first place.