23 Responses to “Taking Attendance, 6/4/2012”

1. Andy Crossley Says:
   June 4th, 2012 at 6:52 pm

   Did anyone have expectations this high for Montreal? I feel like they snuck up on people a bit. And yes, I realize the average is skewed by the big Olympic Stadium game or two.

2. Mike Says:
   June 5th, 2012 at 5:40 am

   Are US Open Cup games not included??? Its not like they are friendlies. I say include them if they were played at the team’s home stadium – if not, then I’d say leave it off – like the Sounders case, it would skew the data. Carolina Railhawks’s high attendance should be around 8,000 I think.

3. admin Says:
   June 5th, 2012 at 5:46 am

   No, these are league games only. Have always been league games only, and will always be league games only. You want to keep your own list, keep your own list. I can’t always GET Open Cup attendance figures for everybody. I keep those separately.

4. admin Says:
   June 5th, 2012 at 5:47 am

   I think we all figured Montreal would do well based on a lot of things, but the huge crowd for the opener was slightly surprising to me.

5. ERic Says:
   June 5th, 2012 at 8:35 am

   You have the attendance for the rain-shortened Harrisburg – Richmond game? I checked Pennlive and couldn’t find it. Despite their being three articles on the game (man, they really cover the team well!)

6. KT Says:
   June 5th, 2012 at 8:59 am

   It was in the Kickers’ recap of the game that was in their email press release.

7. El Conductor Says:
   June 5th, 2012 at 9:32 am

   As always, you’re work in documenting American soccer attendance is a credit to the sport. Bravo, sir. Also, I have a suggestion that would make your life a tiny bit harder, but these updates WAY cooler: add a column for “Overall Rank”, for average attendance – just an idea.

8. KT Says:
   June 5th, 2012 at 10:12 am

   They’re ranked within leagues. Nobody in the NASL would be anywhere but at the bottom of the MLS list. Occasionally I’ll mix it up and show one list of everybody, but it has no surprises – MLS teams at the top, PDL teams at the bottom.

9. Eric A. Says:
   June 6th, 2012 at 10:21 am

   Sorry in advance if this question is answered elsewhere on your blog, I’m new to it. Don’t you have numbers for the current (outdoor) NPSL?

10. admin Says:
    June 6th, 2012 at 12:24 pm

    Nope. They’re not regularly published. Keeping track of them – given the vagaries of the NPSL schedule – is not something I want to devote effort to right now.

11. Eric A. Says:
    June 6th, 2012 at 3:26 pm

    Understood. Do you know generally where they stand in comparison to the PDL? Any chance we’ll see the higher attended PDL/NPSL sides move to the higher divisions?

12. admin Says:
    June 6th, 2012 at 3:53 pm

    I don’t have the slightest idea. I know Chattanooga draws well, but that’s only because it’s usually Chattanooga fans who keep bringing it up. I know the San Diego derby only drew a few hundred fans. I’ve been to an NPSL game with 50 people there.

    I always say if you’re in the PDL, you probably don’t have a lot of money. But if you’re in the NPSL, you have neither money nor ambition.

    And given the spotty history of teams that have moved up a level (or two), I wouldn’t expect we’ll see a lot of it anytime soon.

    People tend to just look at a team’s attendance numbers and if they’re not too bad, just assume that the owner would LOVE to be in a higher level so he can lose more money. I just don’t get that. If you want to own a pro team, own a pro team. If you just want to have a team (either to own a team or to give players a place to play in the summer), you can own a PDL team.

    And if you, for some reason, think you can have a team and consider yourself an owner, but you want to spend virtually no money, you can own an NPSL team.

13. Eric A Says:
    June 6th, 2012 at 6:48 pm

    I’m not saying there aren’t lazy owners or teams in the NPSL but you obviously haven’t been to an FC Buffalo game. The owners are very committed. They are active on social media. twitter.com/fcbuffalo They’ve had viral marketing. http://espn.go.com/espn/page2/index?id=5204287 They entice fans with door prizes like pro teams do. This Friday vs Erie is cowbell night. And they’ve played an international friendly with 4000 in attendance http://www.buffalonews.com/city/article472847.ece in which they were featured in a BBC documentary. http://youtu.be/22JJ7qmSBPs Their attendance is okay (usually 350+) but rising.

14. admin Says:
    June 6th, 2012 at 7:15 pm

    350 is not okay.

    But if they’re the exception, fine. Not everybody is as bad as the Phoenix Monsoon, but please show me the last NPSL team that moved up to a higher level.

15. El Conductor Says:
    June 8th, 2012 at 9:48 am

    “I know Chattanooga draws well, but that’s only because it’s usually Chattanooga fans who keep bringing it up”

    Squeaky Wheel, baby! Squeaky Wheel.

16. El Conductor Says:
    June 8th, 2012 at 10:41 am

    On a serious note:
    I think the PDL and NPSL actually have built-in economic advantages over the NASL and the USL Pro – free amateur talent. Fielding highly skilled players without a crippling payroll expense makes it possible (dare I say, “realistic?”) for 4th-tier clubs to break even with a healthy combination of sponsorship dollars and gate receipts. But once teams have to start paying their players, yes, they’re gonna lose money.

17. admin Says:
    June 8th, 2012 at 10:46 am

    Yes, the cost of player wages and (especially) workman’s comp can be killers.

    But the PDL and NPSL teams that are drawing 50-100 people a game are just basically having a wank. (Some exist purely to give players a place to play, which is noble enough, I guess.)

    I’m sure at the higher levels of the PDL, you can probably do pretty well financially, and if you are Des Moines or somebody like that, why would you be interested in necessarily playing at a higher level and losing more money?

    But at the lower levels….I’m not sure why some of these people do this. Everybody needs a hobby, I guess.

18. kebzach Says:
    June 8th, 2012 at 11:15 am

    In case anyone’s interested, the first Chicago Red Stars home game had 400-500 fans at it by my eyeball count. The second home game had 700-900 fans.

19. admin Says:
    June 8th, 2012 at 11:25 am

    Thank you, sir!

20. John Says:
    June 10th, 2012 at 8:52 pm

    According to something I read on a different website (caveat emptor and all that), the Timbers U-23′s have 1,500 season tickets sold just for them.

21. admin Says:
    June 11th, 2012 at 8:00 am

    Which is odd, because they had 349 at one game.

    Also, I just realized that the PDL record they broke was likely their own…Portland’s U23s drew 8,029 on May 24 against Kitsap, a week before they drew 8,174 against Vancouver. Both were morning games, tied in with kids, apparently.

22. El Conductor Says:
    June 12th, 2012 at 8:52 am

    From what I understand, the smaller 4th-tier clubs exist a) to give locals (and players home from college for the summer) a chance to keep up their game, b) to help fill-out the leagues, and c) generally promote the game in their area. There also seems to be a trend of successful city/ area youth programs creating NPSL or PDL squads as extensions of their Select programs. Presumably, those organizations can offload a lot of the costs of running a semi-pro team onto the larger program’s budget. It also helps having potentially hundreds of built-in fans/ volunteers ready to help in the behind-the-scenes details that always need doing as well. I think the ability to “piggy-back” a semi-pro team onto an existing rec organization is another financial advantage the higher tiers don’t have.

23. admin Says:
    June 12th, 2012 at 9:17 am

    And those are altruistic motives that help grow the game.

    I’m just interested in watching them do it.

Leave a Reply

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website