CONCACAF World Cup 2026 Winners and Losers

2157889318001_5389646668001_5389584613001-vs

The official news that everyone already knew was coming was finally announced today in Lower Manhattan as the presidents of the Canadian, U.S. and Mexican Soccer Federations announced a joint bid to host the FIFA World Cup in 2026. This will be the first World Cup to ever involve 48 nations, making it the largest edition of the tournament yet, and will provide one of a few reasons why three of the largest countries in the world chose to host a World Cup jointly rather than compete with each other for the rights.

Some interesting notes about the bid are that the USA will host 60 of the 80 matches, while Canada and Mexico will host 10 each, and none after the quarterfinal round. In addition, a successful bid would grant Mexico the title of being the first nation to ever host the World Cup three times. On top of that, this would be Canada’s first appearance in a World Cup since 1986, the only time they ever qualified.

The implications of hosting a World Cup in North America would be huge as evidenced by the last World Cup held in the U.S. in 1994 as well as the recent Copa America Centennario held in the U.S. in 2016. In both cases, it was the most well attended and profitable edition of the respective tournament. While many have been left scratching their heads as to why the U.S. chose this route compared to hosting alone, one doesn’t have to travel too far for answers.

The most obvious reason why the U.S. went the safe route for this bid was its role in the still fresh exposure of FIFA’s corruption scandal. You don’t have to be in elementary school to know that a tattle tale would not receive unbiased treatment from the party that was ratted out. By packaging its bid with Canada and Mexico, FIFA will have a tougher time finding excuses to award the hosting rights somewhere else, arguably as it did when granting the rights to Qatar in 2022.

A less obvious reason is that sharing the hosting rights also means sharing the costs. While the United States may be the most qualified country to host a 48 nation tournament in terms of infrastructure already in place, the cost will only grow higher by the time it is actually 2026.

The biggest winner here appears to be Canada just for the simple reason that this bid would allow Canada to qualify for the world’s biggest stage for possibly the first time in 30 years depending on how 2022 works out. In addition, the game has already drawn respectable crowds to MLS matches with the rise of Toronto FC, the Montreal Impact, and Vancouver Whitecaps, and the 10 games hosted in 2026 may be just the right amount to boost that buzz for Canadian soccer to the next level.

In a country as ravenous for soccer as Mexico, ten games may seem like a loss on paper, but going head to head for a World Cup in 2026, there is good reason to believe that the United States would have surpassed a solo bid based simply on security and stadium readiness, even if it was beaten out by a competitor in another continent. In this case the old adage of “if you can’t beat them, join them,” rings true. However, out of the ten matches that will be played in Mexico, it is a bit surprising to see that none of them will be at least a semifinal match, especially considering the history and size of Stadio Azteca in Mexico City.

Finally, that leaves us with the United States. All things considered, hosting 60 matches, all the semifinal games as well as the final should be considered a victory for a nation eager to prove its rise in the sport. Time will tell if the results say otherwise.

4-10

REFERENCES

http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/39544868

http://www.ussoccer.com/stories/2017/04/10/17/52/20170410-news-us-soccer-canada-mexico-submit-unified-bid-host-2026-fifa-world-cup

2016 MLS TV Ratings So Far

mlsWe are currently three months into the MLS’s 21st season, on the heels of a successfully hosted Copa America Centenario, and now seems like as good as time as any to have a status report on how things are going.  After all, if MLS was a living, breathing human being, it’s finally old enough to buy a beer now.  Could this be a sign of more lucrative beer sponsorships to come? And can MLS finally get over the heavily coveted TV ratings hump that has been dogging the league for years?

Back in March, this year’s MLS opener featuring defending champion Portland Timbers and defending runner-up Columbus Crew on ESPN averaged 362,000 viewers. The following nationally televised matchup between Seattle Sounders FC and Sporting KC on FS1 averaged 267,000 viewers.   Since both ESPN and FOX Sports are continuing a Sunday afternoon/night doubleheader that was put in place last year, comparing viewers becomes much easier.  Last year’s MLS opener featuring Orlando City and NYCFC averaged 539,000 viewers, 33% higher than 2016.  But last year’s New York Red Bulls vs. Sporting KC matchup on FS1 drew virtually the same amount of viewers as 2016. At best, these figures suggest that MLS has found a small but steady niche audience.

The “newness” element of having two expansion teams playing in their first ever competitive match was clearly a contributing factor to the higher than normal average viewership for the opening match in 2015.  But MLS cannot keep expanding so that wow factor will soon become unavailable.  Other factors such as star power, team loyalty, and must-see TV will be more paramount as the league moves toward this next phase in its history.

Perhaps less surprisingly, viewership for the plethora of international soccer that has been on TV this summer is significantly higher.  ESPN has reported an average of 815,000 viewers per game as of the end of June for Euro 2016 in France.  The Saturday quarterfinal match-up between Germany and Italy, two contingents with heavy fan bases in the U.S. drew over two million viewers and a 0.8 rating among the 18-49 demographic on ESPN.  The Copa America broke TV records across the board in the tournament’s history.  MLS was even able to capitalize on the Copa, albeit for one game by featuring a doubleheader on Univision after the third place match between the U.S. and Colombia.  The following game between the San Jose Earthquakes and Los Angeles Galaxy was the largest TV audience for an MLS game since 2008, drawing an average of one million viewers.  While piggybacking off the coattails of games that are popular to mainstream audiences is a brilliant way of exposing MLS to the masses, making sure the product on the field is exciting to watch is the best way of retaining higher percentages of those audiences for future games.

One source of inspiration for MLS could be the Icelandic national soccer team.  It’s thrilling Cinderella performance in Euro 2016 captured the small nation by storm and an incredible 99.8% of Iceland’s TV viewers at the time witnessed the team’s final game in the quarterfinals against host nation France.  The NFL by comparison drew around 70% of TV viewers in the 18-49 demographic for Super Bowl 50.  Is there reason to believe an MLS game can draw the interest of 99.8% of American TV viewers? Absolutely not.  But it proves once again just how important it is to have an exciting game to watch on the field.

On July 17, MLS will hope that its nationally televised Cascadia rivalry match-up between Seattle Sounders and Portland Timbers on FOX can pass the test to prove MLS Soccer deserves a steady position on broadcast TV, and not just cable.  Based on the league’s current ratings performance that probably won’t happen.  But one can dream, and the dream of MLS becoming a ratings monster lives on until it becomes a reality.

REFERENCES

http://thebiglead.com/2016/03/09/mls-opener-viewership-down-33-percent-on-espn/

http://worldsoccertalk.com/2016/05/26/mls-fails-make-positive-impression-tv-ratings-big-soccer-weekend/

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/uefa-euro-2016-staggering-998-908124

 

 

 

 

 

The U.S.A. Could (And Should) Host Another World Cup

chile-copa_2706getty_875Last night the Copa America Centenario came to a close with Chile defeating Argentina in a penalty shootout after a 0-0 draw. This was almost an exact replica of Copa America 2015 when Chile defeated Argentina in a penalty shootout after a 0-0 draw.  The difference? The United States does it bigger, and does it better.

The predominately Argentine attendance last night in East Rutherford, New Jersey was reportedly over 82,000, a New Jersey soccer record. This comes on the heels of last week’s impressive crowd at the USA vs. Argentina semifinal in Houston, Texas that was reportedly over 70,000, a Houston soccer record.  For a country that has played host in the past to Pele, Ronaldinho, and David Beckham, there are many reasons for tournament organizers to be pleased right now.

The amount of records broken by this edition of Copa America cannot be ignored.  After last night’s final, the accumulated attendance of the 32 games played was just over 1.5 million, shattering a record held for over 25 years by over 350,000. In addition, the average attendance was nearly 46,000 fans per game, topping 5 of the last 9 World Cups (excluding the USA hosted World Cup in 1994).  Average attendance even topped the past 6 European championships despite an average ticket price of just over $100.  Using just attendance alone as a measuring stick, the U.S. has raised the bar as a host.

In terms of TV ratings, even more records were broken.  Not including the final, the first 30 matches of the Copa America Centenario drew over 100 million viewers in the U.S. from the combined broadcasts of Univision and Fox networks.  Univision reported that ratings for the tournament have been higher than average ratings for the 2014 World Cup in Brazil.  The USA vs. Argentina semifinal even drew 3.29 million viewers on Fox Sports 1, a network soccer record.  In terms of reach, the tournament has been broadcast in 160 countries, and 1.5 billion viewers worldwide. While the days until MLS reaches 1.5 billion viewers are still a long way off, competitive international soccer in the US has consistently proven to be record draw since the ’90s.

In short, the Copa America Centenario achieved every feat it intended and then some.  As Sunil Gulati accurately concluded, the United States Soccer Federation successfully proved that this country has the infrastructure, management system, and consumer base to thrive as an international soccer tournament host.  In many ways, the United States has everything that Brazil is missing for the Rio Olympics in less than two months.  Even with all the bribery and scandals that surround FIFA, it would be incredibly hard to avoid the potential money-making machine that the United States just displayed for a memorable, drama-filled, and lucrative three weeks.

REFERENCES

http://www.pressherald.com/2016/06/24/copa-america-has-been-successful-with-attendance-tv-ratings/

http://www.forbes.com/sites/sergeiklebnikov/2016/06/26/successful-copa-america-2016-smashes-records/#44766b89734b

http://www.latimes.com/sports/soccer/la-sp-copa-us-argentina-tv-ratings-20160622-snap-story.html

http://www.news18.com/footballnext/news/lionel-messi-misses-penalty-as-chile-win-copa-america-2016-title-1262520.html

Viewing the Copa Half-Full for U.S. Soccer

usa vs argLast night, we witnessed Lionel Messi and Argentina embarrass the U.S. Men’s National Team, 4-0 on its home turf in Houston, Texas in the semifinals of the Copa America Centenario. Without debate, it was the biggest game for the USMNT since its 2-1 extra time defeat to Belgium in the 2014 World Cup. Unfortunately, there appeared to be a lot less positive takeaways this time around. But if we dig really hard, here is what we can find:

First off, nearly 71,000 fans filled NRG Stadium in Houston on a Tuesday night to watch soccer.  According to MLSSoccer.com, that was a Houston soccer record.  On top of that, they came to cheer on a U.S team of predominately MLS players face off against the top ranked international team in the world.  Everybody likes an underdog story and without having to market the game too vigorously, that is exactly how the bracket played this one out.  Sure, a home team win would have been nice, but we can’t have everything we want.

Next, the future pool of U.S. players includes some potentially marketable stories.  When the game was already lost, we saw Christian Pulisic from Hershey, Pennsylvania substituted in to shake up the tempo.   Even though the U.S. finished without a shot on goal, the only opportunities that even made it close to the Argentina penalty box all came from the American wunderkind.  He may not even come close to Messi’s talents, but Messi is a once in a generation player.  Pulisic is the next best thing, already rising as a star in German soccer with Borrusia Dortmund, considered levels above American soccer.  There were reports that he had just went to his prom last week.  We also saw Darlington Nagbe, the Portland Timbers star from Liberia who became a U.S. citizen in 2015 to earn his shot at international glory, enter the game late in the second half to generate offense.  One of the reasons why the Olympics earn such excellent TV ratings  are the feel-good story lines of young American athletes triumphing over obstacles to reach some specialized sporting events that most average people could not care less about.

In many ways, the U.S. Men’s National Team has its own stories to draw interest. On top of Pulisic and Nagbe, there’s Clint Dempsey, the old but reliable scoring and rapping talent from Texas.  Even more intriguing, backup goalkeeper Tim Howard’s legendary performance against Belgium two years ago has kept him on the map. His name was brought up almost as much as head coach Klinsmann on Twitter after the score was 3-0 on Tuesday.

Third, while this has been considered an official Copa America, it’s not a typical Copa America.  The tournament is usually held every two years, but in order to create this anniversary edition (and to lure the event outside of South America) the Centenario was held this year, 2016, a quick year after the last official Copa America in 2015.  If you throw in the corruption scandal that had to be sorted out beforehand, it almost makes the whole tournament seem entirely meaningless (but probably not).

In the aftermath of the game, U.S Soccer President Sunil Gulati, comparing the U.S. to national soccer teams like Argentina said, “we have a long way to go.”  But that isn’t necessarily true.  If the US wins the third place game on Saturday night in Phoenix, it will be the best finish by the U.S. in Copa America history.  Out of the eight invitee nations outside of South America that have ever competed in the tournament, none have ever finished higher than second place.  Maybe our expectations are too high.  Maybe in a country used to dominating all sports, not being the best at one is just unacceptable.  If we wait until we’re the best international team in the world before soccer takes off in the U.S, then we truly have a long way to go.  But from a global perspective, the USMNT has plenty of reasons to hold their chins up high.

And finally, at least it wasn’t 7-0 like Mexico.

America’s Oldest Cup Needs an Upgrade

US-Open-Cup-630x300
England has the F.A. Cup and the Capital One Cup. Germany has the DFB-Pokal. Italy has the Coppa Italia. The United States has…the Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup. It may be a mouthful, but as the only American cup competition still running since 1914, it’s the oldest tournament in the American sports landscape. But year after year with little change, the question still arises: why isn’t the U.S Open Cup a bigger deal?

Last night concluded the fourth round of US Open Cup action and there were some exciting match-ups, albeit sparse crowds. In perhaps the most highly attended game, the New York Cosmos of NASL defeated New York City FC of MLS for the second straight year in front of nearly 7,000 fans at Fordham University in the Bronx. Other games of note involved the Houston Dynamo (MLS) defeating San Antonio FC (USL, third division) in front of just under 6,000 fans, FC Dallas (MLS) defeating Oklahoma City Energy FC (USL) in a stadium with a capacity of 1,500 that did not appear full, and Orlando City FC (MLS) defeating Jacksonville Armada (NASL) in front of a capacity crowd of 2,158 fans in Jacksonville. All in all, these attendance figures aren’t exactly a magnet for attracting sponsors.

But more sponsorship just might be the injection of life that this tournament needs. If we look across the pond, England’s storied F.A. Cup has been around since 1871, so virtually everyone in the country knows about it and adding a name brand to the name would do no good. For better or for worse, most people would still call it the F.A. Cup. But the League Cup has only been around since 1960, and that’s why corporate sponsors like Carling and Capital One have attached their names to the tournament over the past decade. Associating a brand with a sporting event is effective when fans describe the event using the brand name. Associating a brand with a sporting event is also an effective way of generating the necessary funds to market the event in the first place. That being said, why not add a naming sponsor to the U.S Open Cup?

Lamar Hunt was one of the founding fathers of Major League Soccer. As long as his name is still engraved on the trophy, he could still be honored. But for marketing purposes, if his name was to be replaced or followed by a sponsor willing to pay a plethora of money for a long-lasting association with one of the most growing team sports in America, the growth of the league that he helped build in life could accelerate after his passing. But first, there has to be a sponsor willing to take the gamble.

In Italy, the Coppa Italia that has been around since 1922 was rebranded as the TIM Cup, after its sponsor, Telecom Italia. For a tournament with such a long, rich history, the chances of it being referred to as Coppa Italia are still higher than Telecom Italia would like. But when a fan sees the TIM logo now, they have a far greater chance of associating the company with soccer.

If that positive association with a brand makes the fan buy the product or service, then both the league and the sponsor can be happy because the sponsorship worked as intended.  When a sponsorship is done right, everybody wins.  Some fans may disapprove of how much commercialism has been injected into the game, but even the most skeptical fans acknowledge that a little commercialism is necessary to pay for the players, the staff, the coaches, and all the moving pieces that make all sports what they have become today.

Overall, a team from MLS that wins the whole event plays an extra five games on top of their league schedule of thirty two games starting in June, and ending in September. The league games usually start at the end of March and end in late November. Instead of an All-Star break, MLS should incorporate two rounds of Open Cup action into that break, and hype up those rounds as must-see TV. The remaining three rounds could mean starting the week before the MLS season in March, and the two weeks at the end of the MLS season in November/December that way the schedule is less forced.  Taking a page out of England’s book, the final could be played in a neutral venue that bids to host the event like the Super Bowl.

In short, there are few steps needed to make the U.S. Open Cup a bigger deal.  First, get a title sponsor. The AT&T or Verizon or Geico U.S. Open Cup would be prime examples. Next, use the money from the title sponsorship agreement to offer the winning team a significant prize, not just the measly $250,000 split that teams currently win. And finally, change the timing of the whole tournament so that the games fit better into the current calendar rather than playing the games on weekdays in small college fields that are difficult to find. Slowly but surely, we just might be able to make the U.S. Open Cup the spectacle it deserves to be.

 

Empty Seats at Copa America

IMG_20160604_171457

This month, soccer is available to the average American soccer fan virtually all parts of the day with three European Cup games on in the morning and afternoon capped off by two Copa America games at night. It’s beautiful isn’t it? It makes you appreciate the ‘worldly’ aspect of the game. But does it provide too much convenience to the average fan? So much so that he or she would not get up off the couch and see a game in person?

As the first round of Copa America comes to a close tonight, and as the first round of Euro 2016 begins, a bit of an alarming trend has become apparent in the stands on this side of the pond. A significant number of seats are empty.

The story lines of the first round were not the problem. We witnessed a United States team with little expectations finish at the top of Group A. Colombia was handed a stunning 3-2 loss to Costa Rica setting up a potential matchup with a Brazil team that was even more stunned by a controversial goal at the hands of upstart Peru to be sent home after one measly round. We saw the spirited frustration of Luis Suarez as he could only watch from the sidelines as his countrymen from Uruguay would exit this tournament early as well. And of course, we saw Lionel Messi dazzle in the limelight with a hat trick despite entering the game as a second half substitute. In most of these cases, you could not ask for a better sequence of events.

The real problem could be a combination of factors. One could be the low expectations for this US team. In the past quarter century, the US has given the nation pride with spirited performances in the World Cups in South Africa and Brazil, possibly reaching a plateau with the heartfelt performance of Tim Howard against Belgium in the World Cup knockout round in 2014. But since 2014 most of the news surrounding the national team has been negative. They finished in fourth place on their home turf in the 2015 Gold Cup, a tournament they usually dominate. Small Caribbean countries like Jamaica and Haiti were no longer easy matchups; the island nations were highly competitive, sometimes even better. The US had gradually ascended into a North American juggernaut from 1990 to 2014. Suddenly, all progress appeared to be lost. But here we are in 2016, and as usual, head coach Jurgen Klinsmann has somehow lit a fire under this team again at the most unexpected moment.

Another factor could be the lack of star power. Before Brazil flamed out of the tournament in spectacular fashion, they were playing without the face of the squad, Neymar. Talented striker, and habitual opposition biter, Luis Suarez was injured or listed as injured in all three matches for Uruguay. Even Argentine sensation Lionel Messi was used as a substitute rather than a starter due to an injury he sustained before the tournament. You could call it bad timing, but without the stars to advertise, smaller nations like Panama, Haiti, and Venezuela have never been crowd pleasers. Unfortunately, Brazil and Uruguay’s eliminations in the group stages could continue to have an adverse attendance in the more meaningful knockout round matches.

A third factor could be these over-sized stadiums hosting games. The last Copa America in Chile averaged around 25,000 fans per game, and the previous Copa America in Argentina averaged just under 35,000 fans per game. After 20 games in this year’s tournament, the US average is significantly higher at just above 40,000, with some clear outliers. Despite statistically better turnouts, hosting games in 70,000 to 80,000 seat stadiums makes for a poor aesthetic.

And finally, the biggest factor could be TV coverage. Univision is reportedy averaging 2.8 million viewers per game while Fox Sports 1 is averaging just over 800,000 viewers per game. According to Nielsen Media Research, over 2 million viewers watched the US defeat Paraguay 1-0 to advance to the next round, the most watched men’s soccer match in Fox Sports One history. Yet on TV, you could see whole swathes of sections empty in the upper tiers of Lincoln Financial Field.

In all United States sporting events, going to the game has been marketed as an experience. An experience unlike sitting at home and watching on your TV. Instead of just seeing two century long rivals face off in a battle for glory, you could feel it. Live it. But at what cost?

The price of a TV subscription is relatively low compared to the price of a premium Copa America ticket. Currently on Stubhub, the cheapest ticket to the Copa America Centenario Final in East Rutherford, NJ two weeks from now is just over $300. For almost half that price, you could enjoy a month’s subscription to the cable provider of your choice with access to every game of the tournament on your TV, on your tablet, on your computer, and on your mobile phone at all times of day, alone or with friends and family in the comfortable confines of your home. With the right sound system, and with the right TV, the experience at home could be extravagant on its own. And with all the freedom available to you of watching the game anytime, anywhere, why on Earth would you trek through traffic and parking attendants to see Jamaica play Uruguay?

The organizers of this tournament have learned some unfortunate new realities about soccer in America. Just like with regular television, fans have choice now. The capacity crowds of the 1994 World Cup didn’t have a smartphone and live stream of the event in prime-time. The skeptical “wow me” fans of 2016 do. Unless Mexico plays the US in the final, the remaining tickets at MetLife Stadium have a poor chance of being sold at face value. Welcome to the new age of international soccer in America.

REFERENCES
http://www.starsandstripesfc.com/2016/6/13/11920118/usa-paraguay-copa-america-match-breaks-tv-viewing-record

Univision leading the way in Copa America TV ratings with FOX Sports trailing behind

http://www.newsy.com/videos/don-t-get-too-worried-about-attendance-at-the-copa-america/
http://www.concordmonitor.com/Copa-America-soccer-attendance-2828093

 

What does hosting Copa America mean for US?

d3af522992f5eb3500282b42a695bf4e-original

Tonight marks the commencement of the Copa America Centenario tournament, the 100th anniversary of the storied South American competition.  However, all eyes will be on the United States as for the first time ever, the tournament will be held outside the Southern Hemisphere, pitting all 10 South American international teams against 6 of CONCACAF’s finest.  While there are many articles and stories out there predicting which nation will hoist the trophy, and which stars you should watch during the largest competition held in America since the 1994 World Cup, how easy is it to predict the economic implications of this event?

Before Orlando, Florida was awarded the rights to host three group stage matches, its bidding effort launched some pretty bold estimates on how much impact just one game could have on the region.  In the presentation by the Central Florida Sports Commission last March, $30 million to $50 million in revenue were projected figures depending on actual attendance.  In many ways, Orlando has realistic data to use as a reference when conjuring these estimates  based on its history as a host city during the 1994 World Cup.  Some other projections were the possibilities of 10,000 international travelers visiting the city, as well as 40,000-45,000 room reservations for at least one night stays in local hotels.  Orlando will host games on June 4, June 6, and June 8.  Time will tell if these predictions become reality.

The host city in the Bay Area of California, Santa Clara, is currently in the epicenter of American Sports with the Golden State Warriors of basketball competing in the NBA Finals, and the San Jose Sharks of hockey competing in the Stanley Cup Finals.  Tonight, Levi’s Stadium hosts the opening match between the United States and one of the favorites, Colombia.  A reported 67,000 seats have been sold as of the morning of June 3. Considering the capacity is 70,000, local businesses should be very pleased at the turnout.  Before San Francisco was awarded its bid, it projected a $139 million economic impact on the region based on the events. With the United States playing in the stadium, that number could reasonably grow even higher depending on the result.

From a sponsorship perspective, many big brands have hopped on the bandwagon to have their names associated with Copa America Centenario.   Anheuser-Busch, Delta Airlines, Nike, Coca-Cola, and Sprint will all feature prominently in this tournament.  Soccer United Marketing and IMG reportedly guaranteed the tournament organizers a minimum of $20 million for TV and sponsorship rights.  Fox Sports paid $15 million for the privilege of English language rights, while Univision reportedly paid over $60 million for the Spanish language rights. Realistically, the TV ratings for the Spanish language viewers should be tremendous given all the star power.  This proves once again that television reigns supreme in the sports world.

In short, the influx of international soccer fans, the passion of American soccer fans and the tourism revenue that will be present over the next month will be a spectacle that even the most passive sports fan can appreciate.  Copa America is normally held every other year, so the normal schedule would dictate that after the 2015 iteration, the next tournament would not be held since 2017.  To honor 100 years of the tournament (and cash in on the marketing implications of a South American competition on U.S. soil) an exception was made for 2016.  The most amazing part of all this is that the tournament almost didn’t happen after investigators uncovered a bribery scandal involving the organizers in the first place.

In case you’re curious, I predict a Mexico victory over Argentina in the final.

 

REFERENCES

http://www.bizjournals.com/orlando/blog/2015/03/big-score-if-bid-is-successfulcopa-america-could.html

Copa America Soccer Tournament Comes To South Bay

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-04-07/anheuser-busch-delta-to-sponsor-centenario-soccer-tournament