Over the last couple of years, the USL has firmly established itself as an integral part of the American soccer landscape. Currently boasting 33 teams (with more to join in 2019), and a national streaming deal with ESPN, times have never been better for the USL.
Even in the Valley, the difference is noticeable. Phoenix Rising bears little resemblance to its predecessor, Arizona United. Average attendances have increased five-fold. Rising’s car magnet is a familiar sight on local roads and freeways. Games are broadcast every week on TV; and the club logo proudly adorns milk bottles, pizza boxes, hot sauce, beer, and a wide range of sports merchandise.
Yet as the USL continues to grow, the American league that it supplanted as second tier continues to make its case in the courtroom, not on the field of play.
The North American Soccer League (NASL) is relatively young, first appearing on the soccer scene in 2009. Formed as a breakaway league by teams that had dropped out of USL’s top division, the divorce was messy. To facilitate the transition, the US Soccer Federation (USSF) temporarily created its own league in 2010; and the NASL gained provisional Division 2 status a year later.
What caused the split? At the time, the USL was primarily owned by Nike, who subsequently sold their stake to NuRock Soccer Holdings LLC. Several team owners were resentful of the fact that they did not control the league in which they played – a major point of difference to many sports leagues worldwide. These owners argued that the model did not serve the best interests of the league and its teams; and with many sides in serious danger, or in the process of, folding, their accusation stuck. The formation of the NASL was positioned as a way to fix the problem.
However, some teams took it further than this. For example, the New York Cosmos, who joined the NASL as an expansion team, were hardly quiet in their ambition. “We don’t look at ourselves as second division in any way,” Erick Stover, the Cosmos’ Chief Operating Officer told the New Yorker in an interview. “We’ve said from the beginning as we’ve taken over this project that we want to be at the top of the pyramid in the United States.” This stance was certainly echoed in the expansionist policies of Bill Peterson, the NASL’s Commissioner from 2012 until January 2017.
To encourage new sides to join the league, the NASL offered lower expansion fees than MLS. However, low barriers to entry are hardly a guarantee of success. Consider for example, Rayo OKC who struggled through a single season before ceasing operations with huge financial losses in 2016. Management issues and strong competition from OKC Energy in the USL also allegedly contributed to Rayo’s downfall.
Ultimately, the NASL’s challenge to the top flight of American soccer was mistimed. MLS is built on strong foundations. Just one season after the NASL first took the field, MLS games switched from the niche Fox Soccer Network to NBC Sports, and also gained more prominence on ESPN. Two years later, MLS signed an 8-year TV deal worth a reported $90 million a season. While there may have been an opportunity in the early history of MLS to fight for its crown, the NASL challenge was simply a case of too little and too late.
Meanwhile, the NASL has also been blighted with its own problems. Clubs such as the Atlanta Silverbacks, FC Edmonton and Fort Lauderdale Strikers folded. Montreal and Minnesota moved to MLS. Traffic Sports, one of the key investors in the league, was indicted in the 2015 FIFA Corruption investigation. The Cosmos, convinced that they had to splash out on older, famous names such as Raúl to remain competitive, have generated losses numbering tens of millions. A scheduling clash necessitated moving the 2016 NASL Championship Game to a small stadium, capable of holding just over 2,000 fans. By 2017, USL teams (discounting MLS reserve sides) were drawing in over 1,000 more fans per game than their NASL counterparts.
The resurgence of the USL has been the final nail in the NASL coffin. The NASL had always relied on waivers to meet MLS’ Division 2 requirement of a minimum 12 teams each year. By working with MLS, the USL has gained stability, and its rapid expansion made it a strong candidate for Division 2 status. NASL’s time has run out.
Throughout 2018, the NASL remains on hiatus. The league’s reigning champions, San Francisco Deltas, who defeated Rising in the 2017 US Open Cup, have folded. Plans for two expansion teams in California have been cancelled. All the drama today takes place off-field, as the NASL engages in legal battles with USSF to try to regain their status. The NASL today has four member clubs – Jacksonville Armada, Miami FC, New York Cosmos, and Puerto Rico FC. In April 2018, the Cosmos even attempted to force their way into the top flight, offering to invest $500 million into the sport if USSF reviews its governance and league standards, thereby paving a way to the NASL gaining Division 1 status. USSF has rejected the Cosmos’ offer; and ongoing legal delays could now put the NASL 2019 season in jeopardy. Meanwhile, the Cosmos’ ownership refuse to join the USL, believing it to be beneath them.
The NASL story should not be considered in isolation. Other minor leagues across the nation have fallen foul of their own ambition, only to ultimately realize the challenging nature of life outside the big time. Without the large TV contracts, without the big stadium deals from local government or private business, and without a strong and loyal fan base, it’s hard to run a minor league side. To make matters worse, any team showing a modicum of success is often snapped up by the top-tier, leaving the stragglers to continue to fight for scraps.
The USL’s approach has been far more successful. By engaging with MLS, it has brought in a new period of stability for the league and its growing membership. MLS today has a vested interest in the continued operation of the USL. Instead of focusing on legal battles, the USL is considering three Division 2 conferences, and will also establish its own Division 3 league in 2019.
The future for the NASL is far less promising. The original NASL (no relation to the current one) folded in 1985. What price the same fate for the four team strong NASL?