Figo, anyone?
November 15 - 2006
Today, La Opinion is reporting that Luis Figo is set to sign a 5-year deal with Red Bull New York worth $20million dollars. The deal would be permissible under the Designated Player Rule.
If anyone can explain to us how a $20million splash on a single player is a good idea for an MLS club, have at it. Will Figo put $20million worth of asses in seats? Will $20million in Red Bull be sold because Luis Figo wears the shirt? Will Figo bring $20million worth of titles to New York?
And listen up, Don Garber. Why, in God’s name, would you not allow a team to diffuse $20 million throughout an entire roster? Can you imagine how much improvement an MLS club could get for that kind of money? Why must you continue to dictate how owners spend their money?
Paying attention to the MLS is maddening. Currently, our frustration levels are so high, there’s only one thing for it: a Swiss puppet-show featuring Sepp Blatter in which two puppets are red-carded by God for boning. It makes about as much sense.
I stopped paying attention to the MLS when…well, when the following things happened.
1) Jay Heaps is a starter in a league where Leighton O’Brien was NOT good enough.
2) Dave Sarachan is a coach.
3) Craig Waibel is a starter. Nice guy, shitty soccer player.
4) Shootout from 35 yards was deciding games.
5) Brandon Prideaux is a starter. Again, nice guy but shitty player.
6) Chris Albright went from forward, to midfielder, to right back…how is that possible? I thought that only happened in womens soccer ie. Brandi Chastain.
7) Lorrie Fair was an on field commentator followed by Heather Mitts.
9) Did I mention Jay Heaps?
Should I continue???
Comment by LG — November 15, 2006 @ 9:16 pm
Re: Number 7
It could have been worse, LG. Michelle Akers.
Comment by Nordy — November 15, 2006 @ 11:00 pm
Oh shit! Nordy dropped the Akers bomb!
Comment by garth — November 15, 2006 @ 11:19 pm
Some quick analysis on the economics of paying Figo $4mm per year:
Divided by 15 home games, Figo would have to generate an extra $267,000 per game for RBNY to break even. If you assume that each person pays about $30, RBNY would have to bring in an extra 8,900 fans per game. Not too likely.
Obviously though, this is an over-simplification. He’d put some butts in the seats for away games. If the league were footing the bill for Figo’s contract, Figo would have to bring in an additional 4,500 fans per game. Again, I don’t think that’s too likely.
He’d also generate some shirt sales, added TV viewers, he’d maybe help sell more Red Bull and Adidas. MLS could maybe demand some more from sponsors. Who knows.
After all that…MAYBE you could come closs to convincing yourself that Figo would be worth $4mm per year. I’d be pretty doubtful.
Does NY have a big Portuguese population? I think he’d be better in NE, where the team could draw on the huge Portugese population in Fall River/New Bedford.
Comment by Nordy — November 15, 2006 @ 11:28 pm
As much as this bit of MLS bizness makes me want to kill myself, I did also notice that the MLS will be requiring teams to setup youth academies, and teams can then sign their academy players without putting them in the draft. This is a good thing. Paying old footballers vast amounts of cash to kick back is probably not so good.
That said, Figo can still play, but we’ll see how much of a positive impact one overpaid player on each team can have on overall quality of play. We want to watch good soccer Garber, not read People magazine, football edition.
Comment by jobicoppola — November 16, 2006 @ 1:12 am
Garth, I’ve been thinking a lot about a point you make in your post: “Can you imagine how much improvement an MLS club could get for that kind of money?”
For me, this is the strongest argument against signing players like Figo or Beckham.
BUT, history tells us that a rise in the standard of play will not translate to additional attendance. The standard of play has gotten a lot better since 96, yet attendance is flat or down. The league could spend Figo-cash to hold on to guys like Jacqua, Aiden Brown, or any number of decent-but-unexciting players who have left for Denmark or Sweden. It would help increase the standard of play, and satisfy soccer nerds like us. But it won’t put more butts in the seats, or get more people to tune in.
Comment by Nordy — November 16, 2006 @ 12:59 pm
Bringing Figo to the States…didn’t they make that mistake a few years back…Yep, in the form of Lothar Matthaus. This league fuck’in baffles me. Bringing in expensive talent to play along side crapy players makes about as much sense as ordering the lobster tail to go along side my Fritos and Mountain Dew. New York’s sponsor is of course Red Bull. You try to make logical decisions juiced-up on that crap.
Comment by hose B — November 16, 2006 @ 1:35 pm
hose B, it all depends on the player who is brought in. Does the player still have any desire? Clearly, Lothar was a disaster. But it was a formula that worked well with Hristo Stoichkov, and Peter Novak.
If I were a betting man, I’d put Figo in the Lothar category. I don’t see him embracing a role as a mentor and bringing a lot of fire and intensity. But that doesn’t mean the MLS should never sign expensive older players again.
Comment by Nordy — November 16, 2006 @ 3:59 pm
hose B: I believe that’s on the menu at Red Lobster. “Nascar surf and turf,” I think it’s called.
Nordy: Excellent examples, but can we get a price check on those two?
Comment by garth — November 16, 2006 @ 7:57 pm
gandon
Comment by sarah — February 17, 2007 @ 12:17 pm