Soccer: How about owning your own club?

[DonkeyKongSr]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I just signed up. However, they aren't asking for the money until the team is taken over. I hate soccer, but whatever, this is an exact business idea I've seriously considered before (except I was thinking of other sports), so I'll support these guys and see how it goes before I even begin to go through the process of getting something like this going in the US.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I was going to include in my original post about baseball truly being the only sport that I could see this work. I don't envision soccer as being the proper sport but I do wish this club well.

Obviously, purchasing an MLB club would be out of the question due to not only the cost but due to the current owner's deciding whether someone can purchase a club or not. See Mark Cuban.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, that was always my biggest hurdle when thinking about this. I was almost thinking to start with a minor league team (for whatever sport) and then by running that great for a few years, the pro league could give consideration to a group of random internet investors.

Really, community owned pro teams aren't a novel concept in the US: the Green Bay Packers are community owned. However, that's a special situation that was created long ago.

Actually, I'm thinking maybe the AFL could use the publicity of such a stunt, and the team would be affordable to run. It would help to at least have a team that would have some national coverage to appease all the investors, so AFL>Minor League Baseball.

[mason55]

[ QUOTE ]
Actually, I'm thinking maybe the AFL could use the publicity of such a stunt, and the team would be affordable to run. It would help to at least have a team that would have national coverage to appease all the investors, so AFL>Minor League Baseball.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure American Football really lends itself well to this at all though.

I mean, you really think you're going to get any worthwhile input from the masses on your depth chart at right tackle?

[mason55]

Thinking this more I think hockey would be best to do this with in the US.

The fans tend to be the most knowledgeable. There's only 3 positions to worry about. Talent is easily evaluated.

[reo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Actually, I'm thinking maybe the AFL could use the publicity of such a stunt, and the team would be affordable to run. It would help to at least have a team that would have national coverage to appease all the investors, so AFL>Minor League Baseball.

[/ QUOTE ]

I mean, you really think you're going to get any worthwhile input from the masses on your depth chart at right tackle?

[/ QUOTE ]

That's why I felt baseball would be better suited since statistics are widely available and could be used to determine the value of a player. Only defense comes to question, although I'm not sure if any tool regarding it has been recently released.

Also, managing a game could be done by computer but the "manager" could instill what we typically hear called "chemistry." See Joe Torre. I'm sure I'll get heat for this idea (computer managing).

Regarding the AFL suggestion, Mason, I think he was referring to just a takeover of a team. Obviously, investor input regarding on-field management when it comes to football wouldn't be wise.

[mason55]

[ QUOTE ]
Also, managing a game could be done by computer but the "manager" could instill what we typically hear called "chemistry." See Joe Torre. I'm sure I'll get heat for this idea (computer managing).

[/ QUOTE ]

A minor league team did it last year actually.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseb...-leagues_x.htm

[ThaSaltCracka]

this is pretty neat actually. Seems kinda silly too. Wonder how Nick Hornsby feels about Cambridge U being bought by a bunch of yahoos.

[MicroBob]

[ QUOTE ]

Really, community owned pro teams aren't a novel concept in the US: the Green Bay Packers are community owned. However, that's a special situation that was created long ago.

[/ QUOTE ]


They don't really do that much in terms of influencing team decisions though.

[MicroBob]

From the article mason55 linked:

""It wasn't something I was thrilled about because the concept of it, just 'You (fans) be the manager' is not exactly what you're shooting for," he says, with a little grin.

On the second day of the voting, fans put his center fielder at first base (where he hadn't played in four years), his backup catcher at third base and his productive first baseman on the bench.

"Unmitigated disaster," McCauley calls it. The producers have since tweaked the online voting site to give the fans more information, including the manager's pick for each position that day, and the results have been better.

"We've had our tough times with this, definitely," says veteran outfielder Eric Cole, who was shifted to first in the now-infamous ballot. "We just don't want it to turn into a mockery of the game. ... (but) it really hasn't been that bad as of late."

Cole, a 12th-year minor league veteran who made it as high as Class AAA with the Astros organization, says players' friends and family members are voting constantly to counterbalance uninformed fans."


Such voting would generally be a disaster for a baseball or football team.
Especially if it was interactive within the game on things such as "should he steal now? should he bunt now? which reliever to bring in?"

You could only do this in the independent minor-leagues btw.

There is absolutely no way this can be done with an affiliated minor-league team. Everything is far too structured by the organization and it's the parent club that decides which players are going to be prioritized. They are trying to develop players.

I also think this idea would be terrible at football.
And probably would suck at hockey too.

The number of people out there who have never played the game or even been on the field before who think they know as much or more than an experienced minor-league baseball manager is really pathetic.

It's not even close. The vast majority of the fans would vote terribly.
The top 20% of intelligent fans who have some clue would still be pretty lousy.
The top 1% of knowledgeable fans MIGHT have a chance to not completely screw it up with the worst decisions ever.

[LionelHutz00]

Sounds like the Green Bay Packers, except that the Packers shareholders elect a board of directors, who hire a GM, who makes the personnel decisions.

[Shadowrun]

C'mon how much worse will fans do then the amazing, skilled, management/coaches at teams like Tampa Bay Devil Rays. At least this interaction gets fans into it.