Major League Soccer 2011 Attendance - By the Percents
Since the 2011 Major League Soccer season ended and the final attendance numbers were released, there has been a bit of excitement from MLS fans. It's excitement well deserved as we've finally broken the 1996 Attendance record as well as shattered the number of people attending games during the season by almost a million and a half fans. These are some great numbers, awesome accomplishments and even more growth from MLS that likely nobody was expecting to see even as recently as five years ago.
There's been a bit of an overzealous boasting from MLS fans about how much better the league has been doing overall than other leagues in America like the NBA and NHL, unfortunately. The stat I heard most often was how MLS's average attendance was 17921 to the NBA's 17318, a stat that I used myself at one point after the numbers were released just because it's cool to look at and a fun talking point for our still growing league. Unfortunately, looking a bit closer at the numbers makes it look a bit less impressive.
The Seattle Sounders 30,000+ per game gives MLS an already unfair advantage since no NBA team can hold more than 21,000 in their stadium. Though the San Jose Earthquakes skew it in the other direction a bit with a maximum of only 11,000 or so, it still doesn't work quite as well as we'd hope. Removing both of the outliers in the situation to give it a more even playing field in attendance sizes gives MLS a 16,794 average. Still not what I'd call a bad clip, but it's nothing to write home about and certainly wouldn't have been noteworthy for breaking any records. That number being smaller than the NBA's average attendance doesn't help the case much either.
It was pointed out to me during a discussion on those numbers that perhaps it would be a better idea to instead of looking at the raw numbers in attendance to look at the percentage numbers; in other words, what percent of the stadium was filled for each team each game. The first thing to check was the NBA's and NHL's percentages in that regard. Unsurprisingly, the two lower tiered members of the 'big four' in American sports had quite impressive attendances, especially coming off of what were considered fantastic overall seasons in both leagues.
The NBA was able to fill 90% of the seats in the league during the season with their lowest number coming from the Indiana Pacers with a mediocre 74%. The NHL actually outpaced the NBA - bet you didn't know that! - with 92% of the seats in the league filled at all times thanks mostly to a higher rate of teams selling out every game near the top of the attendance table. The NHL's lowest attendance was significantly lower than the NBA's with the Islanders managing only a paltry 67%.
So the numbers to beat are in place, 92 and 90. Unfortunately, there are obvious problems with MLS's calculations in this particular statistic which will become quite apparent in the chart down there if you haven't already figured them out. So here's what the averages look like for the 2011 MLS season. They were mostly useful for determining what the maximum size for non SSS's was.
| TEAM NAME | ATTENDANCE | STADIUM CAPACITY | TOTAL % |
| Seattle Sounders | 38,496 | 35,700 | 108 |
| Los Angeles Galaxy | 22,484 | 27,000 | 86 |
| Vancouver Whitecaps | 20,412 | 22,000 | 92 |
| Toronto FC | 20,267 | 21,800 | 93 |
| New York Red Bulls | 19,691 | 25,189 | 78 |
| Portland Timbers | 18,227 | 18,627 | 101 |
| Philadelphia Union | 18,258 | 18,500 | 98 |
| Sporting Kansas City | 18,749 | 18,467 | 96 |
| Houston Dynamo* | 17,694 | 32,000 | 59 |
| Real Salt Lake | 17,594 | 20,008 | 88 |
| DC United* | 16,046 | 46,000 | 32 |
| Colorado Rapids | 14,838 | 18,086 | 82 |
| Chivas USA* | 14,830 | 27,000 | 54 |
| Chicago Fire | 14,273 | 20,000 | 71 |
| New England Revolution* | 13,222 | 22,385 | 59 |
| FC Dallas | 12,861 | 21,193 | 60 |
| Columbus Crew | 12,185 | 20,455 | 59 |
| San Jose Earthquakes | 11,858 | 10,300 | 115 |
The final numbers say that 79.5% of the seats are filled for MLS all told. The biggest advantage that the other leagues have - other than 50 year head starts getting fanbases obviously - are that each team in the NBA and NHL all have stadiums specifically made for their sports. DC United's 32% total destroys MLS in this since they play in the cavernous RFK Stadium. Houston playing in Robertson isn't helping either and though New England do stifle ticket sales a little bit so not all of Gillette Stadium is open, they still can barely fill half of what they've got. It also goes to show the reason why I've been saying for years that Chivas USA should get their own stadium, perhaps a cozy little 16,000 seater, so they don't have to be in the wide open Home Depot Center. That stadium was clearly built for a team with a much larger fanbase like the Galaxy.
So MLS teams have an unfair handicap in this just like the NBA/NHL did in the original numbers up top. What happens when the playing field is leveled? Simply removing DC United from the equation boosts MLS to 82%. Removing the rest of the teams that aren't Seattle and San Jose who don't have SSS's, and this does include Chivas in my eyes, boosts the league all the way to 85%.
So who's really pulling the weight here? Teams like Colorado and Salt Lake who continue to improve attendance every year are keeping the trends going higher while the insertion of Portland and Vancouver into the league this season almost certainly made the numbers better than they would have been last season. Hilariously, giving San Jose a real Earthquakes only stadium would probably decrease their league leading % numbers. The problem children seem to be Columbus - whose attendance sunk horrifically early in the year after half their team got sold after last season - and Dallas, a perennial attendance stinker. Strangely, if those two teams didn't play in such large older SSS's it wouldn't be nearly as much of a problem.
With the level playing fields in both situations, MLS is losing slightly in both average attendance (after removing Seattle and San Jose) and the % numbers (removing the teams who are playing in stadiums far too large for their purposes). However, the discrepancy's numbers are small. 85% of the seats or even the original 79% of the seats is really nothing to sneeze at for a league that supposedly nobody in this country cares about.
These numbers are certainly going to continue an upward trend next season as Houston move from Robertson to a smaller venue and Montreal Impact enter the league with another MLS-hungry Canadian fanbase. Again, we must remember that our home league is a mere 16 years old and has plenty of years to continue growth. While we're still sitting underneath the other leagues in this country in attendance, the catching up that we've seen has been fantastic.
How fantastic? Well, let me make a bold but surprisingly possible statement.
I'm willing to bet that by year 20 of MLS, every team will have a Soccer Specific Stadium and that we will see attendance numbers higher than both of the other leagues in both raw and percent based data. Combine that with the almost certain addition of the 20th MLS franchise by that point and we're looking from a country with a big four going to a country with a big five. Will I say that MLS will be the 3rd most attended league in the country and hold that? Perhaps not, but I will most definitely say it is a possibility.
Our 'level playing field' final numbers once again are MLS 85%, NBA 90%, NHL 92%. If you'd told me 10 years ago that we'd be seeing that, I would have eaten my hat, vomited it up and eaten it again. One more cheer for us, the fans of MLS who have set a record and have made some numbers that could make a league 50 years older than ours look at and cringe.
By the way, Major League Baseball? 69% total attendance last season. So walk tall MLS, at least you're beating somebody!
11 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
skewing the averages
so I am interested in the ones over 100%
I get there was be standing room only seats because DSGP has that option but 15% more people attending then seats? In San Jose thats an average of 1500 people standing? How is this possible?
At least with Seattle I understand because their last game they opened the entire stadium and I heard there were like 60,000 People in attendance and even for one game that is sure to skew the numbers.
It’s fairly easy to fit 1000 more people into Buck Shaw stadium – seated or otherwise – since there’s a completely empty side on it with no bleachers installed or anything. San Jose just happened to announce a stadium capacity of 10,300 and then stick far more people in there every week. It happens in the NBA and NHL as well, mostly at United Center in Chicago where the Bulls have a 104% attendance and the Blackhawks have a 108%.
2011 Colorado Avalanche - Not yet mathematically eliminated from the playoffs.
The 2011 Buffalo Bills - Not going 0-16 this year
Burgundy Wave - SBnation's home for the Colorado Rapids
Crystal Palace FC - Oh wait, we're winning games this year? That wasn't on the schedule until 2016!
by UZ on Oct 25, 2011 3:59 PM MDT up reply actions
And at least a few times they did indeed add more straight up seats to the stadium in San Jose at the other end.
2011 Colorado Avalanche - Not yet mathematically eliminated from the playoffs.
The 2011 Buffalo Bills - Not going 0-16 this year
Burgundy Wave - SBnation's home for the Colorado Rapids
Crystal Palace FC - Oh wait, we're winning games this year? That wasn't on the schedule until 2016!
by UZ on Oct 25, 2011 4:00 PM MDT up reply actions
Actually, I don’t know. If they did, that would explain that number a little more.
2011 Colorado Avalanche - Not yet mathematically eliminated from the playoffs.
The 2011 Buffalo Bills - Not going 0-16 this year
Burgundy Wave - SBnation's home for the Colorado Rapids
Crystal Palace FC - Oh wait, we're winning games this year? That wasn't on the schedule until 2016!
by UZ on Oct 25, 2011 6:15 PM MDT up reply actions
Yes, San Jose played in front of 40,000 at Stanford Stadium.
I built that into my capacity calculations and came up with 93.8 for San Jose’s season.
That bumps the original MLS number down to 78%. Still not what I’d call bad. Again, these numbers will never really be fair until every MLS team has their own stadium where they play every game.
2011 Colorado Avalanche - Not yet mathematically eliminated from the playoffs.
The 2011 Buffalo Bills - Not going 0-16 this year
Burgundy Wave - SBnation's home for the Colorado Rapids
Crystal Palace FC - Oh wait, we're winning games this year? That wasn't on the schedule until 2016!
Nice write up
Growth is still the name of the game. I really hope teams like Columbus, FC Dallas, and the Revolution will eventually get their act together. At least with the Rapids I get the sense that the numbers are going to keep going up, and I expect next years attendance to be even higher than this year. I went with several friends to to DSP this year and most of them were at best moderate soccer fans. Afterward, though, all of them talked about how much fun it was and how nice the atmosphere/stadium was.
I think MLS is going to hit a critical mass at some point, where people will start seeing enough interest and fan base to start taking more interest. When games are televised next year on NBC Sports, perhaps seeing the amazing fanbases like in Portland and Seattle will really get people going that MLS is slow but surely becoming the real deal
Year 20 is going to be the milestone year for me. If the growth has stalled by that point from where we are now, I’ll be worried about MLS’s growth for the future at that point. But again, it’ll need to wait until every team has their own stadium for any real analysis.
2011 Colorado Avalanche - Not yet mathematically eliminated from the playoffs.
The 2011 Buffalo Bills - Not going 0-16 this year
Burgundy Wave - SBnation's home for the Colorado Rapids
Crystal Palace FC - Oh wait, we're winning games this year? That wasn't on the schedule until 2016!
by UZ on Oct 27, 2011 3:03 AM MDT up reply actions
Comparing league attendance
I really enjoyed reading your article, thank you for writing it. It is good to see that the MLS is continually improving in attendance. Do you have any idea if the teams are profitable. That will go a long way in determining if the league will be around for the long term.
I think it is difficult to compare different leagues. UZ, you brought up some of the points already. I think there are a few more though when considering a comparison of leagues.
1. The NHL and the NBA each have roughly 40 home games a year while the MLS has about 20. I don’t know if each of the MLS teams would continue to have the same average if you doubled the number of home games.
2. The NHL, MLB and NBA all have lots of games during the week. I don’t think the MLS has quite as many as they do. I suspect the day of the game might affect attendance a little bit.
3. The ticket prices I don’t think are comparable either. Who wants to pay $100-300 a game for the best seats at an NHL or NBA? It looks like some people do, but if there are going to be open seats it would seem like they’d be there. The MLS I don’t think has any seats in this price range and I don’t know if people would pay that amount for a ticket either. I don’t have the money to pay for those tickets in any league. So for me it doesn’t matter. I was even shocked to see that there were tickets in the $50 range at RFK for the United.
I have been to home games at three MLS stadiums. RFK, Soldier field (when Chicago played there) and Crew stadium. Other than the RFK game, all the games I attended were more than 10 years ago. It sucks not living in a city with real soccer for the better part of the last 12 years. The atmosphere in Chicago was amazing. I saw most of their games their first year in the league. The fans were loud and were really into the game. Ii saw the same atmosphere at the game I went to in DC this summer. In Columbus, I remember the fans being a lot quieter and the atmosphere was a lot different. It might not attract the casual fan as much to the games in Columbus as was the case in either of the other two stadiums I have been to. I think the atmosphere goes a long way to how a casual fan enjoys the game. In Columbus, the stadium is not in a great location either. It is fairly close to downtown and on the Ohio fairgrounds. There is not much to do that is really close to the fairgrounds unless it is at the same time as the fair.
UZ, I found your site form the Buffalo Rumblings site. I have visited before a long time ago because of your link. It seems like a great site. I would love to watch the game tonight, but I am out of the country and I don’t think it’ll be on tv here.
Most of the teams have been kept profitable simply because of the salary cap making it so teams can’t go and spend money they don’t have like you see so often in Europe. Teams having their own stadiums is helping immensely because they own the grounds now and don’t have to make accommodations to make soccer fit.
And on the point of watching tonight’s match, there will actually be a livestream of the game on MLSsoccer.com if you need to see it. Thanks for commenting, good to see my incessant posting on BR is doing some good :P
2011 Colorado Avalanche - Not yet mathematically eliminated from the playoffs.
The 2011 Buffalo Bills - Not going 0-16 this year
Burgundy Wave - SBnation's home for the Colorado Rapids
Crystal Palace FC - Oh wait, we're winning games this year? That wasn't on the schedule until 2016!
by UZ on Oct 27, 2011 5:17 PM MDT up reply actions















