Prfc announcement
- Thread starter Singh
- Start date
Yup, the announcement was for 10:35am. Here it is:
Phoenix Rising FC has signed a three-year agreement with @arizonasfamily becoming the official broadcast partner of the state’s only professional soccer club.
“Phoenix Rising is thrilled to announce this landmark partnership with Arizona’s Family,” said Rising’s President Bobby Dulle. “This deal makes Phoenix Rising soccer accessible to anyone in Arizona through 2025. We’re also honored to be the first sports franchise to join Arizona’s Family newest venture. We cannot wait to kick off our 2023 season at our new home in the City of Phoenix, live on Arizona’s Family.”
The deal includes the live broadcast of 28 Rising matches on Arizona’s Family new network, Arizona’s Family Sports and Entertainment on channel 44 over the air and channel 116 on Cox Cable. The station will go live for the first time on March 1 and will replay highlight matches from Phoenix Rising’s six years of action in the USL Championship regularly.
An additional five matches will be simulcast live on KTVK (Channel 3) and one match, later in the season, will be featured live on KPHO (Channel 5).
“This is an exciting time for Arizona’s Family,” said Debbie Bush, Vice President and General Manager of Arizona’s Family. “The creation of the Arizona’s Family Sports and Entertainment Network will allow us to provide viewers with exciting live sports at no additional cost to them. Arizonans love their soccer so when this opportunity presented itself, we knew it would be the perfect partnership to launch our Network.”
pitchplease
SILVER
RandomSoccerFan
GOLD
I'm not sure why they were caught off guard. ECNL clubs that have ECNL as their second team with MLS Next as their first have been strongly encouraged for 12+ months to pick one. If the ECNL teams are still dominating, an argument can be made that they are still good enough to remain - but that certainly wasn't the case here (and isn't the case in most of the clubs that had both MLS N and ECNL).
RandomSoccerFan
GOLD
Highly unlikely. It's not a good example.
pitchplease
SILVER
maybe because they had no idea. about any of that. i know quite a few of those parents who have a player there. and they are pissed off.
RandomSoccerFan
GOLD
I don't understand how you can invest thousands and thousands for travel, all of the time and energy that staying on that team requires, and not have any idea about the reality of the situation. Of course the parents can be legitimately mad that they paid for an "ECNL" team that will no longer exist - but if it's obvious to anyone on this board, it's surprising that they are so oblivious.
The problem is someone needs to get frustrated enough to sue. There's just not enough desire to do this from a bunch of soccer people. This doesn't change the fact that what ECNL is doing is illegal. It's just that nobody cares enough to fight it.
pitchplease
SILVER
ive been on this board since 2017, and have seen and experienced more than my fair share of change in the soccer landscape, girls and boys. i dont have a dog in the fight there. so personally, i feel for a few of those players, but I am not surprised. the talent pool here is so spread out and dispersed that there are literally 2 teams, 1 mls, and 1 ecnl that can actually compete in their divisions in this state. and im talking about the boys, i have no idea about the girls, dont care.
RandomSoccerFan
GOLD
You've described a very valid possible problem (not enough desire) but have also incorrectly stated what ECNL is doing is illegal. You can certainly believe whatever you want to - that doesn't change the fact that other people believe you are completely wrong. But yes - if a court were to rule that ECNL couldn't do what they are doing - that would certainly change perspectives, including mine.
ENCL or any league for that matter can include or exclude based on some type of performance metric.
What you can't do is tie two seperate products together and make it so customers can't just buy one of the products. This is what's happening. As an example say a clubs girls ecnl program was was doing very well. That same club happens to have MLS Next and ECNL (which appears to be the case here). ECNL can pull either boys or girls from the club if there's a definable metric that shows that the relationship isn't working out.. What ECNL can't do is pull both girls and boys ECNL just because a club has MLS Next.
I understand that ECNL doesn't want their boys ECNL teams to play as second teams behind MLSN. But again they can't pull ECNL boys access just because a club also has MLSN. If the clubs ECNL teams were terrible in league and ECNL had a defined set of metrics for determining what terrible means then no problem booting them.
I realize that some of this sounds weird beacause this kind of thing seems like it happens all the time. However its not right.
whatithink
GOLD
So what about the teams/clubs that are even worse than Rising. Looking at the standings for their conference (which isn't a great conference, but that's reflected elsewhere in the ENL also), their teams are (in South)
- 2011, 2nd of 6
- 2010, 4th of 6
- 2009, 6th of 6
- 2008, 3rd of 6
- 2007, 3rd of 6
- 2005/06, 1st of 6
ECNL know their boys league is second fiddle to MLSN. That's not changing.
Rising owners (of the pro team) have plenty deep pockets, so it may depend on whether they get insulted by this or are bored. They have the wherewithal to sue (if there is a case), for sure, but I doubt they will.
RandomSoccerFan
GOLD
Anyone can state that what ECNL is doing by trying to prohibit teams from having MLSN and ECNL Boys team is immoral, wrong, shortsighted, bad practice, unfair, or any other adjective of dislike they choose to use. Maybe some - or even many - people agree with them.
Anyone calling what they are doing illegal has no idea what illegal means. Everything is legal until a law states that it's illegal. Laws don't mean much, unless the defined illegal acts within have consequences, whether financial or other.
In this case - you believe that if someone were to sue, based on the above logic, a court would find that they are in fact breaking the law, and either award damages or force changed behavior. I think your prediction is very optimistic, and not very likely.
Anyone calling what they are doing illegal has no idea what illegal means. Everything is legal until a law states that it's illegal. Laws don't mean much, unless the defined illegal acts within have consequences, whether financial or other.
In this case - you believe that if someone were to sue, based on the above logic, a court would find that they are in fact breaking the law, and either award damages or force changed behavior. I think your prediction is very optimistic, and not very likely.
whatithink
GOLD
They aren't (based on the info in the screen shot) linking the boys and girls, just taking the boys. That said, if they are pointing to performance (player pool), then clubs that are worse than Rising should be chopped, as their player pools are also, by implication, not of the "standard" that ECNL boys apparently has ... I reckon there is a case that could be made.
Tying (commerce) - Wikipedia
RandomSoccerFan
GOLD
Do they have both MLS N teams and ECNL teams, or is it just that their top team is both ECNL and not very good? I don't think Rising (and De Anza, and the others) are forced out because their ECNL teams are noticeably bad compared to their peers - I think there wasn't a legitimate argument to keep them in, if they were not particular good teams. If they were dominating their ECNL bracket, it would be more questionable about the board removing them - especially if part of it was due to competitive reasons.
RandomSoccerFan
GOLD
Tying (commerce) - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
Definition of ILLEGAL
not according to or authorized by law : unlawful, illicit; also : not sanctioned by official rules (as of a game)… See the full definition
www.merriam-webster.com
You need to keep in mind that people can sue for anything they want. It doesn't mean they'll win or lose even if the law specifically states x+y=z.Definition of ILLEGAL
not according to or authorized by law : unlawful, illicit; also : not sanctioned by official rules (as of a game)… See the full definition
Optically it looks like ECNL is retaliating against Rising because Rising puts their top boys teams in MLSN and second teams in boys ECNL.
If this was to go to court all Rising would have to do is ask ECNL to produce some kind of preexisting metric for when clubs are booted from the league. We all know that ECNL can't and won't do this so they'll settle.
whatithink
GOLD
They seem to be competitive in their conference and in showcases, obv. not every age group. If ECNL are cherry picking clubs to drop, then they could have a (legal) problem if someone were inclined. The quality of teams & clubs in any age group and any "elite" league varies enormously from the top performers to the bottom performers, in both conferences and the ECNL in general. So if ECNL are hanging their hat on "competitiveness", that would be transparently wrong.
I thought ECNL had a stipulation on the boys side that you had to enter your top teams, but assumed I had that wrong as there are obvious examples, Rising being one, where that doesn't happen and is allowed by ECNL not to happen. So they couldn't hang their hat on that either.
In short, ECNL should be consistent, and they don't appear to be and that could be problematic if someone were inclined to take a run at them in court.