Kartik Notebook Part 2: Where does the USL Super League stand? League and team updates yield some concerns; A commentary on NWSL
August is getting closer and we should all be getting more nervous about how this launch might go
In February, the USL Super League (USL S) was granted Division One sanctioning on the women’s side by the US Soccer Federation. In theory, this places USL S in the same bracket as NWSL, but let’s be serious. The comparison is simply a superficial one allowed under the flawed USSF Pro League Standards (PLS).
While USL is having success on the men’s side in fending off MLS Next Pro (contrary to my expectations, my feeling that MLS NP might just devour USL in a few years time ) the women’s side is increasingly of concern. Tampa Bay Sun stand out as a side with a vision and are on a true D1 path, and I have a lot of faith in the ownership groups in Spokane and Lexington.
The USL Super League should be an essentially part of what is a growing ecosystem of pro and amateur clubs on the women’s side. Besides, I have a plethora of criticisms of NWSL that I hope USL S in time can address and do better. I get into these issues, which are numerous in my mind below the reporting on the league and clubs.
At the USL HQ/league level
Amanda Vandervort is someone I think extremely highly of, but her constant interviews at this point aren’t helping in my opinion because they’re short on specifics and long on fluff- which become more problematic as we get closer to August. The rhetoric sounds great but if I were in USL HQ or a club owner I would be increasingly concerned that
League wide, we’ve seen a lack of player signings.
We don’t have a schedule for the league yet. Or even home openers. Or even a date for openers.
We have no real discussion of structure and connections to the USL’s established W League that have happened publicly. Worse yet, my private conversations have yielded confusion about this topic.
USL has from what I understand made a decision NOT to host a combine which I think is a mistake for a new league. While some sides like Tampa Bay and Lexington have identified an extensive list of available player targets, my understanding is most clubs are not there yet.
I have assumed the majority of players in this league in year one will come from recently graduated college players, the USL W-League or WPSL. But the timeline is tight for the later two. Let’s say USL W-League playoff teams are filled with players that USL S League teams want. They may not get these players until early August for a presumed mid to late August start of season. That’s not ideal.
Now club issues…
Loudoun United’s ownership is less committed to launching the women’s DC / DMV entry than previously reported. Loudoun’s ownership much like that of Phoenix Rising are annoyed by the delays in getting sanctioning and quick turnaround to launch the league. This probably leaves DC United, the same club that still hasn’t launched an MLS Next Pro club (the only MLS team not to do so) in charge of the new club launch.
The Dallas/Fort Worth team has appeared to settle on a good local name- Trinity. H/T to Derek Reese for finding that information. But otherwise details about the club are minimal. Yes the owners are wealthy, and maybe they can sell sponsorship’s quickly, but my guess is it would be very difficult.
As someone who has worked at the lower division men’s level in the US extensively the idea of formally launching a club, securing a venue and selling tickets as well as sponsorship as quickly as these USL S clubs are trying to do so, is pretty unrealistic. I get that the D1 sanction helps with sales, but still that doesn’t overcome trying to do a 15-21 month job in 3-5 months.
I understand the stadium project in Fort Lauderdale is behind schedule which likely means that club will have to play away from home for several weeks to start the season. This obviously isn’t the end of the world and we see it every now and again with new teams - Carolina Core in MLS Next Pro this season for instance. But still, for a league that hasn’t released a schedule yet, I assume this creates an added complication.
Is Brooklyn actually focused on the women’s launch at the same time as they are starting a USL Championship team on the men’s side? My conversations have sounded like the women’s team is a secondary thought.
The Carolina Ascent do have a plan in place to sign players and build a squad but it’s heavily dependent on local players and feel pretty tight in terms of timelines. It’s not a bad plan, but executing it from mid-April to early-July (when I assume training will start) is very tough.
The obvious travel issue for Spokane with Phoenix and Tucson both being out for year one at the very least also has me extremely concerned if revenue doesn’t flow into these clubs quickly.
THE BROADER PICTURE - USL Super League v NWSL
We need the USL Super League to be successful and maybe given time and resources it will thrive. But the launch is being rushed and the initial impression of the league is likely to fall well short of the D1 standard established by NWSL. However, it MUST be remembered that NWSL has the market advantage they do because US Soccer not only subsidized them for years but managed the league’s operations (arguably starving the rest of the game of resources as a result). NWSL has seldom shown interest in proper youth development or grassroots initiatives which is among the reasons I personally believe the USL Super League is needed.
Another reason is the USL Super League is going to have the sort of integration and connectivity to the growing European club game that NWSL not only lacks, but in many cases has arrogantly and snobbishly rejected.
Factor in that NWSL as an entity has not been held accountable for its scandals (which should have seen the league shutdown in my opinion and replaced by something cleansed of those administrators that created an unsafe working environment for women, perhaps replaced by a USL-led entity), we do need USL to badly make this work.
It is my personal view or bias if you will, but to me NWSL is one of the worst entities in professional football anywhere in the world. You do get second chances and should, but to me the scandals were so egregious and the cover up so extensive, it will never sit well with me.
Sure the league is now generating some huge sponsorship and TV deals as well as seeing clubs sold for crazy amounts of money. To many that justifies sticking with NWSL. To me it does not - nothing in my view will cleanse the league of what from my vantage point was one of the biggest sports scandals of my adult life.
All of this is why my broader is view is USL has to get this right and this clunky start isn’t helping matters - not just for USL as a corporate entity but for the game on the women’s side in general.
I agree with a lot of what you're saying here, but I will also take a contrarian view. What will help and accelerate getting USLS off the ground is that it's not a men's league.
There's an abundance of untapped women's talent available, even if it's being pulled together on short notice. The supply far outstrips the demand in this case.
The wms game is much, much cheaper to operate. Look at the news regarding Clark signing with WNBA, as it relates to salary. This may be a D1 league, but most NWSL players make D3 money, with a few making decent momey. Still, nothing like MLS pay.
Sponsors will climb over each other to support this league, in my opinion. There's more equity in supporting a women's league at the ground floor than there is for supporting good, established men's leagues and clubs in the US. It's just good optics.
Will it be perfect? Not even close. But most of these clubs will have ties to existing men's organizations. Thar helps cut down on the learning curve for operating the business. The most obvious challenge is Brooklyn. Trying to do way too much, too fast, without the infrastructure.
Good summary and update! One option may be for the USL Super League to have a truncated season --more of an exhibition, really-- like what happened during the pandemic times.... At this early stage, it's more to establish a "bridgehead" than to achieve fiscal neutrality.