Major League Cricket: A Cash Grab which won't move the needle of the US sports market
With Major League Cricket announcing team names and their draft lots of optimism abounds but it won't move the needle in the US sports market
The US likes to be number 1. It’s sports like to be the centre of attention. That’s why New York can play Boston and then be declared World Champions. Major League cricket is more like a Minor League even if the branding says otherwise.
The US could be in the unique position to impact the global cricketing landscape due to the population of 332 million people and the World’s largest GDP of 23.32 Trillion Dollars. But instead USA Cricket has sold itself and it’s soul to the Indian franchise owners for short term gain.
Take the team names. Mumbai Indians New York is a sure-fire way to have no-one from New York ever care about them. They don’t want to be an offshoot, They want to be front and centre as all areas and regions want to be. There is also the issue of an American team being called Indians with the historical connotations and while the issue in itself is complicated and changes on which group of people you ask within New York itself it is very much a taboo word even if it refers to India and its people. The rest of the names are corny but they are at least unique (except for Los Angeles Knight Riders).
A main issue is that it doesn’t help promote the game in the US. It is locked behind Willow TV (who helped found the competition so that isn’t changing) which has only 4 million subscribers across North America so 1.2% of the population of the US or 0.8% of the population of North America. They also carry very little else so there is a lack of passive discovery of the sport available as you have to already like cricket to purchase Willow TV. The main hitter will be matchday attendance and I’m expecting less than 5000 fans at most of the games due to the unknown quantity of the sport.
This should have been a great chance to grow the sport if the focus was on the long term sustainability and growth of the sport. USA Cricket should have started by trying to have a competition on a major network to help increase passive discovery of the sport even if these were just regional competitions or their own Minor League Cricket but it all being through Willow means there is no discovery.
Also for a nation so vast having only 6 teams is very poor. The other sports in the country look for at least 30 teams and keep adding more so they can cover the vast distances available and while this might be a pipedream having 12 teams into an Eastern and a Western conference to cover more of the population and reduce travel distances and expenses would have been good. They have basically a free spot only competing with the English Domestic Structure but they have failed to take advantage of it by limiting opportunities too much and failing to attract investors from the Mid-Level to the Top of the American Financial structure.
The domestic talent cupboard is very very bare with aging players from the West Indies present after they have qualified for the USA. It appears that the quality will be low and attendances even lower for a cash-grab of a league instead of a genuine attempt to grow the game.
They have already had the wrong city shown in an announcement video so it’s started as it means to go on.
What could have been done instead then?
Well I would first point to trying to implement a domestic structure across the entire nation which gives a pathway for players to rise through from a local level all the way to a national level.
I would have this focus on the contiguous 48 as Hawaii is too far away currently too far away and Alaska is both too far away and has a really small population.
Having 5 divisions of 9 or 10 teams to make up the 48. All regional based as well to minimise travelling costs as much as possible. With maybe 1 Overseas player which can come from a centrally funded draft. This would give 48 Overseas Players while the current system also gives Overseas Players. As they are spread out you would need to try and find more sponsors but the location variance should give enough different businesses a chance to sponsor teams.
I would have the conferences as follows:
1: California, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Nevada, Utah, Arizona, Montana, New Mexico
2: Texas, Oklahoma, Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Wyoming, Missouri
3: Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, West Virginia, Pennsylvania
4: Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Tennessee, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia
5: Maryland, Delaware, New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine
1 is a Western/Mountain conference and is really the only way these states could play. it is also only 9 teams so if you can get Hawaii later it could join this one.
2 is a Midwest Conference focussing on the Population centres hence Missouri also being in their due to Kansas City being split and St Louis being a bit away from any Indiana population centre.
3 is a Northern and the Great Lakes area with lots of people closer together and Pennsylvania having Pittsburgh meaning that balancing the North Eastern States means Philadelphia gets canned.
4 is the Southern States. They are close to each other and those of the similar Longitudes further North have more states so can have 2 conferences
5 is the North-East. A lot easier to travel through with their proximity and their closeness.
Washington DC is ignored as I don’t think their is physically space for a Cricket Ground in the District of Columbia.
There is such a lack of recognition or talent in the US that a jump to a top franchise league without the backing of those with gigantic wealth the league will not move the needle on the national scale. Focussing on lots of local regions where they can drive participation from a young age as well as foster existing rivalries to drive engagement should be done.
For each state team there should be a split between 40% of voting rights for members (to become a member you must be born in or currently reside in a state), 30% private backing and 30% from the State Government to help balance grassroots engagement, Having enough funding to compete and always having the interests of the entire state at heart.
Below that level would be within the remit of a State’s own board as they should be looking to produce talent for themselves.