I know the following will probably get TL;DR'd but:
From the moment the club was announced as the lovechild of the gigantic brands New York Yankees and Manchester City, I've been especially curious about the conflict between commercialism (or commercialization) and pragmatism that will manifest itself with respect to the club and playing staff. What exactly does this mean?
Let me note as a sort of preface that our club, NYCFC, is in the most enviable position imaginable. We have a clean slate in terms of roster composition, which is reason enough to be optimistic. We can and indeed must capitalize on the advantages conferred on us by geography.
On the flipside, as history and what we can glean from other New York teams has shown, there is a certain amount of peril that comes with the territory of having your roots in the biggest city in the world. It all stems from pressure, in my estimation. The pressure to succeed instantly on the pitch for fear of not being able to attract the fans is almost tangible. This rigid reality is something management has to contend with from the start.
This line of thinking creates an interesting dichotomy which I will expound upon.
Let us first analyze some of the positives of being based in New York.
Our location alone allows us to enjoy the sort of flexibility most teams would kill for. This is why having a clear vision and plan of attack as it relates to the roster is paramount to the success of this club. Do we want to focus on creating a star-laden roster? Do we go for lesser-known, often younger, players from less glamorous leagues, who still have a point to prove? This is a luxury not afforded to most teams. With all due respect to the likes of Real Salt Lake, David Beckham was never going to be interested in plying his trade there. We have the option of building the squad the way we see fit, whereas most teams are forced into being almost subservient to teams such as LA Galaxy and, dare I say it, New York Red Bulls.
Our links with the deep pockets of both Manchester City and the Yankees prevent such concerns from ever cropping up. If anything, our ability to take players on loan from our "parent club" will be a big boon for us. We could easily attract players of the absolute highest quality and pay their wage packets.
Such players, and the club itself, stand to benefit tremendously from a financial perspective, if the marketing potential is properly tapped into. World class players know they could improve their brand and name recognition by playing here. The possibilities for endorsement deals and the like are virtually endless.
From the moment the club was announced as the lovechild of the gigantic brands New York Yankees and Manchester City, I've been especially curious about the conflict between commercialism (or commercialization) and pragmatism that will manifest itself with respect to the club and playing staff. What exactly does this mean?
Let me note as a sort of preface that our club, NYCFC, is in the most enviable position imaginable. We have a clean slate in terms of roster composition, which is reason enough to be optimistic. We can and indeed must capitalize on the advantages conferred on us by geography.
On the flipside, as history and what we can glean from other New York teams has shown, there is a certain amount of peril that comes with the territory of having your roots in the biggest city in the world. It all stems from pressure, in my estimation. The pressure to succeed instantly on the pitch for fear of not being able to attract the fans is almost tangible. This rigid reality is something management has to contend with from the start.
This line of thinking creates an interesting dichotomy which I will expound upon.
Let us first analyze some of the positives of being based in New York.
Our location alone allows us to enjoy the sort of flexibility most teams would kill for. This is why having a clear vision and plan of attack as it relates to the roster is paramount to the success of this club. Do we want to focus on creating a star-laden roster? Do we go for lesser-known, often younger, players from less glamorous leagues, who still have a point to prove? This is a luxury not afforded to most teams. With all due respect to the likes of Real Salt Lake, David Beckham was never going to be interested in plying his trade there. We have the option of building the squad the way we see fit, whereas most teams are forced into being almost subservient to teams such as LA Galaxy and, dare I say it, New York Red Bulls.
Our links with the deep pockets of both Manchester City and the Yankees prevent such concerns from ever cropping up. If anything, our ability to take players on loan from our "parent club" will be a big boon for us. We could easily attract players of the absolute highest quality and pay their wage packets.
Such players, and the club itself, stand to benefit tremendously from a financial perspective, if the marketing potential is properly tapped into. World class players know they could improve their brand and name recognition by playing here. The possibilities for endorsement deals and the like are virtually endless.