Dundee to play Celtic in the US.

[Deefiant]

Imagine if this game was on or around St Patricks day in a city like Boston or Philadelphia.

That would sound like a slightly better plan wouldn't it

[Nakamura]

One of the factors behind it seems to be the idea that a Scottish Premiership game will be more sellable to locals than a friendly. Is that actually likely?

I think the "first official Euro football game in the US" story would get some free publicity, which a Celtic / Dundee friendly would never get.

Most Americans probably wouldn't know what is Dundee, except some might think of Major Dundee from a western movie. But if it's presented as something very unique, plus there's a (somewhat) known Celtic club, it could work.

Still seems risky, though. There's a marketing angle, but it's not a sure thing to be a big hit, and it's going to be costly.

[Deeboy]

Ho! You cùnt.

[Nakamura]

Hasn't got the MLS several teams that are better than both Dundee and Celtic these days?

I also doubt whether the Irish contingents in Boston are still interested in Celtic or have switched their allegiance to the EPL and Barca/Real Madrid, as has basically the entire global audience of football (including the Irish in Ireland).

If you really want to try this out, create a community shield match between champion and cup winner and play that one abroad, like the French and Italians.

That's a cool idea about the shield.

I think a typical Scottish team is still better than a typical MLS team, and Celtic is considerably ahead, as much as it struggles lately. But yeah, it's not like Americans don't have high quality football on cable TV and can't tell good football from bad. I think some portion won't think that Dundee/Celtic football standard is worth their money.

[SilverWolfe]

You can't see the harm in sending Scottish league matches away to places that there might be a bit more money involved for the club but the average paying fan will be completely unable to attend?

I can certainly understand the point but is it really that bad that 5,000 Dundee fans miss out on one match to allow their club to try something different that "might" bring them more money which could help improve their team?

If an NFL team can disregard 70,000 average paying fans to send their team to London to try something different then i'm sure Dundee's 5,000 fans can cope.

I don't know if it will be a success or not but i'm all for it

[Mr Heliums]

Yep, I think definitely you'd have to cover Celtic travel costs and give them money on top of it, some share of revenue probably.

And this is one reason it shouldn't go ahead. It would be the ultimate irony if Celtic - a team that changed the league rules 40 years ago in their favour to ensure that away teams did not get a share of league gate revenue were to turn around and demand a share of the gate.

And if we're to bend the rules to allow for appearance fees, how long before Celtic and Rangers start doing this for all away games?

[oneteaminglasgow]

I can certainly understand the point but is it really that bad that 5,000 Dundee fans miss out on one match to allow their club to try something different that "might" bring them more money which could help improve their team?

If an NFL team can disregard 70,000 average paying fans to send their team to London to try something different then i'm sure Dundee's 5,000 fans can cope.

I don't know if it will be a success or not but i'm all for it

The NFL isn't the same as Scottish football though, as, and I'm not a huge NFL fan so could be wrong, but isn't there an established history of the teams being franchises which will just up and move to a new city whenever they fancy if they think it might get a bit more support and money for the owner? There's nothing of this nature in Scotland (bar Livingston and Clyde).

For me, it sets an uneasy precedent where the owners can do whatever they want if they think it can get a bit more money into the club, completely disregarding the supporters. Clubs should be about the community they are in, in this case, Dundee and there first priority should always be to provide a team for the people of Dundee to go and support every week. If someone in Boston or Philadelphia wants to take an interest in that then great, but the club's shouldn't go seeking that at the expense of the community they represent.

It also devalues the competition for me, as it allows Celtic to play an 'away game' at a neutral venue which could give them an advantage or Dundee a disadvantage against their direct competitors.

[Deestruction]

The NFL isn't the same as Scottish football though, as, and I'm not a huge NFL fan so could be wrong, but isn't there an established history of the teams being franchises which will just up and move to a new city whenever they fancy if they think it might get a bit more support and money for the owner? There's nothing of this nature in Scotland (bar Livingston and Clyde).

For me, it sets an uneasy precedent where the owners can do whatever they want if they think it can get a bit more money into the club, completely disregarding the supporters. Clubs should be about the community they are in, in this case, Dundee and there first priority should always be to provide a team for the people of Dundee to go and support every week. If someone in Boston or Philadelphia wants to take an interest in that then great, but the club's shouldn't go seeking that at the expense of the community they represent.

It also devalues the competition for me, as it allows Celtic to play an 'away game' at a neutral venue which could give them an advantage or Dundee a disadvantage against their direct competitors.

Aye, the teams are all franchises, but with seperate "owners" of the franchises.

I'll preface this with my stance that I'm not majorly for, or against this as a Dundee supporter.

The use of "international" games by the NFL, NBA and MLB is done purely for economic growth. There's a key difference between if we (any Scottish side) were to do it, compared to those brands however. We are doing it because we have a lack of finances in our league currently, where they do it because they've hit peak value in their base country and see International expansion as a way to generate even more revenue, on top of the obscene money they already have (eg A-Rod who got a $275,000,000 contract from the Yankees for a 10 year deal). Dundee struggle to pay players more than a grand a week, and in relative terms pay equal to the 5th tier of English football.

Secondly, the attendances at their sports are already at near sell-out levels. The lowest average attendance so far this year in the NFL is over 52,000 for the Minnesota Vikings (who are having a great season, but are in a poor market). We attract roughly 1/10th of that, sure, we live in an even worse market (Minnesota's population is equal to that of our whole country), but it's a true factor as to comparing room for growth.

Thirdly, these teams are very much involved in their communities. Players all have charities and Trusts which work locally in their area of birth or profession to get good PR and spread brand awareness. Most clubs here barely have enough coaching for kids in their cities.

Before going out and "trying something new", I do have a niggling thought that we should go back and try something old, and that's getting the base right in Dundee, before even thinking about a far fetched, hairbrained idea of playing a game, which might not be worth it in a different continent.

[French Jag]

I would be very surprised if UEFA allowed this to happen.

When Evian TG was promoted to the French Ligue 2 in 2010, their stadium wasn't licensed to this level. They applied to play their home games in Geneva, just a few miles across the Swiss border. The fans, French FA and league and the Canton of Geneva (owner of the stadium) were all for it, but UEFA blocked the move.

ETG applied again in 2013 (then in Ligue 1) with the support of the local MPs but were denied again. In the end, they had to move 50 miles south to Annecy.

If UEFA can stop a 20-mile cross-border move, why would they let Dundee and Celtic play 3000 miles away from Scotland?

[Dee Man]

I would be very surprised if UEFA allowed this to happen.

When Evian TG was promoted to the French Ligue 2 in 2010, their stadium wasn't licensed to this level. They applied to play their home games in Geneva, just a few miles across the Swiss border. The fans, French FA and league and the Canton of Geneva (owner of the stadium) were all for it, but UEFA blocked the move.

ETG applied again in 2013 (then in Ligue 1) with the support of the local MPs but were denied again. In the end, they had to move 50 miles south to Annecy.

If UEFA can stop a 20-mile cross-border move, why would they let Dundee and Celtic play 3000 miles away from Scotland?

There's a bit of a difference between wanting to play all your home games in another country as opposed to playing a one off glamour tie between two global footballing giants.

[Deefiant]

There's a bit of a difference between wanting to play all your home games in another country as opposed to playing a one off glamour tie between a global footballing giant and Celtic .

FTFY

[Roker Rover]

The notion of 70,000 people paying $40 to watch Dundee and Celtic so they can connect with their Irish roots is laughable. Surely even Americans aren't that stupid.

Having been 3 times, I would never underestimate the stupidity of Americans.

I was against this when it was suggested down here in England and see no reason to change my opinion just because its Scotland. One issue would be that other clubs would want to get involved if it proved a real money spinner and surely a game like this only works if Celtic or possibly Rangers are involved? That would probably mean those two sides playing 'away' games out of the season a few times a season, so that the other clubs could get a peice of the action.

I could be wrong but would Hearts v Inverness in New York make sufficient money through gate reciepts and TV to make it a worthwile excercise?

Likewise I am really not sure Sunderland v Stoke in Manilla would create much interest either. My feeling is the foriegn 'fans' only really want to see the over hyped 'top' sides.

I am in favour of the premier league having a pre season cup in a designated country either every season or every other season. All the sides go abroard anyway, so why not have a knockout cup in China or the USA to try and satisfy their weird curiosity. say the top 16 clubs from the previous season in a straight knockout, with a plate type arrangement for the first round losers so every side plays the full 4 matches. Could be done and dusted in 10 day or so. There is already a premier league cup played between 3 sides and a local team every two years, so just expand that.

Sunderland virtually never play decent pre season friendlies in England anymore (and we never play home games now due to the lucrative summer concerts at the SOL requiring a new pitch every season) and we are left with maybe 1 match v Darlington most seasons that the local fans can attend and even then its mostly the stiffs.

[Roker Rover]

Anyway, I have a solution for playing Scottish league games outside Scotland.

You could try playing some games here;

[Roker Rover]

The Welsh FA tried to get UEFA to force Cardiff, Swansea, Newport, Wrexham, Colwyn Bay and Merthyr Town to leave the English Pyramid and join their newly formed national league in the mid 90's. They lost that argument and have since blocked these clubs from competing in the Welsh Cup.

Ironically when the most succesful side in the newly formed league (Llansantffraid-ym-Mechain), who later became Total Network Solutions wanted to move to Oswestry in England and rename themselves The New Saints, the Welsh FA seemingly had a change of heart re cross border participation and let them stay and dominate their league!! Funny That??

[Nakamura]

The NFL isn't the same as Scottish football though, as, and I'm not a huge NFL fan so could be wrong, but isn't there an established history of the teams being franchises which will just up and move to a new city whenever they fancy if they think it might get a bit more support and money for the owner? There's nothing of this nature in Scotland (bar Livingston and Clyde).

For me, it sets an uneasy precedent where the owners can do whatever they want if they think it can get a bit more money into the club, completely disregarding the supporters. Clubs should be about the community they are in, in this case, Dundee and there first priority should always be to provide a team for the people of Dundee to go and support every week. If someone in Boston or Philadelphia wants to take an interest in that then great, but the club's shouldn't go seeking that at the expense of the community they represent.

It also devalues the competition for me, as it allows Celtic to play an 'away game' at a neutral venue which could give them an advantage or Dundee a disadvantage against their direct competitors.

It would be a Celtic home game effectively. I don't mind.

Great point about the NFL relocation culture. It's common for all American professional sports. I agree, it's despicable, especially since American teams use relocation threats to extort money from their communities.

European strong connection between teams and cities is very valuable, indeed, and I think you raise definitely a good argument there.

[Nakamura]

Aye, the teams are all franchises, but with seperate "owners" of the franchises.

I'll preface this with my stance that I'm not majorly for, or against this as a Dundee supporter.

The use of "international" games by the NFL, NBA and MLB is done purely for economic growth. There's a key difference between if we (any Scottish side) were to do it, compared to those brands however. We are doing it because we have a lack of finances in our league currently, where they do it because they've hit peak value in their base country and see International expansion as a way to generate even more revenue, on top of the obscene money they already have (eg A-Rod who got a $275,000,000 contract from the Yankees for a 10 year deal). Dundee struggle to pay players more than a grand a week, and in relative terms pay equal to the 5th tier of English football.

Secondly, the attendances at their sports are already at near sell-out levels. The lowest average attendance so far this year in the NFL is over 52,000 for the Minnesota Vikings (who are having a great season, but are in a poor market). We attract roughly 1/10th of that, sure, we live in an even worse market (Minnesota's population is equal to that of our whole country), but it's a true factor as to comparing room for growth.

Thirdly, these teams are very much involved in their communities. Players all have charities and Trusts which work locally in their area of birth or profession to get good PR and spread brand awareness. Most clubs here barely have enough coaching for kids in their cities.

Before going out and "trying something new", I do have a niggling thought that we should go back and try something old, and that's getting the base right in Dundee, before even thinking about a far fetched, hairbrained idea of playing a game, which might not be worth it in a different continent.

Americans have a lot of great practices as far as supporter experience, marketing. At the same time, I'm not sure how much better Scottish football would do if it implemented even the best practices perfectly. Scottish football attendance per capita already dwarves any US league. Even if we take baseball, the most attended US sport, with 30 major league teams with 82 home games per season, and a myriad of quite well attended minor league teams in small towns, SPFL attendance relative to country population is higher.

US teams just have insurmountable advantages when it comes to country size / richness. Clubs over the years have relocated to the biggest multi-million cities where they can draw massive attendances. Gigantic television deals. Last but definitely not least, the level of state / federal funding that major league sports teams and owners receive in the US is unthinkable for European football.

[craigkillie]

And this is one reason it shouldn't go ahead. It would be the ultimate irony if Celtic - a team that changed the league rules 40 years ago in their favour to ensure that away teams did not get a share of league gate revenue were to turn around and demand a share of the gate.

And if we're to bend the rules to allow for appearance fees, how long before Celtic and Rangers start doing this for all away games?

A one-off situation for a game in the USA doesn't create even the slightest of precedents here.

If Celtic started demanding appearance fees for all their away games then the other clubs could simply say "LOL m8 NO", and if Celtic didn't turn up for the game then the home side would be awarded the points and Celtic would probably get chucked out of the league. You don't need the agreement of the away team to schedule a match on the scheduled date at their scheduled home ground.

However, in this case, Dundee require Celtic's permission to go ahead with the game in the USA. They're obviously very unlikely to give that permission if it's going to end up costing them a big chunk of money to fly everyone out there, so it's reasonable to offer to cover their costs.

[Old Pack]

Why would the Yanks want to watch a club that's went bust twice and won f**k all for 43 years ?

[RandomGuy.]

What's did we win 43 years ago?

This is the 43rd season since you won the League Cup, surprised you dont know that tbh

[topcat(The most tip top)]

Why would the Yanks want to watch a club that's went bust twice and won f**k all for 43 years ?

Given that the entire league once went bankrupt in the USA they're probably not as prone to that moral panic as the good people of Perth