In a small conference room of a Manhattan hotel, Nicolás García is insistent.
“We are closer than ever to bringing a game (to the United States). Hopefully, it is going to happen soon,” said García, La Liga North America’s VP for strategy and business development, during an interview with The Athletic in March. That sentiment echoes comments from forthright La Liga president Javier Tebas, who told Spanish newspaper Expansión in April 2024: “I think it could be in the 2025-26 season, but La Liga will play official matches abroad.”
The reason for their optimism? Relevent Sports, the events promoter and media rights company co-founded and owned by billionaire Miami Dolphins owner Stephen M.Ross, this month settled a legal fight with the U.S. Soccer Federation, which brought the question of domestic leagues playing regular-season matches outside of their home countries into sharp focus.
In a statement, Relevent CEO Danny Sillman said: “Ultimately, we all share the same goal: growing the sport throughout America. We’re excited to continue supporting clubs from Europe and around the world to expand the sport’s reach and impact across the U.S.”
The matter had reached the Supreme Court in April 2024, but a sudden breakthrough came when world governing body FIFA was dropped from the initial lawsuit. FIFA said it would review its policy about domestic games abroad — with the FIFA Council approving the formation of a working group on the matter — and Relevent, in a statement, said FIFA would consider “changes to its existing rules about whether games can be played outside of a league’s home territory.”
All eyes are now on FIFA, which must find a way forward that appeases stakeholders across global football who often have wildly competing agendas. This can be seen by the makeup of the working group, which includes representation from each FIFA confederation, two representatives from national federations, two representatives from the European Club Association, two representatives from the players’ union FIFPro, two representatives from the World Leagues Association and one representatives from a match organizer.
The presence of the World Leagues Association – which represents the professional football leagues on a world level with political and sport bodies – underlines the challenge, because its representatives are Tebas, who appears to be on a personal mission to bring games to the U.S.; and Mark Abbott, former deputy commissioner of MLS, which has previously appeared opposed, at least in part, to preventing leagues across the world from cannibalizing its U.S. market share.
During numerous conversations over recent months with sources familiar with the direction of the discussions, some of whom spoke anonymously to protect relationships, The Athletic has learned the following:
- The general consensus across the football industry is that FIFA’s policies will soon approve domestic league games to be played abroad, despite the fact the working group has only met once formally.
- La Liga remains the frontrunner to be the first overseas league to play a game on U.S. soil, but the Italian Serie A, Liga MX and UEFA competitions all have advocates keen to do so.
- Despite La Liga’s collective desire to bring a game to the U.S., Real Madrid has expressed internal opposition.
- Some representatives on the FIFA working group are keen to agree to guidelines that restrict the number of games that could be played in a specific foreign territory per calendar year by a single competition, or even a single team – but this could risk further anti-trust litigation.
- While La Liga has been the most vocal league seeking to play in the U.S., MLS has been most concerned by the possibility of Liga MX bringing games over the border.
In a statement to The Athletic, a FIFA spokesperson said the working group is continuing to build towards its recommendations, adding that they must be “based on the principles of transparency, objectivity, non-discrimination and proportionality.”
No recommendation has yet been issued, nor any rule established, that would require a fixed limit on the number of competitive games a league or a team may play in a specific territory each season.
Barcelona and Real Madrid play an exhibition edition of El Clásico at Miami’s Hard Rock Stadium in 2017. (Photo by Mike Ehrmann/Getty Images)
The race to be first in this venture, and the hurdles to clear in order to pull it off, make for a complicated picture.
La Liga explored taking Barcelona’s home game against Atlético Madrid earlier this season to Miami’s Hard Rock Stadium.
In theory, La Liga required the approvals from Royal Spanish Football Federation (RFEF), U.S. Soccer, Concacaf, UEFA and FIFA. In the absence of a settlement – at that point – between U.S. Soccer and Relevant, or a clear policy direction from FIFA, it always felt unlikely. But another key obstacle was the Spanish federation, still in turmoil following the scandal surrounding former president Luis Rubiales. It was without a permanent president at the time and unable to make such a significant decision.
Jorge de la Vega, the CEO of La Liga, told The Athletic in early March: “We are definitely committed to do it, so we’re gonna keep pushing for sure, we’re really close.”
The English Premier League previously considered playing an entire round of games outside of its territory 17 years ago, but the idea melted away amid a ferocious backlash by supporters and media in England, who deemed the idea of a so-called ’39th game’ a betrayal of local supporters.
In September 2021, The Athletic reported how Premier League club owners and stakeholders had discussed a “roadmap to meaningful games abroad.” Last year, Jon Miller, NBC Sports’ president of acquisitions and partnerships and whose network broadcasts the Premier League in the U.S., said he would love to have the league open the competition with games on American soil. He told The Athletic he had previously held conversations with the league on the subject of games abroad and that it had been open and receptive listening to him.
Premier League CEO Richard Masters said the “door looked ajar” following the FIFA settlement with Relevent but insisted the league had no plans to act. The Football Supporters Association, a representative body for fans in England and Wales, warned any attempted revival of the idea would be met “with a full-blown, two feet off the ground, studs to the knee tackle.”
In Spain, however, La Liga appears to have less ferocious local sentiment and is prepared to argue its case. García relayed the feeling that “everybody that pays for their ESPN subscription (to watch La Liga in the U.S.) is as valued as a fan as somebody that pays for the season ticket holder in Spain.”
He added: “To think about our fans as only the ones that go to the stadium will be a big disservice for the game and for the sport.”
De la Vega accepted some fans will be not be “very happy” but warned: “If you are only thinking about the local fans, you’re limited in your growth.
“In Europe, you need to find the balance between not losing like the traditional fan but also trying to grow. This balance is not easy at some point, so you need to be strong and not be so concerned about what the traditional fans will say. Obviously we’re trying to improve their fan experience within the stadium and trying to be influenced by other ways of understanding our industry. … We are trying to make this ecosystem bigger every year.”
Ironically, La Liga’s biggest internal opposition may come from its most successful club. Real Madrid, the 36-time league winner, previously opposed the idea of taking individual matches outside the U.S. because executives have concerns about how it will impact the integrity of La Liga’s competition if home advantage for a participating team is eliminated, therefore creating an imbalanced competition.
For example, should a mid-table La Liga team play a “home” game against Barcelona in Miami, it is likely that the stadium will be packed with Barcelona followers, such is the team’s popularity and reach in the U.S. The counter view is that La Liga insists no teams would be forced to play a game abroad – they would be merely be invited to do so – and if they are prepared to sacrifice home advantage for the perceived upside of growing their brand stateside, then other teams should not take umbrage on their behalf.
La Liga faces competition, however. In March, Serie A stated ambitions to bring a regular-season match to the U.S. within three years during an event at its office in New York City.
“All the different leagues are discussing the possibility of playing a regular-season game (abroad). If you look at the NFL, they’re playing in Germany, they’re playing in London, they are going to play in Australia. So there are a lot of things happening that make the possibility (more real),” Serie A commercial and marketing director Michele Ciccarese said.
“It should be done in a way that makes sense for the club without forgetting the fans, because you cannot play a Milan derby in America because the fans in Italy will get very upset as that game has a big meaning in Italy, so we have to play in a way that is respectful of our audience.”
Ciccarese added there would be benefits to arriving first on U.S. soil.
“It’s always a race to try to be the trendsetter, because then the followers come and the trendsetter is the one who benefits more potentially in terms of revenues of making this thing happen,” he said.
When speaking to The Athletic later that week, La Liga North America’s García quipped: “It’s funny to hear the Italians talking about what we were talking about five years ago.”
Despite the settlements between FIFA, U.S. and Relevent, it’s unclear the extent to which the doors will be flung open. It is also worth remembering that the U.S. would not be the only location interested in hosting competitive European league games.
Promoters have interest in taking Serie A games to both Abu Dhabi and Australia at the beginning of next season, according to people familiar with the proposals. Serie A did not respond to a request for comment.
Cup competitions are already being staged by the Italian and Spanish football federations in Saudi Arabia. It is not difficult to imagine how that may develop if the payments are large enough. Consider, for example, that two meaningless post-season exhibition games for Manchester United in Malaysia and Hong Kong this summer will yield a $10 million (£7.5m) return for the Premier League club.
As such, conversations are being pushed by some within FIFA’s working committee that would seek to limit the number of games a competition can take to a specific territory per calendar year, or per season. This would have the impact of limiting the potential impact, for example, on MLS, with part of the league’s appeal for some owners being its exclusivity over domestic soccer in the U.S. market. Others within the league take a more relaxed view, arguing there is a room within the market for everyone to thrive together and exposure to a taste of European action may inspire greater interest and participation within the U.S.
There are, however, attempts being made in some quarters to limit the number of games a single team could play in a specific territory per season. For example, if Barcelona was part of a La Liga fixture in the U.S. one season, then UEFA would not be able to plan a Champions League group stage game for Barcelona to take place abroad in the same season. However, more leeway might be afforded, if, hypothetically, UEFA decided a long way out to host the Champions League final in the U.S. and Barcelona happened to qualify.
There is no suggestion UEFA is currently actively engaged in such talks. Yet David Berson, the president and CEO of CBS Sports, which pays $250 million per season to broadcast UEFA club competitions, last year told The Athletic that the network would welcome games abroad.
“That is something that is routinely talked about,” he said in June 2024. “We have nothing to say along those lines at this moment in time, but I would not be surprised if over the course of these next six years, you’ll see that in play. It’s something we welcome. I think it’s something UEFA would like.”
PSG president and ECA chairman Nasser Al-Khelaifi has also previously expressed his support for exploring new markets and venues, while UEFA and the ECA’s joint venture to market UEFA club competitions has enlisted Relevent to do so. The ECA has two members representing its interests on the FIFA working group, through CEO Charlie Marshall and general counsel Wouter Lambrecht.
Additionally, MLS is keen to ensure that games taking place on U.S. soil happen during the periods when the MLS schedule is either quieter or in its offseason, but this is complicated because MLS is currently engaged in extensive internal conversations as to whether to alter its league schedule to mirror the European season. Should it do so, then this has the potential to further limit the possibilities for teams seeking to venture into the U.S. market.
Quite how all this would be put into practice remains to be seen. FIFA will be aware of the risk of triggering further anti-trust litigation, while Relevent’s settlement without prejudice means it would be able to reopen the case if the outcome is not favorable. A person within the working group said that if everyone around the table agrees to the policy that is issued – given it includes Tebas – then the hope is this would be the end of the matter.
There is, however, a widespread recognition within the football industry that despite the growing interest in European football, there are only so many domestic league games that would truly drive vast audiences, demand and, crucially, big revenues in the U.S.
Manchester United and Liverpool play a 2024 preseason friendly in front of a packed house in South Carolina. (Photo by Grant Halverson/Getty Images)
Exhibition games between Real Madrid and Barcelona, for example, have driven in excess of $20 million on U.S. soil, while games between Liverpool and Manchester United also come close. Yet such clashes are unlikely as regular-season games in the U.S. Instead, the likelihood is that a large team would be paired against a middling team, so as to avoid taking showpiece matches outside of a host country.
There is also the question as to whether regular-season games abroad should be seen as revenue-drivers or marketing opportunities. In some cases, a league may view it as marketing, but a club may only be persuaded by the promise of a large payday, which may produce tension as a club wonders whether heat from local supporters is worth the hassle of growing a league collectively. Leagues must also factor in the views of coaches and players, who may not wish to travel such distances in the midst of a relentless calendar, while solutions would need to be found for season-ticket holders who are a game short.
As for potential revenues, the television rights will likely already be sold for a league season for its current cycle, which means ticketing revenue, local sponsorship and shoulder programming would be the likely income shared between the league and competing teams.
Once the door opens, further attempts will be made to access the U.S. market. The concern for MLS has long been infringements by Liga MX. While MLS has a positive relationship with its Mexican counterpart, notably collaborating for the Leagues Cup, this does not mean it would necessarily want unfettered access for Liga MX within the U.S. market, as that would not benefit MLS financially.
Reached for comment, an MLS spokesperson said: “MLS has no role in deciding whether to allow other leagues to play regular season matches in the U.S. – that is a decision for U.S. Soccer, Concacaf and FIFA.”
Over 37 million Mexicans live in the U.S., and Mexico’s Club America is often cited as the most-watched soccer team on U.S. television. Other leagues whose nations boast significant populations within the U.S., such as Argentina, Brazil or Ecuador, have also been cited as examples of leagues that may be tempted to experiment with games abroad.
“We’re not opposed to the possibility of playing in the U.S. as the home team, now that the lawsuit has been finalized and it appears that there’s a possibility for other teams to play there,” Club America president Santiago Baños said in May 2024. “It would be incredible to play in the U.S. and in other (Mexican) states because we have so many fans.”
FIFA has in some ways already won the race with the club game, by bringing the revamped Club World Cup competition to the U.S. this summer. What the governing body decides next will shape the sport for a long time to come.
(Top illustration: Eamonn Dalton/The Athletic; Piero Cruciatti/AFP, Alex Caparros/Getty Images)