Man City Owners Pondering Bid for NY II; Red Bull Having Second Thoughts?

You think Garber would let the New York team they've been clamoring for for so long be a feeder team for Man City? When Chivas USA joined the league, it was a different era. They've been pushing for NY to be the 20th franchise for awhile now because of how they feel MLS is represented in New York. And having a Man City New York/USA type team would not help that situtation. I can't believe they would let all their efforts go to waste.

I've agreed with some of your points about Chivas USA and how the league should be built upon those who want to see MLS grow, but I can't see this anything more than what BarcaMiami was.

 

The Connecticut Sun of the WNBA, who took their name in 2003, are named after the principal product of their owner, a casino.

The Mighty Ducks of Anaheim, who took their name in 1993, were named after a popular movie franchise created by their owner.

They didn't set the precedent.

Assuming that BigSoccer is in any way representative of the fans of the sport as a whole is a bad assumption as you surely know. I imagine the reaction of the majority of fans would be "oh".

This team is also the only team in the league with an "anti-fan" base, where people who aren't fans of other teams actively root against them. Maybe part of that is their name, but part of it is just the area itself. NYC is possibly the worst market in the league for a MLS team.

 

yes, i can see Garber accepting NYC2 being a Man City feeder/franchise. if there is enough dirty dirty oil money why not ... he is a hypocrite and just a mouthpiece for the owners who themselves, for the most part, care about money first and soccer second.

and yes, BarcaMiami is/was a stupid idea, all of the same problems would apply. MLS shouldn't have teams that are minor league/feeder/franchises of other teams in other leagues. Chivas USA is the most egregious because LigaMX is a league MLS is in direct competition with and hopes to overtake to be the dominate league in NA. but Man City, Barca or whatever other team wanting to "establish a franchise for greater brand exposure/talent feeder" is a slight on what MLS is hoping to be ... and it, like i said, comes with some serious issues in terms of alienating large numbers of potential fans based on branding, foreign ownership, poor ownership based on MLS not being a top priority, etc.

 

Thanks you for doing the legwork on this.

 

Cruz Azul and Bayern Munich are named after the Company's, I am sure there are more out there.

 

i think you are confusing the Munich team with Bayer Leverkusen (sp?)

 

Someone, get the macro.

Oh wait, half the statement is laughably wrong anyway.

 

Great post...

It's been called the group of maybe 200 by one long time fan. I often wonder what this group sees that other fans and maybe more importantly other highly respected figures in the sport don't see.

Henry doesn't see it nor does Marquez or Cahill or Lindpere or Luke Rogers or Gunnar Solli or Tainio.

Kaka has openly stated he sees himself joining our New York Red Bulls team, his brother is here already. When Red Bull took over many former Cosmos players including Pele and Beckanbauer joined the first game under new ownership festivities. In fact want to blame anyone blame the Kaiser he's the guy who put the bug in Mateschitz' ear about buying the club though Mateschitz later cut him off from participating in building the team.

Our new GM Andy Roxburgh a highly respected soccer lifer at the highest level of the sport in Europe reported that fellow Scot Alex Ferguson recommended he take the job.

Sir Alex doesn't see it.

On the British TV feed of the final of the Arsenal pre-season Emirates Cup a couple of years ago the color commentator couldn't contain his distain for our team. The broadcast was filled with his subtle and not so subtle putdowns. The guy just didn't think we were any good and belonged on the same field as Arsenal. Amazingly we stayed within a goal and late in the game Henry and Miller engineered an impossible to defend own goal out of Arsenal and we tied the game and won this rather insignificant trophy. The color guy was in virtual mourning. Yet at no time did he use what the group of 200 would deem his most potent attack...no mention of the name. So even this crusty old school Brit with an axe to grind didn't see it.

I'm a Pele baby saw a Generals game at Yankee Stadium in the late '60s but really signed up (along with thousands of others) when Pele came. An irony of this F.cosmos deal is that you'll find thousands of old Cosmos fans at most Red Bull games in fact I've predicted more than at games of the new team using the old name. I've spoken to some of these fans at games this year and very, very few are thinking of leaving...yes...the New York Red Bulls even for a team calling itself...yes... the New York Cosmos...they don't see it.

We're a middle of the pack MLS club before and after the Red Bull purchase. A great stadium and incremental improvement in market presence since they arrived but no where near where we want to be. There are reasons but IMHO for the overwhelming majority of the fanbase name just isn't one of them.

 

All of those big names get paid a premium to flounce about wearing Red Bull logos. The supporters, unbelievably, are asked to pay for that privilege themselves.

 

First, RB takes it to another level. It's not hard to understand the difference. Or are there Mohegan Sun womens' basketball teams and Mighty Ducks teams in other leagues around the world that I don't know about?

No, wait, there's no Mighty Ducks teams anywhere now. Because it was a gimmick with a limited shelf-life that failed. Like this gimmick is failing.

Secondly, are you even trying to draw best practices from the WNBA and the Bettman-led NHL? Jesus, man. Think that one over.

I agree with this. Any team trying to make a go of it there has to take advantage of its opportunities to grow its fanbase, not create reasons for people to go away and/or stay away.

 

No, of course there's not, but how many people outside of BigSoccer know there are other Red Bull teams? Virtually none. And yes, the Ducks aren't Mighty any more, but the Sun are still around. I wonder if anyone complains about them (or would if it was a more popular league)?

I'm not saying these are "best practices", just correcting the assertion you made that Red Bull were the first in modern day North America, when in fact they were no better than third. It is what it is.

However, I agree on the most important point: Gary Bettman sucks.

Indeed, but that wasn't happening in the MetroStars days either, but the myriad of reasons why is a whole another thread.

 

I've no specific mind on this particular subject, but one of the key things MLS has taught us over fifteen years is that the league and its clubs may assume their catchment's "lack of awareness" at their own peril.

 

Wait, we might get an experienced soccer ownership for NYC2 AND dump Red Bull? Happy Day! Bring on the MetroStars!

 

In my personal experience with young-ish sports fans living in NYC, who would be right in MLS's demographic wheelhouse, the Red Bull name is a pretty big deal and roundly mocked.

 

Didn't do any better with this age group as MetroStars did we?

 

Comparing Red Bull in 2012 to the Metrostars in 1998 seems less apt than comparing Red Bull in 2012 to other MLS teams in 2012.

 

We're in the broad middle of the league. Give us the typical MLS schedule of Saturday night games and we'll average 19K a game easy. Earlier in the season it was revealed that our TV ratings on MSG are actually better than the Galaxy's in SoCal. There's a danger with all the bitter internal and external debate over direction to see our team as a broad failure...not so.

 

CSKA is named after an Army!

 

Therefore, there will be 3 teams in NY?

 

Great news to see. You can never have too many interested parties investing in MLS.

This would be a great deal for a potential ownership group. A team in a growing league in one of the biggest and most prestigious cities in the world.

In Garber we trust.

 

dark knight, could you come into this thread and move all of the Red Bull related posts to one of the dozens of thread on that topic, and leave this thread for discussion of NY2 and the Man City owners?

oh, wait....

 

Let me get this straight...some people are actually complaining that a "City" franchise in NY would be a bad thing? At this point in time, the league can only dream of having a player actually make City's roster...

Or are we simply assuming that City's owners are simply looking for another plaything to sink money into?

 

Given that the league has already had a player go from MLS to United this isn't as much of a stretch as you make it out to be.

 

Going from "had a player" to "feeder club" is a massive stretch.

Half the clubs in the Premiership wouldn't have the talent to be feeder clubs to Manchester City. It's not going to happen in MLS.