if vegas was laying odds, i'd reckon that "another New England" would be the most likely outcome. another Vancouver wouldn't be bad at all (and a legitimate potential outcome as well) but thats not counting in the exponential factor of further diluting the talent base and adding another turf monstrosity blank's ownership is the silver lining tho honestly i only feel comfortable with Orlando City's expansion; Miami and especially NYC2 are by no means sure things (but at least they have great upside) .... ATL just seems like the proverbial over-reaching cherry on top
bottom line: ATL will enter the League as one of the Top 3 lamest franchises in MLS and has a 50/50 chance of staying that way subtraction by addition.
Clint Dempsey returned to the league in his prime less than a year ago and you're ranting about league quality? I might accept the argument if you asked why we need two teams in NY and LA while other markets don't have a team. But expanding into the Southeast means more TV eyeballs meaning more money and thus more cash with which to buy better players.
I'd be interested if you could explain your use of the first person plural here. I mean, who is being force fed this? Unless I'm mistaken, nobody but the fans in Atlanta, who seem to be OK with it. Seriously, who the ******** are YOU ? WHO the ******** are you? You come across like a delusional megalomaniac, and I mean that with all due respect.
Source/link? Look, you're delusional and you can't distinguish between reality and fantasy. You are suffering from mental illness and should seek treatment. And when I say "you" above, I mean the plural you.
i posted that i had doubts about MIA and NY2; you were unable to read/process that unfortunately LA2 is a disaster. and no one would blink an eye if they folded. expanding into the southeast by no means = more tv eyeballs and then more $$ for players ATL is a horrifically bad pro sports town; and it is more likely this team will end in failure than it is success ATL = MLS overreach and/or NASL 2.0
I don't understand the mind of a troll. It's one thing for a skeptic to say, there are some considerations about Atlanta and address those concerns. Such as Atlanta didn't support a winter sport with horrible owners and they should even though it doesn't get really cold there; or, they don't support basketball with the same horrible owners; or, their baseball team, the braves, didn't sell out playoff tickets over 20 years ago so a MLS team is doomed to fail. Or; their football team didn't have good support until the current owner who is also the MLS team owner completely revitalized the franchise and now have awesome support. Or; they are playing on turf or not in a SSS and ignore the situations in Seattle or other parts of the country. Or; the even more amusing, say that Atlanta doesn't support their teams then completely contradict that and say that the Atlanta fans will be too focused on the Braves or the Falcons. Really and truly, I can understand some people raising some concerns for discussion about playing in a shared NFL stadium. But that can easily be answered by the fact that this stadium is specifically designed for MLS. And Arthur Blank is a committed owner who knows how to put out a winning team. Logistic concerns are understandable, but to say that Atlanta is only capable of being a bottom feeder in this league is ludicrous. I have full faith in the Atlanta team under Blank. He's the right man for the job. And he has all the tools to succeed: soccer hotbed in the largest metro area left that is also the epicenter of the largest region not in the league. Southern fans will support this team. There have been many fans from North Carolina, Tennessee, and even as far as Louisiana who are absolutely thrilled to now feel like they have been included into the league. I honestly expect that Atlanta will average over 20k a game. I believe that is a very attainable goal with Blank. In short, this Atlanta team has all the tools to be successful, and the benefit for MLS is it can now reach out to one of the largest, most culturally distinct, and solidified regions in the country. Feel free to root against us on game day, but no matter what you wish and how much you express your disdain for Atlanta and/or the south, we are coming... We will prove our support. See you on the field in 2017.
Braves: MLB 2013- Braves were 13th in attendance, top half of the league, ahead of 7 MLS cities. Hawks: NBA 2013-14- Bottom of the League (28 out of 30). The least popular pro team in the city. Falcons: NFL 2013- ranked 13th out of 30. Top half of the league. Ahead of 4 MLS cities. Silverbacks: NASL '13- Sold out several games. 5,000+ We aren't an elite sports town, but the hate towards us, based on the above stats, proves that they are unfounded. I thought that MLS fans would want to get into the SE. Did you really not expect for MLS to eventually come to ATL, the largest city in the SE?
Arthur Blank specifically said during the announcement that you will NEVER see football lines on the field during an MLS game in Atlanta.
By the year we lost the team there were lots of rumors that they were moving and ASG was openly trying to sell the team and didn't care if it was sold to someone who wanted to keep them here or not. The 1 year out of 11 they actually made the playoffs attendance was 88% and it was close to that the following year. As far as I am concerned the attendance was better than it should have been for the combination of AWFUL owners who couldn't care less, horrible on ice performance, and the amount of transplants in Atlanta. Here is the great thing about the last one though, MLS hasn't really been around long enough for all the people here from the northeast to have those long standing family ties to other teams. So just because they are Yankee/Rangers/Red Sox/Bruins/whoever fans doesn't mean they can't be fans of the Atlanta MLS team.
It is true, Atlanta meets the definition of a bad sports town: 1) it had a sports team move and 2) it had a baseball playoff game that didn't sell out. So Atlanta you suck as a sports town! Btw, you too New York! And you Boston. If Chicago ever got to the playoffs more than once a decade, I'm sure they would suck too...
It's already not another New England because they have an owner who cares about the sport. Funny, it's as if a whole lot of people here (not you, JasonMa, you are a voice of reason) have failed to notice that MLS is now a completely different animal from what it was when the league started out, and even what it was when Chivas came into the league. Not to mention Atlanta won't be another Chivas because a) they won't be someone else's farm team, b) they won't be playing in another MLS team's stadium and c) they won't try to pander to a very select group of fans from a select ethnic group.
I still don't get why Atlanta gets dogged over two hockey teams leaving while New York gets a pass on two MLB teams fleeing, Boston gets a pass on losing an MLB and NFL team, and L.A. has lost THREE NFL TEAMS -- two in the same year -- yet you never hear anybody whining about L.A. fans. Some of those are ancient history. Some of them are not. We support sports plenty around here. We don't do it in the same manner as other places because of how spread out we are and how many transplants we have. But we attend sports. If college football was a pro sport, people would laugh at you for calling out fans around here. Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, Florida State, Tennessee, Clemson, Auburn and Alabama all easy top 80,000 for every home game. Some of that attendance has been through some stinky teams. But tens of thousands go. If anything, I would totally agree that the city has issues. If it embraced mass transit like a bunch of grown-ups instead of "OH NO I CAN'T RIDE THE TRAIN TO WORK LIKE A POOR PERSON," maybe it wouldn't be so painful to get to sporting events. Those maps of Braves fans that circulated during the relocation news show that fans mostly exist north of 285. MARTA rail mostly doesn't. People sit in that nightmare traffic every damn day yet haven't stormed the Capitol demanding a solution. So we're stubborn and stupid. But as I pointed out elsewhere, we had 43,000 people at a Thursday NLDS game last year, 49,000 on a Friday. If the stadium capacity was 40,000 like the new one will be, the headline would be "Braves sell out both playoff games." But instead people see a couple thousand empty seats as if nobody came. As every other city has shown when it comes to MLS attendance, you can't really gauge interest until you get a team. Toronto could've cared less about the Lynx but then showed up like crazy to support TFC. LA loves the Galaxy but hates Chivas. DC United wins championships yet can't get a stadium while that lame MLB team that hasn't won squat got a shiny new park.
With all due respect, you are a dumbass. I'm a FAN of the league, and therefore an "US", now shut your trap.
If you're a fan of the league, shouldn't you be excited about the developments in Seattle, Portland, Vancouver, Toronto, SLC, Philly and Montreal? Judging by everything you've said here, you had the same concerns about those cities, which turned out to be unwarranted. You sound more like a nattering nabob of negativism than a fan of the league.
Hey look, another thread with Atlanta bashing! Thanks, internet. Fellow Atlanta fans, stop feeding the trolls and instead let's spend our energy getting ready for 2017. "Deeds, not words" and all that. Apparently some guy in Illinois, but expect the courts/NLRB to rectify that matter in due time.
Funny, people seem to forget this league isn't even 20 years old yet. Some of them come across like tMLS has been around for 50 to 75 years and the league is breaking new ground.
On the expansion front, my thoughts: >I rank Orlando's plan first. They may not have as deep pockets, but they have a SSS approved plan, grass field and a downtown location. Small enough stadium that I think the enthusiastic base of fans will fill it. > I rank NYFC next. I put this down in the "too much money too fail' category. Deep pockets, biggest market and at least a temp place to play until stadium deal done. And at least the temp field will be grass, even if a little on the small size. And you would expect them to max out on DP's. Fans will come to this team if the SSS is in the city and popular DP's are signed. If fact, I am going out on a lim to say they will outdraw the NYRB. > I rank MIA next. Beck's knows the game, I feel he is and "his people" also will have more than enough money to pull this off and that franchise will also invest in DP's and have a grass field. Just a political and siting location to get the stadium done. If the perfect mix of a great location, good DP's and a high profile ownership group that really gets into the MIA culture, I think the fans will come. > ATL. The biggest plus is a very rich owner. Rich people don't throw money at projects without much thought, that is why Blank may have taken years to pull the trigger on this deal. Modern stadium with open roof if ok, as long as the downsize looks right and presents soccer in a good light. As for the field, I hope and pray a hybrid field can be used, not a straight artificial field. Houston does it, why not ATL. I know the market is also a lot more hispanic and international than we give credit for and I hope Blank and company go after that, as well as the known soccer community. I also hope they really market regionally - Macon, Chattanooga, Birmingham etc., if nothing else to boost those all important TV numbers. Combine with a occasional double hitter with international teams or national team games. Maybe a 4th of July Fireworks game and try to sell out the whole stadium etc. Maybe marketing tie-in's to Home Depot- discounts with purchases or in reverse, take your soccer ticket to HD for a discount. Could be done very economically with a great upside. Market to all the local colleges as well. Another long shot idea, if ATL is not going to put their own team in USL-3 or partner with a USL team, then why not NASL Silverbacks? They have a small enough stadium in town, easy to move players back and forth. Might actually help the Silverbacks attendance wise. Otherwise, USL Charlotte Eagles don't have an affiliation yet. > As for #24, I vote for MINN , but not the Viking/NFL stadium plan, but the Minnesota United- Minnesota Twins plan, especially if its a grass SSS in the downtown location I have heard about- near the current and planned 4 light rail lines and the commuter rail station.
Okay Trolls, I respect your right to troll, but please just drop the "they could have grass or hybrid" thing. Its not going to happen and not to the fault of the Falcons or ATLMLS. The stadium is used as one huge conference hall. Last year when the Dome hosted the Final Four I remember hearing the turf was covered up for over 3 months between January and April due to different events taking place. Any time of grass is simply not an option.
Did a little more research on the jump from $1b to $1.2 b Information came from this AJC article. http://www.ajc.com/news/news/local/falcons-stadium-price-rises-by-200-million/nbbSY/ "Falcons president Rich McKay attributed the revised budget to a variety of factors, including the plan for an “iconic” eight-sided design, complex retractable roof and 62,000-square-foot video screen within the roof opening. Also driving the price higher, McKay said, were the costs of property acquisition, related road work and weather-proofing an indoor-outdoor facility." "The Falcons didn’t provide a breakdown of costs for specific stadium elements but allocated the $1.2 billion to these broad categories: $102 million for development and pre-construction expenses, including property acquisition and related road work; $73 million for design and professional services; $77 million for systems and equipment; and $948 million for construction and contingency funds." So pretty much the $1b was an estimate and due to the complexity of the design which caused the price to go up. It had nothing to do with the downsizing technology.
I've been on Bigsoccer long enough to know that all the whining Ive seen on these boards for weeks about Atlanta's and NYCFC's stadium situations will grind to a halt if they draw big crowds. Nobody will give a crap then that they play in a baseball or football stadium on turf. These threads were all very common when Seattle and Vancouver entered the league. Now nobody says a peep about either teams turf football stadium because they draw big crowds.
Probably one of the most understated points regarding Atlanta. As I've said before, people are going to be surprised by the support Atlanta will receive.