Commish Says Portland in in 2011 if...

Discussion in 'Portland Timbers' started by PDXTimbersFC, Oct 8, 2008.

  1. PDXTimbersFC New Member

    Member Since:
    Aug 3, 2008
    Location:
    Portland
          
  2. Eckstoss BigSoccer Yellow Card

    Member Since:
    Oct 31, 2007
    Speaking objectively, that's nice to hear, but I'd be careful about what we make of that. I wouldn't have expected something that concrete, but at the same time I think Garber says this to every city. This kind of soft commitment is cheap for him to dish out because there's nothing in writing.

    We need to get the funding approved - which seems likely - while ALSO continuing to make the case for Portland in general.

    With approved funding for a great stadium, I think we are ahead of Vancouver and St. Louis - these are identically sized media markets but have other issues of their own. However, Montreal and NYC2 would continue to be tough competitors given the shear size of their markets.
  3. Sport Billy Moderator

    Member Since:
    May 25, 2006
    Until it's an e-mail from Garber, it means nothing. St. Louis was told over a year ago they would get ateam and that was stated on MLS's wibsite. Seattle had a letter from MLS telling them they would get in, but it took 8 years.


    What is an issue for St. Louis. - I can think of a couple, but what are your thoughts?
  4. Lu Grego New Member

    Member Since:
    Feb 21, 2008
    Location:
    Maryland
    This is just Garber playing games like he did with St. Louis and Philly. He is just trying to put pressure on Portland to get their funding together. Why would he make such an announcement before the deadline anyway.
  5. texgator New Member

    Member Since:
    Oct 28, 2003
    Location:
    Plano
    You guys should stay in the USL, you'll have better chances of winning international games that way. LOL.


    Good luck....a Portland-Seattle rivalry in MLS would be sweet.
  6. Sport Billy Moderator

    Member Since:
    May 25, 2006
    BTW, the thread title is very misleading -

    It should be Paulson Tells City That Garber Told Him Portland Will Be In In 20011 if ... the city gives him $120 million.
  7. Hierarchyfive Member

    Member Since:
    Sep 17, 2005
    Location:
    Portland
    Club:
    Portland Timbers
    Country:
    United States
    Garber is like a used cars salesman with his comments.

    However, I do believe that if we can get the approval for the Beavers park and renovations that we will get in.
  8. KdaleB New Member

    Member Since:
    Mar 11, 1999
    Location:
    Vancouver, WA
    Club:
    DC United
    Country:
    United States
    Here's the quote from the story:

    "Major League Soccer's commissioner has said Portland would get an expansion team in 2011 if the city built a soccer-specific stadium, according to a city e-mail."

    So your title would also be misleading...
  9. Sport Billy Moderator

    Member Since:
    May 25, 2006
    Sorry - you are correct. It's only $85 Mil. I some how counted the baseball stadium twice. I apologize.

    But, the e-mail isn't from Garber or anything. The e-mail is from the city reporting what Paulson said about what he claims Garber said. The title and the quote you give both make it appear that the e-mail was from Garber.
  10. PDXTimbersFC New Member

    Member Since:
    Aug 3, 2008
    Location:
    Portland
    This is true that the thread title is a little misleading.

    And I do agree that unless it is in writing with Garber's signature I will not take it to heart. Either way Portland still has a promising shot as long as said public financing or some other agreement between Paulson and the city comes to light.
  11. Kayak Member+

    Member Since:
    Feb 16, 2007
    Location:
    Columbus
    Whatever, I’ll take it as good news I’m hoping for Portland St. Louis expansion. I had banners for CCS but had them confiscated for being in the wrong section of the stadium. I would have fought with the security guy more but it was either that or enjoy the game.
  12. KdaleB New Member

    Member Since:
    Mar 11, 1999
    Location:
    Vancouver, WA
    Club:
    DC United
    Country:
    United States
    Do you have particular knowledge of that e-mail?

    The story is kind of vague... was it an e-mail from the city to the writer that was part of some sort of interview? Was it some sort of internal communication that was FOIA'd? I'd guess the former. Without further knowledge of the exact wording of the e-mail, I think we're all just throwing WAG's against the wall. I know that Garber has been to Portland several times; I'm sure that city leaders have had some sort of direct communication with his office in this process. There have been plenty of opportunities for a statement like that to get to the city leaders without getting washed through Paulson first.

    All that said, even if Garber communicated that directly to the city in some form (whether verbally, in an e-mail, or even in a letter) it isn't worth a thing unless its in some sort of contract (which it isn't).
  13. Eckstoss BigSoccer Yellow Card

    Member Since:
    Oct 31, 2007
    We do know the exact wording as the email was actually posted on MLS-rumors.net.

    It was a city official reporting that Paulson had told him that Garber told Paulson that Portland would get MLS if the Stadium was worked out.

    I honestly don't doubt Garber said that to Paulson, but completely doubt how genuine or significant that statement is. He says that to every city, so I think we can just ignore the comment entirely.
  14. Sport Billy Moderator

    Member Since:
    May 25, 2006
    If you follow the links in the first story, it is in there.

    http://blog.oregonlive.com/portlandcityhall/2008/10/081008.logsdon.email.0820.PDF

    That e-mail is from Dave Logsdon, Spectator Facilities Manager, recapping a meeting he had with Paulson and Don Mazz.

    Here is the exact line:

    "MLS Commissioner told Merritt that if Portland solves the venue issue, we will get the next expansion franchise( team# 17) and would start in 2011. MLS intends to award next two franchisesin early 2009."

    So, you have Logsdon's summary of Paulson's summary of a conversation he had with Garber.
  15. Sport Billy Moderator

    Member Since:
    May 25, 2006
    So that everone is one the same page:

    Paulson's Proposal to the city:
    http://blog.oregonlive.com/portlandcityhall/2008/10/081008.paulson.proposal.PDF

    The city hired consultant Public Financial Management to review Paulson's Proposal.
    Here is PFM's review:
    http://blog.oregonlive.com/portlandcityhall/2008/10/081008.pfmgroup.study.pdf

    This report is only a week old and is referred to as a "smell test."

    In addition to saying the Paulson's proposal is incomplete, they are calling for many follow-up activities or "next steps".

    I cannot see completing "feasibility studies", identifying "additional revenue streams", identifying "funding sources", crafting a "risk profile", crafting a "comprehensive funding plan" AND getting this all reviewed discussed and voted on by the politicos in time to be awarded a team for this round.
  16. Fenerbace Member

    Member Since:
    Oct 8, 2008
    Club:
    Portland Timbers
    Country:
    Turkey
    But the city is working on a schedule that allows them to vote in January and MLS is working to accomodate that schedule so that they can incorporate the city council's decision into their consideration of each city.

    There is nothing new here and just because the city is still gathering the information they need to vote in 2-3 months doesn't at all mean there is any risk to the schedule that the City, Paulson and MLS are working together on.

    I understand the desire to see otherwise from other candidate cities, but there's no problem in the fact that the city is still gathering information.
  17. Seph New Member

    Member Since:
    Dec 2, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, Mo., USA
    Club:
    St. Louis Lions
    Country:
    United States
    MLS's "schedule" has always been flexible to suit their needs. There is still a strong possibility of one team being announced at the Cup this fall, which would leave Portland fighting for the one remaining spot.

    Even if the league waits, Portland is cutting it awfully close. If anything at all delays the Portland council's decision even a little, the window of opportunity is gone.
  18. Sport Billy Moderator

    Member Since:
    May 25, 2006
    Unlike getting into the PNW market (Seattle) and getting into the 4th largest market (Philly), none of the candidate cities really offer much over the competing cities - save NYC. So, I don't see MLS waiting around very long for city X if Cities Y & Z are ready and MLS knows it could bring it city X the following year. (Assuming of course that MLS actually wants XY&Z)
  19. Fenerbace Member

    Member Since:
    Oct 8, 2008
    Club:
    Portland Timbers
    Country:
    Turkey
    Completely disagree on what you think MLS would do as far as the schedule based on:
    1) Paulson's statements that he is working very closely with MLS and there is no problem with a January vote schedule
    2) when its a matter of a couple of months on what is a major expansion decision, MLS has absolutely no reason to make a premature decision before every city has played out the key details of their plan.

    Seattle had 18 months to prep between announcement and MLS kickoff which was seen as plenty of prep time, while a March '09 announcement would allow for 2 years between announcement and an April '11 kickoff, so there is no real time pressure on MLS.

    When you have all the leverage, the basic negotiation tactic is to continue to let competitors play off eachother. MLS has every reason to wait and let (pressure) all the applicant cities to make their best case.

    So even if you think Paulson is lying and not working with MLS on the city vote schedule, you can't really believe MLS won't take it's time to really see what the options are - especially when Portland's last remaining detail is a scheduled city council vote that would make or break the bid.
  20. Sport Billy Moderator

    Member Since:
    May 25, 2006
    Seattle didn't have a stadium to be built or modified.

    Philly, was named in January of 2008 to start play in April 2010.
    They still haven't broken ground. It's going to be close.

    My point is that if two cities are ready and MLS wants those two cities, why wait for a city that isn't ready when you can bring them in the next year?
  21. Fenerbace Member

    Member Since:
    Oct 8, 2008
    Club:
    Portland Timbers
    Country:
    Turkey
    If having the most ready facilities was the deciding factor, Portland and Montreal would be in better shape than cities like that need to build complete stadia.

    No, I don't think facilities read iness will force MLS to accelerate their schedule by 60 days or so.

    MLS could decide in a couple weeks if they wanted to I suppose, but between their options to:
    1) decide in early November and not have a full picture of all the candidate cities
    OR
    2) wait until January and let the remaining details of all the cities' bids play out, thereby retaining the ability to keep pressuring all cities to continue to improve their package

    I think you clearly go with #2. That and again, Paulson has confirmed that MLS is aligned with Portland's January city council vote schedule.

    Given the logic and Merritt's statements, I don't understand why you keep trying to make this point.

    MLS will wait for Portland's vote in January before doling out both slots at least.
  22. Sport Billy Moderator

    Member Since:
    May 25, 2006
    It's the same rhetoric you hear in every city AND I know how long all of that took in St. Louis and I don't see how you have time. Still needing feasibility studies??? Don't get me wrong, If I had my choice I'd chose St. Louis and Portland (with NYC coming in the moment they are ready).

    But I don't see Portland being ready for a January vote.

    That being said, I agree MLS will wait Nov ---> Jan, but I don't see them waiting Jan ---> Mar/Apr
  23. Fenerbace Member

    Member Since:
    Oct 8, 2008
    Club:
    Portland Timbers
    Country:
    Turkey
    You can believe what you want based on scraps of information, but people close to the city council don't indicate there is any slip in a schedule for a January vote - as of the meetup last week everything with the city was proceeding to that timeline.
  24. Sport Billy Moderator

    Member Since:
    May 25, 2006
    I hope that's true. I really do.
  25. The Marquis Moderator

    Member Since:
    Aug 13, 2007
    Location:
    Vancouver, WA
    Club:
    Portland Timbers
    Country:
    United States
    Besides I get a feeling that Timbers MLS is a big deal to 2 council members and 1 other it's something he thinks would be good and is a current Timbers fan. There is a 4th that is a ? and a 5th yet to be elected, which if one of the two is, she could be on board just because she's a fan... perhaps a Liverpool friendly would entice her. It's a statement when a possible 3 of the 5 (2 of the 5 at the least) city council members are soccer fans, and a 4th wants the baseball stadium built more than anything. It's his project. The council really seems keen on pushing this through and they seem pretty understanding of the deadlines. All I know is that Councilman Randy Leonard will not let the council forget about this or move past it in January.

Share This Page