Don Garber said today that 3 of the 4 expansion franchises are "already spoken for."

If Atlanta's stadium gets built(and it will...trust me), Atlanta will get a team simply based off the fact that the new Georgia Dome will be configured for soccer AND Arthur Blank has the city by the balls. Plus he's a billionaire..

 

Fair enough. Not even a town there but I guess Gander Island counts.

 

Would be a good new home for Chivas?

 

when you have to explain the joke, it was very a lousy joke.
but anyway, haven't you ever heard of a gander change operation?
with my apologies to big soccer, of course.

 

Hmmm. Gander....gender.

Ok.

 

it would be the first instance of a team placed in a location (without a town) for the possibility of a pun on the name that nobody would get.
i understand not everyone would be ready.

 

Just get a stadium plan and 10,000 season ticket deposits and you'll be good to go.

 

Yes nice try but nothing is going to stop the speculation train.

 

A franchise being "spoken" for does not mean a location is definite.

I think we can all agree that Becks has a franchise that should be considered spoken for at this point but we don't yet know the location (although obviously Miami seems to be in play).

 

Our case for San Antonio. Only San Antonio currently meets or exceeds the criteria set by MLS. http://www.total-mls.com/2013-articles/mls2020/mls2020-san-antonio.html

 

How so exactly?! Where has this ever ever been said!?

It hasn't. Total BS. There have been no indications that New Falcons stadium = MLS team.

Besides, does MLS really want a NE Revs South? A team with tiny support in a huge stadium that plays 2nd fiddle to an NFL team all the time?

Me no think so.

 

The overnight numbers are in...and outside of Columbus, the market with the top TV ratings for Tuesday night's game was...MIAMI! Of course. Was there any doubt? Miami-Ft. Lauderdale has consistently been the top-rated soccer TV market for the past 10 years. I have no doubt Miami will top TV ratings for the Brazil World Cup next summer, too.

Here's the ESPN release from this morning...

Best Overnight Rating Ever for a FIFA World Cup Qualifying Match

Last night’s ESPN presentation of the U.S. Men’s National Team’s 2-0 victory over archrival Mexico in Columbus, Ohio, earned a 1.9 overnight rating according to Nielsen, based on the metered markets. This is the highest overnight rating for a U.S. Men’s National Team match in a non-FIFA World Cup or FIFA Confederations Cup tournament.

The previous high was a 1.6 overnight rating for Mexico vs. USA on March 26, 2013, in Mexico City’s Estadio Azteca. Final ratings numbers will be available this afternoon.

Top markets: Columbus (5.1), Miami-Ft Lauderdale (3.3), Buffalo (3.2), Dayton and Washington DC (2.8), San Diego, NYC, Seattle, San Antonio, West Palm Beach (2.5).


Read more here: http://miamiherald.typepad.com/tota...p-tv-ratings-for-us-mexico.html#storylink=cpy

 

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD PEOPLE.

MLS does not decide "oh hey lets put an MLS team here."

There has to be an ownership group that makes the proposition and can write the big ass check.

Right now STL (to our knowledge) has neither.

You obviously have no idea how this MLS thing works.

 

Please explain to me how the new Falcons stadium is "configured for soccer?"

Because a $1 Billion, 65,000 seater, fake turf stadium doesn't sound "configured for soccer" to me.

 

Tropical Park in West Miami-Dade County near the Miami International Airport is one of many locations being discussed as a possible site for an MLS stadium if a team is awarded to Miami.

 

Please read my entire post again, but with sound effects. That whooshing sound you'll hear is the sarcasm plane flying waay overhead.

 

Except, of course, NY2, right?

Just saying, it's not like MLS hasn't decided a market is a crucial/strategic market before so theoretically they could do so again. MLS could decide that St. Louis is such an important market it would warrant wooing investors to put a team there.

That said, I am not quite certain that St. Louis is that important. It'd be really nice to have and it really seems strange that nobody is even cautiously interested... but I doubt that they'd keep out a Minneapolis, Atlanta, etc. for St. Louis's sake.

 

MLS teams play second fiddle to NFL whether they play in same stadium or not. Everyone criticizes the Revs cuz they don't like the feel of the stadium. But it is still a profitable business model, and frankly doesn't involve the same taxpayer subsidies that accompany certain projects.

Remember that Seattle follows the same model, except the owners aren't the exact same.

The reason Revs don't work has many other reasons including what I summarize in short form, "People don't care enough about team to drive out to Foxboro".

That's a completely different issue from NFL teams owning MLS teams doestn't work.

Frankly, I'm not sure there's enough support in Atlanta for a team to be profitable without the synergies of joint ownership, so this actually makes a bit of sense.

 

Well, maybe Bex/Claure and Ross could be persuaded to team up, and we could end up with SS SE.

 

My bad.

 

If Garber thought STL was that important he would have said it by now. He would be publicly campaigning for a STL team just like he did for NYC2.

But you have a point, for all we know he could have had a few phone calls with Stan Kroenke to point out the city in his backyard could be a great MLS market.

I sure hope he has.

 

Where did you hear that?