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

A well attended MLS team also helps pay off that huge debt he has made to finance this stadium.

What about Arthur Blank makes you think he'd treat this like some step child? The man grew Home Depot into what it is, and the Falcons franchise (outside of 1998) was definitely near the bottom in the NFL (on field and off) before he took over in 2002.

 

i agree ... Orlando and SA are doing it correctly and are the model MLS 3.0 expansion franchises ... they have from the ground up built a local passionate fan base, have local soccer-centric committed ownership and have all of the soccer infrastructure in place from stadiums to youth development to local sponsorship/corporate support ... that is the right way to start an MLS team.

not force feeding a NYC2 team where none is desired or wanted by clamouring fans; owned by two sporting giant entities that couldn't give two craps less about MLS by virtue of the fact they spend more in one transfer window or one one half year of salary cap than the entire damn franchise is worth. or jumping in the way back time machine to revive the MLS 1.0 way of building an MLS team like the plan is in ATL and MIN.

 

When we get a team I'll be the first to buy tickets along with my friends who are clamoring for a team...I can't wait for us to make you guys eat a state sized plate of crow

 

because his NFL team is worth 1 BILLION dollars and his MLS would be worth 100 MILLION dollars at best ... so when one thing is worth 10x another thing you tend to give it, properly and sanely, 10x the consideration. it isn't like this guy is a long time soccer junkie and avid supporter.

and because the proof is in the models of guys like him we have ... Kraft, Kronke, Hunt ... Kraft made the patriots a huge success ... and yet the Revs suck donkey balls Kraft couldn't care less and the Revs suit his limited purpose of filling the stadium in the off-season when it would otherwise be empty in a league/model that insulates him from too many loses and allows him to keep at team with minimal expense and input.

 

You'll likely have your choice of good seats.

 

I talked to my wife today about buying season tickets. Yes, we live in Alabama. No, it's not Birmingham. Also, I know other people here that would buy tickets. We are part of the whole, "Atlanta is the regional team of the South that we support," that people from other parts of the country don't think exist.

 

I talked to my wife today about buying season tickets. Yes, we live in Alabama. No, it's not Birmingham. Also, I know other people here that would buy tickets. We are part of the whole, "Atlanta is the regional team of the South that we support," that people from other parts of the country don't think exist.

 

I talked to my wife today about buying season tickets. Yes, we live in Alabama. No, it's not Birmingham. Also, I know other people here that would buy tickets. We are part of the whole, "Atlanta is the regional team of the South that we support," that people from other parts of the country don't think exist.

 

Sorry that it posted 3x.

 

Maybe, but for some reason I get the feeling that the current MLS is in a completely different boat. All of the expansion teams after Chivas have been successful at the gate. I suppose Atlanta could conceivably end up like the NER if its owner completely neglects the team for the next 17 years, but is that likely?

 

and lest anybody forget just how MLS 1.0 this potential ATL MLS bid is remember that Blank has Jim Smith working for him, who if i recall correctly is one of the worst MLS executives to ever work in the league ... correct me if i am wrong Crew fans.

 

To make a team work in Atlanta - notoriously soft pro sports market, not exactly a big soccer town - it's going to take a visionary and 100% committed owner. Blank might care more than Kraft, not exactly a high bar, but he's in a market where outright failure looms as a possibility. Kraft can get by with the bare minimum. Blank might need the absolute maximum to make it work in Atlanta.

 

Scott:

I like you and really want you to get a team, but these clowns don't have the capital (themselves) to own a team.

 

Missed the point, stupid. Atlanta will get in because Blank writes a check. Seattle got in because Paul Allen lets you use his stadium for peanuts.

 

In general, I agree, Kenn. But my point was that it's someone with a big fat check that is the biggest determiner, not a stadium, not being a "youth soccer hotbed" of having a lot of "hispanics" of where a team is going to be located.

 

With that avatar I would prefer if you called me a "hockey puck."

 

Isn't a given that MLS owners have assets that are worth much, much more than their teams? Didn't Grant Wahl report that Lieweke told Alexi Lalas that firing him was one of the least important things he had to do that day? And AEG haven't ever been described as disinterested owners (outside of SJ). Why is it such a red flag when one of the owner's assets happens to be another sports team?

 

Because in Ole's world only certain things count, like NFL teams, but only for certain owners, and not including AEG. Or whatever rules he wants to make on a given day to pretend that his point was still valid.

 

well A. i think houston might also say they've received benign neglect from AEG too; B. it is hard to have a sports ownership with multiple components and give them all equal focus, passion, resources, etc ... especially when there is a huge disparity between the monetary and perceived value between the two C. while some of these owners who's only sports focus is on MLS have other business focuses i think there is something unique to sports that allows them to compartmentalize in a way that doesn't happen between multiple sports components, but that is just speculation ...

i don't really know the why i just see the evidence before my eyes of what teams in MLS are considered "model" franchises in the new MLS and which ones aren't and while there is not a 100% match or a direct causality there sure is a pretty compelling picture of MLS centric ownership being mostly in that group of "model" franchises and not many of the non-MLS centric ownership being in that "model" franchise group.

MLS-centric ownerships
SEA - 3/4 owners sole sports involvement is MLS team
VAN - majority owner & most of rest of ownership group sole sports involvement is MLS team
POR - owner's sole sports involvement is MLS team
RSL - owner's sole sports involvement is MLS team (prior to buyout it was 50/50)
SKC - owner's sole sports involvement is MLS team
MTL - owner's sole sports involvement is MLS team
PHI - owner's sole sports involvement is MLS team
CHI - owner's sole sports involvement is MLS team (a definite exception to the "model" franchise club)

non MLS-centric ownerships
TFC - NHL Leafs pretty clear priority over TFC (hey it's Canada)
DCU - all owners have all sorts of other sports team priorities, Chang had MLB prior to new owners
FCD - NFL and NHL clear sports priority for Hunts
NER - uh, NFL
RBNY - extreme/adventure sports priority 1; multiple other soccer interests at least one of which for now is "bigger" than RBNY but that may change
CHV - Chivas de Guad clear priority
SJE - MLB priority (not a model franchise but not doing too badly)
COL - Arsenal and NFL and other sports priorities
LAG - NHL a slight priority? (maybe an exception as LAG is a model franchise)
HOU - behind the LAG in pecking order but has 50% ownership who are MLS/Hou centric so a wash?

and of course until like yesterday CLB was in the non-MLS centric group and by no means a model franchise but we'll see how MLS-centric ownership changes the club over the next couple of years ... another SKC or another CHI?

so as you can see it isn't a 100% hard and fast causality. if you are non-MLS centric ownership it isn't "impossible" to be a highly successful and a model MLS franchise as LAG show, but it also doesn't seem very common. and inversely being an MLS-centric ownership doesn't guarantee highly successful/model franchise (as Chicago proves) but there do seem to be quite a few in that group.

 

And I think market size appears to be a really big determiner.

2004 - Los Angeles II (MSA #2) and Salt Lake (MSA #50)
2007 - Toronto (CMA #1)
2008 - San Jose 2.0 (MSA #11)
2009 - Seattle (MSA #15)
2010 - Philadelphia (MSA #6)
2011 - Vancouver (CMA #3) and Portland (MSA #24)
2012 - Montreal (CMA #2)
2015 - New York II (MSA #1)

Stadium solutions were in existence (or renovations planned) in seven of those ten, two others finally got done and we don't know about NYII.

As for TV market ranks (as of the first season, may be different today):

2004 - Los Angeles II (#2) and Salt Lake (#36)
2007 - Toronto (#1CDN)
2008 - San Jose 2.0 (#6)
2009 - Seattle (#13)
2010 - Philadelphia (#4)
2011 - Vancouver (#3CDN) and Portland (#22)
2012 - Montreal (#2CDN)
2015 - New York II (#1)

The current top US TV markets without an MLS team (this is not new information):

9 Atlanta.......2,326,840 TVHH
11 Detroit......1,845,920
13 Phoenix......1,812,040
14 Tampa........1,806,560
15 Minneapolis..1,728,050
16 Miami........1,621,130
18 Cleveland....1,485,140
19 Orlando......1,453,170
20 Sacramento...1,387,710
21 St. Louis....1,243,490
23 Pittsburgh...1,165,740
24 Raleigh......1,150,350
25 Charlotte....1,136,420
26 Indianapolis.1,089,700
27 Baltimore....1,085,070

No one else even brings 1% of the US TVHH to the table. Wichita is market #66. I can't see what Wichita brings to MLS in 2020.

The ability to write a check trumped a lot of things in 2004. It doesn't trump the other things today, and that will be even more true in 2020.

I do agree with you, though, the bit about "soccer hotbed" and "favorable demographics" is shaman-speak.

It seems like most people (here), when asked their opinion about a particular market's chances for MLS, do some sort of nebulous math ("I've heard of it...I guess it has a lot of people there...it would be fine, I guess") unless they actually live there, in which case it's a slam dunk, can't miss proposition in their minds.

The BoG does things a little differently, it seems. I am going to venture a guess they look at things that can actually help their business overall. Based on their track record to this point, I'm inclined to think they're less haphazard than most and way less haphazard than most seem to think.

 

no ... again you are purposely misrepresenting and misunderstanding my point ... no surprise.

if you break the league down into two groups, mls-centric and non-mls centric and ask yourself "which group would i rather my team belong to in regards to overall franchise quality, taken on the whole" i think the answer is pretty damn clear unless you are just purposefully being obtuse ... i mean choosing between SEA, POR, VAN, MTL, SKC, PHI, RSL, CHI and LAG, HOU, FCD, COL, DCU, NER, TFC, SJE, CHV, RBNY, (and until very recently CLB) isn't that hard.

and again ... for the record ... i am not suggesting 100%, ironclad causality ... obviously LAG/HOU and CHI show exceptions are possible ... but there is something to it or the overall disparity between the two groups wouldn't be so obvious.

 

Hey, seeing Kansas City turn around and become such a strong Soccer city has convinced me this is more than possible....

 

Let me just add, I think a lot of people will come that first season maybe just to see the stadium if nothing else!

The thing will truly be world class.

 

No, i'm pointing out that you have created an arbitrary line between MLS and non-MLS-centric owners and then deiced that's the primary reason for team's success or not, ignoring a multitude of other factors and creating "exceptions" when it fits your point.

But we don't need to go round and round again because clearly we're never going to be on anything but opposite sides of this one.

 

i imagine that it has a lot to do with "competence" of the mls ownership and "competence" is probably added greatly by passion for, focus on and dedication to soccer and MLS.

that is perhaps why AEG bucks the trend because while they have other sporting priorities their passion and dedication to soccer and MLS is hardly in question; and also perhaps why no matter how mls-centric the Chicago ownership that is overwhelmed by its incompetence.

so the question will be answered over the next couple of years, how competent will the Precourt ownership turn out to be.