Because USL/NASL success, or lack thereof, has been a completely unreliable indicator of MLS success. I notice, for instance, that you failed to list Toronto or Seattle in your post; you and I both know the reason for that.
For the same reason the UFC would by Pride, StrikeForce, and WEC - control all the major entities in the industry. Besides, division 1 can only grow so large, then where do you go? Naturally, division 2.
I actually said in my post that minor league attendance wasn't important at all for Toronto or Philadelphia. Seattle actually drew fairly well for minor league, not Montreal or Orlando standard but not hideously either.
Quakes 1.0 were being pursued by Club America, who was looking at moving them to Houston for Aguilas USA. In fact, Club America officials toured the Astrodome with a plan in mind to have the team play there. As for Pachuca - their eyes were clearly fixed on the "Orlando Tuzos" before Phil Rawlins moved the Austin Aztex, forming Orlando City (who may be end up as team #20) Could you imagine Becks or Titi Henry vs. Houston Aguilas, Orlando Tuzos, or Barca Miami?!?
Their eyes were briefly and teasingly fixed on Orlando. And Phoenix before that. And San Jose before that. I hope we meet them in the Champions League and kick their asses.
This should be MLS in 2013: 1 New York Cosmos 2 Los Angeles Galaxy 3 Seattle Sounders 4 Chicago Fire 5 DC United 6 Houston Dynamo 7 Sporting Kansas City 8 New England Revolution 9 Philadelphia Union 10 FC Dallas 11 New York Red Bulls 12 Portland Timbers 13 Toronto FC 14 Montreal Impact 15 Colorado Rapids 16 Vancouver Whitecaps 17 Real Salt Lake 18 Columbus Crew 19 Orlando City 20 San Jose Earthquakes Looks perfect this way.
I just don't buy that Orlando will be able to fill 18,000+ each match, which is the new MLS standard. Miami and Tampa were unable to do it and I don't anticipate them getting another chance any time soon.
I think Garber would like to put a team in South Florida and/or Tampa Bay. But I also think he wants to make sure there is solid grassroots support in those areas first before comitting. Contracting those markets ten years ago still burns in their memory banks.
Miami and Tampa came a few years after the original Strikers and Rowdies fan bases were wittled down to nothing in the minors, then thumbed their noses at history like everybody else did initially. If they had become the Strikers and Rowdies in 2000, when the Clash became the Earthquakes again, I think things might've been different. They still have a little work to do in order to rebuild their fan bases. Orlando can say a lot about their ability to support a franchise in 2012, but I can say the supporter culture is extremely strong, with yet another club forming recently.
Garber knows putting another team in South Florida/Tampa is too much to gamble with right now. Too much positive expansion in other areas. Would Don like a team in the Southeast? Yes, he's said for years he wants a team south of DCU. Is it in the best interest of MLS to gain fans down there in the southeast? Yes, but only if the people will put their butts in the seats, buy the scarves and watch it on TV. Right now MLS can't take that risk.
NYC, St.Louis, Minnesota, San Diego & another club in Canada, if Chivas doesn't move to SD and DC United doesn't move outside the DC area(Virginia/Baltimore) to one of those cities. Not necessarily in that order, I see as potential near future options to bring the league to 24. Personally I would love to see clubs in Memphis(lol), Nashville, Atlanta, Charlotte, Birmingham(Al. lol), and one or two in Florida, but I dont see it happening anytime in my lifetime. I agree with those that have said MLS should grow in talent before they get to big though and to draw more international stars here.
It may be the new MLS "standard" for expansion teams, but half the league doesn't get 18k per game (or didn't in 2011). What Tampa and Miami couldn't do in MLS 1.0 isn't necessarily a referendum on what they could do today, or what Orlando could do today, though everyone tries to make these statements based on some idea that "Florida" doesn't work. Committed ownership, good stadium situations, smart front office...neither Tampa Bay nor Miami had any of those things (though Lockhart was far from the worst stadium situation MLS has ever had). I'd be interested to see what they could do with all of them. It is a big leap from 5k a game in D3 to 18k a game in MLS, but the whole dynamic changes when you move to MLS 2.0. Seattle's one example, but the Toronto market did nothing for its A-League team and look at it now. Salt Lake's D3 team was one of the better-drawing D3 teams, and they've done well in MLS. Vancouver was a well-run D2 team, but they quadrupled crowds over their D2 days in MLS. And Portland has basically doubled theirs. I'm not sure what happened before is a perfect indicator of what would happen now. The landscape has changed quite a bit. This league is no longer seen by anyone but the most rabid anti-soccer media types as having the potential of failure. It's got a tremendous infrastructure now, and a place at the table where it was denied one for years. It's here, its teams are parts of the sporting fabric of the communities in which they play. And the sport itself, as a spectator sport, is leaps and bounds ahead of where it was ten years ago and you can see that any time our national teams play as well as what MLS teams can draw. Ask yourself this....who has ponied up lately to get into MLS, built a proper stadium and had solid ownership and vision and not been successful? Chivas? That's been an exercise in ethnic pandering and they're not had a lot of continuity in their organization. San Jose's not there yet, but do you think they're going to be solid when their new stadium gets built or not? Who else? So why couldn't Orlando or Atlanta or even Tampa Bay or Miami be successful now if the pieces were there?
I'm nervous about Miami, but your point is well-taken. It all comes down to the pieces being in place. If I was sure that there was a well-heeled ownership group who gets soccer culture and had a great stadium plan in place, then for sure I'd say, "Welcome to MLS." I'd like to see how the Rowdies and Strikers develop over the next few years and possibly look at them as potential #21 and #22. I really think MLS would like to bring in Florida teams in a pair for the rivalry aspect. I'd like StL to get it together so that SKC could have a natural rival, as well.
I think expansion depends mostly on AEG and whether or not they have a good venue in the area. If AEG does not feel like it has a good venue in that area then you can bet expansion picks up steam there. If you don't believe me, I point to Sacramento. About two months ago, the MLS website came out with a press release touting Sacramento as a potential MLS market. Freaking Sacramento. No history of soccer, no lower division team. Why? Because right now the Sacramento Kings are threatening to move to Anaheim. AEG wants to fund part of the construction of a new arena in Sac in return for 35 year operation rights. AEG uses MLS as a bargaining chip. A couple of things are going on that impacts AEG and thus impact expansion. (1) Live Nation merged with Ticket Master. Live Nation may have to sell some facilities to AEG in order to gain approval for the merger. (2) AEG is starting an in-house ticketing system called AXS. The highest profit margins for AEG is to control all three: the act, the facility and the ticketing. AEG has AEG Live where it programs its acts in your venue. But more and more, AEG is trying to operate facilities and book the act. So to me, it makes sense to look at what facilities SMG (competitor), LiveNation (competitor) and AEG own. If AEG operates a relatively new arena in a market then it is most likely open to another owner to start a franchise. IF AEG does not have a presence in a market at all or if the venue is too small then AEG probably wants to go in there and do it their way with the stadium location/operating contract and then sell. Think about NY Red Bull. Red Bull bought AEG rights to the Harrison stadium for $100 million. Construction was delayed. In the meantime, AEG finalized agreements to operate the Prudential Center in Newark and Barclays Center in Brooklyn. So they now have other venues. Now that AEG is doing ok in the market, MLS can think long-term about the perfect venue in the perfect spot. Think about Houston and San Jose. San Jose gets moved to Houston. Many teams were having stadium issues. But look at the other venues in Houston. All the Reliant stadium properties are operated by SMG. Toyota Center is not an AEG facility. So AEG profits are limited. AEG builds a venue in downtown Houston. After it opens and the contracts written and finalized, will sell the 50% remaining ownership. Think about Chicago. Soldier Field is operated by SMG. United Center is not an AEG facility. AEG builds Bridgeview stadium. After it opens and the contracts written and finalized, sells to Hauptman. AEG Live events go through it. Think about Philly. Sakiewicz, President of AEG New York, goes from NY Metro Stars to Philly Union to get the expansion team and PPL Park up and running. AEG Live events go through it. Now AEG operates facilities in Seattle (Key Arena), Portland (Rose Garden and Memorial Coliseum), Kansas City (Sprint Center), Salt Lake (Maverik Center), Denver (1stBank Center), Dallas (Verizon Theatre), New England (Rentschler Field), San Jose (Warfield, Regency Ballroom). So if shit hits the fan or for some reason you have a falling out, AEG is covered in those markets. But you can bet AEG has agreements with the owners in those markets for AEG Live to come through. Columbus got a stage after Germain Amphitheatre closed and AEG Live has events there. DC is a mess...I don't know AEGs presence there. With Canada, I don't know if AEG even operates there. But Canadian expansion is most likely finished. So where do AEG have newer arenas out of the possible expansion cities. These cities are probably free to start with local ownership. New York- Prudential Center, Barclays Center- No current lower team San Antonio- AT&T Center- Scorpions (NASL) Charlotte- Time Warner Cable Arena- Relatively close to Railhawks (NASL) Miami- American Airlines Arena- Strikers (NASL) Phoenix- Jobing.com Arena- No current team Orlando- Amway Center- Orlando City (USL Pro) (*If contract renewed) Where does AEG have kind of older arenas or a small venue where they may want a newer venue: Minnesota- Target Center- Stars (NASL) San Diego- Valley View Casino Center- None Las Vegas- Colosseum at Ceasar's Palace- No current team Where does AEG really not have their own facility at all (as far as I know): Atlanta- Silverbacks (NASL)
Sacramento has nothing to do with AEG, the proposed ownership group is totally different and the area in the 'burbs. Hardly prime live music venue stuff.
It wasn't a press release. It was a roundup of news reported by other outlets. In this particular case, the story was reported by the Sacramento Bee. This is what the MLS website does now, when it's not reporting outright rumors. The rest of what you wrote is Da Vinci Code stuff.
You are righ; So 18K is the standard, yet the best MLS season ever finished with 17,872 average My FIRE finished below 15K; I guess we are not up to standard. Good analysis, but just a fact, AEG does not own Toyota Park, the Village does.
It is important to note when discussing South Florida that, while both are in the same statistical metro area/media market, Miami and Fort Lauderdale are two very different animals. Miami is risky, very risky. Even having the name attached to teams that play in Fort Lauderdale drags support down(see Fusion and 2009/10 Miami FC). There really isn't any suitable venue for a MLS club as we stand today in Miami/Dade and essentially zero chance for any public money for a new one after the Marlins ballpark fiasco. Aside from that there is the deceptive demographics. Lots of Latin fans who love soccer, but love their soccer. Latin and Euro leagues and national teams. It could work in Miami but it would take a stellar stadium and Galaxy/RBNY level talent on a consistent basis for it to thrive long term. Fort Lauderdale on the other hand, when not disrespected with asinine branding decisions, has drawn consistently solid support over the various iterations of the Strikers(in line with what division they played in). The history and support is there. Absolutely. Perhaps in the end it winds up being one of the two and Orlando, but honestly I think all 3 could end up in MLS some day. Major pieces need to fall into place in all 3 markets, but the potential is there for what would easily be the best intra-Florida rivalry in all of major league pro sports, hell the only intra-Florida rivalry in pro sports. Strikers-Rowdies is the only one that really means something, and I think Orlando would fit in nicely. Also the travel aspect is an advantage of having 2 teams in Florida. Other teams would fly in and do the Florida stop in one trip, like NBA and NHL teams generally do. MLS really screwed things up the first time in Florida. It would really sting if they came back to the state but did not make amends in Fort Lauderdale and Tampa Bay first. A 3 team derby with those two and Orlando would be EPIC and I think would be a great success. Until then, the teams we have now are exciting and I can't wait for the first proper Fort Lauderdale Strikers vs. Tampa Bay Rowdies(they got their name back if you didn't know) match since 1993. It's gonna be a special day for soccer in Florida and I don't think any fan in either city will give a damn what division it's being played in.
I'd like to see the battle royal in Fla. I think it is the three cities, Tampa, Ft Lauderdale and Orlando have the best chances. But their are out of the picture for a while with Garbers fixation on NYC2 (I won't mind that either)!
Orlando, Tampa and Ft. Lauderdale MLS clubs would make great television. Matches would be intense. The home and traveling SG's would bring Zany to a whole new level.