Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Atlanta Silverbacks FC' started by MLSinSTL, Apr 27, 2010.
Railhawks media guide (which you can read at their website)
Interesting comments from NASL PR director Kartik Krishnaiyer.
RR: Do you feel as though next year when you have the two expansion franchises in Atlanta and Edmonton making a 10-team league that the NASL will be sanctioned to stand on its own by the USSF?
KK: Yes, I believe so.
RR: Any particular reason for that?
KK: Because we meet all the thresholds. There’s a clear outline and criteria that the Federation has for sanctioning a second division league and we meet all of those thresholds. The previous sanctioning process that ended up in this hybrid league was because of the lawsuit against three of our teams, including the Rowdies, by USL.
Not totally clear but NASL is planning on Atlanta for 2011.
Also, Railhawks owner Wellman said this in January regarding Atlanta and 2011:
You're having a general meeting [in Fort Lauderdale] right now. Do you have nine teams meeting there?
We have nine teams and we have four visiting teams that are prospects that would like to consider joining our league.
They are there to consider you or you to consider them?
Both. Meet everybody, chat with them, start talking about 2011 and joining the NASL.
Is Atlanta one of them?
No, Atlanta is already a member of NASL. They're not part of the nine, though. We have nine team that will play in 2010. Atlanta will rejoin the league in 2011. They're number 10. We'll have an announcement of another franchise within the next two weeks that will start in 2011. That will be 11. Then we have four others here who are talking with us and will be meeting with us about 2011.
That's an interesting question to Kartik. I just wish someone had asked specifically what was going on with Atlanta. I guess we'll all just have to wait until something more concrete comes out about Atlanta.
http://www.nasl.com/ Has ATL at the top of their site, so it must be true. But I am wondering as well why ATL's Website hasnt been updated.
Probably because they are too busy organising a game against the FC New York (lol)
FC New York , is that an imaginary team? I looked on http://www.uslsoccer.com/teams/ and dont see such a team.
Never mind i see them on the Super Y-League. lol
Some posters have claimed that ''FC'' stands for ''Fantasy Club'' (lol)
It means absolutely nothing. The 'Backs, as far as I can tell, have shown no signs of life at all. Now, I'm not in the loop at all, and am not privy to any information of any sort, but there has been no indication whatsoever around these parts that the Silverbacks are ever coming back, much less next year. They can put the logo on their website all they want; when we see a team and a coach, that will be the proof of the pudding. If they do come back, I don't see them lasting more than one season; I'm afraid they made too many people mad on the last go-round.
Yea, i kinda wish they would follow Edmonton's led on how to start an NASL Expansion team.
I've heard from some of the old Silverbacks USL coaching staff and they say they are going to prepare for a 2011 in the NASL.
Maybe they are; but only they know for sure. They're certainly not saying anything about it.
Thanks. I just thought it Kind of strange that NASL would have them on their site if there was no truth to it.
Which is totally wrong, they should already be CREATING A BUZZ
Wait, now; this is soccer. We're supposed to know all this stuff and just show up, remember? Marketing and advertising is a negative return, and is beneath them.
Well it seems that these guys are alive and kicking, they have just announced some trials (lol)
Garber keeps mentioning Atlanta and South Florida, because he knows deep pocketed billionaires there, who have already shown an interest in MLS and whose money Garber is obviously interested in: Blank in Atlanta and Claure in Miami/South Florida. Traffic might also qualify as an investor Garber is interested in; not sure how their money stacks up compared to Claure or Blank.
It's pretty annoying seeing Tampa draw well and Miami/Ft. Lauderdale draw poorly and Atlanta not even have a team currently, while being ignored by Garber, but in spite of Garber's talk of the importance of the fan base and supporter groups, nothing will happen in Tampa without a sufficiently large investor. At that point, Garber will start talking Tampa - this could happen literally overnight, too; the "MLS expansion death race" has been turned upside down on more than a few occasions by the sudden appearance of a new investor interested in MLS.
Having local soccer fan support guarantees nothing, but proving that there is local support can help draw in big investors - see Philly, Portland, etc. There are potential investors out there. The Glazers won't be overextended with Manchester United forever. Hank Steinbrenner is on the Rowdies advisory board. The developers trying to build a soccer stadium and shopping center and monorail(!) at the Fairgrounds presumably have deep pockets, and probably have or are connected to more than a few billionaires, and if they intend to build a SSS they will need a tenant to occupy it - so who knows the Rowdies could come up with a SSS and deep pocketed new co-owners for an MLS bid in a year or two from now. Yes it may seem unlikely now, but these things can happen, fast, when they do happen, so making predictions based on "what we know now" can often prove futile.
It would certainly help Atlanta's case if they actually had a team in D2 and could prove that they have a loyal fan base. It doesn't guarantee anything, but it can help. Having nothing sucks: ask the fans in the Tampa Bay area circa 2002-2009.
If Hank Steinbrenner Involvement might help Tampa push to the MLS.
Well, he's only on the advisory board, but he did grow up watching the Rowdies at Tampa Stadium as a kid. He might have no interest in MLS, and only be on the board to help the current ownership get off to a proper start (the Rowdies playing a GSF is obviously his doing).
We've no idea if he would be interested in investing in a Rowdies MLS bid. Even if he is interested, he might spread his risk as a minority investor together with the current owners and some new, deep pocketed investor(s).
In short anything is possible; ain't I a font of useless information?
And ask Atlanta 2009-present. If ATL had a D-2 team that was run like a sports franchise, and not like somebody's toy, people would show up, and that might help. Otherwise, it doesn't matter. But both TO and Seattle have shown that D-2 attendance, or the lack thereof, is no indicator of potential MLS attendance. Great D-2 attendance looks good (i.e., Vancouver, Portland, Montreal, Rochester), and an MLS team would probably draw well there (unless they really sucked, and sometimes they show up anyway ), but bad D-2 attendance usually indicates that a) the team has either no $$$ to advertise, or no desire to do so, b) the team is a throw-together, cut-rate operation, that really sucks, and nobody cares about, or c) the fans have the "when MLS gets here, then we'll show up" mentality.
Yes I agree to an extent, but that's not the whole picture, IMO. Would we have the Philadelphia Union today if it weren't for Sons of Ben? Or Portland Timbers in MLS if it weren't for the Timbers Army? The Portland Timbers weren't exactly the best marketed or best run team in USL for much of their history prior to MLS. The Timbers fans did things for themselves regardless.
The Rowdies drawing well, on a very modest marketing budget, has to say something about the potential of the Tampa Bay market for MLS. It is simply a matter of keeping it going until a deep pocketed investor takes interest. I mean, if you were a billionaire looking to find a city and possible local partners for an MLS bid, and you were taken to a Rowdies game, and then a Miami FC game, which market would you find more attractive? It always helps to see actual proof that a pro soccer fanbase already exists before you shell out a few score millions of dollars on an MLS bid.
It is pretty insane that Atlanta now has two SSS and yet no D2 team. Portland and Vancouver and Seattle can boast of ownership groups who, in whole or in part, made the transition from USL to MLS. Why couldn't a potential ownership group in Atlanta (ie Blank) do likewise? I guess some billionaires are just too proud to be seen owning and operating a "minor league" soccer team.
Also, having a successful D2 team is probably more relevant to Tampa anyway since it is Tampa Bay that didn't have an MLS owner (circa 1996-2001) and it is Tampa Bay that is being ignored by Garber, not Miami/South Florida or Atlanta.
So my points about having a good fanbase/supporters group matters in Tampa simply due to the negative stereotypes that have been allowed to build up about Tampa Bay since the MLS contraction, and due to the lack of a potential MLS ownership group in Tampa Bay, currently.
So my points don't apply anywhere near as much to Miami/South Florida or to Atlanta, since Garber already has potential owners there who he is interested in.
Atlanta has only one SSS, at KSU. I don't know which other one you're talking about, unless it's Herndon, and it's a college football stadium. Silverbacks Park only seats 3-4000, and hardly qualifies as a "stadium."
As far as Blank is concerned, it seems that he took a rather sizable hit in the economic downturn. That's one of the reasons he didn't continue with the MLS to start with (that, and the stadium issue). As far as D-2 goes, Blank has no affiliation with the Silverbacks at all, and Boris probably wouldn't sell them to him, so I don't really know where you're going with that. Owning a "minor league" franchise wouldn't phase him, as he was the owner of the AFL Georgia Force. If you're suggesting that he do an end-run around the 'Backs, and put a team in either the NASL or USL, keep dreaming, kid; ain't gonna happen. It'd be cool, but it ain't happening.
I was referencing the Atlanta Beat's new SSS at KSU, and the RE/MAX stadium the Silverbacks used. Wiki says RE/MAX is 5,000 expandable to over 7,500; KSU is over 8,000. Either is big enough for D2.
My point exactly. Blank is not going to bother with D2 soccer because he's not really 'into it' for the soccer itself; remember, I said minor league soccer; please note that I did not say AFL or minor league sports in general. I think you're trying to read far too much into my comments. And either missing or ignoring the actual points I was trying to make. Oh well. It doesn't matter.
Yeah, KSU is plenty big for D-2, but Silverbacks Park (no longer called RE/Max; they lost the sponsorship), despite what Wiki says, is not 5,000; even their media guide listed it at 4,000 (but it's more like 3,000; their average crowd just about packs the house ). It might get to 7500 if expanded, but not much bigger than that (there was the original plan to expand it to 15,000, but it probably wouldn't happen without another land buy for additional parking, plus the expansion would destroy the rest of the complex). Like I said, it barely qualifies for a stadium as is (albeit it is a decent place to watch a soccer game), although the SSS part is right.
I took your comments at face value, and respectfully disagreed. The reason ATL has no D-2 team, but two SSS is because the owner of our D- team made some bonehead moves in the past that finally caught up with him. It has nothing to do with Blank (nor his pride), or anyone else.
The Silverbacks will not be joining NASL next year. Maybe 2012 but not 2011. Might have better luck with USL and getting the Blackhawks upgraded to D2 status is USL is still in D2 next year.