PDX owner lists competing cities

Discussion in 'Portland Timbers' started by GOALSeattle, Sep 3, 2008.

  1. QueensNick Member

    Member Since:
    Jul 19, 2007
    Location:
    New York City
    Country:
    United States

    18 is going to be so interesting - right now its Portland or Montreal - but if NY submits a bid - then I really think they jump to the top of the list - because the League wants it!

    The plans are in place, its just a matter of when they want to move on it!

    Im sorry - I have not heard anything about Miami putting in a bid. I know there are the Barca Rumors but i have not seen a concrete owner or plan - ya know!

    San Diego - i know nothing about - do they have an owner? Plan? etc
          
  2. Sport Billy Moderator

    Member Since:
    May 25, 2006
    That was from left field - I'm lost. And people complain about NY wanting a team - that would be 4 for Califonia. :confused:
  3. Curva Nord Member

    Member Since:
    Mar 29, 2007
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    Club:
    FC Internazionale Milano
    Country:
    United States
    That is quite interesting. I did not know that history of the Meadowlands.

    Thanks for the info.
  4. NYC_COSMOS BigSoccer Supporter

    Member Since:
    Jan 13, 2007
    Location:
    Queens, NY
    Club:
    CA Vélez Sársfield
    Country:
    Argentina
    Apparently you have not read much of our forums if you have responded in this matter, let me educate you for a minute.

    The real issue here isnt so much a boundary drawn on a map but rather the identity that that line might have created. Yes we are different peoples and thats the main reason why we prefer what we prefer. You and no one else is going to change my belief no matter how much soap box bullshit you try and preach my way. I've been waiting since 1994 and I'll continue waiting until this team is a reality!!!!

    Are you dense aren't you. First you didnt get it that its NOT AN ISSUE of a boundary but rather an identity and then you didnt get it that I was alluding to rivalries and NOT THE REASONS for the rivalries! SO whatever reason you may want to present about either Inter or Milan it simply just doesnt fit into the context of the conversation. You are just wasting space on my computer screen.

    Then if you were a NY resident, you lived in Westchester because you are clueless about the Queens and Brooklyn.

    So you haven't lived in NY since approx. 1994. Real NY'er you are, by now you are as Southern as they come!

    IS NEXT!!!!
  5. NYC_COSMOS BigSoccer Supporter

    Member Since:
    Jan 13, 2007
    Location:
    Queens, NY
    Club:
    CA Vélez Sársfield
    Country:
    Argentina
    I think that the league should be putting teams where there are fans. The league knows where they are! Its not rocket science. If that means 6 teams in Cali so be it. But it also means that the Northeast will probably have twice as many teams.

    Personally I would like to see an extended season akin to the Brazilian championship where we have a regional championship and then a National championship.

    In the regional, we mix in USL 1 & 2 teams along with PDL teams and put them all against the MLS teams.

    In the National Championship we have the MLS teams along with expansion cities and the two best non MLS teams that played in the regionals.

    Great for soccer, great for local teams. Great for the fans of little teams and far away places as well.

    It's a win win and even Atlanta could have the Silverbacks or whatever their name is compete for a spot in the MLS league!
  6. RedzFan31 New Member

    Member Since:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
    b/c there is no bid
  7. Timbers Member

    Member Since:
    Aug 14, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    True, but that's because Chivas USA only draws about 4,500 fans per game (based on actual, paid ticket sales). They can't draw from their own (Chivas) fan base, much less from the Galaxy fan base.
  8. bigredmachine Member

    Member Since:
    Mar 19, 2000
    Location:
    Prospect Heights, IL, USA
    I think going to twenty teams would be great, IF they significantly increase roster sizes and the salary cap so as to attract more talent from overseas. If that happens, then I'd like to see NY2, Montreal and St. Louis added in the east, move KC to the west, and add Vancouver. That makes 20 and keeps the divisions balanced. Also, hope that Chivas gets their own stadium complex in Orange County or San Diego. That should be good for now.
    Next wave, when it comes, could address the southeast (Atlanta, Miami, maybe Tampa or the Carolinas), and Ottawa and Portland are still there for the future as well. I think the demographics in Las Vegas aren't there for now. Too many old retirees and not enough club soccer, recent immigrants, etc.
  9. Hierarchyfive Member

    Member Since:
    Sep 17, 2005
    Location:
    Portland
    Club:
    Portland Timbers
    Country:
    United States
    You do realize that this is a Portland forum. You don't think the Carolinas should get a team before Portland. You have to be kidding me.
  10. Call me Ralph. New Member

    Member Since:
    Aug 27, 2008
    Location:
    New England
    Club:
    FC Tampa Bay Rowdies
    Country:
    United States
    Not anymore.
  11. Hierarchyfive Member

    Member Since:
    Sep 17, 2005
    Location:
    Portland
    Club:
    Portland Timbers
    Country:
    United States
    Chivas USA all over again, just what MLS needs.

    If it failed there once before, then MLS will surely succeed with Barca USA!!!!

    :mad:
  12. Call me Ralph. New Member

    Member Since:
    Aug 27, 2008
    Location:
    New England
    Club:
    FC Tampa Bay Rowdies
    Country:
    United States
    And it begins.
  13. j66j66 Member

    Member Since:
    Apr 26, 2005
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    Club:
    Portland Timbers
    Country:
    United States
    i didn't have a problem with Chivas USA coming into the league, they originally provided some great comic relief, and then started to play some very pretty soccer. I was willing to overlook the awkward marketing ploy it represented for the moment.

    Barcelona is a bit of a different beast. Larger, more recognizeable, more McDonald's than In-N-Out. But the real thumbs down for me is the lack of stadium. I'd be sad, but eventually come to terms with Portland losing out to Montreal, Vancouver, St. Louis, or even NY2. But if the BOG swoons over a stack of cash waved their way with no real plan for a stadium, i'd be downright angry.
  14. Call me Ralph. New Member

    Member Since:
    Aug 27, 2008
    Location:
    New England
    Club:
    FC Tampa Bay Rowdies
    Country:
    United States
    There is no "lack of a stadium". FIU Stadium is being offered, rent free, to MLS. FIU Stadium was built with soccer in mind, according to the latest FIFA regulations, same as Qwest. Miami MLS will play rent-free at FIU Stadium for a few years while the new SSS is being built at the old Orange Bowl site, and the City of Miami will contribute $50 million to the construction of the new SSS there. The money has already been set aside for this purpose and all legal and other impediments to it have been swept aside. It will happen.

    It really isn't that difficult to educate yourself about the current status of the Miami MLS bid. Come over to the Florida MLS expansion forums and read the threads there. Most of the people in the other forums who are casting aspersions on the FC Barcelona/Miami MLS bid have no clue what they are talking about. They just like repeating misinformation about the Miami bid because it makes them feel better, I'm guessing. :)
  15. Sport Billy Moderator

    Member Since:
    May 25, 2006

    I don't like Qwest, but there is a huge difference between Qwest and FIU.

    FIU has no revenue control. It will be almost impossible to be profitable without concessions, parking, etc.
  16. j66j66 Member

    Member Since:
    Apr 26, 2005
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    Club:
    Portland Timbers
    Country:
    United States
    Then why didn't they at least give a nod to that effort in their coming out party?

    No mention of anything except they hope to play at FIU.
  17. Lendog Member

    Member Since:
    Sep 2, 2003
    Location:
    Mt. Hood
    Country:
    United States
  18. Sport Billy Moderator

    Member Since:
    May 25, 2006
  19. Timbers Member

    Member Since:
    Aug 14, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    Depending on the terms, playing "rent free" at FIU could save the Miami team enough $$$ to offset the loss of revenue. The Houston Dynamo pay $700K per year in rent to play at the University of Houston (and that's an old stadium). The key will be for the Miami MLS team to negotiate a cut of parking, concessions and naming rights, and to negotiate the right to use the stadium for international exhibitions and even some "non-soccer" events. (Alternatively: Barca may not care how much revenue the MLS team will take in at the stadium, if it's all part of their effort to market the "Barca" name, and Barca merchandise, in the US.)

    Meanwhile, even if a Miami MLS team builds their own stadium, it won't be free. About $50 million is available for a soccer stadium at the Orange Bowl site as part of the Marlins stadium deal, so the MLS team would still need to come up $40-$60 million to complete the deal. (Also: I don't believe that MLS would share parking revenue as part of that deal, since the reason that $50 million was allocated for a soccer stadium is to allow for the adjacent Marlins' parking structure to break even, with the added events that a soccer stadium would provide.)

    Given the current worldwide financial crisis, any project that doesn't require financing is going to be much easier to pull off. Given that, Miami (at FIU) and Montreal (at Saputo Stadium) appear to have the strongest expansion bids (at the moment). I honestly wouldn't be surprised if St. Louis has to put their deal on hold for a bit, since so much private investment is required as part of the real estate deal. (There are already rumors surfacing that Philadelphia's MLS debut may be delayed for similar reasons, and that was a project that includes a significant amount of public financing).

    Among projects that require financing, those that are backed by public bonds (and don't involve real estate deals) will do better than those require private financing. Some public agencies have already noticed that recent bond offerings have gone much quicker than usual, as investors realize that public bonds are a safer bet than private investment. Given that, Portland's bid will be quite strong, if the City approves the use of public bonds. (On the other hand, the fact that a guy named Paulson will need to come up with the $40 million expansion fee may no longer be such a sure thing. I'm sure that a big chunk of Paulson money has vaporized in the past few weeks, and it's also quite likely that the Paulsons were counting on their Wall Street buddies to invest in the team.)
  20. Hierarchyfive Member

    Member Since:
    Sep 17, 2005
    Location:
    Portland
    Club:
    Portland Timbers
    Country:
    United States
    Yeah, but who is in control of all that bailout money. Portland just added $700 Billion to our ownership group.

Share This Page