Garber wants two teams in LA... the second team won't be called "Chivas USA" (see article). Garber hinting at MLS Sacramento expansion is a different story all-together. No doubt what that is all about... Garber wants to head off NASL Peterson's plans for California and San Francisco. Major League Soccer purchases Chivas USA http://www.mlssoccer.com/news/article/2014/02/20/major-league-soccer-purchases-chivas-usa
I don't think Garber cares about Peterson's "plans" in San Francisco. As it stands whatever half measure Peterson has planned is doomed.
Garber and Peterson can "deny" all they want in the media, BUT anyone can see the truth that both gentlemen through the leagues are competing against each other. New York and Florida for now; California coming up next...the biggest state, the biggest prize.
Really? MLS stepping into Chivas "temporarily" is proof that MLS is vulnerable in SoCal. That's why NASL knew to copyright the old Aztecs and Surf names for their SoCal future. Peterson says NASL SF; Garber "hints" at MLS Sac even with USL Sac going on. That's not competition for the Cali market?
OK...I wager on MLS. I bet everything I own against everything you own...inc children, pets, etc....up for it?
There's a problem with your conspiracy theory. (I try not to say that disrespectfully, but you are definitely "theorizing") The main problem is that the MLS doesn't give a rats a$$ where the current OR future NASL teams are/will be located. Simply look at the most recent expansions and potential sites: NYFC- Cosmos set up shop two years prior Miami- Ft Lauderdale right down the street Atlanta- Silverbacks can't even get a phone call from Blank Minneapolis- The NASL team is participating in the potential MLS bid. San Antonio- Same as Minny. The ownership is courting the MLS Indy- Talking MLS Sorry dude, but all the NASL is doing is vetting the top markets for the MLS. The existing NASL teams are either irrelevant (Silverbacks) or are actively participating. How is this a competition? MLS can have those markets anytime they want
It does? To me it just proves Jorge Vergera is a moron when it comes to running a soccer team. It is no comment on MLS in the LA area or did you forget the very successful team whose locker rooms are down the hall from Chivas? And Sac is pushing their own move to MLS internally which Garber has now acknowledged. It has nothing to do with NASL's fantasy plans in a completely different market in San Francisco. Or did you forget the MLS team you claim to root for that is already in the Bay Area market?
I think NASL running their show as a 2nd division is a good thing for US Soccer but I don't think they are anywhere near what MLS was in 1996-2000. To get to that point, (which wasn't all that great compared to what the league is today) , we are at least talking about another 10- 15 years, if that. Maybe if the Cosmos pull off another Pele like signing, I.E. Messi or Ronaldo, it could happen sooner but we all know that won't happen.
Personally, I think NASL is positioning itself in larger markets on the off chance that relegation/promotion comes to the U.S. Everyone knows it is a long shot, even NASL. But if it did, them deep pocketed owners are more likely to support NASL clubs and commit to whatever financial payout is necessary to participate if your in Indianapolis, Atlanta and Oklahoma City as opposed to, say, Rochester and Charleston. Do I think it will happen? No. But the downside is you have the opportunity to grow your product in 2nd tier markets and the upside is, well, pretty damned good.
In order for relegation/promotion to happen, you have to have deep pocketed owners like Uncle Phil , Kroenke not to mention Lew Wolff & Beckham, wanting to commit to it. I seriously doubt Phil or Lew would agree to it at their age. If it ever happens, those same owners could very well get out of the league. Don't see why they would want to invest in a minor league and I don't see it happening now or in 15 years time.
Key for NASL positioning themselves in the "big" markets is what happens with Chicago. NASL already trademarked the old Chicago Sting name, and the local supporters group there on Twitter is behind that name to get a team. If (and it's a big if) the Sting come back into the NASL fold, and the Cosmos-Sting match-ups are a success, then obviously the next step is Los Angeles market (Aztecs or Surf ???).
I can't understand all the talk about resurrecting these old, tired names (not calling you out Earthquake FC). I've seen a number of posts where people keep pulling these old ass team names, .....hey lets call them the "Bay City Rollers". I am sorry, but id you give a $hit, you are in the extreme minority. If the Sting play the Cosmos, there will be like five people in the stands who actually remember the originals, and only two will think its cool.
Why would anyone give a shit about the Sting name when it hasn't been used for three decades? The Fire have actually fielded a team twice as long as the Sting did, right? Plus the name, colors, & logo for the Fire are superior to the Sting. Not that I'm against reviving NASL names. SJ & the Pac NW teams have great names. Aztecs is a great name. I'm on the fence about the Rowdies. Strikers, Kicks, Sockers all sound like people trying to hard to make the sport itself into the name of the team. Carribous isn't terrible, but Rapids is better. NE Teamen is one of the best, but is it better than Revolution (owner & logo aside)?
....but is the upside that good? Compared to what? In ten years I might be able to say the upside of D2 is good...five if everything goes incredibly well, almost perfectly. That is just to say the upside is there, not that anything else is close to happening, or os even feasible any time soon. Think you are being super optimistic.
When MLS has shown it can just acquire your markets if it wants them, whether you are involved or not, this seems to be either hubris or cluelessness. If you have, as a long-term strategy, something that is that unlikely, you are not focused enough on now. Pro outdoor soccer at the lower levels is still dicey. Thinking that in 10-15 years you might be MLS ready when you are drawing 4k a game now.....well, let's get out a bit more NOW, ya think? I honestly don't believe the people with actual means and skin in this game think about pro/rel 2% of the time that people here do. It's not frigging happening. Can we stop, please?
They don't...and we know that. The overwhelming majority of them care about survival first and second...third is about limiting losses. This is where the net is fun, but also shows the huge issue with it in society. It allows folks to convince themselves that things matter more than the do, and allows the 2% to create so much noise that folks less educated about situations start to think there may be some legitimacy behind the constant posting...and endless repeating. I would love for the NASL to be able to challenge MLS. It would mean that soccer is about 20 years ahead of where it actually is right now. It isn't, and no amount of net posting or grand net schemes is gonna change it.
Very few soccer fans under the age of 35-40 can actually claim they remember seeing the old NASL , so I don't think they care either way about reviving the old names and logos. Some names , logos and color schemes were bad and some were ahead of their time , but there has to be a reason on why the Quakes, Sounders , Caps and Timbers brought back those old names. One thing is certain, if it weren't for the old NASL, there is a very good chance soccer in its current state will not have existed. Therefore, history has to has to be recognized to a point. Back to Sacramento, I remember these names the the Spirit & the Gold were kind of cool too...