San Antonio's MLS discussion thread

Re: Important news Announcement at Soccer Factory

Girls, girls: you're both pretty. You can both go to the prom.

Re: Important news Announcement at Soccer Factory

You were wrong about SA having no history of soccer culture at the pro or any other level. You were flat out wrong, period.

The sport's history runs deep here and it does have (admittedly brief) history at the pro level.

Regardless of how important you think it is/isn't ... the FACTS show that you're wrong. You made a completely false statement. Deal with it.

NYC2 ? No, no work. "South" or FL ? Yeah, show your work.

Barcelona backed out of a deal in FL .... wonder why.

The league has already had two franchises in FL contracted ... wonder why.

The FL market sucks for sports ... every major sports league in this country has some of its worst franchise trouble spots in FL.

Nobody in the "South" can get their shit together to get anything done. Or is that logic too simple for you ?

I don't see any work. I just see more statements you've pulled out of your ass.

You're the one making these statements. But unless you've got something to prove them, that's all they are.

You don't really understand how things work here do you ? Actually you just said that you don't -> "I don't know much about TX" <- and that's what most of this boils down too. You don't know a damn thing about Texas, how things work, what history is here, etc etc etc.

What was the situation of BC Place before ? THAT is the comparison point between it and the Alamodome.

Yet, going by our standard (which was total bullshit anyway) SA really wouldn't be competing with them. However, when it suits your opinion it works ...

NY yes.

The other 2 ? Not at all.

Name one place in the South or in FL that has a group equal to SS&E that wants to get an MLS franchise.

Despite what you might think, it is pure conjecture on your part that anyone outside of NYC2 actually has the league doing legwork for it.

Again, I just see statements. Nothing to substantiate them.

You didn't spell fan-boy or subjective right.

Re: Important news Announcement at Soccer Factory

i am going to humour you one last time because your idiocy amuses me.

1. you said the Alamo Dome and the BC Place were equivalent stadium prospects or similar. they aren't ... the Whitecaps had OTHER stadium plans ... namely a riverfront SSS plan and ONLY AFTER the governemnt agreed to spend an obscene amount of money renovating BC Place to an open air/retractable roof stadium with tons of internal overhaul for the Olympics AND a new roof/inner roof system specifically designed to make the too large capacity into a soccer suitable set up did the whitecaps chose that for its stadium option. there is no equivalent with the Alamo Dome ... it is too big, has a a permanent roof and the amount of money it would cost to make it suitable for an MLS team is beyond any government entity in the state/city. so BC Place was totally unviable and not an option to house MLS ... then the government decided to spend obscene money to renovate with olympics in mind and the Tigers/Whitecaps ... then it was viable ... the Alamo dome was never viable and the government would never spend the money to make it viable ... so it will never be a viable MLS stadium ... so there is no comparison.

2. two years back 35 years ago is essentially nothing .... many prospective cities have more and SA has no more "soccer culture" than any other large metropolitan area and far less than others (san diego/minneapolis/st louis). so "no history" should have more correctly been "no remarkable or differentiating soccer culture that isn't the same found any any other metro are in the US)

3. i am not going to argue with you ... MLS wants to be in NYC proper ... and are focusing on it and putting resources there. but they have also said ... on more than one occasion that "they cannot see the league not eventually having a team in the South or in Florida" .... to those at MLS HQ the eventual end game for the league is GOING TO HAVE a team in the South and AT LEAST ONE in FL ... take it to the bank ... period ... end of story ... they have clearly said as much on multiple occasions .... after they focus on and get NYC i am sure they will bend their will towards one or the other of those two goals. it isn't up for conjecture.

4. i am not pulling demographics out of my ass ... i am pulling them from this place called the US Census ... which if you weren't too stupid or lazy you could do yourself ... but since you are i will help you:

San Antonio, San Diego, San Francisco, Minneapolis

if you look at those MSA demographic reports you'll see that SA is last in total population between 20-44 (SF 1.5M, MN 1.2M, SD 1.1M, SA .7M) and in % of population between 20-44 (SD 37.1%, SF 36.9%, MN 36.3%, SA 35.1%).

it is worst in % of households with income less than $25K per year (MN 16.3, SF 16.6, SD 18.2, SA 26.3) ... so as i stated it is has the highest rate of "poverty" amongst those cities.

it is worst in % of households with income more than $75K per year (SF 50.1, MN 42.4, SD 41.9, SA 29.0) by a big big big margin ... so as i stated it has the lowest rate of "wealth" amongst the cities.

it is also last in Median Household Income (SF $75,220, MN $64,630, SD $62,708, SA 47,336) and Mean Household Income (SF $103,099, SD $83,524, MN $82,988, SA $63,719) ... so again ... exactly as i stated.

it also comes in last when you compare the number of people who have a bachelors or higher degree to those who have no hs diploma or less education (BA+Grad/no HS Diploma) (MN 5.5, SF 3.3, SD 2.3, SA 1.3) ... so it is the least educated of the cities i mentioned just as i said (but at least it does have more college grads than hs dropouts which is more than some expansion markets can say).

so again ... not pulling out of ass but rather i have done the reasearch. SA falls far behind SF, SD and MN in all of the demographic categories that correlate to high MLS attendance and are most represented in the MLS fan base. now ... again .... that doesn't mean that no poor, uneducated or old people watch MLS ... nor is strong demographics the be all and end all ... it is just one of many factors and one in which SA gets trounced by the three markets i mentioned and is in the middle of the pack compared to other markets on these measures (better than some and slightly worse than others).

5. no SA is competing with about 15 other markets for 2 expansion slots after filling 3 with NYC2, ATL and FL1 (ORL being the front runner for now). my comment about SA being too close to DAL and HOU isn't soley about proximity but proximity and market and footprint and what you gain by putting another team in proximity to an existing one? some of the 15 markets SA are competing against ALSO have a proximity issue. at which point these other factors Size, Demographics, Soccer History/Culture, Current D2/D3 Support, Ownership, Stadium must be weighed and compared. if the market is a truly outstanding potential market for MLS than proximity means less, my point is that SA is NOT an outstanding "potential market" by any of the above measures (TODAY) thus proximity becomes prohibitive as it wouldn't be for another market which is strong on the other factors.

6. uh ... arthur blank/atl falcons? and who says SS&E wants an mls team or could get one? they don't have ANY team at the moment just the rights to one soooo talk about wild conjecture ... and Orlando already has a fully operational D2 ownership group that is so far walking the walk ... now i am sure they'd have to add investors to be at MLS levels but it is a far cry better than SS&E having the "rights" to put a D3 team in SA (where a D2 team is about to pre-exist them anyway).

7. conjecture? well we already proved with DATA that SA is #12 behind 11 other "competitors" (not counting NYC2, ATL, ORL) in size (see previous post); and i already proved with DATA that SA is well behind at least 3 other (and in reality more) competitors in MLS demographics. so that is two factors that SA without any question falls short on ... let's look at others:

a. media market: #4 San Fran, #11 Detroit, #12 Miami, #15 Phoenix, #16 Minneapolis, #17 San Diego, #19 Tampa/St Pete, #21 Baltimore, #33 St Louis, #24 Charlotte, #25 Pittsburgh, #26 Riverside CA, #27 Sacramento, #28 San Antonio ... so wow ... on this factor San Antonio falls well down the pecking order of many of its potential competitors yet again.

b. soccer history/culture: obviously this is hugely subjective ... but it is pretty clear that cities like St Louis (Stars 67-77, almost double the attnd of SA NASL), Minneapolis (Kicks 74-81, Strikers 84-88 indoor, Thunder 90-09) and San Deigo (Sockers 78-84, 2 titles, also indoor 80-96), Tampa Bay (Rowdies 75-84 1 title, attnd 3-5 times that of SA's NASL team), all have a far richer/longer history of professional soccer ... that cannot be debated. as for current support for D2/D3 well that remains to be seen but even tho Minneapolis, Miami, Tampa, Baltimore, St Louis are either not spectacular or had and lost D2/D3 teams there is no way to tell if SA Scorpions will best even that very low acheivement in terms of D2/D3 support ... seems like they might but D2/D3 is a tricky thing and the financial model is percarious at best so who knows what will happen ... we'll have to withhold judgment for a couple of years and i obviously wish SA the best at the D2 level (D2 needs strong teams for soccer to really grow in the US). but it is hardly fair to say that SA is at the "top of the class" when it comes to soccer culture/pro soccer history or current minor league soccer support. it simply is not. that isn't the be all end all of course and they have a chance to stake a strong claim on at least one of those factors but yet again ... overall ... on yet another factor ... SA is not outstanding but rather middle of the pack.


so we've looked at all of the things we can currently analyze with any kind of factual basis .... where does your super optimism about SA come from? on any of the reasonable known factors (ie not ownership/stadium because no market has that as a known to compare either) SA is either far behind or middle of the pack ... a very large pack for a very few spots? i have "shown" my work ... where is your "work" to show this ludicrously delusional fairy tale of thinking SA is a "good" MLS prospect outside of YOU pulling it out of your ASS? point to one important factor where SA is superiour/head of the class compared to other potential markets?

i will say that having only 1 other pro sports team is of moderate benefit but not prohibitively so ... other markets aren't flooded with pro teams either (San Diego 2, Las Vegas 0, Riverside CA 0, Baltimore 2, Sacramento 1, San Antonio 1) so while it is probably a positive thing it is also not something that SA has alone among the candidates.

now i am done with this discussion ... as things stand there is no evidence to support SA being an outstanding potential MLS market and nothing to make it stand out ahead of any of the 15 or so other markets it would be competing against for 2 remaining spots. i wish the Scorpions luck with their inaugural season and hope that SA can become a very strong market in D2 (thus giving it at least one factor where it can claim to be outstanding in terms of MLS potential).

Re: Important news Announcement at Soccer Factory

again. proximity is not a factor in isolation. if a market is "outstanding" enough then that can override any "proximity" concern. but SA is not "outstanding" as i've outlined so there is no overriding impetus to ignore "proximity" as an issue.

and as i also pointed out many of the current "proximity" MLS teams are IN DIFFERENT STATES ... or are in the case of LA/Chivas or RBNY/NYC2 in a gigantic metropolitan area and media epicenter that the league WANTS to saturate.

what does the league gain from a strategic standpoint in putting a third team in TX in near "proximity" to two other teams? nothing? because SA doesn't offer anything unique or outstanding as a potential market ... unlike say a Seattle - Portland - Vancouver do ... all of which are in different states (one in a different country) and all of which are EXCELLENT individual markets that simply override any worry/issue with proximity due to their outstanding potential (now realized) across multiple factors (size, soccer tradition/history, D2/D3 support, demographics, ownership, stadium) prior to becoming MLS teams.

think of "proximity" like being ugly .... being ugly wont prevent you from getting laid if you happen to be rich, famous, supper funny, highly successful or any combination of those ... but if you are average or below average on all of those other factors than being ugly surely does become an impediment to getting laid. not a perfect analogy but as close as i can think of on short notice.

it is a "limiting" factor that must be overcome not a "precluding" factor that cannot be overcome at all.

Re: Important news Announcement at Soccer Factory

Alright OleGunnar, what untapped great and beautiful markets are out there like Portland and Vancouver?

Re: Important news Announcement at Soccer Factory

honestly ... none.

but from a demographic standpoint ONLY; San Diego, San Francisco and Minneapolis are the closest.

from a "not much other pro sports competition" stand point a few others ... like i pointed out above.

from a soccer history/culture/D2-D3 support ... nobody even close (well except the Cosmos but that has as much drawback as positive) ... tho if Orlando keeps it up they are on the right track ... and St Louis and Minneapolis and San Diego do have rich (just not PNW rich) soccer history and culture.

also much of the future MLS expansion will be guided by MLS strategic aims ... the footprint they want the eventual league to have ... thus the focus on NYC2 and the stated aim of "not having a league without a team in the South or in Florida" ... and i would add the Southwest US as an empty market they will likely want to fill.

from an ownership/stadium standpoint well nobody is that far along tho i will say i like what i see from the D2 ownership in Orlando ... they seem to be doing things correctly at that level from a marketing, corporate partnership, operational/team standpoint such that with more proof along that path they would make a very good "soccer core" ownership that they could add some bigger money too to make an MLS ownership group (sort of like Seattle/Portland/Vancouver).

but just because there are no more seattles or portlands out there does NOT mean that all the remaining potential markets are on equal footing. some have the distinct advantage of being part of MLS's strategic plans and others have their strengths on other more mundane factors.

it just so happens that SA doesn't fall into any of those categories. it isn't in MLS's "must have" strategic markets ... it isn't a "super standout" in any of the other factors (size, media market, demographics, history/culture, d2/d3 support, ownership, stadium) ... i really don't see why that is controversial ...

Re: Important news Announcement at Soccer Factory

WRONG. you have confused two different things. success at the D2/D3 level has been a very good predictor of success at the MLS level ... name a successful D2/D3 team that has either failed or been median at the MLS level? i am waiting? it is not the SOLE predictor nor is it as you seem to wrongly assume preclusive. "If A then B" is not the same as "If not A then not B". which means not having success at D2/D3 level of course does not mean you cannot have success at MLS level (as Philly proved), and that is not mutually exclusive with the previous assertion.

as you rightly point out this success at D2/D3 is most often due to very good ownership/FO which when translated to MLS also tends to lead to success.

but let's not kid ourselves ... there are A. two levels of "success"; top 1/3rd attendance for instance is not the same as median attendance ... so seattle and tfc and vancouver and the galaxy are NOT equal to houston and rsl who are in the MIDDLE ... it isn't bad to be in the middle of course but neither is it great. and with fewer and fewer spots i imagine that MLS would like to target markts with the potential to be "great" before ones with the potential to be "median".

and you are definitely wrong when you say that FO is all that matters ... it isn't ... market matters ... and some markets are better for pro soccer than others ... based on some of the factors above and probably others i've never even thought of and some that are not quantifiable. but that hardly means you throw up your hands and go ... well we can't figure it out with 100% certitude so we might as well not analyze it at all.

i have discussed this before and you have the links to the census site and you can do the same research i did ... but there IS a slight positive correlation between certain demographic factors (% 20-44 age; high +$75K households; low <$25K households, high "education" ratio) and mls attendance.

it is NOT perfect ... you CANNOT plug in the demographic numbers and get an EXACT attendance ... but high attendance MLS MSAs tend to share certain demographic traits and low attendance MLS MSAs tend to share certain demographic shortcomings on those same traits ... yes, one particular team may buck the trend on one factor or another ... and i am not suggesting that demographics is the ONLY factor that is important or that it is a factor that cannot be overcome by a particular MSA in theory. it is only an attempt to quantify what can be quantified and look at it as one of many factors along with overall population, number of other pro teams, media market size, corporate sponsorship, soccer history/cuture, high d2/d3 success.

i really don't see why this is at all controversial. any expansion discussion must necessarily move beyond rich owner/stadium because A. rich owner/stadium is minimally necessary but not sufficient now and going foward in MLS ... any MLS expansion team will de facto have a rich owner and a stadium; B. at this point none of the 15 or so potential expansion MSAs has anything close to a legitimate ownership/stadium situation to even compare.

so in lieu of that why not look at OTHER possible factors that are quantifiable (to some lesser or greater extent) on which the candidate markets can be compared? and why all of the angst at such comparisons when one particular market falls short on one or more of those comparisons? it isn't personal ... and it certainly is holy law ... it is simply using the little data that is available to a discussion that moves past "my city is awesome and deserves MLS! no MY city is awesome and deserves MLS!"

Re: Important news Announcement at Soccer Factory

Just to let you know, OG, I believe your media market numbers are old.

Here's the latest from Nielsen. We should really figure out a place to put this for quick reference.

6. San Fran
9. Atlanta
11. Detroit
14. Tampa Bay
15. MSP
16. Miami-Fort Lauderdale (if you add West Palm Beach, it supplants Houston at 10th)
19. Orlando
20. Sacramento
21. St. Louis
23. Pittsburgh
25. Charlotte
27. Baltimore
36. San Antonio

Riverside is no longer listed on its own. I think at some point they folded San Bernadino in with LA.

Re: Important news Announcement at Soccer Factory

The Census is a joke, has been for decades.

I trust the State much more:

http://www.window.state.tx.us/specialrpt/tif/alamo/demographics.php
[yes, they do deal with Census numbers for some charts/graphs]

Sigh, I knew you were simply going to go "raw data" and not actually look into anything. So we'll just agree to disagree on the true makeup of San Antonio. I'll trust though, what I see and live with every day here in the city we're talking about.

I won't even get into lack of income tax, cost of living, and disposable income.

http://www.bizjournals.com/buffalo/stories/2009/09/28/daily18.html

http://images.businessweek.com/ss/09/10/1022_40_strongest_us_metro_economies/2.htm

----------------------------------------------------------------
a - there's also a pretty good media market right up the road ... it's #6. The Spurs benefit from it greatly ... no reason to think another SA pro team wouldn't. It's not just about the SA media itself (although the NBA doesn't have a problem with it, so why would another pro sports league) ... I mean, do you just selectively apply your "proximity" meaning to your opinions ?

b - I see you failed to click on the first link I provided to SA's soccer history. You simply go by NASL apparently ... too bad, you're missing out on quite a few cities with great soccer history.

1 - Again, how are they not similar ? There are OTHER plans/ideas/etc here in SA for a stadium. Alamo Stadium most notably. (and really, do we want to get into the reality of the Riverfront proposal for Vancouver ? No, you don't) Who said anything about permanent ? As a temp (few years perhaps) place it works just fine. I also like how you "know" the politics of SA and what can/can't be decided here. Fantastic. Since you're such an insider there's plenty of questions the people here would love to ask you.

2 - Yeah, 2yrs ... that's it See "a" above. I'd also love to know how you're measuring "soccer history" as you seem to have simply plucked one thing to wrap around your opinion as opposed to looking at actual soccer history.

3 - I don't want you to argue, I want you to show facts. I know NYC2 is the league's pet project and have already acknowledged as much. But Florida ? The South ? The only thing I can find on Florida is the OC owners talking, not the league (in terms of wanting a franchise in Florida). In fact, the only thing I can find from Garber on FL is this: http://www.majorleaguesoccertalk.com/south-florida-soccer-fans-send-clear-message-to-mls-were-ready-13510 "more work needed" ... anything more recent ? For the South ?

5 - Again, outside of you just repeating it to back your opinion ... got anything concrete on ATL and FL ? I mean, how'd that D2 culture work out for the Mutiny ? .... or FL's soccer history in regards to either of the contracted MLS clubs ? Curious as to what you're going off of that makes you continue to say that FL already has as spot reserved ... I mean if discussions with the OC ownership is what you're qualifying, then SA has Orlando beat as the league has talked to two separate groups here.

6 - SS&E says they want an MLS team. Who says Blank can get one or wants one ? Blank ? If so, then that makes SS&E just as viable. They've stated they'd like to bring an MLS team to SA (that's part of what the whole Alamo Stadium vote is about).

The whole point of them owning the rights to the D3 team was in regards to your asinine representation of why the Aztex moved to Orlando. Hartman already had the NASL slot, and SS&E owned the D3 (USL) slot. They couldn't move to SA even if they'd have wanted to. Follow the bouncing ball.

Re: Important news Announcement at Soccer Factory

You have every right to doubt how successful this will be based on soccer for a cause. it is a noble move and it is great for the media but soccer is not a non profit based sport. that is not saying that there is no non profit organizations in the soccer world, but to have a team actually based this way does not look good.

As for the potential for San Antonio to have an MLS team? That dream is getting slimmer by the year.

MLS currently sits with 18 teams (as of now).
Barcleys is at 20
La Liga is at 20
Seria is at 20
Bundesliga at 18
Ligue 1 at 20
Eredevise at 18

San Antonio only has 2 potential years to maybe make it. The only other option is that soccer in the US goes to a relegation formula which does not look favorable for Garber.

Re: Important news Announcement at Soccer Factory

That is ********ing stupid! I rarely curse but this called for it. I am not current on MLS news since I don't follow the league, but this is such a dumb idea. This is why MLS will never move forward with the rest of the world in terms of competitiveness with the rest. This will help in growing the sport in the US since it is catering to the likes of the NFL. As much as I want to follow soccer in the US. Things like this just make it look stupid. I am sorry for being negative but I just don't like it.

Re: Important news Announcement at Soccer Factory

Thanks for explaining you don't know what you're talking about. Thanks for saving us the time of trying to understand where you are coming from.

If you want to change this, I'd suggest taking the time to learn why MLS is the way it is. Yes, MLS is unique in the world of soccer leagues in a number of ways. Figure out why, then let's have an informed discussion. Until then, please be considerate and don't waste our time.

FWIW, I'm not saying MLS is perfect, or that there aren't discussion points. But I am saying that until you've learned the league, all we're going to get from you is "I'm not used to it, I don't like it." (Take a guess at how much stock people might put into that kind of opinion.)

Re: Important news Announcement at Soccer Factory

With a country as large as the United States where relegation isn't seen as a viable option, stopping at 20 teams would be pretty ridiculous in my opinion. I lived overseas in Germany and Japan and understand the global view on soccer, but currently I live in Houston and you have to open your eyes to the perspective of the culture in each country before judging the league within that country.

I could see the San Antonio MLS doing great. I use to think that San Antonio would be a crappy choice since I use to live there and now I am in Seattle.

San Antonio MLS has a few things go well for them such as Spurs Sports and Entertainment, Crocketeers and Alamo Stadium.

SSE knows how to tap into the local media and could make MLS SA mainstream. Plus SSE has a large base of season ticket holders and corporate buyers from the Spurs and other minor league teams.

My concerns for MLS SA would be that SSE would package the MLS team like MLS 1.0 with mascot, cheerleaders, and canned-music.

Timbers did great by marketing their team around the supporters' culture.

You're right. I'm fairly confident that it would be packaged in this way.

The Portland Timbers have a mascot, he cuts off a piece of log every time they score at home.

The Dynamo (and others) have cheerleaders.

All sports everywhere have teams that use canned music.


All of that aside, why do you think SS&E would do that ?

The Dynamo have a mascot, too.

Re: Important news Announcement at Soccer Factory

No, it isn't, really. It's not in the top ten reasons why MLS isn't among the top echelon of leagues worldwide.

Stuff like conferences and pro/rel and whateverthehellelse you people want to throw in there are just window-dressing on the societal and systemic issues of US soccer. But it's just what people who admittedly don't follow the league like to fixate on.

Re: Important news Announcement at Soccer Factory

I really don't want to agree with Gunnar since he has been kind of a jackass throughout this thread, but he is right on the NYC2, Atlanta, and Florida issue.

Blank applied for expansion a few years ago. He is still talking about MLS as a second tenant for a new Falcons' stadium. Whether it is being used as a bargaining chip for the stadium and/or a date filler, Blank wants an MLS team in Atlanta. (BTW, Wylf is doing the same in Minnesota)
Garber has talked to Orlando City more than once. Orlando is more or less the front runner in Florida, which makes some sense since the Magic are the only other major league team. Kind of similar to Salt Lake & Portland in that way. Miami & Tampa both have NFL and MLB teams to contend with, in addition to their other "problems."

I believe you are absolutely correct on this. Garber has a hard on for NYC2 and is actively working to find/bring together an ownership group and help get the stadium built in the city.
But Garber has offered vocal support for Vegas, Minnesota, Orlando, Miami, and Orlando. Of course vocal support means jack shit... He made no promises to any of those markets.
And no, I'm not showing my work. Check out the MLS expansion threads for those cities to find it. There is a lot of stuff out there about all of these markets.