Cosmos need to buy the red bulls. Only way they get in. Red Bulls lose the 2nd most money (behind Chivas ) and everyone knows what happens to Chivas. Make the Red Bulls a lucrative offer and maybe they bite. Maybe even get a slight discount if you agree to use Red bulls as the jersey sponsor and stadium name.
I don't think the Cosmos has that much money. I really don't know of they do or not. Unlike some, I'd like to see the Cosmos in the MLS.
I would too. In place of the Red Bulls. Chivas USA will be gone next year so the Red Bulls is the last remaining cringe worthy name. New York City F.C. versus New York Cosmos is so much better than NY Red Bulls
You are of course assuming that RBNY is in some way for sale. Somehow I just do not see the league forcing Austria's hand on this one the way they did with Chivas. Remember, we are talking about an organization that pumped in a huge amount of cash when the league was definitely floundering - an organization that built a stadium in the nation's largest market and one of the toughest to do so in (even if it is in the Jerseys burbs). This is the same organization that brought in Henry and a host of other DPs - the only team beside the Galaxy to bring in multiple name players. Frankly, without Red Bull, I'm not sure the league would be where it is at the moment. I'm not saying they are the sole saviors of the league, but they have played a very important role in its turn around. The team has already been rebranded once. Does it really need to be rebranded again? Neither Red Bull New York nor New York Red Bulls are "cringe-worthy" names, in my opinion. Neither is better or worse than "City Name FC" or "City Name Mascot." It's all subjective. If the team has supporters and those supporters are fine with the name - and more importantly the owners that actually seem to give a damn - then leave well enough alone.
Oh I agree completely with you. I'm not talking about MLS making them sell. I'm talking about the owners doing ALL the right things like you said. Building a beautiful stadium, bringing in one of the greatest players of all time, spending money. And their profits are negative. They lose money. Attendance is decent. When is enough enough ? At what point do they throw in the towel?
Hopefully never, or at least until they find an owner that is willing to show the same level of dedication to the team and the league that they have. I just don't see the Cosmos owners as being that "generous" or patient. If they were, they would have gotten the nod long before ManCity came into the picture. Also, Red Bull may be losing money on the team, but since it is an extension of their advertising strategy, it may be paying off elsewhere.
I still think this would be the best option for everyone involved, especially if the Cosmos don't get their stadium done! Cosmos to partner with the Red Bulls franchise, name the team New York Cosmos, have Red Bull as jersey sponsor and keep it as the stadium name and even have the brand all over the stadium and team...as a sponsor! With combined (financial) resources the Cosmos group and Red Bull should be able to at least compete with the NYCFC group and make for an incredible derby. The cons here are: I'm sure a lot of the Cosmos die hard supporters would hate this, because the team would obviously play out of New Jersey and not within the Boroughs anymore. Even though, the old Cosmos also played in New Jersey so from a historical point of view, this would still somehow make sense. Another one is the Cosmos' sponsorship deals with Nike and their current jersey sponsor. They surely would have to wait them out still. The third one is Red Bull's marketing approach...at the moment it is simply to name sports (or at least soccer...and hockey) teams, not to just sponsor them. I surely hope that will change some day, so this kind of partnership between Red Bull and the Cosmos can become possible, but for now it is the way it is and this partnership is just not the way they want to do things.
Are the Red Bulls looking to sell? I doubt it. Of course the team spends more than it takes in. That's what advertising campaigns do.
Exactly. The Galaxy make more than $10 million per year in stadium naming rights and shirt sponsorship. So by my way of thinking, if the Red Bulls lose $10 million per year...so what? If they wanted to name a stadium in a major market Red Bull Arena and have their logo plastered on the shirt, that's what it would cost. Owning a team gets those benefits, plus the benefit of having the team itself named after the company. From their perspective, it seems worth it to me.
I am not a business man, but I am a sports fan. Where I grew uo, soccer was not even an after thought. Now, it's available on TV and teams are everywhere! I personally hope that BOTH the NASL and MLS succeed. I like the success the MLS is having. Glad ATL is getting a team! The NASL will have to up their game (new stadiums, a TV deal, etc) before they are a real threat to MLS. Look at it like this. There are top-notch leagues in England, France and Spain. America has almost as many people as those three countries combined. If soccer continues to grow in our country, we should be able to support two top level leagues. I am probably off base, but I really would like to see both leagues do well. Soccer fans/games are such great events and are so close.
I think your math is slightly off here. According to Wikipedia: France's population is 66,616,416 Spain's population is 46,704,314 England's population is 53,012,456 Those three added together is 166,333,186 America's population is 317,956,000
My point is, those three countries have, what, total of 60 top tier teams? Surely America could sustain 40 or so teams with intiment (<20K seat) stadiums. And I didn't say those three had as many people as we do. That was my point. They have way less but support more top flight teams.
Is this the time when we start reminding people that the MLB, NHL, NFL, NBA, NASCAR, College football/baseball etc exist in this country and there is nothing equivalent to this competition in the rest of the world? Sure theres cricket and rugby in a dozen countries and ping pong is big time in China, but nothing like the competition MLS has here in the States/Canada.
Those other countries do support more top-flight teams in one sport than we do. But when you consider all pro team sports, a factor that can't be ignored because they all are competing with each other for the fan dollar, we do have quite a lot of teams. A lot more than 40.
The NASL will never be a threat to MLS. Just as the Atlantic League will never be a threat to MLB. That is not to say the NASL does not serve a niche role. It could become one of the most successful non-major leagues in the country if it plays it smart. NASL may very well be here to stay, serving non-MLS markets or MLS markets with more demand than supply as a Chicago Wolves to the Chicago Blackhawks-style alternative. I want all the leagues to do well, but lets not get carried away about the NASL challenging MLS in any way, at least not on a business scale.
The difference being that the Wolves are in the NHL's AAA league, the AHL. They are one of the few IHL teams that survived by jumping leagues. The IHL was a glorified minor league that sought/claimed to challenge the NHL, hence my comparisons between it and the NASL...
The Wolves were in the IHL, which was also affiliated with the NHL, for a time. Unless you mean the 1929-1936 one? And, on an individual basis, the Wolves are to the Blackhawks as the Cosmos are to the Red Bulls and City FC. Neither is affiliated with the major league team in their market.
Right, the Wovles were in the IHL, until it folded. They are now in the AHL and affiliated with the Blues. The IHL never had a formal affiliation agreement with the NHL. Certain teams had deals with specific teams and a general agreement to allow movement from IHL clubs to NHL clubs, but it was closer to what Harrisburg had with the Union than the current MLS-USL deal. The NHL began pulling its affiliations from the IHL in the later half of the 90s after the lower league tried to capitalize on the lockout and began planting teams in NHL markets. This led to the NHL formalizing its relationship with the AHL as AAA and the ECHL as AA level leagues and eventually led to the death of the IHL. Only six IHL teams survived and merged with the AHL. The Wolves, the Milwaukee Admirals, and the Grand Rapids Griffins are the only three clubs that remain in the same city. The moral is that being an unaffiliated minor league with vague comments about competing with the existing major league while placing teams in its markets can be a deadly thing. Also, it never works out. With two MLS teams in NYC, I do not see the Cosmos surviving at the top level should the NASL lose the war to the MLS-USL. The NASL is far more IHL than WHA... And that might be a generous statement.
I dont see RBNY selling, the only way I see the NY Cosmos coming into the league, is by RBNY buying the NYCosmos and rebranding RBNY to NYCosmos. Not sure if NY Cosmos has the money to buy Chivas out, but if they did, look for the Cosmos to move elsewhere, now that NYCFC is coming into the league.
Don Garber has since ruled out a third New York team via either expansion or relocation. Buying out NYRB or NYCFC would be the only way in for the New York Cosmos. Neither look likely to sell.
That was my point. But with NYRB or Chivas buying out NY Cosmos and them being in NJ or elsewhere. But not as an expansion team, just mergers.
Why not? All of the boroughs except Staten Island have a larger population than the Salt Lake City metro.