USL Pro expansion news, rumor and wishful thinking.

The only people that would really get offended or stop taking it seriously are the few thousand people that bother to follow the minor league teams in the given city and the people on this board. It is just marketing, and if it makes a 2 minute story for the local news, they will bite on it. For the most part these are never/rarely national news stories aside from on BS and other soccer news outfits.

Just look at the Tampa VSI news. It is all over BS, but outside of local media it is hardly a blip on the radar - and it should not be. It is interesting to people that are interested and the local media because of the potential local impact. Outside of that hardly anyone cares.

 

Tampa probably isn't the best example. I read some national stuff on their "plans". Though it mainly dealt with them wanting to build a ridiculously expensive and big SSS less than it did the team itself.

 

You are probably correct about Tampa not being the best example. But I think my point still stands about national attention for lower level "plans".

 

Yes, I guess it is, since we have corresponded for over a year and I thought that would put me into the class above "anonymous". If you don't remember me or you are just becoming a troll (what have you done with Kenn??)

 

well, of course, it's the ownership equivalent of designing crests and kits...

yeah, that. it's unfortunate

 

It looks like expansions side Phoenix Wolves are in a bit of trouble. Hearing owners are suing each other over control of the club. Hopefully they get it figured out as USL meetings start at the end of the week.

 

I got some looks from the other law students when I started laughing in the library. Thanks.

Got a link? All I found was this about the stadium. http://www.azcentral.com/members/Blog/OdeenDomingoFC/174444

 

Sorry about that it just seemed fitting.

 

This is the second time I've heard this, but I haven't found any link about this. What's your source? I'm not saying you're wrong, only that I want more information. And do we know that they are going to be the Phoenix Wolves?

Just asking.

- Mark

 

I'm anxious to find out this possible source as well.

We do know that the team will be called Phoenix Wolves FC. Here's a link for you

 

Yeah, sorry brain fart on that. I've been looking at the expansion teams in Sacramento and Northern VIrginia, and forgot that Phoenix had chosen Wolves as a name. D'oh!

But nothing on the Phoenix owners having fallen out with one another that I've seen. Of course, I'm at work and supposed to be, you know ... working.

- Mark

 

Bring back SPARTA!

Be Cool Huny Bunny!

 

I honestly don't remember that. Mad Cow. Apologies.

Hadn't heard that, but here's the thing: blueballs69 (tee he, It Came From The Seventh Grade) obviously is someone who works for a team (or the league itself) and quite often finds out things he then delights in leaking here, for whatever reason. (He doesn't really contribute to discussions or advance discussions, he only drops nuggets like this, usually negative ones.) So there could very well be something to it. But I hadn't heard it.
My big problem with PFC at the moment is that you can't even buy a t-shirt for somebody for Christmas.

 

http://www.mlssoccer.com/superdraft...t-notes-garber-usl-pro-partnership-livestrong

 

It would seem that MLS teams could partner with already successful PDL teams in order to advance them to the USL PRO stage. Fresno Fuego partnering w/ Chivas USA, due to the California and largely Latino demographic connections. While the Des Moines Menace could partner with the Chicago Fire in much the same way as the Iowa Cubs do with the Chicago Cubs. Then USL PRO would have two teams with strong attendance and both MLS teams could expand their markets of influence.

Just the idea that has been spinning around in this fans head.

 

I have shared this thought for quite some time. My thinking has been that KC would seek to affiliate with the Menace, but Chicago works too. There seems to be a natural relationship between our cities., especially when it comes to sports. We've been with the Cubs forever (and the Sox before them) and the Energy have been with the Bulls since their inception. If only we could have gotten the Blackhawks... Our AHL franchise would probably still be here. And I say that as a Blackhawk hater.
Bonus: We're both red teams.

 

No rumors yet. We don't even know how this deal will play out. My guess is that they'll wait a little while before the even start talking about renewing the preliminary agreement.

 

Bob, you know I love you.

But I will never understand two things:
1 - Why expansion rumors are like catnip to some people.
2 - What makes anyone think that if there WERE such rumors, they wouldn't be immediately posted here?

You don't have to troll for expansion rumors or "any news?" or anything like that. For some reason, any stray word from a guy's best friend's sister's girlfriend's roomate's cousin gets immediately put here.

 

I wouldn't call this 'news' but it falls under the 'speculation' category (and there didn't seem to be a better thread for it).
A few days ago I did a comparison of USL Pro to the NASL trying to evaluate the 'quality' of each league relative to each other and to MLS... you can go to here if you want to read the whole thing but basically what I came up with was that USL Pro seems overall to be slightly better than NASL. I realize the sample size is limited and that results don't dictate true quality of play (so don't crucify me on method or semantics!).

I have only personally been to USL Pro matches, though I recently saw Orlando City vs. TB Rowdies. I haven't seen any other NASL matches. So, I would be interested to hear some feedback from people who have been to or watched both leagues. Also seems like the investment in NASL is a lot bigger, so is it really worth it? Or do you think the leagues will stratify more (with NASL coming out clearly ahead) in the next few years?

 

They're so cute when they're young, aren't they?

No matter how you slice the issue, fanboys on one side and fanboys on the other side are going to disagree. It seems like it would be counter-intuitive (at least to me) that if you're spending more on players, you wouldn't be getting better players (and therefore a somehow better level of play, however one tries to or wants to quantify that). Small samples are all we have - some would give it the eyeball test (and two people can watch the exact same game and have wildly different opinions on what they saw), some would use US Open Cup results (kinda silly in a small sample), some would use...well, I don't know what else.

I think the general consensus is (or should be) that there are some quality organizations in both leagues, and some teams in each league that could conceivably beat teams in the other. I don't know how that makes one league "better" than the other, when there are a myriad of metrics you could use to determine "quality." To each their own.

NASL teams (by and large) spend more. They're (by and large) better financed, attract players that can command more money on the open market and who have shown (by and large) that they are professional players of a reasonable standard. Some USL Pro teams have more longevity and tradition (while others are just starting). Money has a lot - but not everything - to do with most things.

The NASL is, basically, just three years old (and has played two seasons). They've done better than a lot of folks (myself included) thought they would overall, but they haven't (to my mind) been substantially superior to how a second-division league has been run for a long time. But in the kingdom of the blind and all that.

I don't know how it will shake out. There are far fewer DII markets for MLS to poach (and fewer likely slots in the top flight to fill them) and many more opportunities for the NASL to establish its own niche with solid new franchises like Indianapolis. The next few years will tell if they continue an upward track or if it's the two-steps-forward-one-step-back scenario that has plagued this sport in this country seemingly forever.

Meanwhile, USL Pro is adding teams, but the early returns are not encouraging. DIII teams are usually less-well-financed and more tenuous (with mainstays like Charleston and Richmond and Charlotte exceptions to that).

Almost half the teams that have begun play in DII since 1999 have failed. In the same period, the DIII failure rate is 78%. This has not been a competition to see who's been better at this - it's largely been an exposition of who's worse at it.