sure, if montreal and/or vancouver had the only well monied investment groups out there, you'd have a point, but that's not necessarily the case. the rest of your post just talks about why very rich owners are a good thing, nothing specific to these two cities or canada as a whole. in relation to my earlier post (focusing on MLB because i was apparently talking out my ass in regard to the NFL), do canadians view MLB as a US/Canadian league, or a US league with a Canadian team or two? i don't know a single american that views it as anything but an american league.
You might have wished to refer to the NBA, there - what with the Toronto Raptors present and what have you. The NHL had Canadian teams from the outset, yes - but 4 of the Original Six teams were in the US even then. Even so, those 2 Canadian teams happened to be rather important aspects of that smaller league, just as the six Canadian teams in today's NHL are now. Plus, the NHL is headquartered in New York, along with MLS, but that does not stop Canada from having a stake in what is as much their league as it is the USA's. Right now, with only one Canadian team in MLS, the situation would be closer to the examples seen in NBA and MLB (hell, even when the Expos were still around, it didn't matter a lot) - but the relative off-field success of Toronto FC compared to many other clubs in Major League Soccer, the smaller size of the league, and the impetus towards getting the Impact and 'Caps into MLS makes for a dynamic somewhat closer to the NHL. Of course, it'll really be closer to the NHL if Montréal and Vancouver do get in, and prove to be the kind of off-field success that Toronto FC is now (and maybe if they can turn it on during the actual game, too!).
Yes - but they are billionaires interested in MLS - I'd say that trumps the fact that they represent Canadian markets. What examples are there of billionaire owners wanting to join MLS in U.S. markets?
As I've posted in a seperate thread, The Original Six is actually a misnomer. The founding teams of the NHL were 3 Canadian clubs. The Ottawa Senators, Montreal Canadiens, and Montreal Wanderers. And while 4 of the Unoriginal 6 clubs were indeed American, two teams were owned by the same individual (James Norris owned the Black Hawks and Red Wings) and he had controlling interest in a third (The Rangers).
Indeed - a Hall of Fame where the most featured team happens to be from... where, exactly? Methinks that the team might be one of those most familiar to the staff doing said replays this season.
Whatever. It's still our league. The MLS doesn't "need" Canada. Are you a nice addition to the American operated, based, and started MLS? Yes. But where the heck was Toronto and Montreal and those Canadian billionaires in '96? We started the damn thing, laid our asses out (again) and have decided that you guys should join the club. You'd think you'd be a bit more grateful and less, I don't know, self-important. This post is less at you and more at the general attitude coming from Canadian fans. To Montreal and Vancouver people...there are a helluva lot of Americans who have been dying waiting for a team to come to their city (how about region? I live like 800 miles from the nearest team), so please don't be offended if one of them blows up on you because you start talking about "deserves" and "look at Toronto" and whatever else. It ain't cool. You'll get your teams...just chill.
TFC's fan support goes a long way for Monteal and Vancouver's bids for spots in MLS. 3 Canadian teams, Atlanta/Florida, and St. Louis will mainly complete capitalizing on the biggest and best soccer areas in the U.S. and Canada.
they were telling MLS to pissoff and laughing at the idea of even a 10 million dollar fee, that's where they were. saputo was very vocal about where he thought MLS could shove their ideas about montreal joining the fledgling league.
I think that before worrying about whether this is an "American" or "North American" league, MLS is and should be more concerned with finding reliable fanbases who will buy jerseys and sell sponsorships. The last thing that they should do is put a franchise in a tourist market like Las Vegas before going to Montreal. That is a laughable suggestion and there are reasons beyond gambling why no major professional league has settle a team there. New York is not needed at this time either for the same reason that I thought that it was ridiculous for the NFL to try to force a franchise into LA over Houston when the interest clearly was not there at the time. I think that putting another franchise there will do more to hurt the existing franchise in that area than to help MLS in that market. Let RBNY build their stadium and nurture thier fanbase before throwing another team there. For some of the other cities like Miami and Atlanta a case can be made, but as an American, I care less what flag will be flying over the venues and more about the overall strength of the league. Don't put franchises in an American market if it doesn't have a stronger plan for success than a Canadian market simply because they're American. The MLS opened this league to Canada when they admitted TFC and now that the precedent has been set, it makes good business sense to give them at least one regional rival. If a case can be made that a city in America makes more financial sense than Montreal then grant them the franchise. Everything else is nonsense. Such ideas are counterproductive to the success of the league, and I am certain that the only flag that MLS execs are concerned about have dollars and sense attached to them. That pun was intended.
Precedent is one Canadian team gets in for every 14 American ones. So only eleven more cities to go Montreal .
What does that mean? St. Louis, NY, Atlanta, Florida, Portland, Rochester were all in the NASL then?????
We were the Vancouver Royal Canadians in '67 or 68... (which was actually Sunderland AFC competing in the NPSL during their English off-season.) We've had pro soccer in this city for 41 years, minus an off season immediately following the collapse of the NASL. Not many MLS cities can boast that. I'm not posting to troll, I'm just saying it's funny listening to MLS pundits wax poetic about "big rivalries" and "history" when Vancouver and Seattle have been beating the hell out of each other much, much longer.
MLS can exist without Canada but it can exist better with Canada. Up there all you got is a long winter & hockey. So by spring an MLS team is a great new thing to be into & be out & about. Canadian cities have lots of money to spend & lots of kids to become future players. I was telling my brother a few years ago how MLS could have a northern division of Canadian teams & USA teams with a 24 team league. Canada is a very good place to be close by for MLS to operate in. Take advantage of it. Canadian people are warm, friendly & trusting. Like America used to be.
I just thought it was weird to throw out random years and ask where people were. The United Soccer Associatian was a pretty strange experiment. I think it is a bit of travesty. The '69 NASL season was awful as well. Can we promise never to bring in another foreign team and temporarily rebrand them as some American team?
MLS doesn't particularly need Canada but it does need more franchises that look and behave like TFC. However, Toronto is not the equivalent of Montreal, nor Vancouver and each prospective expansion should be taken on a case by case basis. The fact that these two solid contenders for near-term expansion happen to be Canadian should be a non-factor. I would turn the topic around though and say that TFC absolutely needs MLS. And further that Canadian cities that want something other than a nominal top flight soccer franchise absolutely need MLS (in the forseeable future, at any rate).
The MLS relationship with Canada is mutually better for both sides. MLS needs clubs that can make money and have strong followings. TFC has provided that so far which makes some people, like me, believe that one or two other clubs in Canada would be beneficial to the league. The MLS doesn't need TFC, but their fans and revenue make the league look better and make more money than a team only bringing in 6,000 fans each game. But Canadian teams need a strong expanding league like MLS to bring a better level of soccer and entertainment than they would have otherwise.
I don't mean to single you out, but I'm just using your post as an example. Why do people assume that Successful Toronto = Successful [fill in Canadian City]? It's like saying "look at LA - all US cities will have good attendance" or "look at KC, all US cities will have poor attendance." That's stupid. Toronto's success has absolutely no bearing on the success of other Canadian teams. For christ's sake, Montreal is 350 miles from Toronto and Vancouver is 2700 miles away. Toronto is vey international while Montreal has a larger French-Canadian population and Vancouver has a larger percentage of Asians. They simply cannot be compared on the basis of just being Canadian.
The extrapolation that Montreal and Vancouver would be identical successes as Toronto is - of course - a stretch. However, to dismiss out of hand their potential based on ethnic makeup and distance from Toronto is a bit disingenuous as well. The fact is - for both cities - a good potential for Toronto type success exists, part of which is they are Canadian, most of which is that they have shown to be good soccer markets with committed ownership and a willingness to meet MLS criteria for expansion. The flip side is also true: no US market should be dismissed based on the mistakes made in other markets. However, no market should be given priority based on size, regional inclusivenes, or another nice-to-have features without commited ownership and a track record of good support for soccer.
You're speaking to the choir with that bolded part. But there are plenty of cities with all of that in the US. I'm not against Canadian teams per se, I just think the top US league should take advantage of those US cities that will be successful before resorting to additional Canadian teams. MLS has indicated that they want to slow down expansion. Montreal and Vancouver are not going anywhere. They have their USL teams and could make the step up any time in the future. So why not go to US ciites that only have occassional "windows of opportunity" to get teams. ie: NY2, St. Louis, etc. That being said, I wasn't dismissing anything out of hand. I was simply pointing out that Toronto has absolutely nothing to do with measuring how successful any other Canadian city will be. Just as LA or KC has no bearing on say Miami's chances of success.