Seattle will NEVER get an MLS club........IMO

[Bayer04fan]

IMO, Seattle will not be getting a team anytime soon even if they have the stadium situation because there are NO fans. Seattle averages about 2-3K a game. Even though people come out to see Celtic and Liverpoll or whatever the matches were that were held in Seattle for the CWS tour, those were fans for those clubs, its no gurantee that these same football fans will come out to support an MLS club.

[sounderfan]

IMO, Seattle will not be getting a team anytime soon even if they have the stadium situation because there are NO fans. Seattle averages about 2-3K a game. Even though people come out to see Celtic and Liverpoll or whatever the matches were that were held in Seattle for the CWS tour, those were fans for those clubs, its no gurantee that these same football fans will come out to support an MLS club.

There are threads about the subject of A-League attendance and MLS expansion in other areas of this board.

Here's my take:

1. Seattle Sounders USL-1 attendance is lousy, and troubling as far as MLS support goes.

2. MLS could care less about A-League attendance numbers. They want investors to add to the value of their league. Seattle would need to turn things around, to be sure. But the fact that "Big Time" soccer draws well here seems like more of a positive for MLS. Now just convince people MLS is "Big Time." Seattle doesn't think the USL is, apparently.

3. Most large cities that have/have had minor league pro soccer have struggled at the gate. Exceptions: Montreal and to an extent Minnesota and Vancouver. Portland and Rochester have solid support in smaller markets.

4. NEVER say never. Exactly what was the "great support" shown by New York before getting the MetroScum? The Centaurs bombed. There are many other examples.

Here's the thread I referred to earlier:
http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=156418

[Delta Blues]

IMO, Seattle will not be getting a team anytime soon even if they have the stadium situation because there are NO fans. Seattle averages about 2-3K a game. Even though people come out to see Celtic and Liverpoll or whatever the matches were that were held in Seattle for the CWS tour, those were fans for those clubs, its no gurantee that these same football fans will come out to support an MLS club.

A fart has more value than that post.

P.s. you'll NEVER get laid.

[Clint Eastwood]

IMO, Seattle will not be getting a team anytime soon even if they have the stadium situation because there are NO fans. Seattle averages about 2-3K a game. Even though people come out to see Celtic and Liverpoll or whatever the matches were that were held in Seattle for the CWS tour, those were fans for those clubs, its no gurantee that these same football fans will come out to support an MLS club.


Expansion is all about money, money, money. If Seattle brings a truckload of cash, they're in. It doesn't even have to make sense. Why put a second team in LA when there are plenty of other markets like Houston and San Antonio? Money, money, money. Vargera threw mucho dinero around.

[gherter]

Expansion is all about money, money, money. If Seattle brings a truckload of cash, they're in. It doesn't even have to make sense. Why put a second team in LA when there are plenty of other markets like Houston and San Antonio? Money, money, money. Vargera threw mucho dinero around.

True, deep-pockets ownership will seal the deal, but the stadium in Seattle is the problem, IMO. MLS should think hard about getting new teams into anything bigger than 25K. Of course, Seattle's NFL stadium is about as good as it gets as far as soccer goes, so it might be worth a shot if any that big are, but it is still way too big for an MLS team.

Right now, Houston, Rochester, and Toronto are all ahead of Seattle because of their current or planned smaller stadiums. San Antonio in the mix, too, because they could probably be convinced to build one as well. But as far as big stadium locations go, Seattle, and probably Philly, are the best bets.

[swedcrip34]

True, deep-pockets ownership will seal the deal, but the stadium in Seattle is the problem, IMO. MLS should think hard about getting new teams into anything bigger than 25K. Of course, Seattle's NFL stadium is about as good as it gets as far as soccer goes, so it might be worth a shot if any that big are, but it is still way too big for an MLS team.

Right now, Houston, Rochester, and Toronto are all ahead of Seattle because of their current or planned smaller stadiums. San Antonio in the mix, too, because they could probably be convinced to build one as well. But as far as big stadium locations go, Seattle, and probably Philly, are the best bets.

I haven't heard of any smaller stadium in Houston. Unless you think Club America would automatically just build one.

[Clint Eastwood]

True, deep-pockets ownership will seal the deal, but the stadium in Seattle is the problem, IMO. MLS should think hard about getting new teams into anything bigger than 25K. Of course, Seattle's NFL stadium is about as good as it gets as far as soccer goes, so it might be worth a shot if any that big are, but it is still way too big for an MLS team.

Right now, Houston, Rochester, and Toronto are all ahead of Seattle because of their current or planned smaller stadiums. San Antonio in the mix, too, because they could probably be convinced to build one as well. But as far as big stadium locations go, Seattle, and probably Philly, are the best bets.

I agree that having economically viable stadium deals is an important component for expansion. That's definitely part of the "money" argument. It's just that we here on BS keep trying to rationalize where expansion is going to take place based on geography and the fact that we want MLS to contribute to the development of the US National team and American soccer.

Nothing that MLS has done recently shows they have the same priorities. Their top priority is to make the league profitable. Don't be surprised if Kansas City is bought by Club America and moved to Houston or San Antonio(this would be on condition that a good stadium situation can be arranged). Then don't be shocked if the next two expansion teams are given to Toronto and another "hispanic"-oriented team in Chicago or New York. We can keep talking about Seattle, Philly, Rochester, Cleveland, Portland, etc. etc., but until economically vialbe ownership groups are installed it's all a dream.

By the way I live in Upstate NY, and think the Rhinos are an awesome A-league franchise. However, I'm worried about their possible move to MLS. Is the owner in position to lose significant money in the short term? Can they convince world-class players to move there? The new stadium is also in the Columbus mold, not the new stadium set-ups like HDC, Frisco, and Bridgeview. Is it really MLS ready?

[Crewmudgeon]

A fart has more value than that post.

P.s. you'll NEVER get laid.


Hey, I resemble that remark.

[AndyMead]

Maybe folks with negative reputation shouldn't be allowed to start threads.

[GMan Eric]

I haven't heard of any smaller stadium in Houston. Unless you think Club America would automatically just build one.

Robertson Stadium at the University of Houston has been suggested in the past. It seats around 30K and IIRC could fit a 70 x 110 pitch. But then again, a Houston poster would be able to better confirm that.