Wich city should get a MLS team?

[Jasonma]

Originally posted by Ubiquitous One
If we are moving out West and solidifying the national imprint, give it to Seattle -- but not in the new stadium -- or Portland. According to the Commish, whatever city has a) a group of investors b) a solid soccer fanbase and c) a soccer specific stadium, will get the expansion teams.

Of course this is the same Commisioner's office (different commisioner) that promised Seattle a team when Seahawks Stadium was completed. I think in Seattle we have b, if we can get a, then c should be set aside for the first few years assuming that Paul Allen is a, or that Paul Allen is willing to ive a good lease deal to whomever is a (John McCaw maybe?).

[Jose L. Couso]

Seattle
Portland
Philadelphia
St. Louis
Atlanta
San Diego

[calcioguy9]

What about Madison(WI), or Milwaukee? theres a pretty soccer following in the Madison area, and excellent soccer around Milwaukee. Only fear would be being to close to Chicago.

[skipshady]

Originally posted by pething101
Wow. No love for the Triad of NC. With Greensboro, Winston-Salem, Charlotte, Raleigh, Durham and Chapel Hill all within 90 minutes (and all good soccer support at the HS and college level), I would think the Triad would be a great place for a team. For this reason, I would say the Triad gets a team before Atlanta. Atlanta is a horrible sports town (anyone who is familiar with the Hawks or Braves would agree) while the aforementioned North Carolina cities have a history of supporting soccer.

[butchiesboy]

Kearny, N.J.

[wu-tang beez]

For economic reasons purely I think it's hard for any sports franchise in phoenix to fail. What have the cardinals done since they arrived there? Nothing, yet they still draw.

But for making american games feel more like european derbies and giving the US a true homefield advantage, how can you leave Filthydelphia out of the mix. Those should be the next 2 franchises. Canadian teams won't work because the exchange rate and canada's rediculous tax structure. Ask the Grizzlies why they really moved. San Diego couldn't draw a crowd for the allstar game and numerous international matches(exluding mex) so forgetaboutem. Seatle and Minnesota look good, but how many did they draw for the NASL? I heard detroit did well. Houston has very indifferent fans, much like Miami. You'll have hard core die hards, but then you have everyone else. Same goes for Atlanta. They showed well for the olympics, but I don't see this as a feasible city for atleast 15-20yrs.

[timmy409]

For this reason, I would say the Triad gets a team before Atlanta. Atlanta is a horrible sports town (anyone who is familiar with the Hawks or Braves would agree) while the aforementioned North Carolina cities have a history of supporting soccer.
yep the braves getting 33,686 sunday against the cardinals is real bad

[kasai]

Originally posted by wu-tang beez
For economic reasons purely I think it's hard for any sports franchise in phoenix to fail. What have the cardinals done since they arrived there? Nothing, yet they still draw.

But for making american games feel more like european derbies and giving the US a true homefield advantage, how can you leave Filthydelphia out of the mix. Those should be the next 2 franchises. Canadian teams won't work because the exchange rate and canada's rediculous tax structure. Ask the Grizzlies why they really moved. San Diego couldn't draw a crowd for the allstar game and numerous international matches(exluding mex) so forgetaboutem. Seatle and Minnesota look good, but how many did they draw for the NASL? I heard detroit did well. Houston has very indifferent fans, much like Miami. You'll have hard core die hards, but then you have everyone else. Same goes for Atlanta. They showed well for the olympics, but I don't see this as a feasible city for atleast 15-20yrs.

Actually, I think you have your numbers mixed up. San Diego drew about 25k for the MLS all star game with very little advertisement in town. Also for some US friendlies not including Mexico, the crowds have usually been 15~30k depending on the opponent.

Also, why exclude Mexico soccer matches held in San Diego from the total soccer loving population in San Diego/Tijuana. Most Mexico matches in San Diego draw over 40k and some especially the ones against the USA have drawn over 50k. That is better than almost any other soccer venue in the USA other than the Rose Bowl.

[Ronaldo13]

San Diego, Atlanta, and New York(I know we have the metros but we share with NJ...so they're not a NY team...they're shared)

[wu-tang beez]

Originally posted by timmy409

yep the braves getting 33,686 sunday against the cardinals is real bad

it is when turner field holds close to 50k, when the braves are scorching earth in 1st place & you team is battling a traditional rival. Texas v NY avg 44k, 3 consecutiive sellouts & the rangers blow.

Nothing personal, I just doubt any minor sport will survive there or in San Diego.

Mexicans don't sell out their own teams in mexico, what makes you think that once the novelty has passed they'll stop going. or what makes you think Tiajuana transplants will have any loyalty to American Soccer. I honestly believe the crowds there will make Miami look like freakin' OSU v Michigan.

[skipshady]

Originally posted by wu-tang beez
it is when turner field holds close to 50k, when the braves are scorching earth in 1st place & you team is battling a traditional rival. Texas v NY avg 44k, 3 consecutiive sellouts & the rangers blow.Plus, Braves has had trouble selling out playoff games, iirc. I can only imagine how bad attendance will be if they stop winning.
--------
But back on topic:
Another reason why the Triad area in NC may do well is the local press coverage. Newspapers in the Triad and the Triangle have been covering soccer for years thanks to universities and high schools there, and there is less of the editorial stigma attached to soccer that you may see in other cities.
Plus, the newspapers have been supportive of all professional teams, be it the Courage, Hurricanes or even the Skyhawks of the old WLAF (now NFL Europe).

Here's my vote for Winston-Salem.

[writered21]

Here's how it like to see it break down someday ... more dream here than actual thought. This is merely where I'd like to see a 20-team league play:

DC United
Columbus
Chicago
New England
MetroStars (NJ)
Dallas
Los Angeles
Colorado
San Diego (moved from San Jose)
St. Louis (moved from Kansas City)
Milwaukee (up from A-L)
Portland (up from A-L)
Seattle (up from A-L)
Philadelphia (expansion)
NY Cosmos (expansion)
Carolina (expansion)
Atlanta (expansion)
Houston (expansion)
Detroit (expansion)
Fort Lauderdale Fusion (expansion - rebirth)

You could break this into 4 5-team divisions with 2 conferences to play a 36-match schedule, but since it's all a dream anyway, I'd go with the double round-robin, 38-game schedule.

Of course, in this world, everyone would have their own stadium, cool uniforms and no salary cap.

*** waking up ***

Cheers,
ed

[kenosha]

Originally posted by wu-tang beez
For economic reasons purely I think it's hard for any sports franchise in phoenix to fail. What have the cardinals done since they arrived there? Nothing, yet they still draw.

Seatle and Minnesota look good, but how many did they draw for the NASL?

The Minnesota Kicks were the only team to make a profit in the league. Then, they inexplicably moved the team. Maybe someone from there can explain why they moved.

[toot86]

I dont think a city without Hispanic people in it will like a MLS team.. It has to have some latino People it for the team to survive...

[kidgrifter]

I would say Portland.

[Native Aztexan]

Originally posted by toot86
I dont think a city without Hispanic people in it will like a MLS team.. It has to have some latino People it for the team to survive...

And I'm sure Columbus will not like a MLS team. :rolleyes:

[ToMhIlL]

Originally posted by dawgpound2


True.

And Cleveland Rangers forever!

I guess you didn't hear that when Garber announced that a Cleveland group was in the mix, that the name was going to be the Steamer.

Tom

[burning247]

one day we'll look back on these discussions and laugh, thinking one time back in the day we had to hope our city had a team, and whether expansion would happen. One day soccer will be huge in the US, hopefully one day is soon. :(

[slip2break]

Originally posted by writered21
DC United
Columbus
Chicago
New England
MetroStars (NJ)
Dallas
Los Angeles
Colorado
San Diego (moved from San Jose)
St. Louis (moved from Kansas City)
Milwaukee (up from A-L)
Portland (up from A-L)
Seattle (up from A-L)
Philadelphia (expansion)
NY Cosmos (expansion)
Carolina (expansion)
Atlanta (expansion)
Houston (expansion)
Detroit (expansion)
Fort Lauderdale Fusion (expansion - rebirth)


Wow....do you hate Rochester or something?

[wu-tang beez]

The Bay Area needs to have a team. It's the 6th or 7th major media market in the land. San Diego Tiajuanans will never pay to watch an MLS team when they can turn on the boob tube & watch MFL teams for free.

Just because I move to Brooklyn, doesn't mean I'm going to follow the Knickerbockers.