View Full Version : Percentages candidate cities 2010 MLS
napolisoccer
02 Dec 2007, 03:56 PM
I think that for the 18th team of the 2010 the percentages are these :
New York City : 55 %
Montreal : 15%
Vancouver : 10%
Atlanta :10%
Portland : 5%
Las Vegas : 3%
Miami : 2%
Are you agree with me ?
What are your percentages ?
napolisoccer
03 Dec 2007, 08:56 PM
View original article: http://soccernet.espn.go.com/c...=5901
http://soccernet.espn.go.com/columns...ot=mls&cc=5901
Here's an article today suggesting that MLS needs to change the target audience from the suburban crowd to the urban crowd.
Quote:
That model is cracked. It's flawed. As dated as Napster or acid wash jeans.
Coveting the American family has been the preferred marketing model since the Disco '70s, when NASL pioneers fanned out to evangelize and teach parents and kids Soccer 101. The kids will grow, we were told, to spin gold from the great game.
Indeed, the kids did grow up. The first generation that didn't eschew soccer as some foreign oddity was ready embrace it. Except that some of the MLS movers and shakers forgot something important: that lots of those Gen Xers now dwell in the city. They neglected to tweak the model. Too many MLS deciders remain hopelessly tethered to the old model, forever in futile pursuit of the family dollar.
Those old theories are being overtaken by reality. That reality (something MLS would be wise to remember as its assigns new franchises and renders critical 30-year decisions on where to build stadiums):
Pro soccer works best in this country when it targets 20- and 30-somethings and ethnic audiences, influencers whose presence can create true happenings around game nights (over disparate cultures, no less). When it becomes "the thing to do," families and suburban singles will follow. That's the way our culture works.
MLS needs to think more "Urban Outfitters" and less "Chili's." Look at music and fashion: It starts in the city and spreads outward.
So, why must we cling to misguided notions that things will work backward in professional soccer?
Look at the MLS clubs that have truly been successful at drawing fans (as opposed to fake, "paper" success in some markets). Start at RFK, where D.C. United has always enjoyed robust support. It's in the city. It's on the Metro rail line.
Chicago did well right away, drawing hardy numbers even in a too-large stadium -- but one that was downtown. Real Salt Lake enjoys good support despite an ill-suited venue and a lousy side. The grounds sit atop a beautiful part of town, just up the hill from Salt Lake's epicenter.
Houston's Robertson Stadium is, in a word, a dump. It's in a bad part of town. But the upside is that it's near downtown. And you need only to walk the aisles to see who's showing up: young urbanites and Latinos, neither of whom are prone to start shaking like a squirrel if a nice, safe suburban strip center isn't nearby.
The Dynamo just sold out two playoff games, about 30,000 each. That doesn't happen in MLS. Why? Because team sales efforts often target families, who pick out three or four games per year and spend a nice evening at the ground (but maybe leaving in the 75th minute). It's a nice outing before they (understandably) return to worrying about parent-teacher conferences, birthday parties and the serious business of being parents.
They aren't true fans, engaged and engrossed. When the playoffs roll around, they shrug. Many of them, anyway.
__________________
After to have read this article, I think that the percentages to see a NYC team in MLS in 2010 can be also 60%-65%.
southpaw817
04 Dec 2007, 01:14 AM
Building stadiums in the cities is the best way for the sport to enter the mainstream in the US.
time_drifter
04 Dec 2007, 02:35 AM
My thoughts exactly. No more suburban stadiums! Hopefully the leadership down here in Houston can learn this lesson before they choose the site for our stadium.
southpaw817
04 Dec 2007, 09:26 AM
My thoughts exactly. No more suburban stadiums! Hopefully the leadership down here in Houston can learn this lesson before they choose the site for our stadium.
Its not that you cant get people to go out to the suburbs its just that if the stadiums are in the city they become "events" you know? They become part of the cities culture and develop an atmosphere. People who are on the fence about attending a soccer game will go to games b/c of this.
napolisoccer
05 Dec 2007, 11:13 AM
Are enough realistic my percentages about the MLS expansion for 2010 ?
In your opinion what is the more dangerous opponent of NYC among the candidate cities ?
Nacional Tijuana
11 Dec 2007, 06:57 PM
So, is Oklahoma dead?
KingsCountyFC
11 Dec 2007, 06:59 PM
Hopefully.
I think it's safe to say,
Philly
St.Louis
Then either New York, second canadian team, Las Vegas?
I really don't know what 3rd city would be viable right now besides
NYC.
Kubah
11 Dec 2007, 06:59 PM
I haven't heard anything about Okla... it's all Philly-St. Louis right now.
Kubah
11 Dec 2007, 07:02 PM
I really don't know what 3rd city would be viable right now besides NYC.
I keep reading Portland and Vancouver. Would the league want another Western team?
Another option to getting a NYC team that no one talks about is relocation, but there are no rumors so let's no start one :D