But then, if we're thinking of the Sounders organization fielding a WPS team, don't we have to ask what the incentive is for them to divert millions into a league where the average attendance is currently 3-4,000?
Nobody was saying they should do this. All of the other WPS teams are operated separately and I think it's much better this way. No need to become a sideshow to the Sounders. I hope they stick with this model, and I think Seattle is a great place to expand.
No expansion fee that we know of, (though I vaguely remember the number $750k being thrown around early 2009,) but remember that all the WPS teams lost $1-3million over the 2009 season.
There shouldn't be because WPS is trying to grow and you don't want to scare investors off by charging some huge fee. They should get them in at the bare minimum and help the set up and establish the team as much as they can to market the product to as many receptive markets as possible without going overboard. Some of the markets in the league now may not work out long term so it's good to have others step up.
As far as I know they have the 150K bond that would be used in case the owner runs out of money to keep the team going, to not repeat a St. Louis.
i think the first yr was thrown off because teams added the 1.2M franchise fee into their operating loses. fitz is probably the big spender in 2010 with his fran fee, stadium and signing STL players. obviously he has pulled back this yr. boy...i come up with about 1.2-1.5M yrly run a club at the bare minimum. players, coaches, small front office, travel, complex + stadium rentals, marketing and advertisings, etc. i think GP also said travel cost wasnt a big thing. isnt it something like 25K for 3 trips with a traveling team? commish said MLS teams were interested and this is the time to neg with team. they still have to work with the WPS fran model vs the MLS group model but they were getting there. 1 Seattle MLS bring in the lady Sounders 2. Vancouver 3. Colorado - Rapids have expressed interest 4. Orange Cty Group? 5. Chicago - What's with them for 2012? 6. Arizona - Heard talk about them. Keep the games at night for sure. 7. Dallas - Stadium? 8. Houston -Strong Latin population like Miami I'd think going into the 4th yr they could bring in 3-4 for West. I think the surviving teams have a better lock on their books and expenses so new teams have a shorter learning curve.
I'd like four addition teams for the 2012, and at least 3 of them should be west coast teams. 1. Los Angeles/Southern California 2. Seattle 3. Denver, Dallas or Houston 4. Chicago or Toronto
Hmm .... Two of those are West Coast. It looks like you're not from the West Coast, however, if you think of Denver, Dallas, or Houston as being West Coast. Just sort of kidding (but not completely), I'm originally from Philadelphia and used to think of Pittsburgh as the West. Now I live in Portland and think that maybe Salt Lake City qualifies as the West.
if you look at the "so called" west, you dont see many options. yes...dallas is more towards FL and east. I'd say explore NC again if they want a team in the WPS along with chicago coming back. Then there is Toronto. What if Washington wants back in after Freedom is moved? You could have have 10 teams east of Kansas West/Mid-West only has a couple of spots. Replace the Sol with the Orange Cty group. I'm not sure California will support more than 2 teams. San Diego or Clara? Arizona, Colorado, Seattle, Oregon, Vancouver? Maybe they get a Mexican club to add their women's team. I think I read Utah somewhere. From this group they need 3 for 2012, 4 would be better. How would Santos be worked in the league if they want in?
Hmm.... not to be a stick-in-the-mud - I like the current discussion - but we do have two other threads for general expansion talk; might we respect the Seattleites here, move the conversation and keep this thread on topic? ^.^'''
Sorry about that! I'm thinking that the question may not be Seattle, but rather a western division in order to have natural rivalries. So, thinking about Seattle in isolation might not be the most productive way to get a WPS team there. The better approach might be to think of Vancouver, Seattle, Portland, Bay Area, and Los Angeles/San Diego, possibly with Salt Lake City also (there's a pretty big women's soccer presence there). If Seattle is the most organized, they could be first in line, but several at once might be even better since otherwise Seattle would be out here in isolation from the East Coast focus of the current WPS teams.
UW Huskies women are 23rd in NCAA attendance at 1,000 per match. Sounders Women of the W-League average 600 per match. The Seattle Pacific Women average over 400. The Seattle University Women average over 200. A new WPSL Seattle club is scheduled to debut in 2011, giving the area two semi-pro clubs.
By WPS standards, I could easily see a Seattle franchise draw significant attendance numbers. Starfire would be a perfect venue for them. Of course, you need an ownership group (and other West Coast - or even Northwest - clubs in order to help with travel costs), but in terms of having a base of soccer fans - and women's soccer fans - the Seattle metropolitan area easily has it.
If we're referring to pizza. Although, it can be spelled both ways .......... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominoes