Cincinnati is building a stadium? That would seem to be a surprise to the team. An April 4, 2016 article: http://www.cincinnati.com/story/spo...on-fc-cincy-could-hinge-new-stadium/82140098/
My info is 100% in that the info is from a 10 I 100% trust the person who told me this information would not lie or exaggerate. This person had a direct conversation with a guy who has handled stadium deals and their project management in numerous major cities across the country, including Cleveland and Cincinnati. This person said he has a working group on a stadium in Cincinnati for their USL team (he specifically mentioned CFC was playing in Nippert for time being) and is building that in Cleveland. However, most of the details discussed centered around the Cleveland stadium so the details regarding Cincinnati could've have been misunderstood, that wasn't really the topic of discussion. No they are not currently breaking ground at the moment in either city, but the effort is being spearheaded by a group that has successfully done stadiums deals before but for much bigger stadiums. These efforts appear to be geared at smaller stadiums for a different market/use other than an NFL, NBA of MLB team (all of which this group has done before). In Cleveland a USL team is one of the specific users intended for the stadium and some prominent local soccer people are involved in the discussion. None of this is 100% but I feel it is significant that a group with a lot of experience getting these deals done and built is leading the effort. The stadium is the hardest part and it was what had a great deal to do with the demise of Cleveland's last USL team.
Well, I mean, kinda. Moving up to USL-1 was what killed the City Stars, but I don't think we would've really survived the USL-1 season at Krenzler. I work in sports in the city of Cleveland, and I've heard nothing about this. Not that it means anything, but I'm just skeptical. This would seem to be a big deal, and for nothing to have come out seems weird. I also have no idea where the hell they would build a stadium, or why people downtown would sell the fairly valuable land for a minor league soccer stadium. I mean, I want this to be true. I just am skeptical.
I stopped attending City Stars games when they moved from Krenzler. That was all so unfortunate because it was a fun two years. Don't be skeptical. This is real and USL wants to be in Cleveland. While it is far from happening, in terms of getting a stadium built in Cleveland, there is no better person in town to get it done than the guy who is working to make it happen (short of Lebron or some other very wealthy person donating all the money necessary to build a stadium). I know nothing about the proposed location, other than there is one in mind. Is it going to be next E 4th street, probably not but surely there is someplace in downtown. My hope is they will get rid of the airport which only costs the city money.
Fun fact: paid attendance was actually up the year spent in Bedford, despite it being godawful and in a horrid location. Not that it did much good. I don't doubt USL (or NASL, for that matter) wants to be in Cleveland. We're a major untapped market with one of the best college soccer programs in the country down the highway. I'm just surprised there would be local interest in a team from a potential owner. Most of the people with money here thought soccer would never succeed here. And I legit have no idea where you'd put a stadium and everything that'd go with it downtown. CSU wants to move Krenzler over a few blocks, and it would literally be the exact same size. Burke isn't moving anytime soon, unfortunately.
I have more details and some corrections. The plans for building the stadium are pretty well developed with a location and users on board, along with plans for funding that does not include direct tax payer/city funding. Despite everyone's doubts the location is downtown and it is a good one. What is not developed is the USL ownership group. I was wrong before when I said prominent local soccer people are involved. They are not; that had to do with another project (also good news for soccer fans), and it is probably why no one on here has heard anything about this. I think the people with money in Cleveland believe the city, with three major sports franchises already, is not large enough to support a fourth so an MLS team is not happening. However they do think Cleveland could support a USL team in a 10,000 seat stadium and I agree - if they get the ownership group right. There couldn't be a smarter, more experienced guy working on this so I am incredibly optimistic, and he is in regular conversations with USL. Anyone up for starting some sort of grassroots fan movement to show our support for a USL team in Cleveland? Another correction to what I posted previously is that Cincinnati is the opposite situation. They obviously have USL ownership, but they want/need their own stadium because Nippert is too large. However, the location, funding, etc plans are still being developed. For the record these are not rumors. This information is legit. My corrections are just the result of misinterpretations of a conversation that have been clarified through additional conversations.
If they do find an ownership group for a USL team in Cleveland, I hope they find a way to include AFC Cleveland's owner. He has managed to keep some form of pro soccer alive in Cleveland and it would be nice to see that rewarded because a USL team will likely hurt AFC. Maybe a USL owner could help AFC become a USL PDL team affiliated with the USL team. Or perhaps they could include AFC somehow in the USL ownership.
I thought it was semi-pro. No players are getting paid? I considered NPSL to be a semipro league and as an extension AFC Cleveland a semi pro team, if they are not managing to pay some non amateur salaries or expenses then they are no more relevant to this endeavor than everyone else. Thanks
Basically all NPSL teams are amateur, AFC Cleveland included. You can tell by if they have college players on their roster. College players cannot receive any money, even semi-pro money, and continue to remain an amateur in the eyes of the NCAA, nor can they play alongside any players who are receiving money (they can play against them and can play with them prior to college as seen with MLS reserve teams playing their amateur academy players).
I try to eliminate the "semi-pro" term from my vocabulary because it muddies the water. For amateur reasons, it is important to not through around the term "pro" at all -- even in the "semi-pro" terminology. One is either full-amateur or "professional." Through the eyes of collegiate governing bodies, if those three letters (pro) are associated with a team, individual, teammate, league, etc. it causes a lot of problems. Some teams in NPSL do pay. But, as @GalaxyKoa noted, a team cannot have any college players on it if they pay one player. In the past, a team like Myrtle Beach paid their players, but have since changed their structure. In PDL, Kitsap Pumas are an example of a paid team. There's absolutely nothing wrong with playing against paid players, just cannot play alongside them. This is a reason why NPSL and PDL are still called "amateur" leagues -- calling it a "pro" league would hurt amateur eligibility. In my opinion, a team like Dayton Dynamo are flirting with some issues in amateurism if they keep calling their team "pro" while getting some college athletes in their club. I imagine there could be some college coaches that could lose a player or two. When they were the Cincinnati Saints, they had plans to pay players and move to a "pro" setup. Not sure that's still a goal as Dynamo.
Well, did some digging with my sources. I'm way less skeptical now. Some serious money behind this, including some stadium sites (though not what I'd call "downtown") that would be a great location. Still a long way to go, but I'm way less skeptical.
Why would they bother with NASL? It's not as if USL teams are any lesser in quality, and with Cincinnati and Lousiville in the USL already there's a chance of building derby-style rivalries straight out of the gate.
I definitely go with this. I'm really tired of the "NASL" push from several areas as if they think it's much "better." Logistically speaking, USL is a much better setup -- travel, opponents, league, and even requirements. NASL requires ownership to prove a $40m bank account for the team. It's just as "MLS" as MLS is. The only thing NASL has over USL is a television deal -- CBS and BeIN. Both leagues are 100% visible streaming online. I guess, if someone really wants to throw money into it, NASL does allow for much higher payrolls for its clubs. Highest in USL is like $1.2m. I'd venture to say NASL clubs have higher, overall.
The financial model is entirely different between the USL and NASL. The USL is a franchise model where groups pay for rights to use the franchise in city where they hold the rights, this is renewed on a yearly basis from what I know about how franchising works. The NASL is not like that, from what I gather there is a expansion fee to get in -which is purportedly higher than the USL one- and then you own the rights to your club. The logistic points you mention are correct, except the USL is applying for D2 status so the $ in the bank, $750,000/yearly bond you have to post (as per USSF regulations) on top of franchise fees, will become a reality for the USL in the near future. IMO the push to D2 by USL will diminish a lot of the advantages it has over the NASL. The one lasting advantage will be travel costs, as I think payrolls between the leagues will be competitive (USL is going for a players union). If next year -or very soon- it comes down to reducing travel costs & higher yearly administration costs versus a national TV deal then its a totally different picture. Which is better is largely up to the owner looking to get into soccer ownership.
Him asking that question has nothing to do with the merits of the either league. He is just asking to get to the bottom of it. Derbies out of the gate are kind of overrated, but at the end of the day it is up to the ownership group where they wish to go. There is still no problem with asking questions, nor should there ever be.
I think the talk is because of the MLS-USL relationship. There's at least 1 group with some serious money. I don't think MLS will happen, personally.
I know Cleveland geographically but dont know whats what on the ground since i dont live there. Where do people think are desirable, possible sites for a stadium in the city? Just curious.
There are good spots in the area immediately surrounding the downtown, but I can't think of any in the city center.
It would be cool if they could squeeze a small stadium in along one of the bends in the river but on the Ohio City / Tremont side where you could walk to and from those areas easy. But i dont know anything about anything.
That would be ideal, I just don't know if there's a big enough site or if the property would be anywhere near affordable.