No, the Patriots have control over everything. The Revs are a tenant, secondary, or in some cases, thind in line. The only difference is that the Revs pay their rent and other expenses from one Kraft pocket to the other. They are a tax write-off for the Krafts so the Patriots are not as "profitable" on paper. Kraft once commented that aside from the first few years of MLS, the Revs have made at least a modest profit every year. So who cares if they are still partying like it's 1996? Can't fire Heaps until the end of the season because then they'd have to pay him for the rest of the year, plus pay a new coach. Can't have that, no siree Bob!
Despite the success of Seattle, and now Atlanta, I think a lot of people (or perhaps just me) still think "Revs" when we hear "NFL Stadium". And despite the passage of time, it is difficult to get the images of Giants Stadium, Arrowhead Stadium, Mile High, etc. out of our heads. But as Garber, himself said, it may not work in every city, so it is going to be interesting to see where the league goes from here. For different reasons, two cities came immediately to mind when I read that: Miami and Cincinnati.
Miami does have one the best large Soccer venues in the Country. But I am very skeptical that they can draw Atlanta type numbers.
Would have to get into bed with Stephen Ross. 1. Would Beckham want to? 2. Would Ross want to? Hey they would be playing on grass, unlike Seattle or Atlanta.
it is worth acknowledging that the stadium is not the Revs problem. With completely absent/incompetent ownership, they still average close to 20k at Gillette. The ownership flushed 20 years here but if we had even 75% of the ownership care and interest that some of the other teams have, the Revs would be averaging closer to 27-33k a game IMO.
Ross has had a lot of trouble reading Miami. When he first got here he heavily marketed the Dolphins as a celebrity owned and supported team, something that greatly turned off Miamians. He still views soccer in Miami as being primarily event driven, not realizing that TV ratings for soccer in Miami, youth participation levels, and attendance for the Gold Cup and international friendlies down here is consistently high. Also, this perception of Miami as a bad sports town is just wrong. The Dolphins and Heat have always drawn well, the Panthers drew well before they moved an hour outside of town, and the Marlins have never had an owner that deserved the fans' support. The Fusion, like the Panthers, suffered from a location problem, but if 35-40,000 people showed up at the old Orange Bowl to watch Nicaragua against Panama, or Jamaica vs Costa Rica, I am sure 25,000 can show up consistently to watch MLS.
I do seem to recall some quotes of his on the classico that didn't exactly seem up to date with where the industry has gone in the last 10 years. I'm not saying they are a 'bad sports town', I'm just saying I wouldn't expect them to pull an Atlanta or Miami--and especially not without getting the full and enthusiastic support of Ross (Seattle and Atlanta both had full support of the NFL teams in their cities at launch). And you kind of need a high attendance to make playing in a big stadium look good.
Agreed, though I think Boehly has better team ownership chops than Ross. That said, I like the Overtown site better than Dolphin Stadium. Like La Bombanera, it can have more character.