Here you go, despite the lack of a SSS, Detroit is indeed among the 4 finalists that will be considered by MLS: https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/4-expansion-finalists-announced-for-next-2-spots.2079168/ My guess is Sacramento and Nashville will be awarded in December and they'll wait for a formal announcement on Columbus before going public with awarding a bid to Cincy. Whether Detroit gets the final spot will depend on how the bids evolve in San Diego, Phoenix, St. Louis, etc. Meanwhile, if the Miami bid falls apart, that could open another slot. In fact, if I were Beckham, I'd say screw it and join the San Diego ownership group.
It's an interesting dilemma mls is about to have. Either they don't have a team in the 6th largest state (Columbus leaving) or they continue to not have a team in one of the largest media markets. On the one hand Detroit has an estimated population of 6 million on the other the soccer team that exists there has established a rabid following who are extremely against this new team (allegedly). Also have the issue of Detroit owners allegedly using garber to obtain land they wanted for development and then switching their bid to an existing nfl stadium. Detroit has great upside along with giant question marks
Think you hit upon a very real scenerio. Beckham and LD in the same owenrship group in SD would be desirable fr MLS also IMO.
The Detroit FC story is waaaaaayyyyyyyyy overblown. It's a great story, fun to see, and great for soccer, but they mean so much less than folks make them out to be when it comes to MLS. Their anti "the man/corporate/grass roots" image makes for great press....it's why they get so much covergae. The media eats that sort of crap up, and little kids who don't know any better will lap it up and swamp social media..... ....then there is reality. The owners don't even have the money for NASL. Not even close. They don't want anyone to get in on what they have created (other investors....unless it's fools like Silva and Commisso who are willing to float them for a while), and all they are is a glorified college team, with an incredibly small rabid following, in a very specific area of Detroit. That is the reality. DFC has virtually no effect on MLS comng in....just more feel good press for DFC, but it is essentially meaningless. Great story....but social media, enthusiastic kids online, "social" story for the press doesn't add up to much in the professioanl soccer world. One that DFC can't come close to affording at the lowest levels unless they give up major control to the folks who will back them. It's a yawn in the real world.....fun online.
Have to agree with that. DCFC has only been around since 2012 and they had only about 1,500 fans when they started out. I don't see the opposition to MLS by some of them (certainly not all) as a big deterrent. Here in Atlanta we have the Silverbacks (formerly the Ruckus) and they supposedly opposed the arrival of MLS too which is natural because it threatens the smaller club. In fact, the Silverbacks were in both the USL and NASL before MLS arrived. Now, Atlanta United is shattering attendance records, the Silverbacks have fallen down to NPSL, and no one is going to the Silverbacks games anymore. Meanwhile, AUFC has its own academy and is about to launch a USL team which will render the Silverbacks even less relevant. So, it's sad that MLS basically killed the Silverbacks, but their existence certainly didn't stop AUFC from being successful. If anything, the quick growth in popularity of DCFC, which is just a semi-pro, 4th division, NPSL team, is proof that soccer can be successful in that market. If they can get 6,000+ to show up for semi-pro soccer, imagine what MLS could do in that same market.
There is no chatter I've heard about MLS changing its schedule. There's Eric Wynalda talking, but that's something else entirely.
the Cincinnati Silverbacks were a cincy team at one time when I was a kid. they actually drew pretty well for being a bunch of no names
Wow!!! Berding on @700wlw says club will be announcing they've surpassed 15k season tickets soon! Hope to have 17k before it's done with goal of avg attendance at 25k. That's why we should get the bid! #MLS2CINCY— Cincy Soccer Talk (@cincysoccertalk) November 29, 2017 Fc Cincinnati hits their 15 k season ticket holder goal well ahead of schedule. Expecting 17 k (I'm thinking more maybe) by the start of the usl season.
Once you get a certain critical mass, it takes on a life of its own and the growth accelerates. Now they need to re-think the size of that new stadium because 21,000 will be too small for a club that will average north of 25K for USL.
Hmmmm, so Detroit DID become one of the final four for one of two expansion teams. OK then, I guess I was wrong about what Garber was looking for then. My mistake!
To be fair, that doesn't meant Detroit will get a team as they might not be selected this round and other bids could overtake them by the time they decide on #27 and #28. Just citing all the reasons why they still have one of the better current bids, despite the shift in venue.
The whole stadium is out of pocket budgeted $200,000,000 for 21,000 with configuration expandable to 25,000 and then 30,000 in the future. I think they will be content to have packed houses of 21,000 like Portland or Kansas City for a while and then expand. Berding said other goal was would have some seats still for $10/match like lowest priced USL ones as to not price everyone out. Not sure how long that would last, but a nice gesture.
The fact that Detroit is included in the mix has me worried that one of Sacramento and Cincinnati (or both!) will get screwed.
Here's a link... http://resources.fifa.com/mm/document/tournament/competition/01/37/17/76/stadiumbook2010_buch.pdf Field size may be a little small, maybe not the 68 meters (about 75yards) wide, but larger than the minimum. Other than that, all is good.
What chatter is this? Wynalda in his USSF President campaign? I'm perfectly willing to admit I'm not completely plugged in and miss things, but I haven't seen anything from the soccer media or "reliable sources" that MLS is contemplating a calendar change.
I still believe Nashville and Sacramento will win the 2 bids, but I think Detroit is a stronger dark horse candidate than most want to admit. Things to consider: 1- Until this week, there was nothing previously specified that stated MLS would have a “Final Four” of finalists from which to pick two teams. It could have been final three, final five, final six, etc. So why did they settle on Four finalists? The only logical conclusion is that Detroit’s bid, despite not having a SSS, must be strong enough to at least be close enough to Cincy/Nashville to warrant further consideration, and not be eliminated because no SSS. 2- Perhaps having a SSS is not the be all, end all. Yes it is obviously preferred, but Detroit’s bid is backed by Gilbert, Ford, and Gores... all three of whom are extremely wealthy, and the first two are in charge of companies (Quicken Loans, Ford) that are big time advertisers in sports. MLS is still not profitable, and Gores and Ford may bring “other assets” to MLS as a whole that other bids cannot. 3- Detroit as a market is most comparable in size to Seattle and Atlanta, which ironically are two of the other MLS teams that share NFL stadiums. Detroit is also nearly twice as big (or bigger) market wise than Cincy, Sac, or Nashville. So if sharing an NFL stadium works in Seattle and Atlanta, why couldn’t it work in similar sized Detroit which also is a very good sports city? Ford Field is actually a very nice facility, and would have a MLS feel much more like Atlanta than New England’s stadium. 4- Only Sacramento will have a new SSS ready to go for the 2020 season. Where would Cincy and Nashville play the first year? Does that ambiguity dilute Nashville and Cincy’s bid in Detroit’s favor? Does it make sense to award Detroit and Sacramento first, and award Nash and Cincy in the next round giving those cities another year or two to get their stadiums built? While not having a SSS hurts Detroit’s case, I don’t believe not having a SSS is the eliminatior for Detroit that most on here think it is.
Agreed and I've been making many of those same points on various boards here. Other advantages of Ford Field include the fact that it's in the urban core, it's ready now, they can adjust the configuration to handle various different crowd sizes ranging from 26,000-65,000 rather than being restricted to 23,000 for all games, and unlike other northern cities, the dome would eliminate the risk of a bitter-cold or rainy/snowy playoff game or early season game. Not predicting they'll be named as one of the next 2, but I've been saying all along that they are among the top 4, at least for now, and that's even AFTER they changed the venue to Ford Field. As a side note, Cincy already plays at Nippert Stadium (Univ of Cincy football stadium - it holds 30K) and would just continue playing there until the new stadium were ready. So, they could begin play in MLS whenever they got the green light. In fact, they just announced that they have 15,000 season tickets for 2018, expect that to grow to 17,000, and that should push their average attendance over 25,000 per game. And that's just for USL. Imagine what the demand will be for MLS.
I'm going to predict Detroit and Sacramento as the first two in December. My reasonings: Detroit has a stadium ready to go. The ownership, infrastructure, and funding is in place. Detroit makes more sense to be picked in December than sometime in 2018, for the reasons mentioned in #1. If Detroit is not picked in December, there is really no reason to pick them at all since their bid will not get any better over time, and Gilbert/Gores are impatient men who will not wait. More likely to pull their bid if not awarded in December, and loss of Ford/Quicken Loans as sponsorship opportunities. Sacramento is already building their stadium and has solid, well-known ownership. Detroit / Sacramento satisfies east/west expansion Cincinnati, while what FC Cincinnati has accomplished is impressive, the whereabouts of a new stadium are still unclear. I'm hearing 3 different potential locations and who pays for the infrastructure is still not determined. The timing and turmoil with Columbus hurts Cincinnati. If it was already clear that Columbus was leaving, that would be a bonus for Cincinnati. But, the uncertainty will make MLS willing to wait for the next round on Cincinnati when that situation is more clear. Nashville has a solid chance over Detroit, but no stadium under works yet and for reasons 1 & 2 I think Detroit gets the heads up at this time. MLS can wait to announce Nashville in 2018, they are not going anywhere. And, they have yet to show they can support a team, unlike Cincinnati. The MLS expansion committee is going to meet less than a week after freezing their butts off in Toronto in the MLS Cup game. A warm, indoor stadium in a northern climate is going to feel mighty enticing to them while recovering from frostbite. Now, that's just my opinion, so don't take anything personally about your city. If I had the choice, I would just pick all 4 in December. They are head and shoulders above the other 8 cities at this point. Or, at least pick 3 in December, as I don't think the Miami situation is going to be cleared up until late summer 2018 due to the legal challenges and may never happen.
Honestly narrowing it down to four everyone knew who 3 of them were going to be. Detroit was the only reasonable candidate left. Everyone else has either stadium issues, relocation conflict and the fact their summers melt heavy duty plastic trash cans.
I think the thing people are missing at this point is that the hopeful owners are meeting with the current MLS investors. Any bid presentations are window dressing for the public and media. This is "first date/arranged marriage" territory. Do the current MLS investors see themselves as compatible with any/all of the four finalist groups? That's the real key. Fans tend to think (if you listen to sports radio or read online comments) that 99% is personal and 1% business. In reality, it's the other way around. But this is that 1%. The two bids selected will be those that pass the "is this guy not going to make me regret this by being an idiot, liar, or asshole" test. If any of these groups fail this test, I'm guessing that not only do they not get one of the two slots this year, it severely hampers their chances next year. If all four groups mesh well with the current investors, the other 8 bid groups looking to next year have an extra hurdle to cross.
I like your thinking I just don't see it happening. When the switch to Ford Field happened I was shocked and then immediately thought that there was NO way they did this without first talking to the league about it. Then MLS came out with their response and it seemed as though that was the first time they had heard about it as well....basically shooting down Detroit while stating in their response that they still want a SSS. With all that, I thought (and still do) the bid was dead. The fact that MLS has now come out and said Detroit is a finalist does have my wheels turning though....Why would they be a finalist if MLS says that without a SSS, you will not get an expansion slot? Reading through "insiders" articles that came out yesterday after the finalists were announced leads me to believe we have ZERO chance, just like I thought after Ford Field was announced. Coupling all those articles that are negative on Detroit and my gut feeling, which admittedly means nothing, I say MLS passes on us. We will be the largest market left without an MLS team after the dust settles. Your guess is a good as mine though, so we shall see.