I've long felt that the Marlins site "agreement" was a ploy to get the Overtown site. They even leaked the contract and started going through the motions of buying up nearby houses. Then they bought the private land in Overtown and just dropped everything.
Thats not how I remember it. Seems a business owner (daycare) was one of the main reasons they stopped with the Marlin's location and the crazy demands the Marlin's were putting on them. My memory the Marlin's location was dropped before the Overtown site was pursued. I could definitely be wrong however.
In Garber's own words: "It’s not optimum” “It wreaks havoc on our schedule and it’s not good for fans and NYCFC." “They have been for many years, no different than Miami, trying to get a stadium deal done.” Except Miami isn't freaking already playing in the league. Big difference Mr. G. “I think if we were going to look at this situation today, New York City as teams 25, 26, 27 or 28, we would require there a stadium finalized at that time." So he says they wouldn't allow NYCFC in now before having a finalized stadium deal. Definitely sounds like he thinks it is a mistake. You usually don't say you wouldn't allow something now if you knew the end result if you didn't think it was a mistake. https://www.frontrowsoccer.com/2017...fc-still-optimistic-ncyfc-will-find-new-home/
Wow! A whole thread dedicated to you.... ReeeeeeSPECT, sir!!! I think I'm too lame to even be on someone's ignore list..... never been reported.......never carded... Man, I gotta build some street cred.
Like I said, going through the motions. They had to "sell it" to make it believable. For like three months, everybody in Miami was suddenly in harmony for a site that didn't make sense and likely didn't even fit. The second they closed on Overtown, the Marlins site was dropped.
I'll feel like a MAN!!! Just don't tell Andy; he might think I'm mocking him (I'm not) and you know how he gets.....he'll post something that hurts my feelings. .....anybody else think it's time for the season to kick off?
The problem was the fact that their whole reason for existence was to have a 2nd stadium in the NYC area, but the first stadium IN NYC. They do have attendance, but a baseball stadium is not considered ideal for soccer (See Sporting KC and DC United in their past). Also, it's hard for MLS to tell other expansion cities "You better have a stadium plan or else" when you have NYCFC playing in a baseball stadium without a new stadium already getting built. Miami's NFL stadium SHOULD be in play as an option if Seattle and Atlanta are seen as the new norm and not exceptions. NYCFC and New England are two examples of teams that make sharing stadiums a "norm", so who is MLS to tell Detroit or Cincinnati "You can't do what those teams did even though we approved NYCFC, Vancouver, Seattle, and Atlanta, oh, and all four of them are successful too". It's inconsistent of MLS. Gives mixed messages.
In approaching MLS expansion candidates they could jut as easily frame it as, "we don't want another situation like we currently have with NYCFC."
I think Garber was given the impression that the stadium plan for Flushing was virtually a done deal.
The difference between Seattle/Atlanta/New England and Miami is that the owner of the stadium for those teams is also a co-investor in the MLS club. All the teams you listed do not have to pay exorbitant rents to another entity to play in that stadium. In fact, with DC United finally opening their of stadium, I believe there are no more teams paying rent that eat heavily into the revenues of their club. Miami playing in an NFL stadium without Ross coming on board as an investor is a non-starter, and a perfectly reasonable requirement for MLS.
I got an undeserved red card once. It lasted about 15 minutes. I have gotten at least one deserved yellow, and I've certainly deserved others I didn't receive. But all of that was a good 10 or more years ago. I can be obstinate and opinionated, but I think I've evolved my posting style to be more sensitive and subject based and less personal.
In a three-way tie for second? Anyone that claims they know how Cincy/Sac/Detroit are fairing with regards to each other - and isn't on the MLS Board of Governors - is just making shit up at this point.
Because they pulled a switcheroo on MLS. MLS has been quite clear that they prefer a stadium in the urban core, if it is possible to do so. They also want one that is of an appropriate size to house the expected fanbase (they have undoubtedly paid a company to conduct a study on this). They also want a stadium designed with soccer in mind. Gores and Gilbert originally had such a site and stadium in mind, and once they convinced Detroit to sell/trade them that site, they decided to go to the Ford family and get them on board the investor team and play at Ford Field. They are most certainly a possibility, but MLS was certainly not pleased with it. There's a lot more to each of these expansion bids than merely having wealthy investors or a stadium site. MLS has spent over 20 years learning---sometimes from their successes, and sometimes they from their failures---what does and does not make a successful club. They have identified well-heeled owners who can have revenue control over a stadium and specific features of the stadium that they feel is most likely to draw the demographics they are looking at for the future. These are but three of the criteria they use, but they are awfully important ones.
DC United flirted with Northern VA after signing with the current site. I'm pretty sure it was to put pressure on DC folks to get their asses moving. If they're emphasizing a location outside of Miami proper, that could indicate a similar motivation.
I guess they should have done their due diligence to verify it. Surely they didnt let a team into the league on an impression. In NYC of all places.
The evidence is still a bit unclear on if they actually learned anything. They, in fact, may be quite happy with the current situation.
You are right. I was a lot more certain they'd learned something before this Miami situation took its most recent turns.
My point exactly They've got a second - very high profile - team in New York putting a lot of fans into Yankee Stadium to watch players that sponsors, broadcasters, and potential fans. For all the gnashing of teeth and stressing for two decades about getting a stadium built in NYC proper, it all paled in comparison to the success the team has been. And, no, the rules for NY don't apply anywhere else. But NYCFC is not, and has not been, a mistake/disaster/error/etc...
Wasn't the main problem with the Marlins-adjacent site that Loria was being a pain in the ass? Isn't he out of the picture now?