MLS 2025: Atlanta United Chicago Fire Colorado Rapids Columbus Crew DC United FC Dallas Houston Dynamo Impact de Montréal Indy Eleven Jacksonville Armada LA Galaxy Los Angeles FC Louisville City Miami FC Minnesota United New England Revolution New York City FC New York Cosmos New York Red Bulls Orlando City Philadelphia Union Portland Timbers Real Salt Lake Rochester Rhinos Sacramento Republic San Antonio Scorpions San Jose Earthquakes Seattle Sounders Sporting Kansas City Tampa Bay Rowdies Toronto FC Vancouver Whitecaps NASL 2025: Albuquerque Sol Arizona United Austin Aztex Baltimore Bohemians Carolina RailHawks Charleston Battery Charlotte Independence Chattanooga FC Colorado Springs Switchbacks Des Moines Menace Detroit City FC Cincinnati FC Edmonton FC Tucson Fort Lauderdale Strikers Fort Worth Vaqueros Fresno Fuego Harrisburg City Islanders Las Vegas Mobsters New Orleans Jesters Oklahoma City Energy Orange County Blues Ottawa Fury Pittsburgh Riverhounds Puerto Rico FC Richmond Kickers San Diego Flash San Francisco Stompers St. Louis FC Tulsa Roughnecks Wilmington Hammerheads USL 2015: AFC Ann Arbor AFC Cleveland Burlingame Dragons Buxmont Torch Calgary Foothills Chesterfield United Corinthians FC SA Erie Commodores FC Buffalo FC Wichita Grand Rapids FC Hershey FC Kitsap Pumas Knoxville Force K-W United Lansing United Laredo Heat Long Island Rough Riders Madison 56ers Michigan Bucks Mississippi Brilla Palm Beach Suns Reading United Seacoast United Phantoms Southern California Seahorses Springfield Synergy Temecula FC Thunder Bay Chill Upward Stars Ventura County Fusion Virginia Beach City WSA Winnipeg
Umm...ok, I don't think Jacksonville, the Rhinos or the Cosmos make it to MLS and where do all of the II teams go?
To me they just seem like demonstrations of foolish fantasy and naivete. Frankly, when I see these lists I'm reminded of the cliched adolescent girl who makes a list of all the characteristics that her future husband should possess. They're all just frivolous wastes of time that will prove hilariously embarrassing in no time at all.
Harsh, but I appreciate that you wrote out loud what I was thinking. It's fine to be an enthusiast as are we all. But, it's foolish to imagine that MLS will expand in a manner or at a speed that is different than any of the other major North American sports leagues.
Dunno.. MLS is curbstomping the other leagues with regards to speed.. It might be because there was a lot of relocation and expansion/contraction in the other leagues early on, but I wouldn't be too shocked to see a "30 and beyond" thread within the next decade.
I think that it's television money now that the television & cablecast networks have decided that there's money to be made in broadcasting & cablecasting television money. At some point, my guess is that the owners/investors will probably decided that MLS has covered almost all of the major media metropolitan areas and that further expansion will cut too deep into their own individual (that is, their own team's) share of the television/cablecast money. I think that's why all of the four major sports leagues have slowed their rate of expansion.
Quite possible. I think that eventually the New York region will have three teams - North Jersey, the Bronx and Queens or Brooklyn. Possibly the L.A. Region could support a third team in Orange County but I dount think that's going to happen anytime soon. A second team somewhere in North Chicago, as well, could make a lot of sense down the road. In the end, it's just demagraphics and television money.
I think there are four major factors that MLS considers when determining where to put expansion franchises, on top of the already existing criteria required by prospective owner/operators: 1. TV Market Share (the larger the market, the more money they can ask from the networks) 2. Major League Sports Market Saturation (how many other teams play in the region that could cannibalize sports fan dollars - especially MLB since it overlaps the entire MLS season) 3. Geographic area (increase national footprint - a city without a nearby MLS team, but one close enough for a rivalry) 4. Miscellaneous (weather, city finances, etc) In my mind, these are the top underserviced markets that have the best chance to be successful and that MLS must expand into to create a 27/28 team league if they want a stable base: Sacramento (1.183% National TV Market share, only NBA team as dollar competition, services Northern California and Reno, natural rival in San Jose) Charlotte (1.014%, NBA/NFL/NHL, services the Carolinas, rival in Atlanta) Indianapolis (0.951%, NBA/NFL, services Indiana, rivals in Columbus and Chicago) San Antonio (0.801%, NBA only, services west Texas/New Mexico, rivals Houston) My next tier of cities would be the ones to flush out the league to 32 teams. However, I would wait a decade and see which franchises sink or swim or move to another city before continuing expansion, since most of these are smaller/oversaturated markets or come with a caveat. They also should be larger markets than Salt Lake City (the smallest market currently in MLS): Phoenix (1.612%, MLB/NBA/NFL/NHL, services Arizona, rivals LA, heat a major issue <see Qatar 2022> games could only be played evenings Jun-Sep) Detroit (1.611%, MLB/NBA/NFL/NHL, services Michigan, rivals Columbus/Chicago/Toronto, bankrupt and dying - city needs to be turned around before serious consideration) St Louis (1.078%, MLB/NFL/NHL, services Missouri, rival Kansas City, many previous soccer club failures) Pittsburgh (1.031% MLB/NFL/NHL, services west Virginia/Penn, rival Columbus and Philly, Riverhounds have financial issues) San Diego (0.931%, MLB/NFL, services SoCal/Mexico, Rivals LA, leeches support from LA teams?) Nashville (0.881% NFL/NHL, services Tennessee and Kentucky, rivals Atlanta, currently an NPSL club) Raleigh-Durham (0.998%, services the Carolinas, Rival Atlanta, only if Charlotte doesn't pan out) Hartford (0.851%, services Conn and RI , too close and squeezed between NY and NER territory?) MLS shouldn't expand beyond 32 teams as that would just lead to diminishing returns on the TV revenue (which will be the main revenue generator in the future) as it would have to be spread among more owners (MLS is not going to stay single entity forever).
I think everyone can agree that at a certain point (be it 24, 28, 30, 32, or whatever) that a league is just too large to function in a way that resembles a real soccer league. Now, maybe you could push it to 40 with two conference of 20, and teams from one conference never play the others unless it is USOC, CCL, or the MLS Cup final. Now, I'm not a fan of not playing every team at least once, but this is clearly where MLS is heading, using increasing expansion fees to drive profits. But at some point, it runs out. Hopefully, at that point (whatever it is), they will look at forming a real pyramid with pro-rel. Garber will have to go for that to happen, and it is likely a long way down the road.
Garber is not keeping pro/rel from happening. He works for the owners. The owners want nothing to do with pro/rel and that is why it will never happen.
Obviously this depends on what constitutes a "real" league. How many years did Mexico play with their divisions? How many leagues have split seasons or playoffs? I get what you're saying and yes, ultimately MLS will have to conceive of something that marries conventional US models with the traditional single-table ideology. But I'd say we're already there with 2 divisions and that we'll likely stay with this for a good while. Because... At this point MLS needs notable leaps in TV money to make any substantial increases worth the effort. We still have teams in the red or shy of targeted profit margins for sustained reinvestment, let alone wanting money to expand payrolls, expand academies, etc. Are the broadcast partners prepared to shell out at least $5M+ more per year, per team for adding the likes of Sacramento, San Antonio, Indiana and PHX? I don't know and think it will likely be 2020 before we can truly gauge that potential. Remember, from here on out each additional market is, generally speaking, smaller from a TV standpoint, and we don't know how many Orlando-like stories are available from the lot. At this point I imagine MLS, in addition to praying Miami works out, is trying to find 3 more markets/owners to pair with Sacramento to reach 28 teams. (Arguably the next magic number for an even # of teams in each division) Probably speaking with advertisers and TV partners about their preferences, and maybe investigating potential in target markets where an owner/venue combo hasn't fully formed (Detroit, STL...) If the numbers don't work they won't press the issue. Especially if the questionable options continue to thrive in a viable minor league, showing that some cities don't need MLS to save them right away. Which all tells me MLS will continue to grow, but we're a looooong way from seeing anything close to 40 teams.
Real soccer league? People need to understand we are an American soccer league who likely will go their own route. So don't expect to see pro/rel ever especially the way MLS is set up.
I think that I got my quote mislabeled there, but it's no big deal. It's interesting, nonetheless, at how easily it would be to set up a league structure that would give you a relatively balanced league structure with 24 and 27 teams. With 24 teams divided into two conferences, each team could play its conference rivals home-and-away and all of the teams in the other conference once for 34 game regular season. With 27 teams divided into three conferences, each team in its own conference home-and-away and all of the other teams once for a 34 team schedule. If MLS is willing to go up to a 38 regular season, you could similarly come up with a balanced season with a 30 team league that is divided into three conferences of 10 teams each. Finally, with a 32 team league, you could come up with a balanced schedule with a league divided into 4 conferences of eight teams each in which conference rivals could play each other home-and-away and all other teams once for a 38 game regular season. I don't know if MLS will ever expand beyond 32 teams any time within most of our lifetimes because the T.V. money would be divided into smaller and smaller individual shares - and that wouldn't be in the self interest of individual team owners/investers. Anyway, something along those lines is probably what the future of MLS is going to look like. If there is ever to be pro/rel in the USA & Canada, it will be in the minor leagues where there's less big money at stake.
Question: Do you think it would be possible for BOTH Charlotte and Raleigh to get teams? I know Charlotte has made quite a few definitive statements about their MLS goal. And today I heard a rumor from a usually reliable source that Jim Goodmon (owner of Durham Bulls and local CBS affiliate and real estate developer) is considering options to bring MLS to Raleigh.
In MLS? I'd guess no because of the economics. Having both Charlotte and Raleigh won't aid the TV contract as much as having one of them plus another wholly unique and unserved market, so that suggests the league would be sacrificing some money. Same might be the case regarding local sponsorship and broadcast opportunities in that one team might be able to land deals in both regions, so having two teams could limit the local money potential of both. Yes, they could form a nice rivalry and neither is unattractive, but given the current state and prospects for the league I see no reason for MLS to consider both at this time.
No way you get both - too much over-concentration of product in one region. Raleigh is probably out since it's a smaller share and the Railhawks are already in the market. And I don't think the end game is four 8-team conferences, it will be two conferences of four 4-team divisions running a NFL-style schedule that rotate home-and-away matches between divisions every 38-game season. That would allow fans of in-conference teams to see opposing teams at home every 2 of 3 years. also it provides greater uncertainty for the bookies in Vegas. The standings will also look like a Champion's League Group stage, to attract European interest.
If they put a team in the Carolinas it would be/should be in Charlotte. It will probably be the Independence. Plus I like their crest.