Lets try this again now that there are 11 cities. Vote for the 2 you think will be the next expansion teams. This poll will stay open until August (MLS said the next 2 teams will be announced at this time). You will be able to change your vote in this poll. If you chose other please post the other city. This poll assumes the following... #21 is Atlanta 2017 #22 is Minnesota 2017 #23 is LAFC 2018 #24 will be Miami 20??
I'm gonna have to give Sac #25 (assuming they don't jump Miami to #24). Their bid is shovel ready, fully funded, has a solid ownership group, proven interest in the market via the Republic, and really is just waiting on MLS's go ahead. I'd give #26 to San Diego given how strong they've come on in recent weeks (and how much groundwork was laid in the last year behind the scenes), they have ridiculously wealthy and connected owners, Garber seems hot to trot for the plan, no public funding to screw it up, and SD is consistently one of the highest rated markets for viewership of the USMNT (never mind the area's massive youth programs). And best of all, there's the potential for Seattle south in the wake of the Chargers demise. There's a reason NASL (x2), USL and MLS are all trying to plant roots in the market at the same time.
I chose Sacramento and Detroit. As much as I think San Diego has the best momentum right now (aside from Sacramento), I cannot imagine that MLS will select two California teams to come in at the same time. I do think that as long as the City Council OKs it, they will be #27, though. Detroit has issues, specifically since they really want the jail site, but I think that won't be a huge obstacle. No one else seems to have all their ducks in a row, either. Tampa Bay has stadium they can expand, but I question whether the ownership group has enough money behind it. Cincinnati has the ownership, but not the revenue-controlled stadium. Everyone else seems to have bigger issues at the present time.
Cincinnati may not control 100% of the revenue, but the small % that they do not control is irrevelent. Their deal with the university is great from FCC's standpoint. The Lindner's just made a multi-million investment in the university this past off-season to add to the school of business.
Really? I have not heard the Don come out an explicitly say Cincinnati absolutely must have their own stadium. They really have a nice organic thing going down there. And the stadium is about as urban as you can get. reminds more of the neighborhood stadiums in England. In my non relevant opinion MLS would be wise to foster more organically grown teams (Portland, Minnesota) than manufactured teams (Atlanta, NYCFC, LAII). For that reason until Detroit builds on the DCFC brand rather than push them aside, I would pass on Detroit. For that reason I'm more supportive of USL or NASL teams making the jump, bringing their proven track record, fans, team identity/history, etc with them.
I said Sacramento and San Diego, mind you I am a just a tad biased. Sacramento I think will jump Miami and end up in spot #24. Miami will theoretically slip to #25 for the moment, most likely to be leap frogged again later. I believe San Diego will be approved during the next round but won't start playing for a few years, and could see another team, Cincy for instance, getting approved later but actually starting to play sooner. Like a LAFC type of situation. The reason I see San Diego getting approved this summer is the timing of it all. If the investors get the timeline they want the City Council will have approved the land sale prior to MLS' decision. So SD will be as ready as it can be. If MLS were to then pass over them I see the entire deal collapsing, and we're back to square one. Considering San Diego has been on MLS' wish list since the founding of the league I don't see them risking it. Basically if the City Council approves the project San Diego is in this summer.
Not debating anything you said but this part. Its a billion dollar deal. Getting the stadium delayed a year or two (not saying it will) won't kill it. They'll just start working on the development that will actually make them money. The stadium is just the carrot to get control of all that land. If the deal is THAT tenuous, it probably isn't a good one.
It's not the deal that's tenuous it's the city council and the timing that are tenuous. The council doesn't want to have to keep Qualcomm Stadium open any longer than necessary as it sucks $12-$15 million a year from city coffers. They're already going to be asked to push back its closing to 2020 by this plan (currently the can close it in December of 2018 when all the existing SDSU and Holiday Bowl leases expire). If the SD in MLS plan isn't approved by MLS, then there's no reason to go forward with the MLS stadium and SDSU will simply be homeless or be forced to shack up with the Padres (assuming the Padres lease is modified to allow SDSU). Neither of which is desirable for the university or the city, never mind the delay not being desirable for the Stone group. Plus the iron will never be hotter to strike with the Chargers just having left to try and replicate even some of what Seattle was able to accomplish in the wake of the Sonics fiasco. Even approving SD this year would put 2 years between now and when they take the field.
SD is going to be one of the chosen 4 IMO. Whether starting 2020, 21 or 22, a year or to won't make a bit of difference to the powers at be, in the grand scheme of things.
I hope you're right. I definitely think owian's approve now, start later if need be idea has some merit in that regard if they have concerns about 2 Cali teams at one time. Though frankly knowing California and both Sac and SD, I don't see that being an issue. Sac is to SD what Philadelphia would be to Charlotte on the east coast. That they're in the same state is irrelevant given California's vast size and population.
I think MLS' record on expansion with regards to 'Organically Grown Teams' and 'Manufactured Teams' will, in the near future, not be favourable to the grown teams. I have no problem with USL/NASL teams making the jump but AUFC, NYCFC, LAFC and San Diego will be massive clubs in my opinion. That's on top of RSL and Toronto FC.
But those are about the only markets - other than Detroit that I think if there isn't an organically grown team you absolutely create one from scratch to enter MLS. But all other markets (mid tier) in my opinion should be showing a modicum of success in the lower division ranks of growing fan support before they are allowed in the the big show (lol). I really look at Orlando,Portland and even Minnesota as examples of the right formula. I think what is happening in Detroit should not be pushed aside but rather embraced by the big money guys. And i think Cincinnati can not be ignored. They are on pace to exceed last year's attendance #s by a decent margin. It will put them far above many existing MLS teams. Same goes for Sacramento - I think they have certainly earned the right to be in the next wave, based on track record and ready to go plan for moving up. It is going to be interesting to see how this all shakes out. Personally, I'd be fine with all of them getting in. 36 team league - four regioanal divisions of 9 teams.
The Detroit group hasn't pushed aside Detroit City FC. Some of the Detroit City FC supporters (The Northern Guard) are pushing aside the MLS Detroit group. The Northern Guard had a poll on their facebook page and half voted in favor of a Detroit MLS team and half voted against a MLS team. Some of the Northern Guard are very vocal and against the MLS expansion in Detroit. All the Northern Guard do not feel this way. And the Detroit MLS group and the owners of Detroit City FC are still having meetings... "Sean Mann, one of the owners of Detroit City FC, a popular minor league team that plays in Hamtramck (Detroit), said the Gilbert-Gores contingent has met with his group a handful of times since April, though there have been no conversations about using City FC as the name of the MLS team."
To be honest I haven't been following Detroit too closely lately. Hopefully they do play nice in sandbox. If the DCFC owners get behind it, then the supporters should get behind it. They have a great thing going and it could be really awesome. Detroit is loaded with soccer talent and knowledgable fans. It has potential to be a really well supported club and over time could producce some exceptional HG talent.
I can't see anyone but Sacramento getting the #25 spot. But the #26th spot will have to go to an Eastern Conference team, and I get the feeling that regardless of the desire and sentimentality for a St Louis team, they'll probably go with a Tampa team since it's the largest TV market without a MLS team. However, this is assuming that Miami gets spot 24, which might not be the case. In terms of what I think MLS would desire, I would rank them (weighting TV market then geographic footprint over anything else): Tampa Phoenix Detroit Sacramento St Louis Charlotte/Raleigh-Durham (one or the other, not both) Indianapolis San Diego Nashville San Antonio Cincinnati (doomed by being too close to Columbus and other larger markets also in the race)
East/West shouldn't matter. Especially when you have Kansas City, Minnesota, Dallas, and Houston currently slated in the west. Most of the eastern teams are closer than the western ones.
Might want to re-consider re-voting if there's any legitimacy to this. Sacramento would fumble their spot away at the 1-yard line if they're stupid enough to flush the Republic brand down the toilet. This pic via @carra613 may be sign of unexpected upheaval in Sacramento's MLS bid, once considered a slam dunk. No longer. pic.twitter.com/3SBUaGaRnc— Brian Straus (@BrianStraus) February 1, 2017 When Republic blossomed, wasn't nearly this amount of expansion comp. They were clear leaders. And they invested like it (academy, etc.)— Brian Straus (@BrianStraus) February 1, 2017 Kevin Nagle was the $ behind push to MLS, along w/ other investors, but Republic was never his brand, his project. He eyed stadium, MLS.— Brian Straus (@BrianStraus) February 1, 2017 'Republic' appears to have been scrubbed from MLS bid book, Nagle's twitter (@KevinNagleMLS) etc. Looks like he cld be imagining fresh start— Brian Straus (@BrianStraus) February 1, 2017 Republic brand, story was a big asset. W/out it, is Sacramento 1 of the 4 most attractive bidders? Not as confident as I was before.— Brian Straus (@BrianStraus) February 1, 2017
I'm not familiar with all the intricacies of the ownership groups and how far along the stadium plans are. I can only go off what I know about the cities. If I had to narrow it down to 2, I'd pick San Diego and Charlotte The 2nd tier is Phoenix, Nashville, Detroit and Tampa.
Yeah I just changed my vote. Absent the Republic, their owners and their fans given the massive success they've been and the massive investment in the future they've made I don't see how Sac can be successful. They just cut off their nose to spite their face.
Those that voted other, please post the other city. I am guessing it's Indianapolis for the 2 votes since they are the team that came in late.
If you are looking for info to help make your vote MLS posted a small write about all 12 bids. Edit: some of the bids have videos to help sell their cities.
San Deigo and Nashville. SD is a way better market than Sac. MLS sees what is happening in Atlanta and knows that they need to put another team in the South.
People don't understand how ridiculously strong SA's bid is. KSAT (local news) did a feature on the bid last night that also dropped the info that SSE will pay FULL expansion amount (no county/city/tax/etc help) AND fund the stadium expansion (no help). No land acquisition needed. No stadium plan needed. No CONCEPTS ... ACTUALITIES SSS literally waiting to be expanded by private funds Stadium location that makes capture of regional support easier Catchment area that is proven to support SA teams Proven support for TWO clubs across two leagues Unparalleled ownership pedigree across multisport platforms Academy/Development set up already in place Supporter's group that has been involved with MLS SG's and Supporter's Summit since before EITHER team existed .... .... We're the silent assassin in this bidding.