The competition for spot #28: Charlotte Detroit Las Vegas Phoenix Raleigh Sacramento Saint Louis San Diego https://www.stltoday.com/sports/soc...al&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=user-share
It is a decent attempt at an article, but Vegas has not submitted a bid, and the author leaves out SA, Tampa, and Indy, all who have.
It's St Lou's bid to lose. They could enhance their bid by hinting they will name the team with some sort of historical reference to StL role in usa soccer history. I'm thinking of something like "St Louis 1950 FC".
The name will not enhance their bid, but if they named the team 1950 FC, it would be interesting. But I don't see it happening.
And the San Antonio bid is the big question. MLS has increasingly shown and ability to keep a secret in recent years and all the hollering from San Antonio a year ago after the PSV/Austin stuff leaked out disappeared suddenly after "phone call with MLS" - and not a peep has been heard since. Maybe nothing will come of it, but who really knows. Silence very well could be golden here.
How would the name of the team enhance the bid. I'm seriously curious. We're talking about hundreds of millions of dollars, corporate, marketing, and sponsorship synergies, demographic projections, municipal government cooperation, and business plans. I'm really wondering how the name of the team is going to affect the decision making process between different bid groups.
At this point, St Louis has the most alive bid. The bids from a year ago are essentially dead. At this point, the question has to be "what changed to bring them back to life?" Charlotte has a new NFL owner who expressed interest in MLS. Tampa Rowdies were sold to the owners of the Rays. Neither of these are publicly actively pursuing MLS teams. At this point, it's hard to see MLS going beyond 27 in the near future.
Phoenix I believe would still be in the running with the most boxes checked although Saint Louis with a female led ownership group and a history for the game probably would seem to move to the top of the list. One thing is for sure is I think MLS wants to get this done by the time they start the new T.V. contract negotiations and have a team to start with Austin.
If San Diego isn't in line now, it may be too late. MLS probably will be making the selection for expansion slot no. 28 within the next year or so After that selection is made, there is no clear path to gaining entry to the league because MLS has not set an expansion plan for growth up to a 30 team league. With competition for the losing applicant for slot no. 28 (apparently either Phoenix or St. Louis), San Diego no doubt will be facing competition from Tampa Bay, North Carolina's Research Triangle, Charlotte, Las Vegas, Indianapolis, and Detroit. Moreover, in a few years, new ownership groups may be making bids for New York No. 3, Chicago No. 2, Sacramento, and Milwaukee.
I don't consider this post grounded in reality. There will be no NY3 or CHI2. It just isn't going to happen. If you know of any interest from Milwaukee in the last ten years, I'd love to hear it. And I've seen absolutely nothing suggesting that #28 is Phoenix or Saint Louis. None of us know what is going on with San Antonio, and until shovels hit the ground in Austin, I don't think that's a cold hard lock for #27, either. Obviously Detroit and Sacramento are close to the line given that MLS did put them in the "group of 4" for 25/26 with Cincy and Nashville. I haven't seen anything to suggest that either of those bids are suddenly out of the running. The fact is, even if we assume that Austin is #27 (the next few months should add a lot of clarity), I find anyone claiming foreknowledge as to which bid from the remaining ten cities is the frontrunner for #28.
Well, we certainly never heard of Salt Lake or Nashville much before those teams were added to MLS. Austin, as well, seems to have come out of the blue. Assuming that Austin & St. Louis are the current front runners for slots 27 & 28, that doesn't give much leeway to San Diego. Since it's almost unimaginable that MLS will ever add more teams than the other major league sports; I.e., the NFL, the NHL, the NBA, or MLB, that leaves at most 4 expansion slots after MLS expands to 28 teams as far as we can realistically imagine. Oh, and I forgot to add San Antonio, Baltimore, Cleveland, Toronto #2, Louisville, and Pittsburgh as possible future expansion cities for MLS in my initial post.
Well at this point the path seems fairly clear to expanse to 29 eventually reaching 30 clubs. I still truly believe that they would have paused at 28 if it wasn't for the Columbus Crew to Austin fiasco. So looking into the crystal ball I can see: 27) Austin (2021) 28) St. Louis (2021) 29) Phoenix (2022) 30) Sacramento, Detroit or San Diego (2022) Club #30 would seem to be the one which will be up for grabs between Sacramento (provided they land their whale), Detroit (provided they return to building a new SS stadium) and maybe San Diego (provided a new group appeals working with the SDSU stadium project). Otherwise who knows someone unforeseen could appear like a Louisville, Pittsburgh or Carolina. With this in mind I just can't imagine expansion past 30 clubs.
====================== So playing with this in relation to stadiums for expansion -FCC coming in, have their current place to play and new place under construction. -NSC have a place to play- Nissan most likely and sound like very close to turning dirt (update me if wrong) -Miami sound like will use the baseball stadium and first steps on their own SSS project approved by vote (because) -Austin- unk what a temporary place would be- too large UT football stadium or their smaller soccer/track stadium or some high school somewhere and then move on to actually building their own ? Still can't believe USL turned dirt there already -St Louis. Could play at the dome (ugh, but probably"available" or better at Busch Stadium. Own project sounds like it has support, but you never know until the dirt is broken. -Phoenix= they could play in the temp place although too small , unless they add more temp seats. Or they need that land to actually build their new place, then would have to play somewhere during construction. I see at least 3 options, ASU football stadium, Cardinal Dome, or even the domed baseball stadium. -Sacramento can keep playing at their current place- even at 11,000 not bad or add a few more temps. The new place is ready to go, short one more inve$stor. -San Diego- I think the vote hurt the whole project, but what ever is built, they need to make sure besides NCAA football , or even the thought of bring back NFL, the stadium can handle soccer, whether an MLS team or international. No stadium owner needs to leave that source of revenue out. And with the world cup coming to USA and even the Olympics in LA may need an extra stadium. -Detroit- please, no more NFL domes and turf. Unless you can somehow convince me Detroit would be the 3rd coming of Seattle and Atlanta... Now if you would go back to the grass SSS, then I am ok with Motown.
Well the current exclusive rights holders have said it’s over... so unless someone steps in at the 11th hour and finds a path to a stadium in a very short timeframe... it’s dead
Yes, indeed. My guess would be that, all things being equal, Detroit would be the frontrunner for slot no. 30 because of its massive media market area.
Personally I don't think any of the club starting with club #27 will be allowed to use a temporary stadium. The start days for Austin, St. Louis, Phoenix and most likely Sacramento will depend on the finish date for their new SS stadiums.
I don't know that that is true at all. Every market is different, and some temporary situations are better than others. Orlando and Atlanta had great temporary starts. The former showed that the demand was higher than the supply and the latter artificially constrained supply at the start (while still seating large crowds) creating an unmatched atmosphere and frenzy for season tickets at the under construction MBS. EDIT: I will agree that the era of temporary venues like the 2008 San Jose expansion team used are likely over, but if MLS had to do it all over again with NYCFC and Yankee Stadium - they would - because New York City. A Raleigh expansion team would not be allowed to start at Sahlen's Stadium, that much I agree with.
Austin lease deal done. https://www.statesman.com/sports/20...ourt-finalize-contract-for-austin-mls-stadium What hurdles & pitfalls remain? If any. I think it is pretty safe to pencil Austin in as #27.
Now that the lease has been finalized, I would imagine a lawsuit will be incoming claiming there were some rules broken.