Didn't Garber say they were done with SE expansion for a bit? Seems to me the league wants STL, PHX, & DET. SD would also be up there. But that would still leave at least one open spot in a 32 team league. And no guarantee those 4 all make it across.
San Diego or Oakland? For California I’ve heard both but I can’t remember if it was for the MLS or the USL...
He has said a lot of things that have changed over the timeline of the Expansion Games. Money talks and Tepper has 11Bill plus you still have a hole from ATL to DC that Nashville doesn't fill. If the league hits 32 then I feel Charlotte is a sure thing, more so than Raleigh anyway
I would bet on San Diego, Oakland is about to lose all of their teams. Unless someone is going to put money into making O.co stadium a soccer stadium.
It's absolutely clear now that MLS is going to zoom past 30. With Sac, Phoenix and Detroit competing for #28, potential owners in St Louis, Indianapolis, Louisville and Charlotte are investing real money in planning for an expansion slot. And Tampa, North Carolina and San Antonio are still in the running, the first two due to lack of interest and the Texans undermined by Austin. Meanwhile, there's always the possibility that San Diego, Las Vegas, the Bay Area and others will emerge if the number of slots increases. I think MLS could handle 36 teams. Any less and we could see more buyouts and potential relocations which we don't wan't to see infect soccer. I'm rambling.
I think 30 is a lock. Probably by 2023. Sacramento, St. Louis and Phoenix. San Diego, Indy & San Antonio seem nearly dead now. Charlotte & Las Vegas could be #31 & #32 down the road.
No? Rochester was never a serious contender for an MLS expansion club, while Sacramento was a virtual shoo-in for an expansion until their owner decided to tell his billionaire backer(s) that they wouldn't have any input on how the team was run.
That's what we are being told, but what actually was happening behind closed doors? More importantly, what actually was being discussed by MLS' BOG? All I'm saying, is don't be all that shocked IF Sacramento doesn't get a spot in MLS.
How is Phoenix dead? They have a stadium location, with no planning requirements plus financial resources from Goldman Sachs. And the Rays must have purchased the Rowdies for a reason.
It is stated that it gives them ownership over the property and may help in getting their new grounds built, although they denied this being the reason.
toad455's complete sentence read that "San Diego, Indy & San Antonio seem nearly dead now." There is a period between Phoenix (from the previous sentence) and San Diego.
I came across this article today, which I want to share. https://mlsmultiplex.com/2019/01/16...ly&utm_source=FanSided+Daily&utm_medium=email Which I have to say I absolutely agree with the writer. It talks about over expansion of soccer in the U.S. which when comparing MLS expansion (the ulimate size of MLS) from other leagues around the world. You can't compare the US to Europe for four main reasons, which are the NFL, MLB, NBA and NHL. They don't the large number of sports franchises from many sports. Unless MLS is planning on splinting into several divisions. Which their is no indication, especially with what they are charging for expansion fees. In addition when you go below the major league level support drops off dramatically. I believe the tipping point is at hand with 30 clubs. Cautiously, 30 is the number that the NBA currently operates at which they seem to be happy. MLS should learn from the NBA, not the NFL which they so desperately want to be. You are only as strong as your weakest link. This why the NBA continues to resist the temptation of expansion. They see value in having strength from the top to the bottom of the league. MLS should strive to make all clubs like Atlanta United, rather than the Chicago Fire or Colorado Rapids. Fix those issues first and then maybe in 10 to 15 years then consider moving to perhaps 32. Therefore in my opinion to reach the magic number of 30, they should add St. Louis, Phoenix and Sacramento. Thus completing expansion in the MLS for the foreseeable future.
That’s actually their plan to tear down the Oakland colosseum and build a soccer park. The Raiders are gone probably this upcoming season and the A’s are going to build a park but not sure when. Quakes President Dave Kaval was hired to be the main guy I believe behind the building of their new ballpark.
The problem with comparing MLS with any of the big four teams is that there is a much larger talent pool to draw from in soccer compared to any of those other sports. Even with the international recognition basketball has gained, you still have a huge gap between American players and foreign players. Same with baseball, same with hockey (except it's Canada who runs the show there) and most definitely true in football. There are not enough elite or highly skilled players to sustain more than 30-36 teams in those leagues. Soccer could be 40+ with the popularity of the game growing and the already large talent pool that isn't dominated by American athletes.
-players are relatively easy to find—particularly outside of Big 5/CL caliber because the intl pool is huge. -it’s true that we have more competition for our sports dollar but we are also a huge market geographically and by population. Louisville would be a huge market in England and it is served by college basketball and little else. Even with markets of 2 million served by a couple of other pro sports teams, there are supporters to be had. If a market of 100k devoted completely to soccer is viable in Europe, why would a market of 2 million that receives only 5% of the per capita support here not be? The support levels, in absolute terms are equal. -I’m not sure it matters if playoff spots become scarce with an extremely large league. That depends upon how the league is sold. Look at college football. 4 of 64 Power 5 conference teams + ND get into the playoffs. If in a large MLS divisions are where you play most of your games, they take on the same importance is college football conferences. And for many schools finishing in the top half of a major conference is a good season. Look at European soccer leagues as well. Most are dominated by 2-3 clubs. Club 5, on paper, has very little to fight for. They’re comfortably out of relegation but stand little chance of winning a league in the lifetime of the supporters.
I think you are missing the point of the article. It's not the talent pool, it's the fans disposable income that is spend on sporting events. U.S. has much greater competition than any other country around the globe. Also it's the strength of the ownership groups.
I was responding to your comment more than the article. The battle for disposable income is always going to be a "problem" to solve because competition is not limited to sports.
Why would you assume the MLS could easily be a 40+ team league due to popularity. NFL football 10 times more popular than soccer yet they have 32 teams. I don't buy the believe because the sport is so popular that every city in America should have a MLS team. That's what the minor leagues are for..
Because there is a larger talent pool available to sustain 40ish teams, the problem the NFL has with expanding is that there are not enough NFL ready QBs (among other positions) to sustain anything more than the 32 teams that are currently active (if that). The NFL is comfortable where it is and does not invest in player development beyond the annual draft. USL is proving that a league of more than 32 teams can sustain itself while fielding guys who are not even the best American players available. Roughly 10 of those are operated by MLS sides but that is still added cost in players, staff, game day equipment, stadium operation, etc. You have teams building and renovating 10-15k seat stadiums for what is effectively AAA soccer right now.
Given that MLS’s revenue is largely driven by the markets it is in, I’m not sure your disposable income is applicable here. As an example, prior to Nashvillle getting an expansion club, soccer fans living their more than likely were not MLS fans and, even now, they are unlikely to watch an MLS game that does not involve Nashville. That isn’t true for the other sports in this country. A Steelers fan is significantly more likely to watch an NFL game that doesn’t involve the Steelers and football fans that live in areas that don’t have an NFL team will still watch NFL games.. Given this, every time MLS expands, it is bringing new fans and new money into the league.. I’m sure it’ll hit saturation at some point, but unlike the other sports, a new MLS team isn’t significantly cutting into the revenue of the other teams...