https://soccerstadiumdigest.com/201...-next-mls-expansion-round-march-2019-edition/ Another random ranking from Soccer Stadium Digest, each ranking has at least one link of recent news for each market. Edit: Except Vegas, they just talk about Vegas.
MLS and commissioner Don Garber eye expansion beyond 28 teams and 2021 http://www.startribune.com/mls-and-...expansion-beyond-28-teams-and-2021/507338972/
And another pointless article that leaves out markets that actually have working bids submitted to MLS. Including a couple of the largest markets in the United States.
Purely for selfish reasons I hope all the near term markets besides sac and St. Louis crash and burn so we can get some justice for San Antonio and get them in as well.
I truly believe that for the near-term the league will expand to 30 clubs, not 32, but to 30. This will means that the next clubs will be barring a change in direction: St. Louis, Sacramento and Phoenix.
Yes and no. Yes the articles ranking bids are pointless articles that don't hold much weight and mostly serve the purpose of being a hub for recent news related to the more active bids (not quietly active as that would be difficult to report). No because the bids left out are mostly bids that we have some kind of confirmation of not happening, San Antonio because of their distance from Austin & Tampa for the same reason (Orlando) plus the Rays saying they would not go for MLS. It list every other active bid and two clubs that have mentioned aspirations rather than having made an actual bid back in 2017-now. The thing is, he doesn't clearly define 30 as even a possible limitation and you could argue that he alludes to the possibility of going beyond that number “Whether we’ll go beyond 28, I’m not sure if that decision will be made at that time or not,” Garber said. “It’s pretty clear to me as you see what has happened in Cincinnati -- which was not on anybody’s soccer radar screen three or four years ago – that there’s a lot of opportunity to continue to build this league in cities across our country. “That’s something we’ll have to wrestle with in years to come out, but it’s a pretty good problem to have.” Not a statement that they will surpass thirty but there is no reason to believe thirty is the limit given what was mentioned in the article.
Proximity as a limiting precept is another one of those rules than is honored in the breach. San Antonio and Austin are doubtless further apart than Yankee Stadium is from Harrison, New Jersey.
But the population of the NY/NJ metro area has a little over 20 million people compared to the 5 million between San Antonio and Austin. Not to mention how important NYC is to tv contract negotiations.
Someone at Red Bull Arena last Saturday told me there were only 7,500 people in attendance to see the reigning Supporters Shield winners.
And that may be true so what serves us to believe that a combination of of two metros totalling 1/4th the size would draw better numbers in the regular? Part of RBNYs issue is where that stadium is as well as the fact that attendance has been down for most clubs this year (to my knowledge).
I'm guessing the territorial rights are about home grown players? Cause TV territorial rights dont hold up to snuff. Thinking about it, this is probably one reason expansion seems so opaque and odd (in regards to Sac and SanAn.) Homegrown player rights are likely to be a sticking point over expansion. Frankly, I think they should be gone in the future but what do I know?
Cincinnati's attendance this season will likely not suffer from proximity to Columbus, and vice versa.
Cincinnati is not either of those places and averaged similar numbers (25k) in USL compared to about 6k for San Antonio. You can't say look at Cincinnati's attendance while ignoring your own statistic of low support for another club. Part of these last 1-3 slots will be filling the map (STL, PHX, Sac, CLT/RAL, Vegas) and bolstering the ownership group while anything (potentially) after would be more about adding large markets that are not yet represented in states that have teams (Tampa, San Antonio, etc). At least that the path I would expect them to follow.
I'd remind people to look at attendances of Cascadia, Minny and MTL on wiki from before they moved up. There is a noticeable bump from minor league to major league.
Montreal's average attendance dipped by about 5k to around 17k 2 yearsyears the smell of new club wore off and only jumped above 20k for a couple more years around their big CCL run. And I'm not arguing that San Antonio wouldn't see an increase in support because that's natural in any sport (MLB with Miami, Denver, Tampa and Az most recently). And San Antonio does have a good ownership structure without another sport to compete with a team after the Spurs season ends. What I am saying is that you can not compare Austin-San Antonio/Tampa Bay-Orlando to the NYC metro because of many reasons (to include population) the NYC area has two teams in most leagues while there is no Austin & San Antonio or Tampa & Orlando in any other major league because it doesn't make sense to out teams that close. Maybe if the league goes past 32 and starts to add the remaining strong bids that didn't make it in up to that point but Austin basically killed San Antonio (which is why lawsuits were filed by the city of SA iirc).
https://www.newsobserver.com/news/business/article228117654.html?rh=1 Not reliant on MLS, would they continue to go by NCFC? I guess it's too late to go with something Raleigh or Raleigh-Durham specific. I just don't see a team being able to claim a whole state, or two, in it's branding for this game and I feel like they missed an opportunity to come up with something better by trying to claim all of NC when no one outside the immediate area will majorly support the squad (kind of like the support for the Canes in Clt).
Also something I noticed when reading through the article a second time, he admitted that this is mostly a land grab that he has hitched onto and is trying to add a soccer stadium onto a development that will be built with or without the stadium.
Tis true but in the case of three of these, their is logic behind the name. NE is a region that Boston is basically the capital city of and their is no other city that has major league credentials (modern day) to challenge Boston for that claim. NY RB is most definitely named on the NY metro area and not the state of NY, being that they play in Jersey. (37 mins to NYC) Minnesota United basically plays between the states two largest cities and is one of the few US clubs that makes sense of the name united. (18 mins between them) Can't argue Colorado, almost as pointless as what NCFC did. Denver Rapids FC sounds just as good, if not better imo. (1.5 hours apart) And of those teams you named, all would reasonably draw from the other large municipalities in the state/region where as a team in Raleigh will hardly make noise in the western half of NC (unless they make a cup run). These are markets that are 2.5 hours apart from one another and, as Milk himself stated, "We are two separate Markets". It is not the same scenario much like SA/Aus isn't the same as the NYC metro.
If you want to make an argument that a team in Raleigh wouldn't get noticed in Charlotte and, therefore, shouldn't be named after the entire state of North Carolina, then start with that argument. Don't make a non-sensical statement about a team in this sport not being able to claim a state (or two) in its branding when there are already 4 teams with branding that covers entire states... That being said, I'm sure you comment about a team in Raleigh not getting attention in Charlotte is an entirely fair one. I'm just not sure a second team would be placed in Charlotte.. Certainly isn't out of the question as Ohio only has 2 million more people and they have 2 clubs, but part of why Ohio got two clubs is because Cincinnati was killing it in the lower divisions. The Independence and Eagles haven't lit up their leagues attendance wise like Cincinnati did...
Or you can pump your breaks on trying to make cold/off base responses to every comment you do not fully understand or agree with because, like when you tried comparing San Antonio to NYC metro, none of those examples are akin to the specific scenario being discussed in my comment. Even Columbus to Cincy is about 2 hours rather than the range of 18-90 minutes between all the municipalities represented by the teams you named (save NE which does not have another major city in it's region, since it is not a state at all. Niether Charlotte or Raleigh has shown the type of support that Cincinnati has, or even Nashville for that matter but one is Comparable to what the Silverbacks were doing, pre-United, and the other one is a similar case (being that the Tepper bid is not attached to Independence at all the way United was not attached to the Silverbacks). But as you all pointed out earlier in this thread, there is a natural uptick in support anytime a city goes from the minors to the majors.
The only bit of news that isn't up to date is Carolyn Kindle Betz the leader of the St. Louis group says she is NOT interested in the next round of expansion. It is Team 28 or she walks.
You may be confusing me with @don gagliardi. I don't recall making a comparison between San Antonio and NYC. You don't seem to understand what my point with Cincinnati. MLS would not have expanded into Cincinnati if the team wasn't already doing well in the lower divisions. I'm not saying that Charlotte and Raleigh can't support an MLS club. What I'm saying is that MLS isn't likely to grant both Raleigh and Charlotte an MLS club. Either Raleigh gets an MLS club, or Charlotte gets an MLS club. In that context, Raleigh claiming the North Carolina mantle is not inconsistent with the other clubs I mentioned.