https://www.mlssoccer.com/post/2017/11/29/four-finalist-cities-named-next-two-mls-expansion-teams Cincinnati, Nashville, Sacramento, and Detroit have made the semifinal cut.
Does Dave Beckham really want to own an MLS team? Or does he just want to cash out on his $25m option? Why not pull the plug on Miami, sell the Beckham option to local Columbus ownership and call Austin the 24th team with PSV ownership? Seems like a solid way for MLS to at least save some face.
I don't know why you put this in this thread. Beckham and Miami have nothing to do with the current expansion process. Beckham has exercised his option for Miami. I suppose MLS could let him change cities but I'm not sure why they would. https://www.mlssoccer.com/post/2014...s-mls-expansion-option-future-miami-franchise His option is a personal obligation by the league. I'm very sure he could not sell it to another party even if he had not already exercised it.
It seems to be heading south (no pun intended) for sure in Miami. The fact that Beckham's partner is publicly expressing doubts that it will get done is a huge concern. But rather than just opting-out, couldn't Beckham join another ownership group? Seems like they'd all welcome him as a minority partner as it would greatly reduce their expansion fee while increasing their chances of being awarded as MLS wants to make good on its promise to Beckham. That said, if I were him, the bid I'd want to join is San Diego. Once they get the formal approval for the plans for the stadium site, they become a VERY attractive bid. With only the Padres left in that town, MLS could quickly become the sport the entire city rallies around. Plus, the plans for the site are fantastic.
The Padres have been below .500 the last seven years and missed the playoffs the last eleven years, but they play the same months as MLS. It could be better for MLS in San Diego if the remaining team there was in NBA or NHL.
The season shouldn't matter much as there is still a ton of overlap between MLS and either the NBA or NHL as well. It's about giving San Diego a team that is truly their own, in a sport that should thrive in that market (unlike hockey for example). If they were awarded a team, I'd be shocked if they didn't consistently sell-out their proposed 30,000-seat venue.
It's been long established that Beckham had the opportunity to choose one city in which to start a team at the discounted $25m price, and that that location is final--no changes of mind, no transfer of that discount rate to another location. Miami or bust (or go in on the current fee elsewhere).
Question ... with the league being at an odd amount of teams next year, why is it that the league is discussing adding an even amount of teams in the next expansion, thus continuing with an odd amount of teams? Having a team off in every round of games creates quite a bit of scheduling awkwardness.
The league is holding a spot for Miami at the moment. These two new spots have been described at teams number 25 and 26 which means they could get back to an even number if Miami figures things out. Also, I don't think that they have said that both of the teams announced in December would automatically start playing at the same time. So we could get back to an even number depending on how they have these teams enter.
I wonder if the geographical balance favors Sacramento. All the other teams would be in the Eastern half of the country (with Miami), although the Austin NeckBeardzzz would surely move to the West to be with their new long time rivals Dallas and Houston.
Geographic balance has never been a factor in expansion. The league has moved teams around to re-align. Orlando and NYCFC came in together. Vancouver and Portland came in together. Chivas and RSL came into together.
MLS has used Sacramento as the stick to move the other expansion candidates along for the past few years. Cincinnati is going to take their place as the new stick and Sacramento will finally get a franchise. Nashville probably gets the next spot as that helps fill out the southwest footprint. Detroit and Cinci are on hold until the Crew mess is sorted out. If the crew moves, they both get in. If the Crew doesn't move, likely only Detroit will get in due to its market size, and Phoenix probably follows.
Nashville in the Southwest? Now, as a New Englander, we regard anything west of Utica, NY as "the midwest," but that's pushing it. The NHL has them in the west because, well, they are west of Detroit or Columbus, who would have to go there if it wasn't for Nashville, but...
Maybe Chicopee, because that's about where you can hear people pronounce the letter "R" (as long as it doesn't come at the end of the word, like Chiner or Eye-dear.)
I still remember the first time I heard a Californian refer to Chicago as "back East". My New Yorker brain exploded.
I said it before and I still strongly believe it.... I think Detroit is in. Garber came out and said that MLS was rethinking its SSS or bust mindset and then a month or so later Detroit expansion bid announced they would play at Ford Field. I don't think it is a coincident. http://www.orlandosentinel.com/spor...-soccer-specific-stadiums-20170916-story.html http://www.espn.com/soccer/major-le...n-for-new-stadium-will-use-ford-field?src=com
I had lived in Houston for a couple of years after spending the first 40 years of my life in the Midwest most recently in Michigan. My boss, who was a Taiwanese immigrant who had lived in Houston for 40 years, said her daughter just couldn't get used to winters at her new job "up North". I sympathized until I found out her daughter was living "up North" in Richmond, VA. It took me quite a while to convince her that Virginia was not "up North" no matter how far north it is from Houston.
Geographic balance, as already stated, isn't an issue. That said, geographic coverage/footprint might be. And when you look at the 40-50 or so largest urban areas in the country, ie, those that could support a team, it's pretty clear that the Midwest/North Central is the biggest coverage hole. Chicago, KC, and Minny (assuming Columbus is 100% gone). 3 teams in 12 MLS sized markets from Pittsburgh to KC (including Louisville) isn't a lot. So Cincinnati and Detroit make sense. The SE doesn't have great coverage, but at this point it's better than the Midwest already has 4 + a placeholder in MIA + Austin (assuming the relo happens) for 12-13 viable markets. Nashville is something of a bridge between the SE and MW markets. The Northeast is well covered. The West is well covered with only Vegas, SD, PHX, and Sacramento on the board.
I wouldn't. I would put the odds of the city approving financing for that stadium somewhere around 2%. San Diego is dead. It will just be another year before anyone officially discovers the body.
I can only tell you that many East Coast folks do the reverse, and speak of "the American West" as if it began just west of the Appalachian Mountains. When I encountered this, as I often did when I lived back East, it caused my Californian brain to explode.
I realize you are trying to play this up as some grand conspiracy theory, but in the year prior to Precourt announcing his Austin intentions, did anyone hear anything at all out of San Antonio? They were an also ran and were never going to be anything other than an also ran.