By every measure I would agree, but MLS has time and again made it seem Sacramento were major threats for expansion and passed them over. Will this finally be the time they get over the hump? I certainly hope so, but with MLS nothing is certain.
Right. And you listed that on a list of reasons why NYCFC was a neglected step child and bad for MLS. I simply countered with facts that Seattle and Atlanta both fail to fill their football stadiums. Which doesn't seem to bother you. Which means you where just making a bullsh*t cherry picked argument. You got called on your nonsense. Take the loss like a man.
Who was Sacramento passed over for? They weren't ready to bid before Atlanta or Minnesota. Miami was already promised a spot. LAFC was too.
SRFC was up at the same time as Minnesota, and that's the best case you can make. But it's not a very good case. Minnesota was pretty much a sure thing at the time, and SRFC was just in there to get their feet wet.
I've been imagining what the issue is for a long time. He's had that expansion slot in his hands for a long damned time. Did MLS make the mistake of not putting an expiration date on it?
Maybe Ricardo Silva is mucking it up behind the scenes? Or at least using his connections to influence people to make it difficult for Becks and his partners? That, or the Miami Political Arena is just very difficult to navigate, especially for outsiders.
Here's the thing. NYCFC has been a disappointment off the field since day one. (on the field, they've been fine, though probably disappointing from Man City's perspective) Some of the disappointment comes from overwrought expectations laid by Garber et al. when they showed with the awarding of the franchise that having a SSS was not now a necessity while also saying that NYCFC had some good ideas and he was confident they'd get it done. Up to that point, bids coming without SSS were not being considered. NYCFC should have the attention of about 1/2 of the largest metro area in the nation, yet brings in fans at the rate of the smaller markets. That's disappointing. Filling or not filling stadium is kinda beside the point. They could put a lot more people in Yankee stadium, yet there is not any real market pressure to open up more seats. It is what it is. Atlanta, in comparison has been a stupendous surprise in their first season, in the same vein as Seattle. Sharing a stadium with football can work, as long as the ownership structure is genuinely dedicated to the soccer side, also. (New England is what you get when the ownership structure is not dedicated). When Atlanta was announced we didn't know if it would be another Seattle or another New England. Then, we saw the hiring decisions, the design of the stadium to explicitly elevate the status of the soccer club to an apparent par with the football club. We saw season ticket sales through the roof. Bandwagon got rolling and there you have it, an astonishing first season. Even playing in Bobby Dodd, not especially suited to soccer, showed an excited fan base and exciting team (last soccer I saw played at Bobby Dodd was by my fraternity brothers in intramural soccer when I was a student at Georgia Tech). Atlanta has 100% MLS market share of a 5.7 million metro area. NYC has 50% MLS market share of a 20 million metro area. That is 10 million. You tell me which franchise looks successful and which is a disappointment.
Wait, wait, hold up. There's something wrong with this idea. First off, neither the red bulls nor NYC have access to 10 million potential fans each. If anything it's a fraction of that amount for both teams, we're talking less than a million because I'm willing to bet a majority of people in the market either don't have the resources to go to games and/or simply don't care. Second, the idea that NYC should have high attendance because they're in a large market? I've seen this assertion brought up before, and I think its a silly one. Now that recall, I remember bringing this idea up once in the attendance thread, here it is: www.bigsoccer.com/threads/mls-2017-attendance-thread.2039301/page-113#post-36034096 Let me quote something I said there and replace the Red Bulls with NYCFC (changes in bold), although I guess it doesn't really matter which NY team I'm referring to. Being in a larger market like NY has its perks, as well as its downsides. On one hand you're in the largest entertainment capital in the world, on the other you're in the largest entertainment capital in the world. There is so much to do here, and NYRB and NYC have to exist in a market with more competition than any other team in the league. We need to think of their attendance success in those terms.
To characterize them as being approximately even or with Sacramento ahead, though, is dramatically at odds with the facts during the short period between Sacramento expressing initial interest and when Minnesota United was approved. It was also already generally assumed a Minnesota team would be accepted; the remaining question was not "Minnesota or somewhere else?" but "Wilf or MNU?" To somehow conclude "MLS thinks something is wrong with Sacramento" is a misrepresentation of the timeline. If Sacramento isn't invited now, then it's based in reality. I don't think that happens, though.
MLS may have changed the terms of the original agreement by now requiring a soccer specific stadium. They may have also added financial requirements. They may have also forced Miami on Beckham. Hard to tell with out knowing specific terms of Beckham's offer.
Question: If MLS approves Detroit's expansion bid with Ford Field being the location, why again is Beckham forced to build a new stadium in Miami when Hard Rock Stadium exists?
Does Miami Beckham United own or operate Hard Rock Stadium? Does one of its major investors? Without venue control, there is no path to profitability.
I'm actually surprised that Beckham's group hasn't approached Steve Ross about being part of the ownership group. Maybe they have, and just kept it quiet. Seems like a no brainer. Beckham needs a place for his team to play, and Ross could use a second tenant to use his stadium during the spring and summer..... Plus Hard Rock Stadium is now one of the best stadiums in this country too. Plus natural grass, overhangs covering the stands.... I'm surprised MLS hasn't initiated talks with him to be honest, and they have worked with him in the past with the Champions Cup.
Right exactly. What would stop Beckham from inviting Ross to be part of the ownership group if a similar deal happens in Detroit, and Detroit gets picked first before any of the three stadiums actively working on soccer stadium deals?
The renovated Dolphins stadium looks fantastic . I'd have no problem with that being an MLS venue. But i understand these things are related to keeping revenue in house. If they followed Atlanta's approach to team building I wonder what kind of attendance they could get playing there.
I think the confusion comes from the transition to a formal bid process. While MLS has tried to expand in twos, they often had to expand one at a time (Tor, Sea, Phi, Mon) and have had to rush teams in with unresolved stadium situations (SJ, NYC). So when Sacramento comes along and has the stadium shovel-ready, the market raring to go, it was easy to think they would be ushered in immediately. Then Minnesota needed to finalize a stadium deal, so the league had to pre-approve them in order to put pressure on gov't there. Then you have the delays in Miami forcing LAFC to come in alone, which would have been a good opportunity for Sacramento, but nothing came of it. So you start to get the feeling that MLS is stringing them along, especially given that at the beginning of their process, we were all used to mediocre bids getting in as soon as they wanted. Here they blew it out of the park and are still waiting, after some good opportunities.
If Miami finally gets announced, they should come in with the other 2 expansion teams, but not to the point of being like Minnesota who kind of was rushed in to offset Atlanta. It would be odd to have 3 come in at same time, but we get back to the balanced West/East set up. Could they play at Hard Rock or another site until their own place is finished? - I hope Detroit does not make this round. I would have gone Sacramento and Detroit had they stayed with the SSS plan. Right now my hope is Sacramento and Nashville. Then if Columbus ends up in Austin (the West), then the following choices could be Cincy and North Carolina to keep the East/West set up. - I don't know, expansion fees are like a drug. 28 is not that far from 32 which seems like a number that puts MLS on level with other leagues, but as other posts elsewhere note, are we diluting the soccer talent or is the country simply large enough that we should have troubles coming up with talent for 4 more teams. - My other concern, so we get to 32 and "really" stop. No more expansion fees. TV revenue is really going to have to increase to make up for some of that missing revenue. Or does SUM continue to contribute on the level it is now or higher ? or do we see the continue selling of players etc. ? -
You think there are consistent rules in this league? Or any rules at all? You have not been paying attention.
Well, concern yourself no more. The league and its teams aren’t operating off of expansion fees. At $150 million a pop expectedly this round, it sounds like a lot... until it’s chopped up 23 ways for a whooping $6.5 million to each current owner (important note, it’s going to the investor/operators, not the teams, and it’s likely split up more than 23 ways currently.). This money is to buy into the organization and profit streams like SUM. The Adidas and national broadcast contracts currently bring in, correct me if I’m wrong, about $7 million a year on thier own. Add in local team sponsorships, ticket sales, local TV if and and other odds and ends, and the money is already there to increase salary spending as they currently are, while expecting those revenue streams to all continue to grow. If this many rich business owners were building thier financial solvency on a limited short term cash grab, there wouldn’t be 11 more currently asking to join as the writing would be on the wall. They definitely wouldn’t be spending 100’s of millions of dollars on stadium and training facilities and academies if they were at risk of dying after a few more teams joined. Instead, they would have infustructure plans equivalent to both interations of the NASL.
I'm going to go out on a limb and predict that the league decides to add three out of the four or all four. Miami will still be on hold and MLS isn't stopping at 28 anyway. Cincy in 2019 Sac/Nashville in 2020 Detroit in 2022
The Mls is not going to leave the 7th largest state in the country wiht out a team when they have a club drawing 20 k + in it. if Columbus leaves, Cincy is in. Cincy may be in regardless, we shall see.