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.
Who I expected. I'd be most surprised if Detroit gets in or if Sacramento does not. To me the second spot is the battle between Nashville and Cincinnati.
I say Sacramento and Nashville get the spots. Cincinnati will become the new Sacramento to dangle before the remaining expansion contenders.
Tough choices there. Here are some demographics: https://www.point2homes.com/US/Neighborhood/TN/Nashville-Demographics.html https://www.point2homes.com/US/Neighborhood/MI/Detroit-Demographics.html https://www.point2homes.com/US/Neighborhood/CA-Demographics.html https://www.point2homes.com/US/Neighborhood/OH/Cincinnati-Demographics.html
So, are the remaining two presumed to be front runners at that time or can other cities overtake them if they click an additional box on the checklist?
I'd say the remaining two are the front runners, but they can be surpassed if the other cities improve their bids. The following is from MLS... "The league made it clear that while only Cincinnati, Detroit, Nashville and Sacramento are being considered for the next two expansion teams, all remaining markets are under consideration for the following two expansion clubs that will be announced at a later date. Those include Charlotte, Indianapolis, Phoenix, Raleigh/Durham, St. Louis, San Antonio, San Diego and Tampa/St. Petersburg."
Detroit and Cincinnati have both NFL and MLB teams, so sponsor money is limited. Nashville only has an NFL team, and Sacramento only has an NBA team. An MLS team would have less competition in the latter.
You know, the team that was the Western Conference champions last year and sold out every single home game last year. The Preds are no afterthoughts in their market. And that's friggin ice hockey in the south! Nashville is a good sports town. They're a strong candidate for that alone.
Very true. And the Tigers haven't always been top of the AL, either. And the Pistons have more loosing seasons than winning. The and the Red Wings nearly went bankrupt before Mike Ilitch bought them. Detroit is a dang good market, too. And we know Cincy and Sac have well-supported clubs now. Really, they can't go wrong with any of them, and I'd pretty much expect them all to get in soon enough.
Cincinnati already announced a shirt sponsor contingent on MLS that would put them among the top teams in MLS. Carl Lindner and management has shown to be able to secure sponsors, they have connections that go deep in the city. I don't see issues of overlap and soccer is actually really appealing to sponsors because our fanbase skews young in that 18-35 demographic they seek.
Not sure why you have California instead of Sac, but according to those stats you can see why Sac is a front runner. According to that website, the change in population since 2010 here is 162%. Occupational employment doesn't seam right as the State itself employs over 64,000 workers in sacramento, that is not a typo. Also we are a very educated town with over 75% having at least some college (quite a few students with Sac State and UC Davis so close). Our median age is also lower than Nashville. And income is higher but that's expected in California. Since you just posted California, thought I'd add these numbers to the discussion.
https://www.point2homes.com/US/Neighborhood/CA/Sacramento-Demographics.html All of those demographics and the ones for the other cities are pretty meaningless as they only are for what's in the city, not the surrounding cities/burbs/metro. A lot of the money/jobs are located outside of the city, and I'd imagine that's the case for the other 3 cities as well.
I think all four get in to make 28, but Cincinnati and Nashville are told to wait out this round to incubate in USL a little longer. Detroit's Ford Field plan doesn't excite me too much, but I think it's a key market and the league wants in it before it gets too full. Prime land for development is plentiful around downtown Detroit so if FF turns out to suck its not like theyll be locked into staying indoors forever. And if it turns out to rock, then you have another ATL/Sea.
Wasn't that news last month or so? I hate the plan too but I think Detroit is one of those markets the league probably views as important enough to look the other way on the venue.
But it’s not even an outdoor venue. It’s a true dome. if it’s not a short term solution it is totally unacceptable. Detroit definitely isn’t an appealing enough market to look the other way on that.
It is the same as Atlanta. Yes, Atlanta has a porthole that theoretically opens in the roof but otherwise it is the same. Will MLS go along with it? We shall see but "outdoor venue" is definitely not a requirement.
Come on, man, you guys play in an 18k seat stadium next to an airport, in the middle of nowhere. That should be unacceptable!
You mean that gorgeous new soccer-specific stadium that has sold out every game since it opened? Yeah, what a black mark on the league!
You mean a beautiful 18k soccer specific stadium (built to the size range MLS desires) right on a major rail line and freeway a mile from downtown San Jose? Yeah, terribly unacceptable ...
The stadium is fine (a little small), but you also forgot about MLS' desire for stadiums being located in an urban core. So, San Jose does not meet that desire, but Detroit fits the bill that in that respect. It remains to be seen if MLS will accept the tradeoff of size vs location, but as Detroit has made the final four for consideration, Ford Field is certainly not considered "unacceptable" off the bat.
You realize San jose’s Stadium is as close to the “urban core” as Seattle, Portland, Los Angeles, Los Angeles 2, Houston, etc... in so much as that means anything in San Jose right? As for Detroit, an old fashioned non retractable dome is unacceptable period. Probably part of the reason all the rumors coming out have Detroit 4tg of the 4.