Fort Lauderdale=MLS

You're pretty much right on the money. The demographics in Miami/Dade can be misleading when it comes to soccer. The Latin crowd loves soccer, but have never really shown they will support the local domestic pro game.

And it would be very easy to upgrade the Lockhart complex to current MLS standards. The stadium is a HUGE issue when it comes to Dade, the local governments sure as hell won't be spending money on any stadiums anytime soon having just dropped $500 million on the Marlins, FIU is not acceptable in my opinion and Sun Life is not an option unless Stephen Ross gives a cushy lease to a team, which I highly doubt.

Just keep supporting the Strikers and who knows, it could be us singing the national anthem at our MLS home opener in a few years.

 

I just like the name of this thread... Exactly what I've been thinking all along...

 

All right guys, let me be the calming voice of reason here. LOL My days as a Strikers fan began in the late 70's when my father took me to watch the glory days of Ray Hudson, Gerd Muller, Arnie Mauser, and my personal favorite, Nene Cubillas. To me, what we have seen over the last two months is the reconnection of pro soccer today to what was the foundation of it here in South Florida, laid down by the Robbie family all those years ago.

Don't get me wrong, I don't disagree with any of the points you made bobbyfusion. I agree with them wholeheartedly, and then some. Miami has not, does not, and will not support pro soccer at any sustainable level for a myriad of reasons, some you discussed, and others we've gone into many times on these forums. But let's be real careful about getting ahead of ourselves after two, admittedly,very successful games attendance and atmosphere wise.

DrSoFlaFan has it right on the money, as he usually does: support the Strikers like crazy, and the possibility of MLS will come of its own accord. MLS is dying for a market in the SE to become the next Seattle, Portland, Vancouver. Making it another original NASL revived team would only add to the flavor. AND, if they could get another rivalry in the deal, Rowdies vs. Strikers to toss one out there , that would be even more compelling. But like I said, slow down, don't even think about MLS this year. Just come out to the games, and tell everyone you know about how much fun the return of the Strikers has been!

 

Right on, Mom! I agree with points made by the OP as well.

BTW, what is the situation with that water park that was going to take over the Lockhart site? I haven't heard any recent news (but I haven't been looking for news either).

You Strikers fans are lucky to have Lockhart. I wish the Rowdies had something comparable in downtown Tampa.

 

I agree with the points as well. Also, everywhere in South Florida, but especially in Miami, people refuse to support a local team since their team is "Barca, Real, or Manchester, for example). I see that here in Broward as well but not to the extent of Miami. All of my friends have asked me about the Strikers after the invites I sent on facebook and many have started going to the games.

You can support your "Euro" team while still having a team you can actually go and watch live

 

The M in MLS stands for Money.

You don't have an owner with deep enough pockets to finance a stadium renovation and develop an academy and roster a damn sight better than what you're already fielding.

Win at the NASL level, support it and pray somebody rains cash and you might have a shot in 3-5 years.......

 

The water park thing is still up in the air. It may or may not happen. In actuality it would probably be a good thing for the Strikers now, AND potentially a move to MLS. I believe as part of the agreement with the city, the waterpark company's plans include renovating Lockhart and building new community/training fields on the south side of the stadium. So the team would not have to pay for any of that.

 

Didn't Horowitz already pay 10 million US for the renewel of Lockhart somewhere in 97 or 98 ?

 

Yeah, it was upgraded a bit from the shape it was left in to accomodate
the Fusion, but it'd be window-dressing compared to what's needed. I touched on this a bit prior to the opener.

You are ahead of the game in the sense you already have the land and the facility........but by no means would "as is" be MLS acceptable.

Drop in the bucket (not to you or I ) for a real owner-but Garber needs to see a deep bankroll (ie: the long haul/after the novelty) before he signs off on another club here and Atlanta * w/ Arthur Blanc(cheque)* is the clear leader in the clubhouse once Cosmos either shit or get off the pot.......

 

Interesting. Well, a commercial tie-in with a SSS has been a popular idea for a long time in MLS, ie having something that brings people to the site and makes money when your MLS team isn't playing makes a lot of sense for a site that otherwise would only be used 15-20 nights a year. I could definitely see the waterpark company as a part owner of an MLS team playing at Lockhart. At least, I would hope that they are thinking about this as a possibility. Add them and someone like Marcelo Claure to Traffic to form an ownership group, and you've got more than enough deep pockets to satisfy Garber and MLS.

 

I have been a Ft. Lauderdale resident for close to 25 years and I just don't see what we bring to table right now that would interest MLS to put a team down here again. There are at least 2 major problems with a team being placed down here and they both come from reputation.

1) City Reputation: The marquee of adding a team down here is Miami is seen as an "international" city. Ft. Lauderdale is really the second tier city in the area. However, Miami won't support a soccer team. You take away the name Miami, then not much differentiates Ft. Lauderdale from a Tulsa or a Memphis and no one is making noise to bring the Roughnecks or the Rogues to MLS.

2) Sports Reputation: Miami is a terrible sports town. Sorry but this reputation is going to spread up to us. While support has been great the first two games, let's see if it lasts after the new car smell is off of the team. Are we going to have the same type of crowd when Edmonton visits in July and the usual summer showers are threatening before kickoff.

MLS knows what they are looking for in an expansion club. I just don't see that formula duplicating itself down here. I hope I am wrong but no matter what we are lucky to have a team to support.

 

I agree.

 

Not only that, but Tim Robbie has, I'm guessing as I don't obviously know for sure, completely changed the dynamic of the team with the City of Ft. Lauderdale. It's exactly the kind of situation Robbie can get into and then walk away from with an excellent turn of events for the Strikers. Look how much the Strikers rebirth has been a part of the city's centennial events. May 14th against the Rowdies is yet another such example, right down to the kits with the city logo on them. I think Tim Robbie puts the team in a very good position to probably even have a say in the renovations, and make sure the team gets a the kind of deal it needs to be successful in continuing to play at Lockhart.

 

This is an extremely weak argument. Does it hurt MLS that its northern California team is in San Jose, not San Francisco or Oakland? No. Pro soccer has been tried again and again in San Francisco and Oakland and failed miserably. It succeeded in San Jose. Pro soccer has been tried again and again in Miami, and failed miserably. It succeeded in Ft. Lauderdale in the original NASL era, and it is doing much better so far in the new NASL, after five years of utter failure as Miami FC. You want reputation? In pro soccer, Ft. Lauderdale has it. Miami does not. "Reputation" and "common knowledge" that works in the major pro sports in the USA simply does not translate that well to US soccer. US soccer is different. Different rules, different history, different reputation.

Also Tulsa or Memphis represent their regions, and they aren't regions MLS is particularly interested in (barring a sufficiently rich ownership group with a SSS of course) - MLS already has teams in the central US. Ft. Lauderdale, in soccer, does represent the south Florida region, including Miami. It does so much better than Miami ever did. MLS doesn't care about "marquee" city names, they care about a rich, stable ownership group, with a SSS and control over revenues, and also the fact that the south Florida region is a huge media market where MLS is not represented - the biggest market where MLS is not represented, IIRC. All other things being equal, MLS wants back in to south Florida, and if the Ft. Lauderdale Strikers ownership group is rich enough and has revenue control over Lockhart, Garber and MLS won't give a damn if the team is named after Ft. Lauderdale and not Miami. They simply won't care. Implying otherwise displays a lack of a grasp of the business realities of MLS.

You are trying to have it both ways. First you claim that Ft. Lauderdale can't work because it isn't a "marquee" city and doesn't have the right "reputation", so it has to be Miami. Then you immediately turn around and say Miami can't work, because it is a terrible sports town with a bad reputation! Hello! Ft. Lauderdale is not Miami! For pro soccer, Ft. Lauderdale is better than Miami. It has the reputation for soccer. It has, in international soccer, a "marquee" name thanks to the original NASL, which many people at home and overseas still remember. The entire reason why we have the new Ft. Lauderdale Strikers is because Miami is a terrible sports town - and a terrible soccer town - and because the Ft. Lauderdale Strikers have the only history of success in pro soccer in south Florida.

And sure the crowds will go down in size this season - but crowds at the D2 level don't have anything to do with attendance success in MLS; a Ft. Lauderdale MLS team won't have any problems drawing MLS level attendance - after all it wasn't attendance problems that killed the Miami Fusion (who played in Ft. Lauderdale). The point isn't to compare the new Ft. Lauderdale Strikers home attendance with MLS average attendance; the point is to compare it with Miami FC attendance. In two home games, the Strikers have already exceeded the combined 2010 Miami FC home attendance. By the end of the season, the Strikers may have exceeded the entire Miami FC combined home attendance for the past five years (ie, all the fans Mami FC ever attracted over its entire existence)! Ft. Lauderdale outdrew Miami by a huge margin back in the 1970s, and it is doing so again in the here and now. Notice the pattern? That's why Ft. Lauderdale is the choice for MLS, not Miami.

Do you actually understand what "formula" MLS is looking for in an expansion club? It does not sound like you do. It has nothing to do with opinions about a city's "marquee" status or "international" status or a city's sports "reputation". Here's the only formula you need: $$$$$$$$$$$$$, ie, a deep pocketed, cash rich ownership group and a SSS or equivalent stadium situation where the ownership controls the revenues. That's it. It doesn't matter whether the city is a "marquee" name or not. With Traffic, the Strikers already have one rich owner, it would not be hard to attract more owners to make MLS possible (ie, Marcelo Claure) and they already have a SSS, or may have it soon enough depending on how things work out with the water park people. MLS in south Florida isn't going to happen overnight, but Ft. Lauderdale is much better positioned for MLS (after NYC2) then just about any other potential MLS expansion candidate out there, currently.

But if you want to talk it down because you fear overhyping the new Strikers is a bad thing and we shouldn't "jinx it" by talking about MLS, that's fine. But do so for the real reasons (ie, because everything is uncertain when it comes to MLS expansion), not these false reasons that simply don't apply. Miami's sports reputation doesn't apply to Ft. Lauderdale. Ft. Lauderdale's "marquee" status doesn't apply to soccer. The only thing that matters to Garber and MLS is a deep pocked ownership group with a SSS. Reputation and "marquee" status don't matter; Ft. Lauderdale represents the south Florida region just as well as Miami does, and historically does so much better in soccer than Miami does. Good attendance at Ft. Lauderdale Strikers home games will certainly help matters, but in the end what makes or breaks the deal is the ownership group and the SSS, and not D2 level attendance, much less such nebulous things as "marquee" status or "sports fan reputation" based on other, non-soccer sports.

 

bap is correct, unfortunately. But it's not just Miami, it's SoFLa. No one bothers with the Panthers, and they're up there. The Marlins didn't pull any crowds up there, either. The only team SoFla supports consistently is the fins.

A previous poster commented that FtL is a central location to WPB and Miami. This is true, but I can tell you that Lockhart is a hike from Miami. When the team plays on weeknights at 7:30PM, it's impossible to get up there in time for the game w/ Golden Glades.

I like the stadium at FIU, except for the fact that it's fieldturf. I thought the facility was nice, but it's a location that's only palatable to someone in West Miami. From downtown, it takes almost as long to get there as it does to Lockhart.

There's also something weird about a pro team being relegated to playing in a college's stadium.

The fact is, though, that more people are coming to the games now, than in the previous years, combined. Whether that's due to tying the team in with the Strikers' legacy or playing in FtL is up for debate, but given the results, it's hard to argue with either decision.

 

Nobody goes to Panthers games because they are on the worst playoff drought in the ENTIRE HISTORY of the NHL. 10 years and counting. Put that kind of suck in any market and you lose fans. The Marlins struggle to draw because every ownership group they had has helped make a joke out of the team by selling off championship teams. That and playing in the worst stadium in baseball hasn't helped. The Heat average is over 17,000 fans per game over their entire existence, 10 years of which was at the 16K capacity Miami Arena.

But none of that matters when it comes to pro soccer. Fact is, the Fort Lauderdale Strikers draw fans, nothing else does. Hopefully if MLS comes back they have learned that lesson. You simply cannot argue with results.

Plus the easiest SSS solution, by a wide margin, is Lockhart 3.0. But it's all wishful thinking at this point. As fans the best thing we can do is support the Strikers now, and see what comes of it.

 

I see two classic errors with your reasoning (except your last paragraph, where we see an actual acknowledgment of what is really going on), and your reasoning is typical of American sports fans and American soccer fans in general, so please don't feel I'm picking on you or being unnecessarily argumentative, but IMO this point needs to be drilled home again and again until people get it.

First error: comparing how other sports do to soccer. Sports like baseball and ice hockey have teams up north that have been in existence for over a hundred years. Florida is full of sports fans who have moved to the area from up north, or whose families did so one or two generations ago, and who still have family or tribal loyalties to teams up north and no loyalty to relatively new teams in Florida. This simply does not apply to MLS teams (or NASL teams, etc); in US soccer, natives and newcomers can equally be loyal to the home team without having to worry about ancient loyalties to teams up north. But in, say, baseball, with a lack of ancient "tribal loyalty" for Florida teams, you can get low turnout except when, say, a big "team up north" shows up, for example in Tampa Bay (I'll use this as an example since I'm familiar with it and the same arguments applied against Miami/south Florida fans are also applied against Tampa Bay fans), when the Red Sox show up and the Red Sox fans outnumber the home fans. I gather something similar happens in ice hockey, too (and does anyone in Florida care about ice hockey whose family didn't move from an ice hockey town up north? rhetorical question). Yes, foreign immigrants are loyal to soccer clubs in their home countries, but that problem exists in all MLS and NASL markets, not just in Florida. So the "conventional wisdom" about Florida sports fans that applies to ice hockey and baseball, does not apply to US soccer. US soccer is a different beast; different history, different traditions, different rules.

Second error: failure to acknowledge the specifics of each case. There are lots of specific reasons why teams don't draw well, quite independent of the actual fan base, which one has to acknowledge before one makes blanket statements about the region's fans. Since drSoFlaFan has already touched on some of those specifics, I'll leave it at that.

 

San Jose does well in MLS? A team that got contracted/relocated once already and who STILL is outdrawn by Mutiny and Fusion attendance from ten years ago? ******** that. If San Jose hadn't won the championship when they did, either Tampa or Miami/Ft. Lauderdale would still have MLS now.

Chop San Jose, and New England while we're at it, and give Tampa and Ft. Lauderdale a 2nd chance now that MLS has had time to mature and soccer as a spectator sport has matured for a decade.

Find us some money men.

 

This.

Another factor that no one is mentioning is the catchment area and those who live in that area. Someone had mentioned that Cubans aren't that interested in soccer. As someone of Cuban descent, I totally agree. You will find them at the Marlins games (and I see attendance growing when the team is moved to a more centralized location next year). However, the Fort Lauderdale area is home to more soccer oriented back grounds like Brazilians, Argentinians, Haitians, and Columbians. The location of the Strikers now will take advantage of that.

 

Soccer is not different than other sports. It is still driven by money. Owners want to make money. To get money advertisers want real cities. Why doesn’t Columbus have a shirt sponsor anymore or have not been able to selling naming rights to their stadium. No one wants to be affiliated with a second tier city. To get money TV wants real cities. The ESPN game last weekend was not between Red Bull New Jersey and the Delaware County Union because the marquee names of New York and Philadelphia are what sell. Ask people around the country to distinguish Ft. Lauderdale, Ft. Myers, or Ft. Pierce and there is a good chance they may not know which one is the suburb of Miami.

I have never said that MLS should go to Miami. In fact, I think MLS would be an absolute failure in Miami. My point is MLS should just stay away from south Florida. Either city will be a failure.

What does Ft. Lauderdale bring to the table that a deep pocketed, cash rich ownership group would want to invest $40+ million in an expansion fee plus the amount needed to get Lockhart up to MLS level? An investor will look at how other sports draw in order to see how soccer would be supported because, outside of the hardcore soccer supporters, a team will need to sell tickets to that same audience. The same excuses have consistently been thrown out there – the fans support their home cities, there are too many other things to do, the weather, etc,. If south Florida cared about sports no excuses are needed for why the Panthers, the Heat, and the Marlins do not have healthy fanbases by now, it has been almost 20 years since the youngest of these teams was formed. It’s general apathy, not any excuse that is why empty seats outnumber fans at our games. If as you state the hockey audience cannot be grown, then why would this investor assume that the soccer audience can be grown. If the fans do not go when they know the opponent, are they really going to buy tickets to see Sporting Kansas City or Chivas USA.

 

Soccer most definitely IS different than other sports. Yes it's driven by money, and the casual sports fan is important, but the hardcore soccer supporter is like no other sports fan. It's a different animal.

And what quantifies a "real" city as you put it? You think advertisers, and the league, were clamoring over Portland, Vancouver, or Montréal because of the prestige of those names? Heck no, it's because they support the game.

And in soccer circles, in North America and abroad, people know Fort Lauderdale because of the old Strikers and the great names on those teams, Best, Banks, Cubillas, Hudson, Mueller, etc.

Fort Lauderdale brings history to the table. A built in fanbase and tradition that goes back further than any pro team in South Florida except the Dolphins. Broward County is as big, or bigger, in terms of population as the metro areas of several MLS markets: Portland, Salt Lake, Kansas City, Columbus, Vancouver, and San Jose. That's not even counting Miami/Dade or Palm Beach. Those are a bonus if you get support from there.

And because of the uniqueness of the Strikers being the only sports team, pro or college, that has ever been truly Fort Lauderdale's own, makes it an easy task to get the locals behind the team.

There are a lot of pieces that need to fall into place for MLS to come back, but to totally dismiss what Fort Lauderdale brings to the table is downright stupid. An investor who understands and appreciates the local soccer history down here would surely not turn a nose up at Fort Lauderdale as a MLS market. We could be every bit as good as Portland or Vancouver if given a proper chance.

 

I would definitely be hitting the "like" button on that last post!

 

All you need to say.

The biggest thing keeping Lauderdale down is the lack of THE GUY with the bankroll and the commitment needed to produce a product that keeps the casual fan interested enough to return.

Sounds simple.....but really isn't.