I remember all that, and remember there being actual backlash to it as well (in fact, the link you provided documents some of it). 1836 wasn't the year the club was formed though, and it was in a league that only had one United in it (and fewer FCs/SCs/Citys) so I was glad to see it canned. Given the current makeup of the league, a team with the year it was created in its name would almost be as refreshing as a team with an actual nickname.
The Rapids badge had 96 added to it when they rebranded in '07 and the Twitter hashtag the team uses is #Rapids96. However 96 is not part of the club's official name.
If/when Sacramento start feeling like Charlie Brown and the Don is Lucy, the rest of the world will understand.
Detroit has one thing going for it. It is a legitimately large metro area. One of the largest that MLS has not yet entered.
I remember this very well, and you have it wrong. Hampton Roads put a long shot expansion bid in with the NHL, with many other cities, in early 1997. They were never approved, though it was suggested that they might be included in later expansion with Columbus if they actually built an arena. On the other hand, Nashville had already built an arena, which was waiting for a tenant. They were the first team in that expansion wave accepted, and started play the year after they were approved. Hampton Roads may have had an outside shot at an NHL franchise, had they actually built an arena. But it’s false to say that the Predators are the result of Hampton Roads’ failure. Nashville was approved totally independently of any other bids, and was considered the best bid among Atlanta, Hampton Roads, Columbus, and Minneapolis, primarily because the arena was ready to go and the NHL would be the primary tenant.
Believe FC Dallas is similar in that it's not part of their official name either, but on their badge.
Good question. It's quite common for teams to play in football stadiums while the new soccer stadium is being built, so that shouldn't be a big deal. Atlanta and Minny both used college football stadiums this past year for example. Plus, MLS could stipulate that the new stadium was a condition of awarding the team so that organizers wouldn't get any push-back from local politicians who might otherwise urge them to use Nippert or PBS permanently.
i think MLS wants to solve the columbus relocation issue before dealing with Cincy and they want to have a closer look at the MLS in detroit, a huge market- can it be atlanta 2.0 ? sacramento will get there, just when- it all hinges on miami, cincy/columbus and detroit
Borussia Nashville Spartak Nashville Lokomotive Nashville Red Star Nashville PSV Nashville Nashville Town FC Bayern Nashville Are there any other Euro names MLS hasn't used yet? Maybe the king of Spain likes country music and will bestow "Real" on them.
Nashville is known as the Athens of the South and even has a full scale Parthenon replica. If they want some tenuous Euro connection in the name/crest it'd be interesting to have some Greek influence. Nashville Athenians? Nashville Classics? That said, Nashville SC is safe and sterile so I expect them to keep that and have supporters develop a more unique, unofficial nickname.
If you think Detroit is going to be the next Atlanta I have some ocean front property in Nebraska to sell you.
Generally agree. My take has always been this... Nashville: Everything was "done." No open issues and MLS needs more teams in the southeast. You don't capture an entire region with just two teams (Orlando and ATL). MLS needed another southeastern team and Nashville was far more ready than Raleigh/Durham or Charlotte. Cincy: I still think they are likely to get in eventually. Based on their support in USL, their chances of success are as close to 100% as you can possible get with an expansion team. However, I agree that MLS may want the Columbus situation resolved before awarding another team in Ohio. Detroit: Strongest ownership group, biggest market of the finalists, and a prime downtown location. Only negative is the use of Ford Field but I think the success in Atlanta and Seattle is causing MLS to soften their stance on having a SSS. Plus, Ford Field is ideally configured for soccer and for multiple seating capacities. So, it's not the liability its being made out to be. Sacramento: I take a lot of heat from Sacramento fans and MLS purists for saying this, but I just don't think this market is a critical piece of the national footprint for MLS. With only 4 spots left, do you double-down on NorCal or add a team in a region that fills a bigger hole in the map, particularly in markets that are growing, have lots of Fortune 500 companies, and are coveted by TV broadcasters and advertisers? That said, they've been successful in USL, have good fan support, and seem to be ready. Garber's public statements continue to hint that the other team added this cycle will be Sacramento. Here's a quote from last night... Garber said Sacramento, seen as the other favorite, is MLS ready. "They have some things to finalize with their ownership that I think would make them optimum," Garber said. "We've said for many years there's a great level of support for the game in Sacramento and I think there's great interest in joining Major League Soccer." So, my bet would be Sacramento is awarded next and Cincy next year, after the potential Columbus relocation is fully resolved. Whether Detroit gets the final slot will depend on the strength of the competing bids in the next round.
I'm a tad skeptical too, but if someone had predicted that Atlanta would be the next Seattle, they would have been laughed out of the room. So, you never know.
One has absolutely nothing to do with the other. The reason Cinci doesn't get in this round is a $25 million shortage on stadium funding. If they had that money, they'd be in, regardless of what happens in Columbus.
So we know Sacramento has a great interest in joining MLS.......but does MLS have great interest in Sacramento?