Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'NASL Expansion' started by oneeyedfool, Mar 14, 2015.
Former NASL minister of propaganda, blogger and hater/lover of all things Nasl, MLS and other soccer. Hates Peterson, loves Miami FC...
Hopefully its not San Francisco City FC. We have enough generic team names.
Yes because Americanness or euro snobbery levels are priority #1 when it comes to things to consider when evaluating a expansion side.
Then again, compared to Peterson, maybe he is!
We must do our upmost to maintain American traditions and culture in face of this foreign onslaught.....
I didn't realize Donald Trump was now posting on BigSoccer. Welcome Mr President.
If i was Donald Trump i would buy all these teams with generic names and give them American sounding names. Give me a break. And my problem is not with Mexicans its the Eurosnobs who say one-nil and want all teams to have British sounding names. Also Mexican teams have official nicknames like Chivas, Monarcas, Xolos, Aguilas, Tigres etc. They don't try to be something they are not
Okay, lets go back to talking about NASL expansion teams.
You can never tell on an expansion thread whether someone is being sarcastic or not.
You don't say. Please tell us more. Hold on, no, let's not keep talking about it. #SarcasmOff
Ah yes The Trumpster had such an awesome experience owning the USFL New Jersey Generals, that he should take a flyer on the NASL. Actually similar stories. Secondary league trying to compete with the big boy. Uncontrolled/unregulated spending, attempts to bring in big name players. Will NASl suffer same outcome as USFL?
He just tried to buy a Colombian team and the called the owners morons for not taking his offer. #diplomacy
Currently he's trying to buy San Lorenzo in Argentina, not sure how that will work out. Or what that has to do with NASL.
Well the USFL sued the NFL antitrust grounds and won on principle but at that point the league was kaput. I think the biggest failure for USFL was to attempt to compete directly with the NFL on a fall schedule rather than remaining with the Spring schedule that made them successful. If NASL tried to compete directly with MLS in a financial sense, I see them ending up in the same way. I wonder if NASL sees themselves more like the AFL than the USFL, in the AFL and NFL ended up merging and the initial Super Bowl's were based on the champions of each league.
Maybe he's seeking favor with Pope Francis?
The USFL was already doomed. Yes, they were playing in the spring, but they were also going head to head with the NFL for talent and drastically drove up the prices on players. Remember, the NFL was an uncapped league until 1994, so NFL owners started feeling it in the wallet. USFL teams were signing Heisman trophy winners and NFL MVPs. This gave the league credibility, but also blew up their plan to have modest spending, and it put a huge target on their backs for the NFL. The NFL had to off the USFL. Notice how anytime we hear about a new spring football league, it is always as a development league for the NFL? People learned their lesson.
The USFL going to a fall schedule was a last gasp attempt at forcing a merger to increase the value of their franchises. Even worse, they were counting on the winnings of their NFL lawsuit to cover the fall schedule move. They were already $160 million in debt. Talk about jumping out of a plane without knowing if the parachute works.
Again, these situations are very dissimilar. The AFL were a collection of owners that were kept out of the NFL. MLS is an expanding league that takes any market it wants. There is nothing the NASL can offer MLS.
You are correct on the Mexican-American market as several sources have confirmed Carlos Slim will be involved.
Damn. That will piss Garber off, one of the richest men in the world. How far away do you think they are from announcements?
Eh, I really doubt he cares tbh. Way more important to worry about. Like the Miami and Minnesota stadium situations.
I would add that MLS's growing commitment to local ownership makes guys like Carlos Slim less attractive to the league. Meanwhile, the NASL keeps saying they have foreign investors looking to get into the league, which is pretty much the exact opposite of MLS lately.
Indeed, that seems to be the lesson MLS learned from Miami and NYCFC. You need really strong local owners to make this work. You can see MLS learned that lesson in their absolute requirement that LAFC feature strong local ownership, and in their demand that SRFC build up its local ownership group.
If MLS is focusing on local owners then that probably goes hand-in-hand with foreign investors being interested in the NASL. They see the US as a big potential market, but MLS is reluctant to allow them in. Meanwhile the NASL is more than welcoming, doesn't have any salary cap, and the NASL could theoretically supplant the MLS sometime in the future.
MLS has also realized through trial and error that a lot of foreign owners don't always have the best of interest.
Except most of the last sentence is suspect, and the reason MLS has emphasized local ownership is because non-local ownership has yet to prove successful in the USA. MLS got burned and continues to get burned by non-local owners. (Miami and NYC most recently, like I said.) You seem to be suggesting that foreign ownership in the NASL is a virtue. I don't think the evidence is on your side.