Not sure if this is the best place to start the thread or if I'm allowed to insert links but, o well. Mods feel free to make it right if it's wrong. As someone who was raised, played and coached club soccer in Oakland and surrounding areas, I am extremely happy to know that there is serious interest in placing a team in Oakland. The timing couldn't be better as the Raiders are leaving and so are the Warriors. The city of Oakland yearns for a sports team that is proud of the city they play in and doesn't make it known they wish they played somewhere else. There aren't that many details at the moment but they have created a survey to get things going. https://www.oaklandpro.soccer/
Club 9 Sports, who Peter Wilt is working for on NASL Orange County and San Diego, are working with an Oakland group as well: http://midfieldpress.com/2017/02/27/peter-wilt-talks-san-diego-chicago-more-nasl-expansion/
That is my account A team in Oakland is logical - The Bay Area is massive, easily can support 2 NASL teams, but has to be done right. - Makes a great travel partner w/ SF Deltas, not to mention the other two SoCal teams possibly coming into the league - Laney College Stadium would be a very logical choice for a team. Right near the cool part of downtown, in a relatively nice part of Oakland. College would likely be very supportive (speculation) ....however some improvements would need to happen, including laying down soccer turf etc, probably adding a supporters bleacher or two as the capacity is somewhere between 3,000 - 4,000, however if NASL doesn't average more than 5k, I don't see why you have to go more than 5k, just sell the games out, create demand. Stadium is also a short walk from Lake Merritt Bart station. I don't think w/ the Warriors and Raiders leaving Oakland that it will have much bump in support of a soccer team, however it couldn't hurt with the timing.
Laney would be perfect location wise but I don't know if they would allow alcohol and I think that might be an important step. The other option but less likely is Raimondi. There's room to improve the field but it's not downtown but it is next to the freeway.
A modular D-II size stadium in the right part of Oakland (or maybe even Emeryville) could, I have said in the past, actually work and work very well. I think it would work even better in the USL, but if there's any place in the Bay Area in which an NASL team can survive*, I do think it's the East Bay. *If travel expenses don't sink them.
I will agree that NASL isn't the best league for any west coast team. Hopefully they are not set on NASL and look intout USL
The Club 9 group is NASL. There is also a Bay Area group looking at USL according to Jake Edwards. NASL will be adding 2 California teams (OC and SD) next year so with the Deltas that would make 4 California teams.
Well the Deltas don't look like a lock to even survive 2017 at this point. But still with OC and SD coming in that would leave 3 NASL teams if Oakland does happen. And if the Deltas fold Oakland will have the Bay to themselves in NASL.
The panicking around attendance after two games is a little unbelievable. Someone is posting can they move locations - they just spent a million dollars upgrading Kezar. They are having some adversity. They need to work through it. There are people with money behind the team - it's time for them to double or triple down on the marketing efforts so they can raise attendance like Miami FC did last year. No one makes money at the USL, NASL or even typically MLS level. It's a toy for the very rich, and/or a giveback to the community. Like everything else in San Francisco, it's going to be more expensive there. It's time to step up, not give up after a little adversity. You won't be successful in anything by running for the hills at the first challenge.
Realism (not pessimism) could have saved the Deltas owners several million dollars already. But apparently they really didn't know anything about the history of soccer or minor league sports in the city they just decided to drop their cyber marketing exercise of a soccer team in. Pointing out the predictable result of their doomed from inception plan is not pessimism. If anything it's probably best for soccer long term in SF since there is already one minor league outfit that has at least a core of support unlike Deltas that will have less competition after Deltas inevitably fold.
Phoenix Rising is another positive example in the past year in a major league market. They are drawing well this year after basically drawing nothing as Arizona United - reported 1450 average but those who went games said asses in seats were much lower. Organizations can turn these things around if the investors are serious.
Mere platitudes. Also, my statement was about realism, not pessimism. Now if you're accepting that reality is, in this instance, cause for pessimism ...
The pessimist claims failure before it even has a chance to succeed. You two have claimed failure to one degree or another since before the team was even officially announced. Pessimists assume the owners did not understand the situation they were coming into. Pessimists use the California Victory as evidence that minor league can't survive, but conveniently ignore SFCFC. You two are the definition of pessimism. You might like to think you are realists, but you are not. Very little of what you two have said about San Francisco in relation to the Deltas has not been pessimistic. A realist will say, "This is what they must overcome to be successful." A pessimist will say, "This is what they must overcome to be successful, but they won't overcome it." An optimist will say, "This is what they must overcome to be successful, and they will overcome it."
You're definition of "happy talk" is a weird one. He in no way was being optimistic, he was describing what SF Deltas need to do if they want a chance to survive. He wasn't being optimistic.
1. Reality is, the deck was stacked against this team from before launch. 2. Reality is, the owners didn't understand what they were getting into. That, I think, has been well demonstrated. 3. Reality is, SFCFC's existence undermines the Deltas by taking up all the grassroots soccer oxygen in SF. This has been stated by the so-called "pessimists" time and again. (The happy talkers seem to ignore this reality.) 4. Sometimes reality is cause for pessimism. See 1. 5. I said in the other thread that we can have the discussion you want, but not with all this happy talk and magical thinking. 6. The realists have been detailing over and over again all that the Deltas must overcome. Each time we're met with denial and happy talk and magical thinking. 7. Reality is, they likely won't overcome what they need to overcome. It's magical thinking to demand otherwise. 8. We're dealing with the cold stone truth about how difficult it will be for the Deltas to survive. Maybe you should too. 9. This is the wrong thread for this discussion.