Hey gentlemen, thanks for your patience. Here is the quote from the FIFA press release "With 194 votes for and 5 against, the FIFA Congress mandated the Executive Committee to implement the steps proposed, including the additional motion presented to today's Congress to limit the number of teams in each top division to 18, by the working groups for financial matters, political matters and competitions of the FIFA Task Force "For the Good of the Game". http://www.fifa.com/worldcup/archiv...+develop+game+touch+world+build+better+future The actual language in the FIFA rules was adopted as part of "for the good of the game" rule adopted at the same pre-World Cup 2006 meeting. - Article 20 of the Regulations Governing the Application of the FIFA Statutes: This new article, after being passed by 201 votes to 1, will allow the FIFA Executive Committee to implement measures that are proposed by the Task Force "For the Good of the Game" and ratified by the FIFA Congress. http://www.fifa.com/worldcup/archiv...tml#fifa+creates+independent+ethics+committee Now whether they will ever start enforcing this -- and whether they will start enforcing it on little leagues like MLS before they try to push it on the big European leagues -- is another question. But it does exist. I don't just make this stuff up for my own entertainment.
Re: Portland Yeah, doesn't FIFA also have a rule about leagues no operating during International dates? We know how well we follow that rule.
Re: Portland How many times does this need to be reiterated? The proposal to limit first division teams is only done for scheduling purposes, as most leagues directly tie the number of games to the number of teams. MLS isn't one of them, so FIFA won't care.
Re: Portland As a Boston area guy, I'm a Revs fan, but I saw the time Portland hosted a US national team game and the crowd was beyond great, pro-american. For this reason, I hope Porland gets MLS Expansion. I just think if it came down to Portland or Vancouver, the eithic base up north in Canada might win out.
Re: Portland Scott47a thanks for finding that rule for us, its good to actually see it in writing. However, I am going to refer to this post as my response.
Re: Portland I am all for Portland and Vancouver BC coming up into MLS. A derby is one of my favorite things in football and I am honestly pissed that we have to give that up in order to go up to MLS. Folks in DC, NYC and Philly are lucky because they will have six derby matches all within a two hour radius. It'll be amazing. Here we already have that and am very sad to be losing it. Best of luck for promotion PDX.
For every San Jose and Philadephia they let in, they should consider Portland or St. Louis to be counter team (a team with a much larger metro area to an area fully prepared to support their teams).
"they" should, and do, consider clubs that have good solid ownership and a concrete, real stadium plan. Got those in baby Portland? Philly's size isn't why they're getting a team. They're getting a team because they got their shit together. MLS doesn't give franchises nowadays, cities earn them.
Do cities "earn" them, or do their owners "pay" for them? As for ownership: the Portland Timbers' owner, Merrit Paulson, is the son of the fomer head of Goldman Sachs (and current US Secretary of the Treasury), Henry Paulson. Not only is his family loaded and well-connected, the Goldman Sachs connection ensures access to investors that would consider $40 million a small investment. Merrit Paulson is also a former VP of NBA Entertainment, which makes him exactly the kind of owner that MLS wants to court (i.e., he's already part of the pro sports & media establishment). Pauslon has said that his family is perfectly willing to put up the money for an MLS team, and he's estimated that $20 million in upgrades would make PGE Park ideal for MLS. In terms of "earning" a team: Portland has a USL team that often outdraws KC and Dallas, and they have a supporters' group that is rivaled by only by DC or Toronto, so it's not much of a stretch to think that Portland will get into MLS at some point. MLS Commissioner Garber made at least two trips to Portland last year... so the wheels are already in motion.
It's not if but when for Portland. MLS will pause its expansion efforts in 2011 at 18 teams. Okay, so then the question for Portland is, when will MLS start expanding again? And will Portland be ready at that time? I think MLS will start expanding again in either 2013 or 2014. So that is the earliest window for Portland if they don't somehow sneak in as the 18th team in 2011. - Paul
Even if FIFA were to start enforcing this rule, it would be relatively easy for MLS to comply, even with more than 18 teams. Other leagues around the world are divided into "divisions", such as First Division, Second Division, or Serie A, Serie B, etc. MLS is already divided into two divisions: the "Eastern Conference" and "Western Conference". There is no reason this couldn't continue, with each conference having up to 18 teams. The only difference is that while other leagues have promotion and relegation between the divisions, MLS would not (but that is already the case in the US, and FIFA does not seem to have a problem with it). Meanwhile, the names of the different divisions don't necessarily have to specify hierarchy: in England, the "League Championship" is actually the second division. So, "East" and "West" should work just fine. If necessary to comply with FIFA, one of the conferences could be officially designated as "Division 1", but that would just be a technicality. Teams from the conference designated as "Division 2" could still compete for the championship, since MLS has always considered the "MLS Cup" winner to be the league champion (and Cup competitions can be open to teams from different divisions, just like England's League Cup & FA Cup) . If FIFA were to really crack down and require promotion and relegation between the two divisions, MLS could simply follow the old English model and place the top teams in the "MLS Premier League" and remaining teams in the "MLS First Division". Teams from both divisions could still qualify for the MLS Cup playoffs.
I won't be surprised if the 17th and 18th teams wind up being Montreal and Portland. MLS has been dragging their feet with St. Louis, and while the league has said it's a matter of wanting the St. Louis owner to find additional investors, I wouldn't be surprised if MLS is also afraid that the level of support in St. Louis will be similar to that of Kansas City or Columbus. Despite the history of soccer in St. Louis, it has been 31 years since a pro outdoor team played there. And while Portland has sold out their 26,000-seat stadium for US national team and Women's World Cup matches on numerous occassions within the past 5-10 years (not to mention crowds of 15,000 for the Timbers), St. Louis hasn't hosted the national team since the 80s, and that was at the St. Louis Soccer Park in front of about 4,000 fans. The other city at the top of the MLS list is New York, but MLS has been talking about a second team there since '95. Given how long it is taking to get the first soccer stadium built in New York (it wound up being a 10-year process with three different owners), and and also noting how long it took to get two new baseball stadiums built in New York (which are still not done yet), I won't be surprised if it takes at least another 5-6 years before New York gets a second soccer stadium built. Miami is also mentioned, to play in a new soccer stadium adjacent to a new Marlins' stadium. However, as in New York, getting a new stadium for the Marlins has been a ten-year ordeal (and is still not a done deal). Vancouver is another city in which the stadium process has been a multi-year ordeal that is not likely to end soon. Montreal, meanwhile, has a new stadium already completed, and better attendance than several MLS clubs. As for Portland, they just need to upgrade the existing downtown stadium (and that is a stadium that already has better amenities than several MLS stadiums, such as corporate suites that were installed in 2001, as well as a Euro-style roof).
i'd be very surprised. garber has made every indication that st louis is 99% to be the next team awarded, and maimi just needs its owner group to solidify. the stadium in florida is pretty much a done deal. vancouver doesn't have a stadium deal in place. they've been fighting for years trying to get it. montreal has a stadium, and while its an awesome USL stadium, its not a major league park.
One other factor, potentially affecting St. Louis and the planned stadium in Kansas City, is the current real estate crisis. Both of those stadium projects involve a large-scale real estate development, of which the soccer stadium is but one component. If access to financing dries up (as it already has for some developers), then it will be difficult for those large mixed-use projects to move forward in the next few years. If that happens, then St. Louis won't be ready by 2011, and KC could also have a hard time holding on to their team. Miami seems like a good bet, but as with New York, it will be surprising if the process of getting two stadiums built occurs as quickly as currently envisioned. It might be a little ambitious to think that Miami's stadium will be ready by 2011 (as currently planned). Delays are inevitable in projects like that (for instance, the Mets' were orginally planning to have their stadium ready by 2003, but now it's planned for completion in 2009). Montreal's stadium would be expaned to 18,000 seats for MLS (about the same size as the planned stadium in Philadelphia), and that could be done in less than a year. Meanwhile, Portland's stadium doesn't need to be expanded (just upgraded to make the field more soccer-friendly, move some seats closer to the field, and provide wider concourses with expanded restrooms & concessions).
I'm just curious, didn't MLS bigwigs come to portland to check the stadium there like last year? I wonder why they didn't deem it a good venue or what else needs to be done. If its just restrooms and other improvements then why not target portland as one of the next expansion candidates.
I believe any improvements would have to be paid for by public funds. There is also the pesky problem of the Portland Beavers AAA baseball club needing a place to play 70 odd games per year. Someone from Portland could clarify this..... but I think Paulsen would have to build a new ballpark for baseball and public funds would be necessary to upgrade PGE. I think Paulsen owns both the Timbers and Beavers.
Here's the deal. They need to add permanent seating in the baseball outfield. The field itself has already been taken care of. Then they have to build a minor league baseball stadium which Paulson is pitching as wanting to place on an MLB sized footprint in order to make the taxpayers happy.
He is also courting the new potential mayor Sam Adams REALLY hard, so I would imagine if Adams is indeed elected in November we could see quick progress on both the Beavers AAA stadium (most likely at the portland meadows) and improvements to PGE.
And Portland Meadows is an awesome location for a AAA field with an MLB footprint. If Portland ever does get MLB, the location is probably only second to a downtown location... even then, might be better with the transit AND parking options where downtown would just have transit options.
There is no requirement that public funds must be used to upgrade PGE Park. If Paulson, or another investor, wants to spend $20 million on upgrades, then I'm sure the City won't stop them. (Right now, Paulson is angling for public funds. Strategically, I think he would be better off spending his own money on upgrading PGE Park, and then seeking public funds for a baseball stadium AFTER he secures an MLS team). As for baseball: since Portland just installed the same Field Turf surface that Seattle and Toronto play on, I don't know that sharing with a baseball team for awhile is necessarily a deal-killer. The dirt areas around the bases and pitchers mound could be taken out & covered with Field Turf for soccer games. The outfield wall could be modified to provide some additional sideline seating for soccer, and temporary or retractable seats could also be "rolled in" to the lower outfield areas next to the soccer field (similar to the Oakland Coliseum, in which entire sections of seats are rolled in for football games).
The stadium is the focal point of the plan though. The final build out for the project is a full ten years. Maybe the full plan wouldn't be built. A decrease in the number of houses could be possible. The stadium and retail portions would likely still go in though.
Wow, we are grasping at straws here, aren't we? I have no idea what the story is with KC, but the financing for the St. Louis stadium is locked in. The bulldozers roll when MLS grants us a team. If the residential and retail components fall apart, so be it, but the stadium is the focus of the first phase of the project. Once the team is awarded, serious calamity would have to happen to keep the stadium from being built. Like, earthquake or nuclear-war or collapse-of-civilization level stuff. I'm sorry the idea of St. Louis in MLS seems to hurt your feelings so much, but maybe it's time to prepare yourself for the prospect instead of conjuring up phantom reasons why it won't work. For the record, I think Portland would probably be a good addition to MLS.
I think St. Louis will be a great MLS market and should be announced ASAP. Here is to the Timbers rounding out an even 18 team league.