Sacramento MLS Expansion Superthread

Discussion in 'Sacramento Republic FC' started by 30King, Nov 28, 2013.

  1. FoxBoro 143

    FoxBoro 143 Member+

    Jan 18, 2004
    MA
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Everyone keeps assuming MLS has been jerking Sacramento along all these years. I suspect its been the opposite. MLS is just waiting for Sacramento to get it's act together, but it just hasn't.
     
  2. mangerson

    mangerson Member+

    Sacramento Republic, San Jose Earthquakes
    Jan 8, 2008
    Sacramento, CA
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
  3. mangerson

    mangerson Member+

    Sacramento Republic, San Jose Earthquakes
    Jan 8, 2008
    Sacramento, CA
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Ehhh, with all due respect, I can't go along with the notion the MLS has been waiting on Sac getting it's act together. Even as a glass-half-full guy on our getting in, the fact is Sac has had it's act together, based on supposed MLS expansion "requirements" far longer than cities that have been awarded a franchise since, including Cincinnati. Sac had stadium designs, a site and approval from the Sacramento city council back in December 2015. Franchises then were going for $100M and stadium construction was expected to be $180M. The ownership group at the time probably had the financial wherewithal to be approved.

    Instead, MLS was a full participant in the Miami Beckham United fiasco. As that dragged on, the costs of stadium construction and franchise fees increased, and the ownership group at the time was priced out of the market. Franchises were given to cities without approved soccer stadium plans, or without any SSS plans, or without a history of sustained support for a soccer franchise. Sac was ahead of Cincinnati, St. Louis (especially St. Louis), Nashville, Austin and Charlotte. The major difference? A deep-pocketed owner.

    Burkle may be filthy rich, but he's not Tepper-filthy rich and what do you know? Charlotte's chances look better by the day. It's no stretch of the imagination, based on recent history, to think that Charlotte is awarded the next franchise, and in the interim other, wealthier ownership groups line up in other cities and Sac will be passed over again.

    I hope I'm wrong, but that's been the pattern.
     
    2in10 and don gagliardi repped this.
  4. FoxBoro 143

    FoxBoro 143 Member+

    Jan 18, 2004
    MA
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    And we all saw how they put their bid together. Owners bickering, investors in/then out/then in again then out again, shady mayor/incompetent mayor, possiblity that Republic continues as a rival product etc.... Sacramento never really had it's act together and instead kept stumbling over themselves.
    The Miami situation has been completely unrelated to Sac. That was the complications of a deal made years before SRFC existed.

    So what your saying with your last sentence is that yes, I am correct that Sacramento never had it all together. Had they had that deep pocketed owner back then, we'd be watching them in MLS now. They didn't.
     
    AndyMead and jaykoz3 repped this.
  5. mangerson

    mangerson Member+

    Sacramento Republic, San Jose Earthquakes
    Jan 8, 2008
    Sacramento, CA
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    In other words, the absence of deep-pocketed owners. So, we're arguing while in agreement.

    Really? How? The shady one that put together the original stadium agreement without imposing the city's will upon the plan, and the other one that ushered in the new term sheet with Burkle after stepping in to resolve:
    but really, how likely was that? Why would a second division club try to rival an MLS club? Because a few guys in the supporter's group or on Reddit said they'd stay loyal? Besides, why would Garber care about a mayor who has little leverage on operating the stadium and would, at best, be termed out of office early in the MLS club's existence?

    Yeah, you might be right. I respect your opinion on that. Or, I might be right. Or, we both are. Neither of us really knows. We just have different opinions.

    Oh, so we're back to the lack of deep-pocketed owners and you really weren't making all those other arguments.
    .
     
  6. FoxBoro 143

    FoxBoro 143 Member+

    Jan 18, 2004
    MA
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I said Sacramento didn't have it's act together, you kind of sort of disagreed while agreeing. Not sure what else to say.

    MLS isn't stringing Sacramento along. MLS is just moving way too fast
     
  7. mangerson

    mangerson Member+

    Sacramento Republic, San Jose Earthquakes
    Jan 8, 2008
    Sacramento, CA
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Yeah, I suppose I might have read more into your original comment about Sac not getting it's act together. It was kind of a vague statement.
     
  8. calcmandan

    calcmandan Member

    Nov 16, 2012
    Sacramento, CA
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    agreed. they almost begged us to collect our entry fee. we just didn't have a complete package. and our owner didn't want to pony up the cash, understandably.
     
  9. TrueCrew

    TrueCrew Member+

    Dec 22, 2003
    Columbus, OH
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I don't even remember what non-jaded looks like.

    Still, we should stick together. Maybe we can have a Jade Cup thing. SJ. Columbus. And Sac.

    Still, Garble or MLS has not said anything negative about your ownership or fan base. That is a telltale sign.

    I will admit, I thought you wouldbe 28 & STL 29, as I thought you guys were further along on the stadium (2021 possible) to come in with Austin & keep the # of teams even (but I do not think that matters much to MLS).
     
  10. SierraSpartan

    SierraSpartan Member+

    Jan 25, 2007
    Placer County, CA
    Club:
    Sacramento Republic FC
    He's said nothing negative in the past about San Antonio's ownership or fanbase either, but they will continue to feel the dick they got fvcked with by Garber for years to come.
     
  11. TrueCrew

    TrueCrew Member+

    Dec 22, 2003
    Columbus, OH
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    As for future expansion, I think 32 is the MIN number they stop at. With 36, 38, or 40 more likely.

    As for Sac as a market, I think you are comparable to most other bidders.

    CSA's in USA (2018). Census area Canada.

    I. Big Dogs (6+ million). 12/12.

    Rank, CSA, Pop (mil) Growth, # Teams.
    1. NY/Newark: 22.7, +1.91%, 2.
    2. LA/Long Beach: 18.8, +4.97%, 2.
    3. Chicago: 9.9, +0.26%, 1.
    4. DC/Balt: 9.8, +8.26%, 1.
    5. SJ/SF/Oak: 9.7, +8.32%, 1.
    6. Boston/Prov/Wor: 8.3, +4.97%, 1.
    7. Dallas/Ft. Worth: 8.0, +16.74%, 1.
    8. Phil/Read/Cam: 7.2, +1.93%, 1.
    9. Hou/Woodlands: 7.2, +17.72%, 1.
    10. Mia/Ft. Laud: 6.9, +11.51%, 1.
    11. Atlanta: 6.8, +11.90%, 1.
    12. Toronto, 5.9 (2016), +6.18%, 1.
    -----------------------

    II. 2nd Tier (4-6 mil). 4/6 with teams.

    13. Det/War/AA: 5.4, +0.64%, Bid. If you add in Windsor (330k), then 5.7 million.
    14. PHX/Mesa: 4.9, +15.67%, Bid.
    15. Sea/Tac: 4.9, +13.54%, 1.
    16. Montreal: 4.1 (2016), +4.19%, 1.
    17. Orlando: 4.1, +18.81%, 1.
    18. Minn/St. Paul: 4.0, +7.88%, 1.

    Of the 18 markets with 4+ million, 16/18 have teams, with Det & Phx with expansion bids. NY & LA have 2 teams.
    --------------------------

    III. Tier 3 (3+ mil). 2/5 with teams.

    19. Cle/Ak/Can: 3.6, -0.85%, 0.
    20. Denver: 3.6, +15.59%, 1.
    21. SD/Chula Vista: 3.3 (MSA), +8.01%, Bid With Tijuana (1.8 mil) would be 5.1 mil.
    22. Portland: 3.2, +10.88%, 1.
    23. Tampa/St. Pete: 3.1 (MSA), +12.91%, Bid.
    ------------------

    IV. Tier 4 (2+ mil).

    24. St. Louis: 2.9, +0.60%, 1.
    25. Charlotte: 2.8, +14.62%, Bid.
    26. Sacramento: 2.6, +8.49%, Bid.
    27. Pittsburgh: 2.6, -1.81%, 0.
    28. Salt Lake/Provo: 2.6, +14.74%, 1.
    29. San Antonio: 2.6, +17.46%, Bid.
    30. Columbus: 2.5, +8.72, 1.
    31. KC: 2.5, +6.15, 1.
    32. Vancouver: 2.5, +6.49%, 1.
    33. Indy: 2.4, +7.27%, Bid.
    34. San Juan: 2.4 (2017), -10.01%, 0
    35. Vegas: 2.3, +14.12%, Interested.
    36. Cincy: 2.3, +3.31%, 1.
    37. Raleigh/Durham: 2.2, +17.02%, Bid.
    38. Austin, 2.2, +26.34%, 1.
    39. Nashville, 2.1, +15.04%, 1.
    40. Milwaukee, 2.0, +1.16%, 0.
    --------------

    Only Det, Phx, Cle, SD, and Tamps have a significant edge on Sac in terms of size. Cle has no bid, and only PHX looks to be making progress among the other 4. And temps could be a factor there.

    Among teams in your vicinity size-wise, only Charlotte is really close. And they still have a way to go yet.

    Hang in there, I think your day is coming soon.














    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_statistical_area#List_of_combined_statistical_areas

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_census_metropolitan_areas_and_agglomerations_in_Canada

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_metropolitan_statistical_areas

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_areas_of_Mexico
     
  12. TrueCrew

    TrueCrew Member+

    Dec 22, 2003
    Columbus, OH
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I still think SA gets in eventually. They are going to wait a couple years to see how PSV does in Austin. If they flop (which looks doubtful), they move to SA. If it works, they get a rival.

    But I think MLS is headed for 36 teams, min.

    29. Sac
    30. Charlotte
    --------

    And, in MLS' order of preference (subject to change):

    31. Det
    32. PHX
    33. SD
    34. Vegas
    35. SA
    36. Tampa/Raleigh/Indy
     
  13. antnee7898

    antnee7898 Member

    Oct 19, 2007
    South Houston, TX
    Club:
    Houston Dynamo
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    True, but San Antonio had a lot of chances though. They've been touting the already built, expandable SSS and great fan base for a LONG time, but never moved ahead on anything. After the Scorpions were sold there was 0 news on the MLS push. Nothing about the stadium going through city or county steps for expansion. I may not be remembering everything, but I think SA had their chances and still have a chance but, nothing from the Spurs ownership. Where are their fans? Almost seems like their fine with the dick.
     
  14. sitruc

    sitruc Member+

    Jul 25, 2006
    Virginia
    I thought the Jade Cup was between Seattle and DC.
     
  15. SierraSpartan

    SierraSpartan Member+

    Jan 25, 2007
    Placer County, CA
    Club:
    Sacramento Republic FC
  16. TrueCrew

    TrueCrew Member+

    Dec 22, 2003
    Columbus, OH
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    We can be the Jaded Cup.
     
  17. AndyMead

    AndyMead Homo Sapien

    Nov 2, 1999
    Seat 12A
    Club:
    Sporting Kansas City
    Juarez - El Paso has 2.7 million.
     
    TrueCrew repped this.
  18. AndyMead

    AndyMead Homo Sapien

    Nov 2, 1999
    Seat 12A
    Club:
    Sporting Kansas City
    The other thing to pay attention to is demographic and population shifts.

    Expansion evaluation isn't just based on today as today will be ancient history for most of the team's run.

    The real question is where are these markets going to be over the next 10-20-30 years.

    These southern tier markets like Tampa, Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham, Phoenix, San Antonio and so on that keep growing at 10-20% every ten years for the last few decades are younger, more diverse, and often more upwardly mobile (disposable income) than the long established, but much slower growing (or even contracting) markets. Throw in the fact that many of these markets aren't as major league saturated as the rust belt markets, there is generally more sponsorship opportunities, and fresh regional broadcast windows, available.

    To be honest though, I was actually shocked how quickly Cincinnati jumped to the head of the expansion line, so my analysis may be flawed. But barring a huge change in demographic patterns, Cincy will quickly be the smallest MLS market, and it will only continue to fall further behind. And competing with MLB and NFL teams will just further limit the amount of sponsorship revenues in play locally.
     
  19. SierraSpartan

    SierraSpartan Member+

    Jan 25, 2007
    Placer County, CA
    Club:
    Sacramento Republic FC
    More nothing from the local rag...

     
  20. TrueCrew

    TrueCrew Member+

    Dec 22, 2003
    Columbus, OH
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Well, assuming a market is going to continue to grow at 10%-20% for decades to come is a bit of a gamble.

    2 million cities (CSA's) are more than enough to support a team. Plus, there are many teams from smaller markets that do quite well: Green Bay, OKC, Memphis, New Orleans (Saints).

    Downtown Cincy is cool. They will be fine.
     
    don gagliardi repped this.
  21. SierraSpartan

    SierraSpartan Member+

    Jan 25, 2007
    Placer County, CA
    Club:
    Sacramento Republic FC
  22. Elninho

    Elninho Member+

    Oct 30, 2000
    Sacramento, CA
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
  23. athletics68

    athletics68 Member+

    Dec 12, 2006
    San Diego & San Jose
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    They already have a team however...
     
  24. AndyMead

    AndyMead Homo Sapien

    Nov 2, 1999
    Seat 12A
    Club:
    Sporting Kansas City
    So does San Diego/Tijuana, but they were in the list.
     
  25. mangerson

    mangerson Member+

    Sacramento Republic, San Jose Earthquakes
    Jan 8, 2008
    Sacramento, CA
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    The latest from Brian Strauss

    Sacramento Republic has been knocking on the door for five years, and they’re now on the threshold. There’s a feeling among many, especially Republic fans, that MLS has been stringing the club along or using it as leverage against other suitors. The truth, however, is that Kevin Nagle never was going to be able to bring Republic up on his own, and he was unable to reach an accord with former Hewlett Packard and eBay CEO Meg Whitman in late 2017.

    It was only last January, when Nagle was willing to cede control to California private equity investor Ron Burkle, that Republic became a truly viable MLS candidate. Then in April, the league jacked up the expansion fee to $200 million. That forced Burkle—a meticulous and thorough businessman and negotiator, according to sources—to recalibrate. Conversations with the league continued, and it’s believed that most of, if not all, the hurdles have been cleared. Sacramento’s wait should be ending soon.

    https://www.si.com/soccer/2019/08/20/mls-expansion-st-louis-sacramento-charlotte-30-teams-bids
     

Share This Page