There really is nowhere to play there either. Unless they tear down the Oakland–Alameda County Coliseum and maybe rebuild something smaller. It would be a miracle if one ever gets built and if it ever did and/or if they do merge with the Oakland group, I doubt they would play in the NASL.
Knave nailed it. They need to move to the burbs, East Bay making the most sense. But that ship may have already sailed if the Oakland group does come in. If that's the case they have three options, build a real venue in a good location in SF (which I doubt they'd want to spend the $100 million+ doing). Or move out of the Bay Area to another California market that actually makes sense for minor league sports. But again, I don't see that happening given the ownership group's heavy Bay Area make up. Or limp along hemorrhaging money until you fold (or just fold outright to save your cash).
Nope. But they did make the mistake of making the same mistakes far too many others before them have made both in minor league soccer and other sports. For not knowing the history of their own supposed region they garner my scorn. It seems pretty apparent that most of the owners are carpetbaggers who thought, "Hey San Francisco is a hipster town, they'll like soccer! Let's just drop a half assed minor league team there!"
Where in California though? Fresno or Salinas? There really is not much else in between until you get to LA.
The Deltas won't move outside the Bay Area. Hell, I'm 99% sure they won't move out of SF. Their whole thing is to be in SF. It's just that I think (as others on this thread do too) that they completely misunderstand the SF soccer market. Like I said, for them it's SF or bust ... which almost certainly seals their fate.
Fresno looks like it's already USL bound so that's not happening. Salinas could work, but I suspect NASL wants a bigger city than Salinas. Stockton or Bakersfield maybe? The latter has a recently abandoned city owned baseball stadium they could potentially be modified? But as Knave says, in all honesty I don't think their owners have much interest in being anywhere but SF. But thus far they've not shown they have a clue how to make it work in SF. And frankly I don't see any minor league ownership group having the financial fortitude to do what it would take to even give high level minor league soccer a shot to work in SF, nevermind one that's already made a bunch of missteps.
Honestly, personally I think MLS is the best option for a team in SF. It's high enough level that it might just play well with the SF soccer crowd, provided it's marketed properly. And they'd obviously need a choice venue of AT&T Park quality. It would not be a cheap endeavor, the outlay to make it happen would be one of the highest if not the highest for an ownership in MLS's short history. But if they got the right owners who were willing to pay for it... I think MLS could do really well in the city. And I agree, would help the Quakes too with a "Teh City" v South Bay derby.
You know, I seem to recall Dan VanVoorhis and his traveling SF Bay Blackhawks team playing around different venues around the Bay Area. It was post (old) NASL and pre MLS and they were the only game in town at that time. From what I recall back then though, they use to draw some pretty good crowds playing at HS stadiums all over the East Bay and the peninsula. I can't remember if they ever played in SF/Kezar or not. I assume they did but their biggest crowds were when they played at Newark Memorial HS in the East Bay. Maybe the Deltas could do a little of that and market the team around the Bay Area?
One of the definitions of insanity is doing something over and over again and expecting a different result. I think this guy's gone through several sock puppets and has been banned each and every time. SMH
Because some posters here are people who wish the NASL were dead at this point, so there's that. Sort of USL bots... But, to be fair, the naysayers have mostly been right so far. Now the questions involve the willingness of the owners to make a go of it. How do you do it and how much money are you willing to spend to do it?
There's a difference between wanting the NASL dead, and just wanting the NASL to stop making stupid decisions (especially stupid decisions people have already made before).
Going back to BigSoccer's earliest days in the 1990s, MLS supporters were the core user group. That doesn't mean we were generally pro or con one minor league or another. For most of BigSoccer's existence, nobody here cared about the lower leagues. That changed when the Cosmos came in and tried to remake the NASL into an adversary against MLS. Bear in mind, the deal the USL currently enjoys with MLS was originally offered to the NASL. It didn't happen only because the Cosmos squashed it at the last minute. So we're not "USL bots" -- nor MLS bots. Indeed, a number of us have been savaging MLS's stupid decisions for decades on this board. (Though they are in recent years shaping up -- finally.) Thing is, a lot of the NASL people don't know this history of MLS criticism. They just see that we're MLS supporters and that we're criticizing the NASL. Well, that's not because we hate the NASL, though Peterson and the Cosmos did piss us off when they went around trying to undermine MLS. It's because this is BigSoccer and there's no aspect of American soccer that doesn't get savaged around here. I don't think we're naysayers in the way some suppose. I think we're just jaded realists. A lot of us are also older. We've been following American soccer for decades. Most of what we've seen is failure. We simply don't take it for granted that you can, say, set up a minor league outfit in SF and have it succeed. There are a number of people here who swear it must be the opposite, that it must be able to succeed. We just don't buy that. Why? Because we've seen this shit before and we know it's better to despair and maybe be surprised, than to hope and probably be crushed. If the Deltas are proving our doubts right, it's only because our doubts are -- unfortunately -- well founded.
I do kind of want the NASL to be dead, but that's really only because I think the USL will prove a more stable league for the current NASL teams. If the USL wasn't a stable lifeboat for the various teams, I'd be sweating the NASL's survival a lot more.
Fair point. In fact I too was hoping NASL would have died this past off season. But that's mainly a reaction to the Cosmos and Peterson's years of bullshit. At least the league's BS is largely gone, and I credit that to folks like Wilt. Unfortunately the Cosmos are different year, different owner, same old shtick.
I realized I kind of called you out without doing it directly...I promised myself I wouldn't do that and I did. Sorry. Honestly, you're not the only ones who feel the way you do on the NASL's continued existence. I get it about the long running trends here on Big Soccer, during the early MLS years I was on these boards. When the Mutiny were contracted, I went away for a while but I was still lurking a bit. What got me to finally join again was the NASL's off-season of discontent. To me, having a viable NASL is in the best long term interests of the game here in this country. I don't want to see the whole pyramid controlled by one group. I didn't want the NASL/MLS partnership when it was offered - and it had nothing to do with the Cosmos. Of course, I also thought that the Bill Peterson spin was ridiculous. "Just shut up and be the best Division 2 league you can be already", I kept thinking. Maybe the Cosmos were driving that, but the words came from Peterson, not the Cosmos front office. Sure Cosmos fans can be annoying, but so are Yankees fans. That doesn't mean that I want the Rays to be in the National League. It seems like the powers that be get it now. Two reasons I'm rooting for San Francisco to succeed is that it gives the NASL another club that it needs - and one out west to boot - and from what it sounds like Brian Helmick was one of the owners pushing this new co-operative stance.
Of course, my club is in the USL now, but I was opposed to the move at the time. The only way I wanted the Rowdies to move was if the NASL collapsed. As we now know, Bill Edwards had his own reasons. Whether they're legitimate or not, a court will decide. Fast forward to the first few games this season and I still haven't changed my mind about the move. The MLS II sides we played were crap. The independents were better, but it doesn't seem like the level is as high. I don't doubt your assertion about the stability of the league, that's a nice side benefit of the partnership - and really started after the partnership began. Regardless of my judgement about their level of play, having the MLS II teams and selling the possibility of MLS to potential new owners has been good for the USL.
You know after the old NASL folded, all there was in terms of soccer was a few semipro circuits, youth and college ball and the indoor game. When I think back to that time , or rather 1985-1995, I can remember as a fan of outdoor soccer, it was a very sad time. I can recall watching the 1994 World Cup final at the Rose Bowl in Pasadena with 94,000 screaming fans on Sunday to watching Preki and the San Jose Grizzlies playing indoors in front of maybe only 4000 people at the San Jose Arena. Back then, anyone would have killed for what we have today in the new NASL, USL and the current state of MLS. When I think back to those days to what we have now and seeing how everyone is complaining, I can't help but laugh. I for one am ecstatic to see all of this bickering and back then anyone would have loved to see all of this soccer interest (good and bad) in the sport. I'm sure I've been on record to be critical of each league as well but on the flip side and in the overall scheme of things, I think the pros outweigh the cons.
NASL and USL should really merge together. At this point, its just not good to have 2 minor leagues. One with so many teams and the other with 8.
They playing the Cosmos tomorrow. I hope the turnout is gonna be decent. Going with my group. I'm thinking the crowd size will be decent since its the Cosmos.
My hunch is that this is nothing -- in the sense that, sure the USL would say they're interested. Whether that interest is feasible or whether there's ownership building a bid is another thing. So I don't think it's worth starting another thread. But I thought maybe I'd pop the rumor into this one. I'm hearing from multiple places that USL has interest in a Bay Area team. MLS, NASL both in the market already. (1/2)— Kartik Krishnaiyer 🇺🇦🌻⚽️ (@kkfla737) April 28, 2017 Also NPSL's San Francisco team has a strong base of support. Will be curious to see how USL's plans pan out. (2/2)— Kartik Krishnaiyer 🇺🇦🌻⚽️ (@kkfla737) April 28, 2017 If there is one group that might be looking in this direction, I'd guess it's SFCFC.
That actually might be a good fit depending the stadium size requirements. A niche team might have a place in that division.