The MLS Stadium Thread

Discussion in 'MLS: News & Analysis' started by fairfax4dc, May 20, 2016.

  1. xbhaskarx

    xbhaskarx Member+

    Feb 13, 2010
    NorCal
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Could this be the next MLS stadium...

     
  2. DCYC

    DCYC Member

    Chivas, DC United, Reno 1868
    Mar 24, 2010
    Reno, NV
    Club:
    CD Chivas de Guadalajara
    Nat'l Team:
    Mexico
    I don't understand the "what a ********ing joke" part. It sure seems like great news. And Carolina is clearly top race for expansion
     
  3. Minnman

    Minnman Member+

    Feb 11, 2000
    Columbus, OH, USA
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    The joke, presumably, is the argument that an aging NFL stadium is now deemed a reasonable substitute for a soccer specific stadium, because of its owner and location. It implies the the further NFL-ization of MLS, by an ownership group (plus Commisioner) with deep NFL ties.
     
  4. jaykoz3

    jaykoz3 Member+

    Dec 25, 2010
    Conshohocken, PA
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    He's been working with MLS far longer than he ever worked for the NFL........

    Guess we should all stop watching the Premier League as well with it's "NFL'Ization as well......

    The NFL is one of, if the most successful sports leagues in the world. There are far worse models for MLS to emulate, and utilize best practices from.
     
    mbar, sitruc, JasonMa and 2 others repped this.
  5. AndyMead

    AndyMead Homo Sapien

    Nov 2, 1999
    Seat 12A
    Club:
    Sporting Kansas City
    That's so Mickey Mouse. /s
     
    JasonMa repped this.
  6. stanger

    stanger BigSoccer Supporter

    Nov 29, 2008
    Columbus
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States

    When previous expansion teams were forced to build new facilities and then one is being considered to play in an aging NFL stadium, or a baseball stadium, that’s a joke.

    Let Indy play Lucas Oil instead of forcing them to build. It’s the double standard that caused consternation.
     
  7. Bluecat82

    Bluecat82 Member+

    Feb 24, 1999
    Minneapolis, MN
    Club:
    Minnesota United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    The late great George Carlin had a baseball vs. football routine this reminded me of.

    In part:

    "In football, you're down in enemy territory, trying to make it to the End Zone!

    In baseball...you're just trying to get home."
     
  8. jaykoz3

    jaykoz3 Member+

    Dec 25, 2010
    Conshohocken, PA
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    The Yankees (part owner of NYCFC) control the revenue in Yankee Stadium.......Arthur Blank controls the revenue at the Benz.....The Sounders have some control over their revenue at Century Link. MLSE controls revenue at BMO Field. Tepper controls the revenue at Bank of America.........

    Orlando City, Minnesota United, Nashville SC, FC Cincy did NOT control the revenue in the venues they were using prior to coming to MLS. See the difference? Inter Miami was forced to build a stadium rather than use of the many viable venues South Florida......why? Because they wouldn't have control over the revenue....
     
    mbar, Element 7ero, Burr and 3 others repped this.
  9. Paul Berry

    Paul Berry Member+

    Notts County and NYCFC
    England
    Apr 18, 2015
    Nr Kingston NY
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    No-one is forcing Indy to build a stadium. They are building it because it's judged to be financially beneficial for them and the city of Indianapolis.

    In terms of MLS expansion they're probably 35 or 36, if the league expands that far.

    I think NYCFC retain matchday revenues.
     
  10. stanger

    stanger BigSoccer Supporter

    Nov 29, 2008
    Columbus
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    https://www.foxsports.com/soccer/story/mls-expansion-2018-teams-rules-dates-requirements-121516

    You also conveniently left out Chicago.

    Also, Detroit would have had revenue control in an NFL stadium but wasn’t sexy enough?

    Your thought that revenue control is the reason has holes. It also results in shitty game day experiences in the case of the baseball stadiums and a lot of plastic grass.

    Simply not ideal.
     
    TrueCrew and AZUL GALAXY repped this.
  11. the cup

    the cup Member

    Jul 10, 2002
    Club:
    Real Salt Lake
    They all think they can be the next Atlanta.
     
  12. GunnerJacket

    GunnerJacket Moderator
    Staff Member

    Sep 18, 2003
    Gainesville, GA
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    It's not the end-all/be-all but it's still a critical reason, coupled with the ability to control/influence scheduling of matches. (Which obviously influences revenues.) The tide turned for MLS when teams had more control over these things. Plus now some markets have a demand for the calibre of suites on offer at NFL venues. Safe to say the demand for such was quite low a generation ago.

    I won't disagree that MLS has been inconcistent in their application of demands, but few would argue the trend for the league has not been getting better overall, Yankee Stadium notwithstanding.
     
  13. ThreeApples

    ThreeApples Member+

    Jul 28, 1999
    Smurf Village
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Requiring a new SSS or not has always been a case-by-case thing for MLS expansion.

    2005: Chivas USA and RSL, no stadium deals
    2006: Houston gets a relocated team with no stadium plan
    2008: San Jose gets replacement expansion team win no stadium deal finalized
    2009: Seattle in an NFL stadium
    2011: Vancouver in a CFL stadium
    2015: NYC in a baseball stadium
    2017: Atlanta in an NFL stadium
     
  14. KCbus

    KCbus Moderator
    Staff Member

    United States
    Nov 26, 2000
    Reynoldsburg, OH
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I find this line of thinking to be really overrated.

    In the late 90's and early 00's, soccer-specific stadiums seemed like key components to having a successful MLS team. But the fact that some markets have come into the league without them and done just fine -- better than fine, in many cases -- proved that if a team has enough other things right, a larger, shared (or not specific) stadium can do the job. And I'd rather the league (or Garber, or whoever else you want to assign the thinking to) be smart enough to recognize this than try to stick to a talking point from a decade ago that isn't as accurate now as it was then.
     
    AndyMead, jaykoz3, Dolemite and 3 others repped this.
  15. FoxBoro 143

    FoxBoro 143 Member+

    Jan 18, 2004
    MA
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Let's also remember that MLS allowed Atlanta to come in at the same time they rejected another brand new NFL stadium in MN. Granted, Minny had an alternate option, but I'm thinking had MLS had the same regard for the vision of the Wilf family as they did with Blank, Dr. McGuire would probably have lost.

    They have no 1 requirement for expansion. Some options needed an SSS to be viable, others didn't. Those who "we're forced to build SSS" likely didn't have a viable alternative.
     
    Egbert Sousé repped this.
  16. JasonMa

    JasonMa Member+

    Mar 20, 2000
    Arvada, CO
    Club:
    Colorado Rapids
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I would say they largely do have 1 requirement. You have to control the revenue stream of your stadium or have a plan to getting to that state. What that stadium is (NFL, SSS, whatever) doesn't matter as much.

    The one real exception to that is NYCFC, but we've heard many rumors that the league was encouraged to add another NYC team for the TV deal. If accurate, a increased TV deal can make up for a team not having that revenue stream.
     
    NashSC and Baysider repped this.
  17. FoxBoro 143

    FoxBoro 143 Member+

    Jan 18, 2004
    MA
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I also believe the league thought they had a stadium in the bag for NYC at the time of approval, and figured CFG money would bring it home!
     
    Egbert Sousé and JasonMa repped this.
  18. the cup

    the cup Member

    Jul 10, 2002
    Club:
    Real Salt Lake
    When it comes to Chivas and RSL, seeing as they were the first expansion teams after Tampa and Miami were axed I think the league was just happy to have someone want to put up some money to join MLS.

    Chivas had no stadium deal but at least they did play in a SSS.

    And thankfully RSL only played in a college football stadium for 3 1/2 years.
     
  19. AndyMead

    AndyMead Homo Sapien

    Nov 2, 1999
    Seat 12A
    Club:
    Sporting Kansas City
    And by "3 1/2" you mean "3 13/15ths" (or "3 13/17ths" if you insist on including the two home playoff games)
     
  20. soccermilitant

    soccermilitant Member+

    Jan 14, 2009
    St.paul
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    it simple its all about revenue control
     
  21. NashSC

    NashSC Member+

    Nashville SC
    United States
    Jan 3, 2018
    I have tried to explain this for some time but some people just don't get it.
     
  22. stanger

    stanger BigSoccer Supporter

    Nov 29, 2008
    Columbus
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Which is why the Fire moved out of Bridgeview... No?
     
  23. JasonMa

    JasonMa Member+

    Mar 20, 2000
    Arvada, CO
    Club:
    Colorado Rapids
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    That probably had something to do with it, considering how little control they had due to their lease with the city.
     
  24. stanger

    stanger BigSoccer Supporter

    Nov 29, 2008
    Columbus
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    So, you think they will have more control in Soldier Field?

    The Crew was forced to build a second SSS in order to get Garber to allow the new ownership to keep the team in Columbus.

    Pretty sure they had complete revenue control in MAPFRE.
     
  25. ThreeApples

    ThreeApples Member+

    Jul 28, 1999
    Smurf Village
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    One of the reasons. Their lease had a terrible revenue split with the village.
     
    CMeszt repped this.

Share This Page