It seems the scratching pitch article about the USL's interest in Nashville was spot on but surprise the NASL has interest to http://www.tennessean.com/story/new...ille-play-pro-soccer-expansion-team/83622346/
My takeaways from the article are that the NASL group has much less of a chance as Nissan is too big, the baseball stadium is not ideal, and the NASL investors apparently have other cities in consideration. The USL group seems to be rushing to get in out of desperation; they want to set up a temporary stadium, they gave conditions to the city that they need the temporary stadium to start before they build their own at an undisclosed location, and the asked the city to defer its plans on its own stadium. All that said, the USL is probably more likely to snap up this market as Lynch already told them: "he would recommend approval to the parks board if the group and USL intend to move forward."
Where did you get that idea? "Whitney, who is the chairman of the Nashville FC board, did not respond to multiple attempts for comment. In an email, Doyle declined to comment." Edit: I found the link to the NPSL side and the USL.
See above, the USL group is tied to Nashville FC (one of the mentioned USL owners is a NFC board member). I find it interesting that Reno can use a minor league baseball stadium, but USL doesn't want to go that direction for Nashville. NASL is ok in a high school football field, but wants a AAA or NFL stadium in Nashville. Maybe it's owners preference, but it's all very odd and confusing as to what league demands what from a stadium. Probably don't demand anything, just fluid as to what gets them in first and what's best initially.
"Metro Parks Director Tommy Lynch identified Marcus Whitney, founder of the startup tech company Jumpstart Foundry, and Ryan Doyle, general manager of oneC1TY, a new technology office hub off Charlotte Avenue, as individuals who came to parks officials to discuss that possibility." Probably this item?!
This blurb was pretty interesting, buried at the bottom of the article: "Greer Stadium, Nashville’s former minor league baseball stadium, has been floated as a possibility for professional soccer. In 2014, the owner of the Harrisburg City Islanders, a USL team from Harrisburg, Pa., met with Metro officials to gauge the city’s interest in converting Greer to a soccer stadium. Talks never advanced, and that organization is no longer interested in relocating." Looks like Harrisburg is staying put. Well, staying in Pennsylvania at least
Feels like it if he is checking on the USL stadium proposal at Ted Rhodes. It looks like USL is NFCs chosen league.
Well, right now, USL may be all that the NFC group can afford without bringing in other investors ... with regards to stadium options (temporary at Ted Rhodes could look anything like Charlotte (not ideal) to Sacramento (should work)). Based on USL's goals, ownership net worth likely is fine for either league (they're not adding someone that keeps them from pursuing D2 status), but I don't know about travel budget, player budget, etc. USL could be putting together plans to have a 3 or 4 conference set up which would allow a central division of Louisville, Cinci, Detroit (potentially), St. Louis FC, Swope Park, OKC, Tulsa, 3-4 Texas teams make travel pretty manageable to some teams in the Midwest.
I think in a location like Nashville...USL would be the top choice due to fairly easy road games to get to in Lville, St Louis, Cincy and potentially Birmingham.
Has Greer been torn down? Would it have good bones to convert to soccer stadium? Is it in good location? Good condition (well good enough)? Seems like someone would pursue this before building something from scratch.
I think that the land that it sits on has been sold and the structure itself is scheduled for demolition but I could be wrong
A temporary structure in the park would be better. At least then you can set it up the way you want. We are talking 5k seats...that can come together quickly.
The article also talks about the USL requiring a soccer specific stadium towards the end and mentions the NASL has no such requirement... Seems odd considering the Reno example you mentioned as well as Nippert probably other locations too.
Sometimes the reporting/writing doesn't do a ton of research either ... so you never know ... and the leagues requirements are different for different markets, sometimes "wishful thinking" and others "get what you can get". Either way, exciting news I think for one of these leagues.
I think that was first mentioned from the HOK deal by 2020 or something relating to that. It's just a little odd to see that sort of language when several teams are not meeting these requirements. I'd expect to see more shovels in the ground, but some groups don't seem to be too concerned. Correct me if I'm wrong, but in a franchise model like the USL, doesn't the corporation strip you of your license rights and ownership if you fail to uphold your contract with them?
I don't think that is entirely correct. They are at least pushing a stadium plan for new teams. ETA: They are working toward what MLS has done in stadium plans...so market to market will depend on revenue control on game days.
From an insider with the Charlotte Eagles. The USL is requiring at least a plan for a SSS and the team has to be valued at X amount of dollars. This was the reason the Charlotte Eagles stepped down. They could't keep up with the demands of the USL, so they dropped to D4. This is also why the Charlotte Independence are hustling to get a SSS approved and work officially started.
I think "SSS" can be defined a number of different ways though. If Charlotte renovates Memorial for the main purpose to host soccer games, I think USL will allow that to "qualify". I think there are a number of ways teams will go about it that will be "acceptable". Sacramento's "temporary" stadium may qualify that they're playing in now, I don't know. Obviously Charleston, Rochester, SAS are fine ... Cinci may be as well? What I'm saying is ... "SSS" may be open to interpretation.