Personally, I believe MLS is going to add another two clubs west (Sacramento and Las Vegas) to bring the league 30 to balance the conferences, which I think is going to be 3 conferences of 10 each to secure local rivalries and safe on travel costs. With club 30 costing $300M. Then when the time is right, they can charge between $500M to $650M for clubs 31 and 32 to cap off expansion within the next ten years.
I think LV and Phenix is better. It spreads the MLS footprint over more territory. That is also why Charlotte will get in over Tampa. Time is not on Sacramento’s side.
Cascadia are three different states and two different countries, in a part of the continent that is barren and has no other major population centers. Hell is Real was not meant to happen. MLS was clearly angling to send Columbus to Austin, and then backtracked when it blew up spectacularly. NY/Phi/DC/Boston are all top 10 cities in the country. They may be close to eachother, but it doesn't support your point. There is a huge difference between Philadelphia and Raleigh. Garber has mentioned time and time again when talking about expansion about the need to fill in geographic holes. You can do that and still create regional rivalries. But, to your point about ownership, stadium, etc, that's obvious. Everyone knows that. The point is that Phoenix, Las Vegas and Detroit are among the leading candidates on those fronts (though Detroit has slipped). They are certainly not behind the likes of Raleigh, Tampa, San Antonio, or whoever else you mentioned. I actually don't want to see LV in the league, but they have certainly made waves in the past 6 months. Phoenix, however, is the most obvious lock ever. USL team with good following, one of the largest remaining cities without MLS, committed ownership, and fills a geographic hole. If their stadium gets sorted, there's not a bid that stands a chance against it.
I never said anything about one city being ahead of another. You said some cities are OUT because cities close to them are IN. I disagreed because I believe MLS now sees the benefit of regional rivalries. And since there are a lot of bids left in my view (at least 8), I would not be counting anyone out yet. Further, those quotes are from MLS' past. Mission Accomplished. Geography is not much of a factor now. I mean, I guess MLS would like a team in the SW (Phoenix, Vegas, SD). But that hasn't stopped them from going: STL, Nash, Cin, LAFC, MIN, ATL with the last six picks (Austin not awarded via expansion & Miami was awarded long ago). With Sac & Charlotte looking heavy favorites for the next two. But the midwest & SE could easily use another team or two as well. Out of the last 8 bids, geography dominated in, one? Two? Garber wanted a team in the SE so ATL (and NASH) got in. But they also had the best bids. That is 25%. At best. Heck, he specifically stated recently that they would not be going back to the SE for a while, and then Charlotte blew up. My point is, the footprint is largely there. Every big time city already has a team. It is about the strength of the bids now. Geography, market size, local rivals, soccer/sports support: those are all a part of it. But the main drivers are: 1) Committed deep pocketed ownership; 2) Kickass stadium plan; and 3) Corporate sponsorships. If do not have those 3 things, you are out. If multiple bids have them, then the other stuff comes into play. Yeah, in the abstract I am sure the league would prefer Phoenix & Detroit as the two biggest markets left on the board by quite some distance. But if their bids are not up to snuff, they will go elsewhere. Heaven & earth won't get moved to make sure they get a team. Vegas or SD or Indy or Tampa or SA will get it instead if they have a good bid.
25 Nashville 26 Austin 27 Miami ? 28 St Louis 29 Charlotte 30 Phoenix 31 Las Vegas 32 Sacramento 33 San Antonio 34 New Mexico 35 Indy 36 Detroit I know New Mexico is a pipe dream, but they getting Cincinnati lite support. If they get a 20,000 seat stadium with the other teams as rivals, *and* a Serious investor steps up with bonfides, I would love to see them.
Not sure about Las Vegas getting a team unless the ownership group is going to build a SSS and it would really need to be domed, similar to my worries about Phoenix building a non-domed SSS. Unless, they are thinking of using the Raiders/Rebels football stadium, which leads us back to the same issues- its not a SSS. While its a dome and a slide out grass field like Phoenix, it just seems way to large for soccer especially in an untested soccer market. Another thought to me is now you have NFL, NHL & NCAA teams- soccer would be 4th in the pecking order in my opinion. The NFL stadium would be fine for random soccer events- USA & Mex national teams, Gold Cups, even a world cup venue in my opinion.
Realistically, you could slide NHL would not be an issue due to playing during different times of the year, and this has worked for ATL & Cincy in spite of the established MLB teams. My concern with Vegas (in regards to the chances of Charlotte getting in) is that it is a tourist attraction in itself, and being able to take in an away game in Vegas would likely keep the fans full throughout the year so it does not come off as a risky move now that the NHL has broken that door down. I'm not sure how big a draw UNLV is but the MLS team would be third in the new NFL stadium and that is the only problem with it the Golden Knights bid. We have to stop capping the league on 20kish SSS just because the league preferred SSS before, it has grown to a concern about revenue control over and priority on scheduling than who will also play in the stadium or how many it seats. We could argue Nashville will be too big of a SSS for an untested market too, can't be scared and can't stay stagnant to old norms is all I'm trying to say. That is how the league ended up with a problem of most of the OG clubs being some of the lowest drawing and least successful/popular in recent years. It's also why the league charged Bridgeview to the game and is moving back into Soldier. Vegas could work in the NFL stadium but not as the third in line but as a Co-Tenant to the NFL squad. I feel like the SSS deal will get figured out soon though, local government seems to be behind that idea and I'm sure the bidding group feels the pressure of Sac, Clt, and possibly Phx for spots 29 & 30 since no one is sure if/when we will go past 30 teams.
I agree with almost everything you said...I think it would be cool if New Mexico got a team. That would be their only major league professional sport, and i think they would draw well for home games. Also, as a Texan, i think having 4 Texas teams and a New Mexico team would be some awesome rivalries... But, if i were going to bet on it... I would replace either San Antonio or New Mexico with San Diego. The league just still seems to want that market...
There is several weeks of overlap at each end of the season with hockey. MLS this season started in March, NHL regular season ended in April, the Stanley Cup finals were in mid June. MLS regular season ends about a week after hockey starts back up in October, and playoffs extend into mid November. With MLS starting earlier next season, the overlap will be even greater.
===================== I am somewhat surprised with Nashville going 30k, but thats better than 60+. There are some current SSS in that 18-22 bracket that should get up to 20-25 level. We all know we have some weak drawing teams in SSS, but I guess still at this point in MLS, I would rather be expanding a SSS, than trying to downsize a 60-65 stadium. My also general feeling is, if your team has a SSS and you happen to be in a town with a NFL or NCAA large football stadium, on that odd chance you want to go big for a certain game, you can still have a game there. Best example is the SJ using Stanford for its annual July game against the Galaxy.
I agree somewhat, but it seems MLS wants to grow the sport Geographically and spread their league to all corners of the country.
In terms of purely geographical needs, I'd say Phoenix, Detroit, and Charlotte probably scratch the biggest itches, although MLS could achieve most of the same coverage with Las Vegas, Indianapolis, and Raleigh. There's no realistic chance of it happening as team 31 or team 32, but Calgary or Edmonton would actually make for a clean Northwest quad without separating the California teams or the any of the other rivalries out West. That's really only an issue with divisions of four teams, though.
There's ZERO chance of this happening with the CPL now in play. The CSA won't allow any additional teams to play in a US league.
They are fun thoughts, but in addition to the CPL issue, there's also the fact that those two markets are tiny compared to anything the US can still offer. They'd be in the 40s-ranks in terms of metropolitan areas in the US, on part with OKC and Richmond. When you've still got the likes of Phoenix, Detroit, Charlotte, Sacramento, and Las Vegas knocking, no way you get down to MSAs under 1.5m
Don't feel bad, I never knew there was this much overlap until the Blues went on their run this year.
Ultimately it comes back to the ownerships ability to field a product fans want, if Charlotte's projected "low 30000s in season tickets" turns out to be just half of what they would still be in the top 10 in season ticket sales among MLS teams. Anything over half just fills the seats before the non-season ticket holders and visiting fans get into the place. It's no coincidence that the newer more ambitious teams are the ones that mostly fill out the top ten. MLS has to grow out of old mindsets and preferences, SSS are not going to make any difference to the success of a well run club. The teams that can't catch up are going to hurt the league more than sharing a stadium with a couple of NFL teams will.
It depends on the finances. The NFL stadium works in Seattle, Atlanta, and New England because the NFL team owners own the MLS team, and the MLS team is added revenue for the owner. It would never have worked in Cincinnati because the NFL lease of Paul Brown Stadium gives the owner of the Bengals most of the revenue from events in the stadium. NFL stadiums in Nashville and Chicago are interim solutions. Of course, with Cincinnati, University of Cincinnati was willing to work with FC Cincinnati on revenue, and the team owner had a long history of being generous to the university. The only reason that I can think of for them to build a SSS is that the mayor of Cincinnati convinced the owner of FC Cincinnati that building the stadium where they are would help revitalize a run down neighborhood. Using the NFL stadium in Charlotte follows the Atlanta/Seattle/New England model. BoA stadium is due to be renovated. Surely they can do that with adding an MLS team in mind.
Per Jordan Rodrigue in the Charlotte Observer: I asked Dave Tepper when he expects to hear word from MLS on a possible Charlotte expansion, and he joked “a week ago” - before seriously saying the bid group is expecting news by the end of the year.— Jourdan Rodrigue (@JourdanRodrigue) August 30, 2019 Tepper confirms that he, Don Garber and MLS have been in “constant conversations” and he remains hopeful. Here’s more from last week on where things stand, and what the ultimate goal looks like for Charlotte: https://t.co/wIJdvEa22P— Jourdan Rodrigue (@JourdanRodrigue) August 30, 2019
That piece from The Athletic was a good breakdown on everything that has happened regarding the Tepper/Charlotte MLS bid and what still needs to be done to cross the finish line. I have been getting a feeling that we will jump Sacramento but I don't know if that is me being hopeful for my hometown or if the mentions of us possibly jumping ahead of the line may become true.
You are homering a bit. Sac is firmly #29 and you guys appear to be the frontrunners for #30. Of course, things could change on both fronts rapidly, especially the second one.