Not necessarily. They still need a deep pocketed owner. MLS does not want any league owned teams. Believe me. Granted, if there is already a good stadium deal in place, it is much easier to find an owner/investor.
My guess (assuming that the deep-pocket ownership is there for all candidates) would be something like this in terms of geographic priority: 20. New York City (Queens/Brooklyn) 21. Miami/Fort Lauderdale 22. Tampa Bay/Orlando 23. San Antonio/Austin/Las Vegas 24. Atlanta/Minneapolis-St. Paul/Washington (if D.C. United relocates to Baltimore) My guess is that MLS will give a high priority to coming up with two or three teams in the Deep South (i.e., Miami/Fort Lauderdale, Tampa Bay/Orlando and/or Atlanta in about that order).
I think there are plenty of threads talking about who will be next by gauging quotes from Garber or potential owners. Lets try to focus on what markets have the best chance of succeeding. There are lots of factors in play... * what cities will have help from local gov't to build a stadium, which won't * size of local soccer fan base * possible natural rivals already in MLS * a under served sports market * a community that supports local teams * a TV market MLS is looking to fill * local companies that can buy corporate boxes * local media that would talk about soccer There are tons of things to discuss here when comparing cities. Yes Garber said NY is next, and anyone else who steps up with a check and a stadium in a market over 1.5M people is probably in too. But lets compare which markets have more potential than others. For instance I worry about stadium funding in Miami. I don't think it can happen, and I think you are going to need to spend a lot of money to bring out stars to get the media and community interested. Essentially you would need another Red Bull level investment which is going to be harder to find. You could probably draw as many fans in a smaller market (like a Carolina city) with probably less investment. I think there are a few cities out there with lots of potential. I know i've said it before (there might need to be a deal made with SJ but it has been done in MLS in the past) but Sacramento is the kind of market that MLS needs to look at. Over 2.1M metro and 30mins from another 800k metro in Stockton. You could be marketing to about 3 million people who only have 1 major league team, lots of rural land to develop a stadium, and a regional rival in SJ. Some metro areas have similar populations and support 3 or 4 pro teams, Sacramento has 1 and that NBA could be moving. Now I am not saying it will happen, and I know that without a big owner it is impossible, but the point is 'potential'. And I think some markets have better potential and return on investment than others. While I support a NYC team, I also really worry that building a Red Bull Arena level stadium in Queens is going to cost 400M and take 5 years to build. I just don't think anyone including the Cosmos group has the resources or willingness to build a real SSS in NYC yet.
Wait, you want people to actually think instead of just take a random comment in a news article and run with it? Pshaw. I'm just curious...how would you measure this? Given how the Marlins extorted them, I would imagine lawmakers would think twice before funding anything like a stadium with public money anymore. Not that they wouldn't, just that it got harder.
I don't know if United will ever get a stadium built in the District, but the whole process of building the Nationals' stadium definitely didn't help. And, of course that shows the difference between MLB and MLS. The Expos show up and quickly get a stadium approved over strenuous objections. United has been playing in DC longer than the last Senators team did.
For the most part, citizenry and lawmakers kvetch about losing a baseball team. Doesn't happen as often with soccer teams.
hhmmm really? 20 us teams and 4 canadian.... either 2 and 2 or 3 and 1 10/2 + 10/2 = 24 11/1 + 9/3 = 24 9/3 + 11/1 = 24 or did you mean stl/maimi? Doubt there will be 2 florida teams in the first 24.... the two maimi failures...nails in the coffin? lets not even mention Miami FC... how many times has stl failed? unless you mean not SA but PHX instead?
The race for 21 and 22 if NY2 is really going to make it 20 should be interesting. I would love to see an ownership group from a smaller town like Omaha come out and have a great chance. It would make things interesting at least.
If Garber is serious about capping MLS at 24 teams, I'd be pretty surprised to see a truly "small market" city win an expansion team. There was a window of opportunity for the sleeper markets, but I think that window has closed pretty much since Salt Lake City got into MLS. What would be the upside of bringing an "Omaha'-sized city into the league if Atlanta, Minneapolis-St. Paul, Detroit, Tampa Bay/Orlando, Las Vegas, San Antonio/Austin, Baltimore, Miami/Fort Lauderdale or Phoenix are knocking on the door?
As a resident of a small market city with fairly good soccer support that is only a couple of hours away from Omaha, I agree with you. This is Major League Soccer. That means the FO perceives a need for the bigger - major league - cities involved. Omaha and cities like that do not make that cut. As great as an Omaha-KC rivalry would be, nobody outside of our sparsely populated Great Plains corridor would give a shit about it. Salt Lake and Columbus at least have the luxury of being in another, larger major league (NBA & NHL, respectively). Plus they have their SSS built. RSL got in when the league was weak and Columbus was fortunate enough to be included as an original (Hunt must have recognized something that owners in the other leagues did not). ///\\\On another note: All things being equal, I see Atlanta before a Florida team. Atlanta is closer to more existing teams and is a major airline hub. Atlanta business leaders have continually expressed their desire to become a major American soccer city and are adament about hosting games in 2022. It seems that they see an MLS team as a way to make that turn.* Having the support of the major business community is vital as they are the big spenders on suites, advertising, etc. There are plenty of large corporations*** based in Atlanta - Delta and Coke being two the biggest.** Current MLS partners Home Depot and AT&T Mobility (cellular division of AT&T) are also headquarted in ATL. Here are a few more companies with their corporate HQs in ATL that have strong advertising/sponsorship potential: Popeye's, Chick-Fil-A, Aaron's, Hooters, Porsche AG (American HQ), Rubbermaid, and UPS. The failure and demise of the two previous Florida MLS teams certainly does little to help either team. From the SJ boards, I've heard that quite a few Quakes fans were permanently turned off by the league when the original MLS Quakes went to Houston; they do not support the new team. This has to play into the minds of Garber & Co. in regards to Florida. Again, that is under the "all things being equal" disclaimer - stadium, ownership, and other issues accounted for and comparable. *I could be misinterpreting various things I have read/heard over the last year or so though. **The fourth highest number of Fortune 500 companies in the US behind NY, Dallas, and Houston. Minneapolis is #5, BTW. http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2010/cities/ ***Wouldn't it be fun to see "Coke" on the front of an MLS jersey considering the league's long time Pepsi sponsorship? Then again, Red Bull is also a competitor... But not to the same extent.
So there are exceptions, right? Would you rather have Miami than Salt Lake? Miami has a shitload more major league teams, but if you had the geniuses who ran the Fusion running it, you look more minor league than teams in smaller markets. If Salt Lake - a small market - has a beautiful stadium and fervent fan support, who gives a shit if someone thinks it's "major league" enough? And Salt Lake and Columbus have one other major league team (God knows how the NHL chose Columbus, holy shit) but they're NOT major league markets by any stretch of the imagination. The market size doesn't determine whether something is major league or not. RSL is a much more "major league" operation than the New England Revolution, despite being in a much smaller market. MLS needs markets that work. ******** what people think is sexy or "major league." That's bullshit. That's superficial bullshit. I just hate this "we have to look major league" nonsense. That's for insecure people who give a shit what other people think.
Fair points. The right small cities - Salt Lake, Columbus, Portland - are definitely better than heading into a mega market simply because it's massive. Personally, I enjoy the fact that there are smaller market teams in the league - especially since they are two of the best teams in MLS. Hell, if I would have had millions in 2004 and something resembling a stadium plan, I would have fought tooth and nail to put a franchise in Des Moines. Even being in a smaller, decidedly minor league city with no personal team ownership and management experience, my DM MLS team probably would have been more professional than the Revs... In a lot of ways, not being an established major league city would give the MLS team a stronger chance at survival and eventual thriving because of the lack of competition. So, I don't disagree with what you are saying. It is a logical argument and the Arena Football League did a lot of that until the last 1990s before deciding on the need for "Major League" cities. Then the original league folded... The new AFL is back with a mix of big & small cities and a financial plan modeled from MLS. My agreement with Tallguy - most of that post, actually - was coming from what I imagine is the MLS FO's perspective. At this stage in the game, Garber seems to be making moves that indicate that smaller cities have a snowball's chance in hell of making the cut going forward. He throws shout outs to NYC2, Miami, Atlanta, Tampa, Twin Cities, and Detroit. He never mentions Birmingham, Omaha, Ottawa, etc. The other thing to consider is TV revenue. Of the potential markets out there, which will produce the greatest amount of TV revenue? This is always a crapshoot, no matter what "data" various leagues base their numbers off of. Still, history shows that certain markets - especially those with larger populations - tend to bring in better TV numbers. -And for the record, I would take any of the current teams and nearly all of the candidate cities over a team in Miami any day of the week. Miami seems to be an odd town when it comes to supporting pro teams... I'm not sure how they keep what they have. Unfortunately, the reality is that most sports leagues FOs disagree with you. Look at every "major league" in the US from the NFL to NBA to MLS to NLL. They all crave the same markets. The smaller, newer leagues perceive value in the established markets. This is most likely tied to the perception of risk, which is understandable. "The major league markets have proven successful for X and Y leagues, so we now we'll succeed there." And often times they fail - NYC has been a deathtrap for quite a few upstart leagues, as have DC and Chicago. Venue cost, competition from other sports, and advertising issues are usually at play. Right or wrong, that is how things operate. As I said before, I would rather place a team in a market that has room and clearly wants to support it than to force another mouth onto an already crowded table. It's much easier to sell MLS as the only major league team in a market (RSL) than to be a late comer competiting against huge brands (NYC). *Yes, I know my opinions and views do not matter. Nor are they guaranteed to match those of MLS executives and decision makers.
And we only know Salt Lake, Columbus and Portland are the right cities after the fact. Trust me - when Columbus was announced as the first MLS city, people said, "What?" And what did you think when Salt Lake was announced? The entire point is that the sheer size or sexiness of the market doesn't always mean it will work. New York hasn't "worked" for years. New England hasn't "worked" (works well for the Krafts, though). Miami didn't "work" at all. Yet Columbus and Salt Lake do and Portland likely will. None of which are terribly large markets. And those clubs doing well reflects well on the league. Isn't that really what we want? They almost all have the same damn markets. The NLL isn't going to be a "major" league no matter if they put teams in New York, Los Angeles and Chicago (I know they've had teams in NY and CHI) or not - and those teams have failed there. That does not mean - to get back to your original point with which I took issue - that "we" (MLS) need to have major markets to be major league. We don't. Obviously, "we" need (and have) teams in the major places where you need a team. Southeast would be nice, I guess, but "we" seem to be doing okay without it for now. But to say that the next expansion team can't be in a smaller market that people scratch their heads about is stupid, because Salt Lake has proven it can be done. I don't care how sexy the market appears at first glance. I care about what happens in it. That's what spells success - successful clubs in a mixture of markets.
first lets agree that a city like Portland is twice the size of Salt Lake in metro area and they both only have 1 major league team. Don't know if it is fair to compare. Salt Lake is actually Rochester size. And what always got me about the Salt Lake bid, was not that we were bringing in such a small market (1 million metro) when we already had a small market team in Rochester with history, trophies, a stadium...and they didn't make it. Now the door is shut for that level of 'small' but cities like Portland with 2M+ metro and only 1 major league team is plenty big. And we need look at business models. MLS is transitioning from a model that made all its money at the gate to one that makes its money in TV/Advertising. Of course we are at the start of that transition, but it is where we are heading. This means that the only way small markets work, is if they can become regional (Green Bay for example). Because even if a small city can get 18k at the gate but have awful TV rating and few corporate partners, then the bid no longer makes sense. In 04' sure, but not now. That is why big markets look sexier to the league. it is why the moment big money comes to NYC or Miami then MLS gets very interested. They see more value than just ticket sales. And that value will be much more difficult to find in an Omaha or a Rochester unless the team gets regional support the way college teams do, but we have yet to see that for soccer. I think the best approach now for MLS is that medium ground. Portland/Sacramento/Orlando/San Antonio - major league cities with 2M+ metro and very little competition for major league sports. Other teams showed that there is enough press/fans/corporate support to make a major league team work but the market is open enough for MLS to operate and be an important member of the sports community there.
I believe you about Columbus; it is what, like the fourth largest city in Ohio? I was excited for Salt Lake, because it was a positive and I embraced the fact that the team would have a local monopoly as the only major league team in the summertime. I scratched my head at a second LA franchise, still do. But I know the bulk of the fan base was of the opposite opinion. Hell, RSL's existence influenced me enough to apply to grad school at Utah. I don't disagree. There is a reason why I called these markets deathtraps for new leagues. Both pro lax leagues and the AFL failed in Chicago. The same is true for the LA & Bay Area markets. The Titans failed miserably in NYC but found success in Orlando but the owners couldn't recoup from NYC losses and the economy in general. I have long been of the mindset that smaller niche sports should focus on midsize markets to establish themselves rather than competing in an already crowded place like NYC or Chicago. I agree. Especially in a league like MLS that is still toeing the line between niche and mainstream. Unfortunately, the people that run the league seem to have a different opinion than us. I have a hard time believing that the league has any interest in unproven small markets - no matter how I personally feel about their usefulness or how good your arguments are. They see things as I stated in my original post - the "major league" (sexy in your words) markets are vital; the rest of us can piss off. I think a Des Moines MLS franchise would outdraw quite a few of the older major market teams. It would be embraced by the fan base because we would appreciate the fact that it is a major league team. This is why Columbus and Salt Lake do well; this is why Portland got accepted. The bigger cities take their teams for granted, which is the root of their failures - it is just compounded by the shitty ownership of Kraft, et al. But RSL was added in a different era. Expansion fees were a fraction of what they are now. MLS was on the road to recovery from their earlier contraction. They were almost desperate at that point. They took something of a risk on Salt Lake and is has been paying off lately. But I recall a couple of years ago that the team was nearly relocated. Yeah stadium issues played a part, but it still shows that Salt Lake has not been the seamless fit you suggest. Had it not been for the success of the USL team and the strong rivalries with Seattle & Vancouver, Portland wouldn't have been a thought. But the market has been successful at the lower level and the community worked to get the stadium in place. The only way other small markets stand a chance going forward is to bring something similar to the table. Again, I don't agree that only looking at the big major league markets is the right way. But neither you nor I run MLS.
yeah but we're Detroit so nobody cares people can sit around talking about omaha and atlanta, but the truth is we're so much closer than 90% of other candidate cities.
Except for the whole "nobody really takes this Frankenstein plan to make the Silverdome a three-level facility seriously" thing and the whole "Yes, I like soccer, my family plays it" ownership thing and the whole double-digit unemployment thing. Other than that, yeah, Garber will probably announce Detroit as an expansion team in his state of the league address today. Certainly by late in the week.
You forgot about the plans to raze whole blocks of buildings and literally decrease the size of the city: http://www.businessinsider.com/the-...an-to-bulldoze-one-quarter-of-the-city-2010-3 http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/05/29-2 http://www.wilx.com/home/headlines/87054002.html Yep, sounds like the Motor City is ready to join MLS! Can somebody explain to me how exactly the FrankenSilverDome plan is going to work out? They want to put two arenas where the old football field was and then put a soccer stadium on top of that using the original upper deck as the seats? And tear the roof off the sucker? How can anyone in their right mind propose that? The seat and exit access issues alone make me scratch my head. Then there is the whole aesthetic issue. We're talking about a stadium stacked on top of a massive arena. How shitty would that look? Plus, how many players would embrace this setup? The ground beneath your feet isn't really ground. I realize that all of us in office buildings do that every day, but there are a few more support beams holding up our floors and those floors are not quite as massive as a pitch. Based on the descriptions I've read, I'd favor a team playing in a baseball stadium over a team playing at the FrankenSilverDome.
I can try to answer some of these. First Detroit has it's problems, for that matter so does Pontiac, but the Silverdome is located in a very wealthy county in Metro Detroit (Oakland County median income is $67,518). Here are some more facts about Detroit and specifically the money being spent on sports entertainment. Detroit Red Wings - ranked 4th in the NHL for team value and have gait receipts of 58 mil. Detroit Pistons - ranked 4th in the NBA for team value and have gait receipts of 39 mil. Detroit Tigers - ranked 22 (out of 30) in the MLB for team value and have gait receipts of 65 mil. Detroit Lions - ranked 28 (out of 32) in the NFL for team value and have gait receipts of 41 mil. The point I am trying to make is even in these trying times people in Detroit spend money on sports entertainment. As stated the plan for the Silverdome is a bit crazy, but even without doing that crazy plan. Soccer can be played in the building with little to no changes. It wouldn't be ideal but the upper deck could be tarped off. As to the owner with high hopes for an MLS team. He has money. He likes soccer. He OWNS a stadium (no rent, no mortgage). He is a business man with experience in rehabbing old cheap buildings and making money out of his investments.
The joke on my spelling would be more funny if the grammar was correct in the sentence. I believe it should read as... "Does the way people walk generate...