Most of them don't have academies but I think that's because domestic transfer fees for real money are illegal. MLS teams use Garber$ to compensate each other. There are about 10 USL teams that have made their MLS ambitions clear. They're demonstrating their commitment by building stadiums and infrastructure whereas in a playing meritocracy they'd be more likely to spend their money on salaries. I think the US has a long way to go before it's ready for pro/rel.
My point is that development and expansion of clubs infrastructures has been spurred by a closed system. There is no "false shortage" because in the United States there hasn't been any real support for the sport of soccer till fairly recent compared to the rest of the world. Pro/rel is great when you have 50 or 60 equalish teams but the US isn't close to being in that situation. How many USL or independent teams own their own ground and play to MLS level crowds? Sac Rep is the only one I can think off and they'll almost certainly be joining MLS, so who else?
Because their owners were touted as some great thing that would improve their respective leagues but turned out to be just more charlatans. Pro/rel would invite just more of those types here I fear, owners wishing to flip teams and not spend much on them.
The most severe false shortage in existence is the one in the Chinese Super League. Prospective owners consistently chose to buy a CSL club and relocate it instead of investing in local clubs, and were so impatient that they were known to relocate clubs mid-season. If China had merged its top two divisions into a single 32-team league, the number of relocations would have been much lower. Similarly, if US leagues were limited to 20 teams with pro/rel, I think the number of relocations could easily have been greater, because buying and relocating is more reliable than spending money trying to win promotion. (It's also an easy way to avoid relegation -- see Mexico.) The only thing that reliably prevents relocations? Market saturation: either having existing local clubs with deep roots everywhere that a club could possibly relocate to, or simply having a lot more places in the top league than major metropolitan areas in the country.
Reading the last pages I now get why churches in the USA arenot community driven, but moneymakers for the "owner" of it. It's just an engrained attribute of Yanks. Someone has to come up with the money and the rest comes in as a consumer, be it a church, a sports club or whatever. Doing/starting something as a community seems to be an alien thing. Probably partly because of the mobility of yanks and of fear it can be a seed of communism.
No league should have to add or subtract a team/market that it doesn't want to add or subtract. If those 25+ independent USL teams want to form a D1 league and show a plan on how to meet the requirements, they'll be approved. It's really that simple. But it's much easier to complain rather than just do the leg work. Hell, look at NISA, they don't even have teams or players and they've already gotten a D3 sanction because they just had to show a plan for meeting D3 requirements. What the actual hell? Seriously, what the hell is wrong with you? I'm agnostic now but at one point in my life I served as a youth minister. Sure there are money-making mega churches that make a mockery of Christ and everything he allegedly stood for but you honestly don't know what you're talking about. Also, never and I mean never put a damn sport in the same category as a church, mosque or other place of worship or religion. It's bad enough we have Americans trying to conflate an outdated standings gimmick with the civil rights movement. We certainly don't need it conflated with people's faith.
There are community events in my town almost every weekend over the summer but when it comes to sport it's all about the schools.
1) I'm the volunteer treasurer of the Church I go to. The overwhelming majority of churches in the US are barely making ends meet. They certainly aren't money making operations. 2) Most churches in the US are legally designated as non-profit organizations. While this grants some useful things like tax-exemptions, it also entails some very iron-clad financial regulations, one of which is that any funds from the organization cannot be distributed to an owner. It doesn't matter if the owner is one person or a collective group (many churches are legally "owned" by there congregations), no person can make money by ownership of a non-profit such as a church. What you're suggesting is illegal. 3) Most churches in the US are owned by their congregations (Lutherans, Methodists, Prebyterians, Baptists), so "community" ownership, or are owned by the broader denomination (Catholics, Orthodox). Only a negligible portion of non-denominational Churches are owned by a single person. 4) Finally, if the above points haven't made clear, you don't actually understand American society. Your lazy attempts to play armchair sociologist from across an ocean based on overused stereotypes and broad generalizations from a soccer forum do not reflect well on you. Stop trying to make you preference for pro/rel and others disagreeing with you into a societal issue. It isn't.
Excuse me, I have to go out. I have to take a walk at the Warminster Community Park (where on Saturday, I'll be helping to set up booths for the Warminster Community Day festival). Then, on my way home, I have to make a stop at the Warminster Public Library. So, I'll be out for a while.
Yup! The diverse choice and availability of soccer in the US is amazing! Not your soccer though eh? I but you'd be singing a different tune if Tulsa would've gotten in years ago. Actually, I know you would. "Stale"... because an artificial importance wasn't placed on them? And yet you constantly reference ideology and individuals doing this exact thing (or equivalent) on the men's side of things. But I guess knowing how idiotic it is for the likes of Crowley to cry foul won't stop you or Wynalda or the M's of BigSoccer from trying to use that as some sort of serious reason (aka bullshit and you know it) as to why you think p/r is a good idea ... Except literally every issue that's brought up (both legitimate and farcical) is met with "open the pyramid" and "pro/rel" ... the "movement" attaches itself to every problem there is no matter how insanely removed from it that the issue actually is. Shame on y'all. Because pro/rel makes things more exciting ... DUH I disagree actually. I think that a larger D1 with regional pro/rel would be the EASIEST way to get it done. This has forever been a point where I turn to the soccer fan and say "nope, that's a YOU" problem. Why? Because playing there is CLEARLY not an issue for NY fans, if they care (see Giants/Jets). Using the location is a scapegoat IMO and always will be. As opposed to that totally non-tactical completely legit study about pro/rel from Deloitte yeah? I forget who commissioned that ... you remember? China doesn't agree with you ... Mexico either. Italy has a comment as well. Pretty sure it's simply A chicken/egg problem not HIS or either side's in this discussion. The false shortage argument can't be proven but M just tries to hammer it home as fact. It's what he does. Until the league is done expanding the actuality of a false shortage doesn't exist at all (and even then the fact that another D1 league can be sanctioned takes away some of the validity of it). If MLS were done expanding it's still tricky to argue. Actually yes, the stadium does prevent some clubs from being "worthy" but that's not even an MLS/USSF issue as that exists everywhere. For me that response echoes the over emphasis and reliance on JUST results making an organization "worthy" of inclusion above its current level. Everything except the butts in the seats in San Antonio (though I'd be willing to bet we've had more than HOU on a couple of occasions this year in reality) is MLS ready/capable.
I didn't realize you so many damn commie organizations in your neck of the woods. Hope you and your God fearing family can withstand the onslaught of red propaganda! [emoji16]
How big a challenge is owning or renting a soccer specific stadium in the US. Here's a list of 38 men's professional teams that: - own soccer specific stadiums (e.g. SKC, Orlando City) - are the primary or equal tenant (e.g. Portland, Chicago Fire) - were designed for MLS soccer and NFL (e.g. Seattle, Atlanta) - have approval and finances to build/convert to a soccer specific stadium (e.g. Indy XI, LV Lights, FCC) along with average attendance: MLS Atlanta United FC 52,535 MLS FC Cincinnati 27,517 MLS Orlando City SC 23,089 MLS LA Galaxy 22,187 MLS LAFC 22,159 MLS Minnesota United 19,724 MLS Sporting KC 18,856 MLS Real Salt Lake 17,219 MLS D.C. United 16,918 MLS San Jose Earthquakes 16,628 MLS New York Red Bulls 16,131 MLS Philadelphia Union 15,840 MLS Houston Dynamo 14,931 MLS FC Dallas 14,531 MLS Colorado Rapids 13,748 MLS Columbus Crew 12,930 USLC Indy Eleven 11,320 USLC Sacramento Republic FC 10,742 MLS Chicago Fire 10,635 USLC Louisville City FC 8,088 USLC Las Vegas Lights FC 7,593 Hartford Athletic 7,246 USLC Phoenix Rising FC 6,535 USLC San Antonio FC 6,352 USLC Nashville SC 6,320 USLC Tampa Bay Rowdies 5,771 USLC Birmingham Legion FC 4,803 USLC North Carolina FC 4,194 USL1 Forward Madison FC 4,075 USLC Saint Louis FC 4,017 USLC Rio Grande Valley FC 4,016 USL1 Richmond Kickers 3,347 USLC CS Switchbacks FC 3,285 USLC Pittsburgh Riverhounds 3,170 USLC Orange County SC 2,980 USLC Austin Bold FC 2,662 USLC Charleston Battery 2,477 USL1 Greenville Triumph SC 2,415 USL1 Chattanooga Red Wolves 2,384 USLC Charlotte Independence 1,576 (Rio Grande and Reno are hybrid teams, independently run off the field). Here are teams who have not announced plans to leave baseball stadiums (most of these teams are in their first or second season): MLS NYC FC 21,341 USLC New Mexico United 12,299 USLC Memphis 901 FC 6,957 USLC El Paso Locomotive FC 6,938 USLC Fresno FC 4,574 USLC Reno 1868 FC 3,522 USLC Tulsa Roughnecks 2,650 USL1 Lansing Ignite FC 2,285 And the rest of the teams not planning soccer-specific, or configurable stadiums in the foreseeable future. MLS NE Revolution 14,345 Football (could go above as MLS owner owns the stadium) USLC OKC Energy FC 4,253 (multi-purpose, shared with high schools). I think that's it. Corrections? Comments?
NE are supposedly making some kind of effort. https://soccerstadiumdigest.com/201...00-million-in-new-england-revolution-stadium/
Any discussion of pro/rel which ignores how deeply rooted High school and college sports are in many communities is seriously flawed. For better or worse, scholastic sports have filled the role played by clubs in many other countries.
The Omaha USL-1 team slated to start in 2020 will be sharing a minor-league baseball stadium (same owner) probably for a duration. And, as noted above, the Battery are losing their stadium at the end of this season.
Bringing in Il Bruce to try and fix things is a faint sign that somebody in the Kraft family wants to salvage the franchise. (wishful thinking, perhaps)
I see that others have chimed in on this but I have to also comment. I grew up in a rural/small town part of Indiana. Without even getting into the many, many churches that were almost completely community operations we had all sort of community organizations. In sports we had little league baseball and football, those were not affiliated with the national organizations of anything, just a group of local parents who wanted their kids to play sports. Those were not designed to develop anyone, just give younger kids in areas too small to many other options something to do. Our little league baseball only had 4 teams and our football only had two teams. Everyone got to play. There were also county clubs for swimming and wrestling because our schools were very small and didn't run those sports for lower ages than high school. That doesn't count all the church/ adult leagues for basketball, softball, volleyball, etc. All organized and run by the communities. Not for money and not as consumers. There were also many, many farmer and small business organizations. Not moneymakers at all but a way for people to work together and develop the community. We bought seed and fuel at the Farmers Co-op. We banked at the Farmer's Bank. We went to the Lions Club events. We volunteered and donated money for the Fire Department and EMS. There were clubs for every activity or interest. All local organizations for the most part. And no one called any of that communism or socialism because we knew what those words mean and the government was not involved in any of it. I'm sure others who lived in different types of communities will have different stories but this kind of thing is everywhere in the U.S. I just looked up the county that I grew up in. There are only 26,000 people but there are well over 500 non-profits and other community associations register and that surely doesn't count all of them. When DeTocqueville wrote about America in the 1800s he said: "Americans of all ages, all stations of life and all types of disposition are forever forming associations," he wrote. "There are not only commercial and industrial associations in which all take part, but others of a thousand types-religious, moral, serious, futile, very general and very limited, immensely large and very minute." De Tocqueville went on to observe that Americans naturally formed groups when they wanted to hold a celebration, found a church, build a school, distribute books or do almost anything else. "Finally, if they want to proclaim a truth or propagate some feeling ...they form an association. In every case, at the head of any new undertaking, where in France you would find the government ... in the United States you are sure to find an association." Things are not exactly the same in the United States and the role of large organizations has certainly increased but that tendency still exists.
Along with already noted Charleston, Chicago is also leaving their SSS. Fresno is actively looking for a location for a SSS. I don't know if TD Bank had any original intention to host soccer. I don't really understand Tucson's relationship to Phoenix, but they have a SSS. Tormenta is building one.
Farm team, I think. Rising have 2 of Tuscon's players on loan. On the upside, Charleston are hoping to play downtown, which will make them more accessible. They've only averaged over 4,000 once in 26 years. The really good news is that over 700k Americans and Canadians are showing up to watch soccer in the flesh and that is going to increase with NISA and the Founders Cup.
Exactly. The elephant in the room is that team sports in the US developed through schools rather than clubs. A whole bunch of college (American) football teams outdraw everyone in the NFL every week. Scholastic football is so important that there's a long-standing tradition of high school teams playing on Friday, college teams on Saturday, and pro teams on Sunday. I'm from Texas. It's sometimes said that high school football is the dominant religion there. Some of the larger schools fill 20k seats every game. During the high school football season, all pro sports are likely to take a significant attendance hit if they play on Friday nights in Texas.
Do you have an idea of how that came into being? It limits the sports to juveniles only, while in the Netherlands all amateur clubs are a mix of all generations. Could that be a reason for a topic discussed in a thread about abandoning the sport after school has been left?
It's in part a product of our sporting history. University teams were the first organized teams in most US sports. American football and basketball were both codified by associations of university teams. And the reason high school teams became important is that public education funding, being written into most state constitutions, built a lot of the sports infrastructure. At the turn of the 20th century when team sports were beginning to gain prominence, the local high school was the best-funded organization in many small towns, and could afford to field a team to play against an opponent from the next town over.
. Really, I don't think we can understate the effect collegiate athletics has on lower league sports of all stripes. And I am not sure a non-American can fully appreciate it.