In other words, they just don't quite equal the following, history or backing of the three-time MLS champion Los Angeles Galaxy... and perhaps they never will (many, many people wiser than me said the same about the Clippers -- WATCH OUT).
This LA Times article seems like a hoax. I mean moving the team to Arizona, come on. Not that Phoenix doesn't deserve but they haven't proved to be viable at this point and the state's legislation doesn't make it favoreable.
Move them here in Vegas! Tackling Tacos FC - they would be sponsored by Roberto's Taco shop Carne Asada Fries & Carne Asada Burrito!
You honestly think Chivas USA would move to piece of shit Phoenix of all places? Why? Phoenix has been given the opportunity to showcase that they are capable of hosting an MLS franchise. And guess what? They failed! After the success of the USMNT friendly, MLS & the New York Red Bulls decided to schedule a preseason match in Phoenix at Chase Field. The NY Red Bulls first team (featuring Mexico Captain Rafa Marquez & Arsenal Superstar Thierry Henry) vs. The Pumas first team. They announced the game a month in advance, and had advertising throughout all of Phoenix. & yet with all of these positives, ticket sales were so piss poor, Chase Field announced that all tickets were buy one get one free. & yet they still only drew 14, 000. So they only had a paid attendance of 7,000. Yet during all of this, the MLS is investing there time and money in three US cities. NYC, Orlando, and TUCSON!. But most haters (like RedRover) say "Tucson would never be able to host an MLS franchise. Its to Hot. Etc." So then why is Pima County investing in a NASL soccer facility, with furture plans to remodel/expand Kino Vetrans Memorial Stadium to an MLS stadium? http://pdfcast.org/pdf/pima-county As long as MLS exists, Phoenix will NEVER have an MLS franchise. Tucson on the other hand? We will have an MLS team by 2025.
kind of funny you are so extremely cold on the phoenix idea, but a city right down the road that has less to offer overall you think is the greatest location ever.
Having lived in one and visited the other, Tuscon is an upgrade over Phoenix.... ...in the same way that a filling is an upgrade over a root canal. You'd rather have the former than the latter, but they both would be better avoided (Bookman's aside).
LA v SJ was always a fiercer rivalry than the made up SuperClassico. People just forgot in LA because it took 2 years off.
San Diego is not happening as long as there is no stadium to play in. Now if the Chargers get a new stadium the situation might change since a new Chargers stadium could be designed ala Centurylink Field or renovated BC Place with the ability to host both sports. Similarly if the Chargers leave for LA and San Diego State is forced to build a new MLS sized football stadium to replace Qualcomm Stadium then the situation might change. But as it stands now with Qualcomm Stadium being the only stadium capable of holding the crowds MLS teams draw, it's just not going to happen.
Not sure if many have been following the lower leagues, but USL Pro (Division 3) awarded a franchise to Phoenix in July to begin play in 2013 as Phoenix FC. Story --> http://uslpro.uslsoccer.com/home/661405.html Any attempt to move Chivas USA there would, I think, be somewhat opposed by this new ownership group and USL as a whole. In the least, some people's feelings will be hurt and club ownership ambitions dashed.
Chivaaaaaaas Las Vegas Or they could keep the uniforms and rebrand to the Las Vegas Americans of MISL "fame".
Quite possible, but probably not too relevant. If there is a viable minor-league organization in place, MLS brings them on board. If the minor-league team isn't sufficiently impressive, they roll right over them (see: Toronto Lynx). I highly doubt Chivas (or MLS in general) will be heading to Phoenix any time soon, but if the league decided to take that route they won't worry about hurt feelings in USL, any more than USL seems to worry about hurt feelings in NASL.
I really want to know what Garber's take on this. He has been working hard on NYC2. San Jose is finally breaking ground on a stadium. Only DC & NE really have the last non-SSS stadium issues to resolve. Yes, Dallas and Colorado can use a bump in fans, but once these issues are resolved, Chivas still is an issue. In other words, if all the other 19 teams are set, does Don then push Chivas ownership to do something ? Or as long as attendance doesn't really bottom out, does he leave the franchise alone because he would then have 2 in-city rivals on both coasts. LA>Chivas and NYRB > NYC2 on the east coast. A nice balance for TV and sponsorships. Do we have any quotes from DON anywhere that are verifiable? Obviously, fans , both friend and foe have plenty of thoughts. I want to know what the league is thinking.
I assume when you (and others) cite Garber or the Don, what you are really doing is using it as a term to personify the opinions of the members of the MLS Board of Governors. Garber works for them and any important action he takes is because they want them to do so.
Unless its a new ownership group and a new front office, nothing will change no matter where this team moves. The renaissance in KC happened when OnGoal took over from the Hunts. The rebrand and the stadium both happened after the new ownership group had built a buzz.
San Antonio seems to be a lot closer to being ready for a major league team then PHX. They have pretty good crowds and support already.
I don't think the LA Times article is a hoax ...I think many are mis-reading or jumping to conclusions. Its not like the Times claimed they have sources and are leaking news about a possible Arizona move. The LA Times article simply made the "suggestion" of Arizona (or maybe out of state), and everyone ran with it. It's highly unlikely they to move Arizona, or even Orlando, St Louis, San Antonio, etc. As long as Vergara is in control, Chivas USA isn't going anywhere. Vergara fought tooth & nail to get to LA, even passing on San Diego & Houston to be 2nd in LA. I cant see him giving up LA now that he has total control. If the Times article is correct, Vergara's form of giving up on CUSA was offering the Cues to buy him out, and that was rejected. Now that he's in control, I think he tries to fix things and make changes to see if the experiment can succeed. I think it's all but certain Chivas stays in LA but ultimately leaves HDC in 2014, and I believe it will be for a new facility at ELAC or at the Willowick Golf Course in Santa Ana. What'd I'd like to see is for Vergara to abandon the USA moniker for Chivas LA or CDLA. If rebranding to something more LA-centric miraculously does ever happen, I wouldn't expect a rebrand until the launch of a new facility, a la SKC.
Yes, by moving them to Phoenix, it would be a disaster. The ownership group is already failing. There first goal was to have a stadium deal in place by September 1st. Its now September 12th, and they're still homeless. San Antonio sounds like Tucson.