I consider it a Holy Grail because it's pretty much untapped for pro sports and it's growing at a ridiculous pace for a market its size. Right now Austin is at an estimated 1,834,303 and is growing at a pace of about 59k per year. That's a population growth rate on par with places like Seattle and Phoenix. The 5 markets right above Austin are all growing but at nowhere near the pace: San Jose 1,894,388 27k/yr growth. Indianapolis 1,928,982 20.5k/yr growth. Columbus 1,944,002 21k/yr growth. Las Vegas 2,000,759 24.5k/yr growth. Kansas City 2,038,724 14.5k/yr growth. Each of those cities, sans Vegas, has at least 1 top level pro sports team in them. Just above those is Cleveland that is still shrinking. Austin is a booming place with a highly educated, young urban population base and no professional sports team at the top level. Obviously the biggest key is a good owner with the money and patience to try and pull it off, but that's a market that is doing a good job supporting AHL and NBA D-League teams.
As many as I did from DC. I popped down when DC United played preseason games there, have some old college friends who moved to that area, and love visiting when I can so Three Lions is still going to be in the mix.
Interesting read about Pittsburgh and the Highmark expansion. Also interesting, it says the stadium is privately funded by the current owner and a 'silent partner.' Read an article where you can tell the current owner has funds for the current level of soccer, nothing higher. Makes that pretty clear. Could this 'silent partner' possibly be an investor looking to take the team up based on how the stadium works out to drive up attendance? Interesting regardless
So it's actually not untapped. They have a AAA baseball team that is second in the PCL at 7,500 a game and is doing well. They have an AHL team that averaged 5,146 a game this past season (19th in a 30-team league). I have no NBDL numbers. But the Toros won the league, so, good. So it's not untapped. What else is going to go there? A USFL team? (Guffaw.) As for soccer, the original Lone Stars didn't last back in the day, the original Aztex moved to Orlando and the new Aztex are in the PDL. Perhaps the reason Austin isn't at one of the professional levels, as I said, is because the current Aztex ownership is operating on his own timetable and not that of someone else. Or because he's more cautious than people are who spend other people's money on the internet.
The comparable markets to Austin, except for Vegas, all have at least one MLS/MLB/NBA/NHL/NFL team with Indy, KC and Columbus having 2 each. You've got a market in that range, with no top league teams, that is growing at a pace that will send it flying past the markets I mentioned in the very near future. There's a big difference between competing with MLB or AAA, NHL or AHL, and NBA or NBA D-League. That would seem to make Austin appear like a more attractive sports market. Then there's the solid attendance numbers and growth they showed during their 2 DII years before Rawlins split for Orlando. Obviously, it boils down to ownership, but that's a market that is much more open than those comparable to it.
University of Texas football is like religion in Austin, so that has to be considered a rival to any pro sports team.
People keep mentioning this. I don't buy it. There are, what, 6 - maybe 7, home games a year out of 365 days. Yeah, the Horns eat up a lot of column inches in the papers and suck draw sports talk radio - but since when has professional soccer gotten much ink or air time? I just don't think college football is that much of a consideration, other than scheduling, for a minor league soccer team. And, for the record, I attended Kansas and have lived for 30 years in Raleigh-Durham (Duke, UNC, NC State), so I'm very well familiar with major college football and basketball programs and their dominance in metro areas.
i'm with you on this. plus, i feel like 60k college students who are obsessed with austin can only help the chances of a minor league soccer team...
The Austin Aztex which would eventually become Orlando City averaged 2974 and 3733 in their two years according to Wikipedia. That's not bad at all for USL Pro.
I read today on the Orlando-blog Scoring Third that Orlando's agreement with USL runs out next year. I didn't realize USL Pro team signed termed-leases to be in the 3rd division. It brings a different dimension to the USL Pro/NASL crossover. It makes me think that the USL Pro teams are as "locked in" as I thought. At least it was news to me.
Also, while it is bereft of any major league teams, Austin is already pretty full of minor professional teams (RR Express, Toros, Texas Stars). Not to mention the little issue of University of Texas athletics (especially, but not exclusively, football). EDIT: replied to Kenn's post before reading any of page 57.
Thus why many of us are saying that this will be the last year for the LA Blues. Their three year contract ends at the conclusion of the current season. You really see them sticking around? I don't as many others don't either. This paves the way nicely for the NASL.
In what way? (Honestly asking.) Do you think that they'll jump to NASL or that NASL will simply replace them in LA? Here are the possible scenarios as I see them, from most likely to least likely: No skin off anyone's back scenario: LA Blues Fold, NASL does nothing with LA, nobody notices or cares Possible scenario: LA Blues fold, NASL puts a team in LA Idiotic scenario scenario: LA Blues do not fold, join NASL Because I'm nice scenario: LA Blues do not fold, decide to start spending money, draw fans Super happy ending scenario: LA Blues do not fold, start spending money, NASL gets LA team, both are enormously successful, soccer becomes biggest sport in USA, full pro/rel instituted within a year, US wins WC, SuperLiga comes back--LA Blues vs NASL LA in the final.
I do like the idea of NASL teams sharing big markets so long as it is done right. Going to the Valley or Pomona or to Orange County would seem geographically pertinent, as going to suburban DC is for Virginia Cavalry.
Because using the L.A. Blues as a shining example of how well or not well a minor league team could do in L.A. is a good idea? That team has been managed by morons and the league has let it happen. I'm not a big advocate for the NASL moving into the L.A. area, but I'm not going to write off the prospects based on the L.A. Blues.
I've often wondered if Chattanooga could work as an NASL team. Maybe their pockets aren't deep enough, but it seems like a well run NPSL team. That said, could anyone see NASL going after any of the NPSL teams? I'd imagine that Detroit and Tulsa have to be intriguing with the support they've been shown at the NPSL level.
Chattanooga is very small. It's currently under 550k and growing at about 4-5k per year. It's going to be decades before it even gets to the soft minimum of 750k for DII/NASL metros. I think it could work perfectly as a DIII/USL Pro location as it is a nice area and is located fairly close to several solid metro areas of varying sizes like Atlanta, Huntsville, Birmingham, Nashville, and Knoxville.
Exactly. Cool as Chattanooga is, and I'm talking about the city itself, if an owner with the pockets were to step up, USLPro would probably be best for the start. Only way they get into the NASL is if they meet that waiver deal kenntomasch has mentioned, where the league has to have X amount of teams in 750k cities before they could let in a smaller one. Again, that's all if an ownership group with deep enough pockets stepped up.
It's not a certain number of cities at 750k, it's 75% of the teams have to be in metros over 750k. I'm guessing that's in there in case an owner in a place like Chattanooga can make it work there while ensuring that most of the league is in areas where the financial model has a chance to work.
No LA Blues please, a new LA area team away from LA Galaxy's area would be fine. I think the NASL should wait till 2016 though to expand west. Build and stabilize the league to 14 teams by 2015 and then move west with the LA area team and at least one more.