But I'm sure that if you are driving from Colorado to Real Salt Lake you can drive about one million miles per hour and there are no cops so I'm sure its a shorter trip than some of the eastern rivalries.
Your pointless trolling is pointless. My threads were gaining traction and you banned me because you did not agree and had the power to do so. The utter brutality that anyone faces on Facebook or Twitter who tries and defend those terrible names are proof that in an environment where biased mods don't try and control what people think, that most people agreed with me. If that annoys you, too bad! It's no justification for the slander and bullying I have had to endure from you. No, the problem with this message board is that it is filled with people who possess a fraction of the knowledge I have in the sport, but who are empowered to silence me. Look on Facebook and Twitter for yourself. EVERYONE thinks those names are terrible ideas and thus, EVERYONE agreed with me! Not only should my threads not have been locked, I should have been commended for having the bravery to acknowledge the problem exists in this repressive environment where we are not free to express ourselves in case a mod disagrees with us. Of course you are not being paid by MLS. Quite to the contrary, mods like you who push MLS fans to the point where they don't care any more by restricting free thought are doing a disservice to MLS and are seemingly trying their best to destroy the league and as such, should be getting a check from its competitors. It is not the job of the mod to interject their personal bias into the forum. When that finally sinks in you will understand that I was right all along and though you will not be man enough to admit your mistake, I accept your apology regardless and will still teach you about soccer when I get the chance.
I don't want him to be president, but you never know. I read about media coverage in England of the 1860 presidential election and how surprised they were when Lincoln won. More recently, Obama wasn't expected to win when he declared his candidacy. You're in Ohio, the state with the longest active streak of voting for the winner of the presidential election.
... "gaining traction" ... YMMV Perhaps you should evidence this when you post rather than hop on a soap box or a horse and crusade the night away by telling everyone else that they don't know anything and are wrong. You have ZERO CLUE the level of involvement in this sport of anyone else on these boards (ok, maybe as high as .5% as some people DO know who some others are). Hell, you can't even get your story straight about how long/in depth you've followed the MLS .... I can find a facebook group/discussion or Twitter following that believes the sky is green .... that doesn't make them right. Mods are people guy ... ... and what, exactly are you right about?
Funny, this seems to be a common theme on this forum. I refer, of course, to a certain Argentina fan who claims to have never heard of David Beckham until 2008 or 2009 despite his noteworthy involvement in one of Argentina's biggest rivalries.
Are you suggesting that the expansion sides like NYCFC (averaging over 28k fans per match), OCSC (>33k) and Atlanta United (>24k STH deposits 18 months before first kick) are not exciting prospects because everyone you follow or friend on social media thinks otherwise? Maybe you should expand your circle of influence!
You mean the Atlanta Silverbacks, who closed shop in 2010, and only were able to come back because the incredibly corrupt Traffic USA fronted the team? Those "real grassroots" Atlanta Silverbacks. lol.
You also forgot to mention how that team was purchased from traffic by new owners who turned around and told the league that they're keeping the stadium but won't spend a dime on the team. Forcing the NASL to run the team. Yeah Atlanta united really screwed over those guys.
This thread is some kind of weird timewarpy/sanity-check thing. In it we have guys telling us they can't/won't watch MLS because the EPL is better quality and someone else telling us that no serious person (Facebook and Twitter verified) can handle the fact MLS could have three teams with the name "united." I would like to put these two gentlemen in one room and let them duke it out. Which is it? Can't watch MLS because the league of Manchester United, West Ham United and Newcastle United is so much better? Or a league with three teams named "united" is a joke? Sort it out and let those of us who enjoy MLS know. Thanks.
It's the normal type of things we get. People who don't want to give MLS a chance come up with whatever excuse is convenient for not giving it a chance.
Yet they are so confident about not giving MLS a chance they have to come here to explain why they are not giving it a chance.
Of course people on here also respond to anyone who is critical of MLS by claiming they aren't "giving MLS a chance" It is possible to have given it a chance and found it unwatchable. That does happen.
Indeed ... but too often people try to tie their dislike to things that don't have any bearing on the match they tune in to watch. There are some many false conclusions, misinformed perceptions, and unrealistic expectations that there's much more to the "give it a chance" than simply the words. 9 times out of 10 people that "give it a chance" truly don't.
I don't give the Eridivisie a chance but I don't go on Dutch threads to explain why I'm not giving it a chance.
I've literally heard someone say that hr couldn't watch MLS because the goal celebrations were too subdued and showed a lack of passion for the game.
That makes alot of sense... which is probably why it won't happen. MLS is too busy trying to harvest the next set of expansion fees and trying to expand to 28-32 teams. The decision to go beyond 24 clubs is probably the worst kept secret in MLS history. It's odd how North American soccer has come full circle... conventional wisdom states the old NASL died in the 1980's due to over expansion to 24 teams. Now, conventional wisdom seems to dictate MLS needs to attempt to expand to the same number of teams as NFL/MLB/NHL/NBA. Not without a hefty check for $100 mil written out to MLS... and there, in a nutshell, is why we (fans) can't have nice things. Pity. I've been posting on this forum for over 15 years now. I used to think bigsoccer had the collective pulse of the typical American soccer fan, or be a bellweather of how our die-hard fans feel. IMHO, that is certainly no longer the case. The moderator of this thread once tried to ridicule my thoughts that younger generations of Americans are far more open-minded about the concept of Pro/Rel than us old farts. Although Pro/Rel is never the first topic of conversation at any number of my favorite soccer pubs in Tulsa, OK, the vast majority of fans I've broached the subject with would love to see it at some point. The majority of dissent I get for the idea comes more from older pragmatists and devil's advocates than anyone who dislikes the concept at its core or thinks instituting it would hurt the sport's development here. You (we) seem to be hearing consistent status-quo arguments from anti-Pro/Rel folks referencing American exceptionalism and bemoaning what relegation would look like for perpetual NFL teams like the Detroit Lions or Washington Redskins... when we live in a country that has 100 million more in population than the era in which the current closed system came about and eventually became entrenched. I really wish we could see a 40-team second division in which 2-4 clubs each year could get promoted to MLS, while 2-4 clubs are relegated, but there's too much money at the top. Our current first division is the domain of old egotistical billionaires who are in charge of making decisions that will affect the future of the sport, hardly the environment most conducive to the kind of creativity and innovation I wish we could see going forward. More likely, the desire to continue to harvest (and promote higher) expansion fees could greedily play out in an MLS that expands to 34 or 36 or 38+ teams... then becomes unwieldy enough to see a "Premier MLS" break away from the bottom half... then Pro/Rel becomes a shrewd business decision to maintain interest from fans whose teams never really had a snowball's chance in hell at winning it all in the larger league anyway. Ironic that the most likely way we ever get Pro/Rel would be based on a wildly successful closed-league MLS.
Except people aren't saying why they "won't give it a chance" They are explaining why after giving it a chance they don't like it. Big difference.
Except in the context of American sports it doesn't make a lot of sense ... American sporting leagues can/will/and succeed at much larger than 20 clubs. There is absolutely no reason to limit the league to 20 teams .... just because. Except you know full well that's about as oversimplified of a statement as you can make. It wasn't the expansion in of itself, but HOW the expansion was done. There's a night and day difference between the old NASL "growth" and that of today's MLS. Conventional wisdom, is that an American sporting league can support 30ish teams .... there's no reason that the MLS should sell itself short. Yes, that's the reason Tulsa isn't a major league city .... or not. If only that was how you presented that argument, rather than making it out to be what you did at first. If only ... It's easy to wish that when you're one of the many with a hand out ...
What killed the NASL was the haste with which it expanded, without properly vetting owners. The NASL went from 9 to 24 teams in 5 years, while also folding 4 teams, so that's 19 expansion teams in 5 seasons. MLS has never added more than 2 expansion teams in any single season.