I applaud their tenacity, but having a successful NASL/USL and NWSL franchise at that location just seems like a pipe-dream. It's not any closer to downtown than the soccer stadium at KSU where the Beat played. And it's much further away for those coveted wealthy northern suburbs (the reason why the Braves moved there from downtown) to travel to. Plus they'll have to compete with a MLS team (backed by a rich NFL owner) now, too.
Unless Aurtor Blank is building a suitable stadium and ATL Utd backing an NWSL team then it a NO to Atlanta, nice plan though may be he could build a stadium DT he's rich!!!
Well, if anything is gonna happen with the rumored ATL team, we'll know by Apirl 4th - seems like there's a website with a countdown clock now: https://atl2018.com/en/home Though maybe it won't be NASL/NWSL and instead will be a soccer version of the LFL with both men's and women's divisions....
If there is any early announcements of expansion, it will only be MLS clubs at this point. To take any other course so soon after the adding of two new independent owners for the upcoming season would be very risky. They need the season to evaluate how well these new owners will do, not to mention there is still a lot of uncertainty with some of the other independent owners. Right now there is a big disadvantage for independent owners and I don't think things are going to get any better for them since they are limited as to what they can do. To make things worse, if more MLS clubs are added as owners, it will only complicate things even more for them.
If I was interested in the NWSL as an owner I would pull my application. Here's why: 1. While US Soccer set up the NWSL so the USWNT have a local league to play/train, the players themselves do not have to play here. So as an owner, fans will not come to watch my team play and I will lose money. 2. If I do have an allocated player they can leave anytime for a better international contract and I don't have any recourse to make them stay. I lose money! 3. The salary cap to keep these players if awful. I'm not sure how Portland does it. I lose money! 4. US Soccer Players on my team can kneel, join arms, do flips, take any type of political stance even against the flag that gives that player(s) the freedom they enjoy but I can't call them out on it without being called a racist, homophobe, etc. I lose money! 5. Fans are fans and want to spend their entertainment money on being entertained watching Women's Soccer! Most fans don't give a hoot about a player(s) sexual orientation, political groups they espouse to or what they had for dinner last night. They just want to be entertained. I lose money! 6. US Soccer players speak out about their Owners, Coaches and organization with the intent of giving that team a "Blackeye". I lose money! 7. US Soccer player goes to other players on the team and tells them "If I were you I would ask for a trade, look elsewhere to play(europe,etc) or just don't resign with said team. I lose money! I guess I will invest my millions in a product that will give my employees confidence and will share in profits. That won't be the NWSL!
Neither the NC Courage nor a potential NWSL team from this bid would be "independent" - one is tied and the other supposedly is tied to NASL teams.
The USWNTers = fans arguement has eroded almost entirely at this point. Not only have the two most-attended teams (both MLS-backed, to point out) essentially been immune to player-driven attendance swings, most of the smaller teams have had their attendance variability lessen as the years have gone on, showing that their fanbases are now more team-based than player-based. Completely pointless argument. No you don't, since you weren't paying for them in the first place. I think you completely misunderstand the point of the salary cap. It stops teams from overspending. So it's essentially saving you money, especially if you're an MLS-backed team with the capability of spending so much more. I don't even know how you made the jump from these political issues to the monetary issues in the first place.... but most soccer fans have been siding with the players on these issues anyway - the WoSo fanbase tends to lean left on aggregate. Might get your own knickers in a twist, but won't hurt your business unless you make it a sticking point. When? I think you're creating an issues out of thin air here. Even if I've missed or misinterpreted something, the point still stands that losing a player =/= losing money.
While you may be right about the two new owners not being classified as an "independent" type of owner, it would still be wise not to add anymore before seeing how well they can actually do.
Well, first, the two new owners we added this year were one independent and on that's damn close an MLS team already. So while it would be nice seeing how the MN guy runs FCKC, the NC organization is far from a unknown quantity. The Railhawks organization is one of the longest-running in US soccer, and Malik has boosted them up immensely. Aside from a mid-size stadium, they basically have all their ducks in a row and just need MLS to say "yes". Besides, there really isn't a reason to hold off expansion based on how current teams are doing, especially if the expansion teams are close to HOU and ORL. It's not like NWSL hasn't already proven those expansion can and do work. Granted, this ATL bid has a much bigger asterisk next to it, but there's still no reason to base whether ATL gets in on how well the new owners in KC and NC do. I agree that NWSL shouldn't expand too quickly, but that's not because they need time to see how well their previous expansion does. And there hasn't been any expansion for 2017 anyway.
I want to hear more about this women's soccer league where no one loses money where that person is going to put their team after re-thinking being in the NWSL.
I am all for expansion, and the sooner the better. It is not about doing it too quickly, but about making the right choices. Just find more like Portland, Houston, and Orlando, the new breed of MLS owners that own and/or operate their own stadiums. There is a particular niche for these kind of owners. Owners in a unique situation with a game plan already in place that allows them the opportunity to succeed right away.
Yes the NWSL needs to expand its been a bit worrying that nothing has been announced to move the league forward. I do believe that they had to repair the foundation before the addition to the house could move forward. MLS owners that follow the lead of Portland, Houston and Orlando that would treat the team with respect. What are the rumored teams/cities? LA and ATL?
Right now, I think those are the two most likely. Unfortunately I'm not sure if they'd be coming it during the same year... ATL sounds like 2018, but LAFC has gone on record saying they want to get their men's team squared away before thinking of joining NWSL, so I'd put them for 2019 at the earliest. Of course, that was said not long after LAFC was initially introduced, so maybe things have been going on behind the scenes. After those two, some names to pay attention to would be Real Salt Lake, the San Jose Earthquakes, and the Vancouver Whitecaps, and maybe NYCFC or NYRB. San Jose sounds very likely to happen but the schedule on their new facility puts them at about two years away. Vancouver recently talked to their SGs about the possibility of NWSL; they might be sooner. Either NY team would likely be cutting a deal with Sky Blue, if they ever realize what they're doing isn't cutting it. RSL has NWSL in their long term plan, but after some facilities things fell through they seem to be satisfied with UWS for now.
If only Vancouver would join so we can have the Ladies Cup Tournament. What percent will be MLS ownship vs NASL/USL teams vs Independent Teams in the next round of expansion? Something like 90% MLS 6% NASL 3% USL 1% Independent
Not sure how you get to 90% MLS in one round of expansion when currently it's only 30%. But hey, stranger things have a happened I suppose. Give it a few rounds And welcome!
I think they meant the actual candidates? Which still is probably high side MLS. Only because I doubt there's enough candidates to make a 1%
I'd say the top two now are Atlanta & Los Angeles. Maybe Atlanta in 2018 & Los Angeles in 2019? I'm hoping Salt Lake & San Jose are still interested. Wouldn't mind seeing Atlanta & Salt Lake added for 2018 & Los Angeles & San Jose added for 2019.
I am not all that sure that those very large metropolitan areas are the right choices for now. Chicago is a giant question mark and Houston's big drop-off in attendance last season doesn't leave me with a lot of confidence that areas like LA or Atlanta are ready, at least not with a new franchise. If they want one bad enough, let them buy one of the existing ones. I wouldn't be surprised to see some more of those available by the end of the season.
I know... It would be terrible to have another team that has around the 3rd best average attendance in the league! And about that "big" drop-off... I think that can be fairly conclusively deemed to be a result of the US not winning the Olympics. SeasonAverage 20144650 20156413 2015 without the WWC Return Game5678 20165696 So if you throw out that one game in 2015 when the USWNT players returned... you see the their average did not have a big drop in 2016 but instead increased slightly. ------ Oh... and about LA... LA had the best attendance in the WPS era, even if it was only for one season before AEG killed the team. Let's take a look at the cities that were in the WPS in 2009 and are in the NWSL in 2016... City20092016% Change Boston46653528-24.37% Chicago49283005-39.02% Piscataway36512163-40.76% Washington57473782-34.19% Total1899112478-34.295% So if LA were to experience the average drop in average attendance that these teams had, it would average 4138. That'd've been 5th best in the NWSL last season. However none of the above teams are backed by MLS clubs, so if LA's team were backed by LAFC, I would expect they'd do better. In case anyone wants to see similar for Atlanta, they didn't play in 2009, but using 2010: City20102016% Change Boston44903528-21.43% Chicago40253005-25.34% Piscataway33202163-34.85% Washington38253782-1.12% Total1566012478-20.32% So based on the average drop from 2010 to 2016, Atlanta would average 2940 (2nd worse). Though that's a bit unfair as Atlanta actually increased their attendance in 2011... so let's see 2011 even though there are less samples: City20112016% Change Boston44443528-20.61% Piscataway21742163-0.51% Rochester49213868-21.40% Total115399559-17.16% Based off of 2011 to 2016, Atlanta would average 4009. Which also would've been 5th best in the NWSL last year. Of course we can't say absolutely that LA and Atlanta wouldn't have worse drops than the teams that remained. But I think it's a more than reasonable comparison to make to gauge how these cities would do. And I don't think either one would be as bad as SBFC remaining in Piscataway. I'm not sure we'll see any of the teams with the worst attendance sell. Not unless the league forces them to. SBFC and Chicago's ownerships have been dedicated to their teams for a long time. And FCKC just sold so I don't expect they'll sell again soon. More likely they'll relocate to Minnesota. I guess I could maybe see Boston selling if the team does awful again this year and attendance actually drops, but their attendance has been increasing every season despite being the worst team in the league since 2014. And I guess Washington is a bit of a wild card, but it would really be awful for those fans to lose their team to relocation for a 2nd time. I wouldn't even wish that upon my worst enemy.
I agree about hopefully seeing those four, though adding all four in just a two-year period is too much. Put a gap year between 'em and I'd say great.
I just wish there was some solid news about moving the league forward a little in the expansion realm. Yes, I meant out of the expansion ownership with the 90% being MLS.
Well, we're kinda commissioner-less right now. Aside from news we need to start the season, (i.e. streaming details, etc.,) I don't think we'll be hearing from the front office any time before they announce the next commish.
News item I missed earlier: The St. Louis MLS expansion group says if the stadium referendum passes, it will start talking to the NWSL too.— Jonathan Tannenwald (@thegoalkeeper) March 30, 2017 Interesting... I'm not sure how likely the stadium referendum is to pass, though.