Oh Really? The revs own their stadium and average 20K a game..............sure let's move them. That makes PERFECT sense. News Flash: building stadiums ain't easy. Particularly in older cities where large tracts of land are few and far between, and come at a high premium price. But hey, let's move a team OUT of the Boston media market and place them in: San Antonio, Raleigh, Nashville.............etc...Because....well because the Internet Says So!!!! These expansion threads have almost as much stupid as the Pro/Rel and NASL4Life threads
Seriously. If you're not willing to dig deeper and understand the facts - business included - you probably shouldn't be posting in N&A
Another anecdote: A few months ago my cousin's stepchildren moved here from Cuba. They're both around 18-22 years old. I was pretty shocked to learn that one of them plays soccer and plays it well. Well enough to join the pick up soccer games that my uncles have where it's a bunch of South Americans and a few Mexicans that have all played all their lives. And this young dude can hang with them.
I think what we saw, and are seeing in Panama will happen in Cuba also. DR however.....damn do they love baseball. That ain't changing any time soon.
Oh please you get that number from MLS? If you believe that then San Jose constantly is a packed house, good lord...... watch a game, check out the empty seats. This is basic stuff , everyone knows MLS hilariously fudges it's attendance numbers . Stadiums take time, within reason. Boston is ten years past reason and even their own fans agree. Boston is not special especially if they don't build a stadium they're first on any rhetorical choooung block. Their own fans agree! Your media market boner is dumb and stupid and thank his mls agrees
Those teams are going to stay where they are. There isn't going to be any movement of teams until MLS gets to 32 teams. Remember that there are 3 Canadian teams in the league so that leaves a lot of US markets underserved. NFL - 32 US teams. NBA and MLB - 29 US teams. NHL - 24 US teams. MLS 2017 - 19 US teams. They need to add another 10 US markets to match the big 3.
It's always interesting to me to gauge people's perception of the San Diego situation. In my opinion, if MLS waits for the November 2018 election before deciding the 27/28th teams then SD is as close to a lock as can be. If the decision is made before November 2018 then the people of SD still have to vote on whether or not to sell the property in question to the MLS ownership group. What happens if it passes and MLS has already committed to other cities? That remains to be seen...
Well San Diego has the added complication that SDSU has proposed a competing idea of the site that is not far off of what SoccerCity was, but it has a slightly larger stadium befitting the ascendant SDSU football program, and more school uses in addition to the same park, etc... What's amazing to me from the outside, is that the FS Investors guys on SoccerCity wouldn't budge on stadium size. Presuming MLS will always be in the 20,000-30,000 seat range when it's still a growing sport.
Well the overall trend in sports tends to be for smaller live venues, so they might be making the right long term decision.
San Diego i think is gonna gonna have a red carpet as team 31 or 32. They're close to golden goose st Louis status (which is my other 31 32), when they're both ready I think final invites go to them
Then there's this: Regarding #MLStoSD:@SDSU supporters launch ballot initiative as alternative to @SoccerCitySD https://t.co/7YF7yEfIm9— Dike (@DikeAnyiwo) September 28, 2017 I agree the stadium size thing seems to be a needless point of contention. The problem is that when they drafted their initial Citizens Initiative they wrote the size of the stadium into the document. So they legitimately CANT budge in the upper bounds of the stadium without invalidating the entire plan for the site. The mistake they made was underestimating the size in the first place in my opinion.
I have been to many SDSU games and I know the massiveness of Qualcomm makes any small number of people look smaller but I feel like 25k was the average. The only time I saw ever saw a huge crowd was when Boise State came to town in 2012. Most of the stadium was blue and orange and the Aztecs were audibly booed when the took the field.
Times have changed. Aztecs have been averaging 30,000 and 38,000 in the last two seasons. And that was before the LAC moved away. This season they've yet to draw under 40k.
I mean even if they avg 25k FSI should have known SDSU would want something closer to 40K. Hopefully this opens the door for Moores again.
I never said scheduling was a reason to expand, way to make stuff up. All I said was I think 32 is the number based on the candidate cities left and pointed out how easy the scheduling would be. Also, how in the world is going from 28 to 32 (14 % increase) watering down the league and going from 10 to 24 in 14 years (240% increase) is not? Straw man much?
You turn your nose UP at something, not down. You look DOWN on something. Pet peeve, I hate when people mix metaphors/cliches. The early bird gathers no moss. Carry on.
Kivlehan usually manages to cover NASL in a supportive way without being blind to its weaknesses and failings. This article goes full MLS conspiracy. While he mentions San Francisco's problems and Edmonton considering the CPL, no mention is made of other challenges, like Puerto Rico FC being in bad shape even before a devastating hurricane, North Carolina's desire to head for the USL, Jacksonville struggling at the gate even with new ownership, or the possibility that the expansion teams may not be ready in time. No mention is made of NASL's role in setting the D2 standards it now finds unduly burdensome. Not his best work.
35 minutes in, Bill Simmons says MLS will go under because of overexpansion... https://soundcloud.com/the-bill-sim...advertising-week-with-malcolm-gladwell-ep-266 Some brilliant analysis here