yes. because the league definitley doesn't need another team in a great MLS demographic city like Seattle, Portland, Toronto, Vancouver, Montreal (places like San Diego, Minneapolis or San Francisco) or a second glamourous ressurection of NYCosmos in Queens ... what the league REALLY needs is another shite team in a city who's demographics for MLS couldn't be worse (and who already proved that by having the two lowest median attendances over their franchises lives) like Tampa or Miami ... or a MSA that is far to small to support even a D2 team like Raleigh/Durham/CH (oddly, if you study the demographics of each MLS city, which i have, the cities that do the best in attendance are NOT college towns which i found a bit surprising) or another team in a thoroughly mediocre demographic MLS city like Atlanta that might draw 16-18K the first season and quickly deteriorate into yet another MLS attendance average albatross that struggles to break 14K a game. i sure hope they put the choosing of the next MLS franchise in your hands.
I figured that by going overboard and incluidng two now defunct MLS clubs in my expansion plan the sarcasm would have been obvious.
sorry. you never can tell. having crunched all of the numbers on every MSA in the top 50 in US/Canada you'd be surprised how stupid some people honestly legitimate suggestions for MLS expansion cities are. i have seen people arguing for OKC with a straight face. plus, was even Garber is spewing the ATL, MIA, TB bullhockey just recently so i never put it past MLS to do something incredibly stupid and actually put a team in Miami again thinking that "well all of that hispanic population will be good for soccer". despite the fact that A. much of that population is of the baseball cultural variety and B. statistically there seems to be a moderate negative correlation between % of MSA hispanic population and MLS attendance. i guess hispanics like soccer just not MLS. MLS needs to lock up San Diego soon, perhaps moving Chivas there and hope that eventually the Raiders and As move out of SF/Oak freeing up some market share for another team in SF no matter how much Lew might protest. If there can be teams as close as 2 in NYC you cannot pass up a gold mine demographic market like SF just because some mickey mouse team (that doesn't seem to draw many or any fans down to SJ for games) is 50 miles south.
Back in the 90's that was true (with the 65 cent Cdn. dollar) but not now. As of 2007, 30% of the total NHL revenues came from the 6 Canadian teams (30 team league).
so. 12,265 at Stade Saputo today. anybody want to bet an over/under on how many MLS teams do not beat that number today? i am going to to with 3. FCD, San Jose and one of either Columbus or Chivas. can we get that stadium done and Montreal in MLS by 2011?
Montreal wanted to start in 2011 and were willing to forgo the expansion draft (which could work if Montreal signed players to MLS contracts before 2011 while in NASL). Apparently the upgrades could be finished over the off-season since they have been planned for years.
well i guess the MLS thought process on this is why blow your wad all in one year. but man could the MLS use the attendance bump to balance out the pathetic shite teams. i gotta be honest tho. i kinda wish Montreal was getting a better and bigger stadium. i have read complaints from MI fans in many places that the whole el cheapo erector set stadium is kind of a pain in the butt (specifically the hard to get into and out of permanent concrete stand), has too few amenities like bars, restaurants, concessions, toilets. i mean have you seen the inside of the new BC Place? and Portland is going to have Wrigley like charm (tho lets be honest that place could use more than the 23M in renovations it is getting too). with such great fans i'd really like to see Saputo match the 23M and spend 50M to really do a nice 25K seat overhaul of Stade Saputo and make it more like the new KCW stadium (beautiful and cutting edge) and less like Crew Stadium. i mean if the Houston group can put down 60M of their own money the Saputo's can't put down 23M?
A. i hadn't heard they are putting in any money to stadium expansion. the money the used to build it hardly counts. that was for a D2 stadium. and they spent a pittance and that is what they got, a pittance. you want to be a MLS team, and one of the top MLS teams at that, the fans deserve a top MLS stadium not some half-assed erector set cobbled together on the cheap. B. and who's fault is it that the fee was 40M instead of 10M or 30M? yeah, Saputo's. not to mention all of the rest of the teams in MLS 2.0 had to pay expansion fees too. the expansion fee is a separate issue from spending what it takes to give the team a stadium that is equal to the city and the fans. Montreal is one of the finest cities in N America and the Montreal fans obviously some of the best that will be in MLS. so it is sad to see that it is likely they will end up in a stadium no better than that found in the shitehole that is Columbus OH.
I couldn't disagree more. High end amenities are a distant fourth priority to a downtown location, a grass field and a proper capacity. And if the team is good, it matters even less. I think Toronto has the smartest stadium model of any team. Build an erector set in the best location possible and upgrade out of the profits. Montreal will do the same.
perhaps. things like team store, pub/restaurant, club seating, and luxury boxes do help with revenue and attracting top notch corporate money tho. i honestly don't see how the best attended D2 team of the last decade is only shooting for 20K? isn't it reasonable to think that Montreal has the same perfect mix that SSFC has (already established team, good demographics, not many other pro teams to eat up all of the press) to create enough of a MLS buzz to build on the 12K hard core long time Impact fans into 25-30K a game MLS fans?
There is plenty of room around the North, South and East stands to eventually expand to 25-30K if the demand is there.
Columbus aren't alone in that now...frankly, most of our stadium is built that way......and when you are in there who cares? It works, fans have great sitelines, and no one cares how it was built.....why should the support in Columbus or Montreal care either?
you mean back when the Canadian dollar was worth +/- 65 cents US.....and Canadian teams got 95% of their revenue in Canadian dollars but paid 80% of their expenses in US dollars? right, that period of time when even though all of the buildings were sold out virtually every night there was no way to balance the books....yet the only two teams lost were because their owners were either going to sell the teams to US interests or wrangle new arenas....when they did not get new arenas they took the money. Look this should not be about Canada v USA....and hockey really is irrelevant (bet the guy who made the first joke regrets it now) but if you are going to pretend to know the truth....look it up first and check that you are even close.
If the MLS-Impact need a bigger capacity for certain high-profile games, they will likely do what the USL-Impact did when Santos Laguna came to town - and take the game next door. It's the same model the Alouettes have used successfully for years (they play up the hill at Molson Stadium usually, but go over to the big O for the CFL playoffs) and the NASL-Impact are already set to do it at least once this year - for the AC Milan game on the 2nd of June.
Well, what we would hope would be the future is across the street for Montreal... hopefully Major League Soccer reaches a state where it can move back into the large stadiums... if Montreal is very successful, then the erector set will serve them well for a couple years and a comfortable existence in the Olympic Stadium would be the next step. and the annual attendance average is meaningless... the numbers are less than accurate to begin with, no point in adding a team a year early for the sole purpose of making internet nerds with excel happy (I say this as my "MLS 2010" spreadsheet is open on my other screen)
i've closed mine in sadness for this year. i can only take so much watching the league median be at or under 11K for a week. and without the 2,500+ boost from SSFC each week the whole picture is even more grim
Olympic stadium is a piece of crap and there is NO CHANCE of a permanent move to Olympic stadium. If they ever needed a 50k+ seater stadium, they would build a new one, not move to Olympic Stadium. People will put up with it for one off games, like playoffs/friendlies, but if you play ALL your games there, you are going to put many fans off. I also think that it is quite obvious that you are far better off having too little capacity than too much, so the starting size is ideal, and then let it increase from their through expansion. I also believe that the pitch of Stade Saputo is top notch, so only the Stands would need upgrading.
It'll get real tempting though if ticket sales are strong.....playoffs/friendlies/TFC matches (there is already buzz on the various TFC supporter's boards about these matches and dreams/discussions of bringing 5k+ to Montreal...if the games are on weekends)......say tickets are avg $25....turning away 5k travelling support is $125k in revenue.....that will pay for Adam Braz in one shot
Why San Diego? Miami is a better market than San Diego. You do realize there are tons of non-Cuban, non-Mexican Hispanics in Miami now as well as Haitians and Jamaicans who (with the right marketing) would support an MLS team right? That's why Garber on occassion "spews" or rather talks about a return to Miami. It's also a very glamorous place that would attract DP type players. Methinks you haven't looked at your demographics too closely because up to 30% of MLS fans are Hispanic. It just so happens most of them are from other Central American countries like El Salvador, Costa Rica, Honduras, etc, NOT Mexico. And then you want a team in San Diego!?! Why? There is a team just across the border in Tijuana who most people into futbol in San Diego already support. All Miami has is the minor league Miami FC. Don't generalize. Hispanic as a "demographic" is just about meaningless when it comes to MLS unless you drill down into the specific Hispanic and Latino groups. When MLS left Miami it was mostly because: 1) The owner was undercapitalized (he had very little cash) 2) The team was marketed to the "South Beach crowd" NOT Hispanics, Haitians, Jamaicans, etc 3) The non-Cuban Hispanic population was much smaller than it is now. Miami in a lot of ways is like a Toronto waiting to happen. You may not be aware of this but many people doubted that Toronto FC would be a huge success. After all, most of the people who watched football there followed European or South American leagues. Would they support MLS? TFC didn't seem to think so as they had planned initially for only 12,000 season ticket holders maximum. But because they had clever marketing "All for One" and they connected with football fans and came off as being an "authentic football club the whole city could get behind as their SECOND football team" then people supported it. The problem with MLS for a long time was they acted as if football didn't exist outside of MLS. Now they realize in places like Toronto, Seattle, Portland, Vancouver, Montreal and maybe down the road Miami that people have other teams they may watch in better league but there is no reason why their local football team can't be their second favorite.
Is that a real number or an estimate by you? I am not trying to be difficult but just trying to understand. I have not spent any great amount of time in Seattle but I don't think of it as a particularly Hispanic city.....so I am guessing (could be wrongly) that the number in Seattle is much lower than 30%...similarly here, while we do have people from spanish speaking countries (mainly south american) they do not comprise a large part of our city/region so I would guess/bet that we are much lower than 30% too. I have been to a couple of Chicago Fire games and, yes, there is a very latin/Mexican feel to Toyota Park during those games. I would imagine that is also the case in LA (certainly was for the one Chivas match I went to). Been to a match in SJ it did not feel very Hispanic.....very waspy/suburban feel to that match really. I would imagine that DC does have a large following from the Hispanic community......similarly Houston and Dallas, I guess, but when you add up those little bits does it actually come to 30% or is that a guess? Who tracks this sort of stuff anyway (outside of the clubs......I guess I am now in, both, Chicago's and Chivas' data base and ocassionally I will get a voice mail from those clubs and it is always Spanish first and then English). Don't worry, Montreal will add French to the league and then those Haitian Miami folks will have someone to follow.
It's a real number that was cited back in 2007 or 2008 in Sports Buisness Journal. The number may actually be higher now. You'd be right. While we do get a fair number of Hispanics coming to games (more this season than last BTW) we are not anywhere near the 30%. However in Chicago, LA, Houston, DC and surprisingly Salt Lake City the number is probably greater than 30% The 30% figure was across the board not talking about your city, or mine. I agree. As for the 30% number, like I said, it came from Sports Business Journal some years ago. There's probably a thread somewhere buried on BigSoccer discussing it but i can't be arsed to look for it.
You do realize Montreal's high attendance in D2 was due to government subsidized low ticket prices right? MLS tickets will cost a bit more.
As I said, you can do one off games there (perhaps even vs TFC), but not an entire season. I note that TFC has yet to do anything at the Skydome under similar circumstances either....