"Oklahoma has a very good chance of landing a Major League Soccer franchise as the Oklahoma City metropolitan area and Tulsa compete for one of four new teams, a league official says." This is a paragraph from an Associated Press report on OKC's possibilty of getting an MLS franchise. My question is, does anyone have any information as to which cities are vying for these four spots? Also, will all four teams come about in the same year?
My guess would be: These are the cities I believe to be vying for MLS and in no preferential (alpha) order and I can't say which ones have already or which cities are in the elite eight: Cleveland Detroit Houston Minnesota (Minneapolis/St. Paul) Oklahoma City Philadelphia Portland Rochester St. Louis San Diego Seattle Tulsa Potential ownership groups and a soccer specific stadium will almost guarantee a franchise for any of the above mentioned cities. If I have left an area out please let me know, if you know of a city in the above list that has dropped out of the MLS picture let me know and maybe we can figure out which eight cities are vying for an MLS franchise.
Move KC to OK.... Maybe they can draw 15k+ in OK because I just don't see Kansas City ever fully supporting their team unless a new stadium is built.
Re: My guess would be: You need to go back and look at Garber's statements from the All-Star game. "This weekend, we have a contingent of interested investors joining us from Tulsa, Oklahoma and Cleveland, Ohio. In the past months, we have visited several new potential new MLS markets, including Toronto, Detroit, and San Antonio. Cleveland - new mention Detroit - new mention Philadelphia - Not mentioned since WUSA and MLS parted company St. Louis - not mentioned by MLS, ever, that I know of San Antonio - new mention Seattle and Portland - not been mentioned in a long time Tulsa - new mention Houston - not mentioned in a long time. Astrodome now needs a purpose though, since the Olympics are not coming. Minneapolis-not heard an official mention, ever. Maybe there's been one. Milwaukee--since the last guy went away, nothing. Then they went to OKC a week later, and Lamar said they had a good chance. Don't get me started on Rochester--they are going nowhere fast. San Diego is not too likely. So, the 8 are, if I had to guess... Detroit Philadelphia San Antonio Seattle Houston OKC Toronto Either Cleveland or Milwaukee, but not both.
Re: Re: My guess would be: There has, by Garber. There was a thread about it in here before the crash. I think it was around April or May when he said it.
Re: Re: Re: My guess would be: I don't recall that, but in any event, I assume MLS would only relocate there if a SSS was built in downtown St. Paul or MPLS. I don't think there would be much likelihood that they would play in Blaine. In terms of locations, it's worse than Naperville. It's also been discussed (pre-crash) whether the Metrodome could work. Again, I highly doubt it. The only way that would happen is if the Vikings moved and the Metrodome was not torn down. In that case, it could become like RFK (stadium without a tenant), and the Metropolitan Sports Facilities Commission might agree to very low rent to get an MLS team. It would also need to install Field Turf. The best chance to get MLS in the Twin Cities would be to get a SSS attached to any new bills for Twins and Viking stadiums--again a very long shot. Alternatively, the only other possibility would be if a new Vikings owner (Glen Taylor?) also was willing to invest in MLS, in which case MLS could conceivably let an MLS team play in a new Viking stadium with a CMGI-like arrangement.
Re: Re: My guess would be: Here's a USA Today article from March 2002 that says "Garber says MLS is considering expansion to Philadelphia, Houston, Rochester, Seattle, St. Louis or Minneapolis-St. Paul." It's not as recent as the All-Star Game, but St. Louis and the Twin Cities have indeed been mentioned by MLS in the recent past. http://www.usatoday.com/sports/soccer/mls/stories/2002-03-21-leaner.htm
Houston Houston is the best bet for expansion. Then maybe Seattle, but the stadium fell through, so now Oklahoma or another NY team.
Re: Houston All right John... tell us the name of the O/I... not the potential O/I, but the real one (since this is the only reason I can think of right now as to why Houston would be a "best bet")... then tell us when/where the new SSS is going to be built or perhaps about the great stadium lease deal they'd get at Reliant... while you're at it, how's the season ticket drive goin' for your "best bet" franchise?
Since Rochester will not be building Pae Tec Park, we can scratch Rochester off the list. They were long shots anyway. They are going to focus on building a smaller stadium or refurbishing Frontier Field making it more soccer friendly for the A-League Rhinos.
I keep hearing about this crash. Did it happen within the last couple of days? (I wasn't here) Someone please inform the lost one (me)
No. California already has 2 teams. MLS needs to balance it out throughout states. I say OKC, New Mexico, or Florida (maybe.) But wherever MLS goes, I hope it's a smaller market so there's no competing with MLB and NFL.
Re: Re: My guess would be: Sad but true. Although the Padres are moving out of Qualcomm stadium soon. Not a SSS, but it's still a stadium free of conflicts that can support MLS. RFK can do it, so why not Qualcomm??
This should not be a reason to keep a team away from San Diego. There's close to 30 million people in the state, with 18 million in Southern California. And I bet if you compared the distance from DC to Boston to New York, it would be smaller than the distance from San Jose to San Diego. California is a big state, and cities the size of Oklahoma city or Albequerque(sp?) are suburbs in CA. To give you a feeling for the size of the California market, if CA was it's own country it'd have the 8th GDP in the world. There's a reason that there are currently two teams in CA, and that's because it is a huge market.
Re: Re: 4 Expansion Teams? Well said my friend! Couldn't have said it better myself. But that's cause I'm dumb...well thats another story hehe.
It's not population but fan base. Yes, there are a lot of people in Cali, but I don't believe they have the largest amount of soccer fans out of all the states. Let me make-up an example here: let's say OKC has 10,000 people in it and San Diego has 1 million. And OKC has 5,000 soccer fans and Diego only has 1,000. Where would be the logical place to expand? Think about it. In fact, I just thought of a REAL example: when the Fire moved to Cardinal they didn't get the most suppport in the beginning, but their last 5-6 games were sold out (even over capacity most of the time.) Even though Naperville is a suburb, it showed that it's capable of supporting a major league team. I think we all can learn from that experience and remember to go where there is a demand for soccer, and not always huge populations.
mls teams I think Phoenix or San Diego would be the best for a new team. I know tons of soccer fans in Phoenix who crave soccer. Arizona doesn't have one division 1 soccer program. The state needs a major soccer team that all the fans of the game can watch and follow. I have watched numerous mls games in L.A. , Colo. , and San Jose. I have noticed the fans at all these game are about 80-90 % Hispanic. Phoenix has a very large hispanic population. I am almost certain if they got an MlS team their attendance would be better then most of the other mls teams. I feel this would be the case with San Diego also. It just seems the Hispanics, Latinos, etc... just get more into the games and supporting their teams then the average white American. I went to the Galaxy game tonight and it was about 90% hispanics. It was awesome to see how involved they were getting. It just seems like an another MLS team in the SouthWest would be more successful in the long run then one up north or elsewhere.
If you're going to use hypothetical examples, at least make them realistic. I've been to multiple games in San Diego involving Mexico with 50,000+. I've also been to a US game without Mexico with around 20,000. And before you bring up the Allstar game, it was poorly marketed and still got a decent showing. The SD Spirit is a WUSA team that averages over 6,000 and the Sockers have been know to get 10,000+ in attendance. There are plenty of soccer fans in the San Diego/Tijuana area. Also population size does matter, because soccer fans and people in attendance at a soccer game are not mutually exclusive. I'm sure there are plenty of people who aren't soccer fans that go to MLS games. So if an areas population base is larger, than in general more people will go to games. The SD metro area is about 2.5 million plus an additional 1 million+ in Tijuana that usually isn't included in the SD metro area. There may be good reasons to keep MLS out of SD (ie. lack of stadium/owner), but lack of support is not one of them. IMHO, San Diego would be able to do better than San Jose.
Re: mls teams Phoenix would be a good area because it is growing fast, and has the potential for a lot of support. But, weather is always an issue when it comes to Phoenix. Unless there was a stadium with a dome, I don't think the league would ever allow games to regularly be played in 110 degree heat. Although after the new Cardinals stadium gets built, it might just be a viable option. Useless factoid: The city of Mesa has more people in it than the city of St. Louis.
Re: Re: mls teams Is Phoenix hotter than Dallas, Houston, Atlanta, Tampa, and Miami? Is Phoenix more humid than Dallas, Houston, Atlanta, Tampa, and Miami? - Paul
Re: Re: Re: mls teams Yes it's hotter than those places you mentioned, and no it's not as humid. Phoenix average temps Dallas average temps Miami average temps Here's the average high temperatures for July: Phoenix = 106 Dallas = 95 Miami = A cool 89 Trust me, it is hot in Phoenix. It's not unusual to get 115 degree days. It's a dry heat, but it still sucks ass.
Re: Re: 4 Expansion Teams? Originally posted by empennage If you're going to use hypothetical examples, at least make them realistic. I've been to multiple games in San Diego involving Mexico with 50,000+. I've also been to a US game without Mexico with around 20,000. Yes, and THAT'S the problem: Will fans of Mexico and MFL consistently show up at San Diego games? And before you bring up the Allstar game, it was poorly marketed and still got a decent showing. The SD Spirit is a WUSA team that averages over 6,000 and the Sockers have been know to get 10,000+ in attendance. Sockers? Outdoors. Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Certainly they found large crowds for a perenially successful indoor team. Here they are anyway: 1978- 5591 (18-12) 1979- 11271 (15-15) 1980- 12690 (16-16) 1981- 14802 (21-11) 1982- 8532 (19-13) 1983- 4214 (11-19) 1984- 5702 (14-10) Compare to San Jose: 1978- 14281 (8-22) 1979- 15092 (8-22) 1980- 13169 (9-23) 1981- 12400 (11-21) 1982- 11012 (13-19) 1983- 11933 (20-10)* 1984- 10676 (8-16) *name changed to "Golden Bay" Earthquakes much like the MLS team tried to do by changing the name from Clash to 'Quakes. Compare to Ft.L/Miami: 1978- 10479 (16-14) 1979- 13774 (17-13) 1980- 14279 (18-14) 1981- 13324 (18-14) 1982- 12345 (18-14) 1983- 10823 (14-16) **1984- 14263 (14-10)** **team moved to the Metrodome as the "Minnesota Strikers" Compare to Tulsa: (knew this was coming, didn't ya 1978- 11207 (15-15) 1979- 16425 (14-16) 1980- 19787 (15-17) 1981- 17188 (17-15) 1982- 14469 (16-16) 1983- 12415 (17-13) 1984- 7797 (10-14) These numbers can get very confusing: to the point where many who weren't there like to call them "MEANINGLESS." All I can say is it is just one measurement of many and gives a small edge that sometimes has more to do with front office/local marketing expertise than actually fan support... just because the fans WERE there then doesn't mean they'll come back 20 years later... ask Tampa. I can say that it is probably no coincidence that teams with good A-League attendance like Portland, Minnesota, Seattle, and Rochester had NASL experiences (Rochester played at a bad hs stadium--Holleder, while Seattle and Minn. were very successful--much like Tampa-- while Portland was moderately successful). Boston averaged about 12,000 fans in '78 but moved from Foxboro to Nickerson Field the following year... eventually moving to Jacksonville. Oakland averaged about 12,000 their first year in '78 but were inexplicably moved to Edmonton. Denver averaged about 7500 fans (still higher than the Sockers) their first year and moved in '79 to Atlanta where they drew even worse... There are plenty of soccer fans in the San Diego/Tijuana area. But will they buy season tickets? Also population size does matter, because soccer fans and people in attendance at a soccer game are not mutually exclusive. Agreed. Yet NASL franchises (dare I say all sports) had differing fan bases in different markets. Atlanta has a bad reputation for not supporting it's teams. Los Angeles lost its NFL team to St. Louis after St. Louis moved to Cardinals to Arizona. Columbus has a miniscule hispanic population yet very high MLS attendance. I'm sure there are plenty of people who aren't soccer fans that go to MLS games. So if an areas population base is larger, than in general more people will go to games. not sure of that either... I think the general population of Columbus knows more about the Crew than the general population of the Bay Area/Chicago/NYC know about the Quakes/Fire/Metros due to the nature of the media coverage. A friend of mine in Boston who knows very little about soccer knew NE had a soccer team but thought the season ended sometime in August!?! There may be good reasons to keep MLS out of SD (ie. lack of stadium/owner), but lack of support is not one of them. IMHO, San Diego would be able to do better than San Jose. Changes in demographics (hispanic population/TV ratings/growth of youth soccer) help your argument, but I'm not necessarily convinced that SD would do any better than SJ... ...unless they had an owner and a good atmosphere/stadium in which to play. The lesson here isn't about fan base... it's about blindly placing teams in cities like Tampa, Miami, SJ, Dallas based on some sort of NASL tradition or youth soccer demographics. Now if San Diego (or Houston, or Seattle, or Philly, or Tulsa, or OKC) could come up with a season ticket drive of over 10,000 like Columbus did, hey... THAT'S WHAT I'D CALL FAN SUPPORT...