Ooh! Conspiracy!!! I just wish DC had a rich enough owner who just says F@ it, had enough, I am building this damn thing with my money and were starting tomorrow.
Wait. How was Al Gore supposed to stop MLB from relocating one of it's franchises? I'm sure, like any good politician, he would have been their to toss out the first pitch. It's cute how people let their hate of another sport cloud their judgement
I increasingly get the feeling that, for a new stadium to be built somewhere in the area, the team is eventually going to end up moving. Hear me out for a second, because I know that sounds nuts. I absolutely hate to think this. But perhaps the current United ownership/front office team has worn itself out with various municipalities in the area. Whether or not it's their fault, there doesn't seem to be much movement towards a new stadium at all in the area. The stadium very likely won't be built in Virginia. It won't be built in the District, and chances are that it won't be built in Maryland either. At least it won't be built under this current iteration. What may actually happen is that the current ownership gets fed up with the situation, is sick of losing money, and sadly moves to another jurisdiction. (Whether that be St. Louis, etc. Who knows.) MLS would likely look towards DC as a near-term expansion candidate, much they did the same with San Jose. MLS knows this is a top market; that's no secret. But the team is bleeding money. If a team is to return to the D.C. metro area, it happens provided the league finds the team a find a new buyer. D.C. gets to keep the colors and history, and a new stadium project is begun by the new ownership group, which doesn't have the baggage of the previous one. Granted, there are no guarantees here. But I think this is an increasing possibility. And before anyone jumps on me for saying this, I DON'T want the team to move. But ultimately, this is a business as much as it is a sport. And there is plenty of precedent for this here in the United States. It happened to the Cleveland Browns of the NFL. The team left Cleveland, the city kept the history/colors,and the NFL granted expansion to Cleveland yet again a few years later, with a new stadium to boot. The same happened with the NBA's Charlotte franchises (the hornets and Bobcats). Heck, the same thing that happened with the Nats, to some degree. It's probably going to be what happens with a possible future NBA franchise in Seattle. Again, I hate to say it, but I could very well see this situation play out with our beloved United. If it could be done to an NFL institution as the Cleveland Browns, it sure as hell could happen to D.C. United.
As a St. Louisan, I both hope and expect that United will be staying in DC. I'd rather wait for an expansion team than steal one from some of the best fans in America. More practically, if MLS won't sell Jeff Cooper an expansion team, I'm not sure they'd approve his purchase of the league's flagship franchise. And the ownership group here has turned away from the already-approved stadium plan in Illinois toward a totally new plan that isn't paid for, at a site that may not even work. So realistically, St. Louis is probably years away from being able to host a team. I guess DCU could move somewhere else, but it won't be St. Louis. And my hope is that it won't be anywhere. If any team needs to stay where it is, it's DC United.
As they should. Taxpayers shouldn't be footing the bill with the economy in the shambles it is right now.
This scenario has crossed my mind also and I think it to be a likely one now. We somehow seem to have worn out our welcome in this area and the ownership and front office may have to go. They at every turn have seemingly made the wrong moves. I realize they were dealt a bad hand, but other teams in other cities have made it happen. United is now the perfect candidate for relocation. It pains me to say it but it's true; this city doesn't want us, others do, United will probably be moved.
So you're saying that because George W Bush is tied to MLB he 86ed any hope of an MLS stadium being built in the district. Furthermore you contend that Al Gore would have stepped in to assure that A $200 million SSS were built in the District for United. I can see how W may have supported the Nationals stadium project, but everything else you said in conspiracy theory nonsense. Take the aluminum foil off of your head man.
Well, the problem is that the Prince George's County Council doesn't seem to want a soccer stadium, period. The County Council doesn't seem to care how it's financed. They're just not having any of it. And, accordingly, the MD Senate and House of Delegates apparently aren't even going to have a committee vote on the bill to do another study, much less than consider a bill to issue bonds. This MD General Assembly simply isn't going to do anything this session. Yeah, I hear you. As far as I can tell, the prospects for a new D.C. United Stadium are completely dead in both the District and Maryland. It looks like this is all she wrote . . .
I have the solution to United's problems. Now I know D.C. United ownership might not be so enthusiastic about playing in such a dump, but hey, they get to stay in town. With the reduced costs, it might even make earning a profit a bit easier...
it will be pretty insightful if MLS management does not collectively get together and figure this out .... having been following and attending DCU since season 1 - to see this garbage play out .... particularly within a metro area with arguably the best fan base in the country for this squad - would be a travesty. Yes it is a business ... but if MLS cannot step in and help out one of their two or three flagship teams - then perhaps it is the death knell in the long term for the league ....
Yes, but what if AEG did the financing as AEG and not MLS? I don't think that would just be playing with semantics. MLS could continue to claim that it has not and will not ever finance a stadium. AEG could get all the concert rights for free. MLS could cook the books towards AEG and backdoor contribute to the financing, etc..... Normally, I would just move the franchise and award an expansion to DC United. But we are talking DC here (not just any ol' franchise). Also, one could see where financing a stadium could be a money-maker- DC United has had very consistent attendence for 15 years now, etc.
Not to make a mocking point, but with the addition of Toronto and Seattle isn't DC like number 4 on the "flagship" list now?
Moving a team to Canada is horrible payback for making us take the Expos. Can you imagine how much more smug those Canadians would be knowing that they were able to burn down DC and then nearly 200 years later take a soccer team that actually wins? I'm not sure they would be able to deal with that much success. Too much of a good thing all at once could cause them to do irrational things like re-routing rivers as part of theme parks instead of for hyroelectricity or digging up and burning oil because birds look funny covered in soot and oil. //I enjoy speculating on what type of stadium United could build. They were dreaming pretty large in the beginning, but we don't know where they stood with PG. All we know is they wanted a roof and some bouncing stands for one section. Any sort of details of what nearly $200 million could buy would have come with the next study...
No, because several teams did well for a few years (ie New England, Columbus) but when their team didn't perform or the FO and security were terrible (ie Miami, NY/NJ) their fortunes changed. DCU has also won a lot of silverware and let's wait and see how long it takes for SS or TFC to collect some.
Yes. Anybody whose saying TFC or Seattle are flagships either have absolutely no clue. DC has the most championships. It has had some of the legends of the league. They have continued to draw through ups and downs despite rickety ole RFK, and have the best supporters group in the league. What other city has as committed an MLS journalist after all? Anyways, DC and LA are the flagships. Seattle and Toronto are very nice additions, but I promise you if you asked Garber which of those four teams he'd prefer to move, he wouldn't be able to get Toronto and Seattle out of his mouth quick enough. That being said, drastic measures may need to be taken. Those measures may need to include a possible investor from, say, St. Louis, NYC or Atlanta coming in and offering flashing digs and scaring DC into reconsidering. BTW, I would love to see Obama go to a game. Him simply recognizing the United franchise in the city could do wonders. It'd just be a way to remind everyone that DC's there and an integral part of the city, and that they can't be allowed to get away.
The missing piece of the DCU stadium negotiations is scaling back the scope of the project. No way DCU needs 190M to build a decent SSS. Rio Tinto is a real nice stadium and the Philly SSS promises to be even better, and their cost is much less than 190M. I've been assuming that scaling the project back is a card ownership has been holding until necessary. Well maybe its necessary now. BTW, I wouldn't call BMO a dump. It ain't fancy, but 20,000 fans seem to figure out how to have a great time there.
and they are in Sandy and Chester. DC wants to keep the team as close to the city as possible (and on the current metro system). it's the more expensive option that DC is pursuing (and it makes getting anything done that much more difficult -- given the value and availability of land closer to the population centers -- and the idea of putting the stadium in a location that will quickly realize addional development and additional revenue for the developers of the stadium and the surrounding new buildings.) the HDC is the comparable stadium to BMO Field (in terms of the role it fills and how it came about.) Canada's Fed needed a national venue (and a main/new cite for the U20 WC in 2007) kinda like how US Soccer got a (warm-weather) home venue and facilities for the US teams in Carson. if US Soccer needed a new east coast 20K venue to host a hypothetical youth WC in DC, then it's very likely that more things would have been pushed along to make a Poplar Point stadium a reality. the truth is that each city and each stadium plan is unique. DC United is facing (and has faced) some very tough circumstances (and at times they have done things to not help their cause).
whoops...I guess people misinterpreted my "idea" I was suggesting DC build a BMO (which is a very decent facility, not a dump like I sarcasticly said), as in a cheaper, less expensive stadium. They seem to want in public funds what NFL and NBA teams couldn't get at the moment, much less D.C. United.
But discussions of what kind of soccer stadium to build are moot when there's never been any land to build it on. DC United never had Lot 8 at RFK in their control. They never had Poplar Point in their control. The don't have land in PG County in their control. It's one thing to say they should do this or that with the design. But it's missing the point. DC United has never gotten the real estate needed for stadium. That's problems 1, 2, 3... 20 in DC. Real Estate.
DC's owners need to do what SJ's owners are doing then... buy their own land. I'm sure there are plots of land big enough in and around DC. DC's owners just need to identify them and plunk the cash down and make a straight up purchase.