Cities MLS HAS to be in...

Discussion in 'MLS: Expansion' started by gosya, Dec 2, 2004.

  1. gosya

    gosya Member

    Feb 6, 2001
    New York
    I know it's potentially dangerous for a business to devise "must be in" stategies, but here I go. I think 3-4 cities that MLS absolutely has to be in w/ in the next five years is (in no particular order):
    Philly
    Rochester
    St Louis and, maybe,
    Houston

    Beyond that, 2-3 cities that would be very nice to expand to (once again in no particular order):
    Seattle
    Portand
    San Antonio and, BIG maybe,
    Florida

    I think that's it. Outside of these cities, I don't think it particularly matters. Whether you go w/ a larger Cleveland and Detroit or smaller Oklahoma (assuming a larger proportional fanbase) - I'm personally indifferent. It seems that it's not a lock at all that MLS would survive there, nor that MLS needs to be there in the first place.
     
  2. Supersuperman99

    Supersuperman99 New Member

    Oct 28, 2004
    Los Angeles
    First Off no teams in Canada!!!! Please, My cities are: Philly, Rochester, Seattle, Detroit, Houston, San Antonio, Any big city in Florida (Lets give them a second chance),Atlanta, St.Louis and Why not New Orleans (lot of Frenchies and they like soccer), I dont mean to ofend any of you french dudes in the big eazy
     
  3. MLS3

    MLS3 New Member

    Feb 7, 2000
    Pac NW
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    why hasn't anyone listed New York City as a MUST BE IN?

    anyways, heres are the ReAL MUST BE IN'S:

    New York (Empire)
    Houston (Apollos)
    Rochester (Rhinos)
    Philadelphia (Independence)
    Seattle (Evergreens or Schooners)
    Portland (Pioneers)

    those are the next 6 cities MLS needs to be in...that would give us 18 which MLS wants to be at 18 with maybe going to 20...so if we add two more there is Florida, Detroit, Cleveland or Minnesota...
     
  4. Clint Eastwood

    Clint Eastwood Member+

    Dec 23, 2003
    Somerville, MA
    Club:
    FC Dallas

    Canada's in whether we like it or not. Garber and MLS go where the money is, period.

    I like the fact that Rochester is on all of your lists, and I like the Rhinos. On the had other hand, MLS doesn't HAVE to be there.
     
  5. purojogo

    purojogo Member

    Sep 23, 2001
    US/Peru home
    Club:
    New York Red Bulls
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Because if Harrison were really to occur, the Metros would be much closer to NYC (1 Path train away), than the Giants, Jets, Devils or even the future Nets would be
     
  6. Agogwe

    Agogwe Member

    Sep 12, 2003
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Agreed. As much as I'd love to have a team in Detroit, until an investor comes along, it's not going to happen. They have to go where the money is.
     
  7. Frank Cunha

    Frank Cunha New Member

    Sep 17, 2001
    UNION TOWNSHIP, NJ
    Philadelphia
    Detroit
    Rochester
    Minneapolis
    Seattle
     
  8. AndyMead

    AndyMead Homo Sapien

    Nov 2, 1999
    Seat 12A
    Club:
    Sporting Kansas City
    MLS is already in too many small markets. I see no reason why MLS needs to be in Rochester.
     
  9. mls2atl

    mls2atl Member

    Sep 13, 2004
    Atlanta, GA
    Club:
    Atlanta
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    philly
    detroit
    houston or san antonio
    carolina, atlanta, or florida (somewhere in the southeast)
    south dakota (just kidding :D )
     
  10. SC in SF

    SC in SF Member

    Nov 18, 2004
    SF
    My list with no particular order:

    Rochester Rhinos
    Houston SC
    AC Miami
    Seattle Sounders
    Independence Philadephia
    New York Cosmos


    If by chance we DO have pro/reg, then MLS2 has:

    Detroit SC
    FC San Antonio
    Cleveland SC
    Atlanta Silverbacks
    Charleston Battery
    Virginia Beach Mariners
    St. Louis SC
    Portland Timber
    Oklahoma SC
    Virginia Beach Mariners
    Richmond Kickers
    Hartford SC
     
  11. Bayern1986

    Bayern1986 New Member

    Sep 24, 2004
    Houston, Texas

    Aggree, a bigger fanbase in big cities, MLS needs to be in Houston, Philly, Detroit, and Seattle.
     
  12. CeltTexan

    CeltTexan Member+

    Sep 21, 2000
    Houston, TX USA
    Club:
    Houston Dynamo
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Gentlemen,

    The Don said that,"MLS is not complete until we have a team in Houston."

    But as anyone that takes business 101 will tell you, an investor who's willing to lose money and all the specifics have to be in place...and that's the easy part.
    The Miami Fusion highlighted the hard part in connecting to the culture and making MLS work in what are "MUST" or "HAS TO BE" markets.
     
  13. MT mojo

    MT mojo New Member

    Apr 23, 2004
    Montana
    If Canada is where the money is at, why do all their teams move south of the border? Ponder this.
     
  14. gherter

    gherter Member

    Sep 16, 2002
    Leesburg, Virginia
    I think to get the attention of the big TV networks, which is what will take the league to the next level, MLS will need to be in Philly, Atlanta, Seattle, St Louis, Detroit, and Houston. If we get to 18 with that list, you will start to see the big networks carrying the division championships, and maybe a game of the week.

    Any others they pick up along the way will be gravy (Toronto, San Antonio, Rochester, Portland, OKC, etc.). Nice to have, but TV execs won't care much (you can throw SLC in there, too).
     
  15. stevewhit0

    stevewhit0 New Member

    Jun 26, 2001
    Champaign, IL
    all their teams? lets not make it out to be that Canada can not support pro sports teams. The reason a lot of NHL teams left was not because canada could not support the teams it more of owners thinking the grass is greener on the other side. ok thats enought talk about that subject. I dont really care if the MLS goes to Canada.
     
  16. Seph

    Seph Member

    Dec 2, 2004
    St. Louis, Mo., USA
    Club:
    St. Louis Lions
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I'm glad to see so many people in this forum mentioning St. Louis. Right now we have no viable venue for an MLS team, but this city is a hotbed of soccer fans and talent.

    As far as having a dedicated, sports-following, soccer-interested fan base, St. Louis is a far superior choice for MLS expansion than anywhere in Florida, Oklahoma, or Canada.
     
  17. superdave

    superdave Member+

    Jul 14, 1999
    VB, VA
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Why?

    If Atlanta or Birmingham or the Triangle, by itself, is a good market, then great. Put a team there. But putting a team in Atlanta won't benefit enough from fans in Raleigh or Birmingham to make a difference. The tiny number of 300 mile round trip fans from all over the Southeast going to Atlanta won't boost Atlanta over, for example, Philly. Atlanta has to beat out Philly by itself.
     
  18. superdave

    superdave Member+

    Jul 14, 1999
    VB, VA
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I pondered it. And I noticed that MLS has crap franchises and crap stadium deals. None of the teams moving from Canada to the US are moving from great stadium deals into crap stadium deals. If MLS puts a team into a great stadium deal instead of a crappy one, there's the difference!! Even xenophobes can figure it out!!
     
  19. Beech

    Beech Member

    Jul 26, 2001
    Kansas City
    Club:
    Kansas City Wizards
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I don't care if there's money in Canada. MLS is a domestic league. Outside of the entertainment revenue, one of it's objectives is to develop domestic talent. If you have a Canadian team, is their roster 24 Canadians with 4 SI's or is a Canadian team going to field 24 US based players per league rules and burn their 4 SI slots all on Canadian players just to try and hold interest in that local market? I would assume that Canadian fans, like US fans, would like to support these teams with a bit of national interest (Canadian players) just like we do in the US, and just like the Mexican fans prefer their nationality as a major populace of their favorite teams' roster.

    I would think that once you choose to ignore the domestic nations borders, as a professional governing organization, (based in the US with US legal concerns), you must then address the courtship of all the Mexican Federation teams as well that would like to conveniently place team in the Houston, Dallas, and California markets for starters. Or MLS would need to start sending it teams potentially to Mexcio City etc... as well as Canada, West Coast, East Coast etc... Travel could kill players have to travel literally all over the hemisphere weekly. If you didn't there is a major discrimination concern as a few of the major Mexican frachises should be able to meet and or exceed the current known expansion requirements of being able to fund start up captial, a venue arrangement, and solid marketing in the US and immediately have a positive revenue stream and a large pool of their own national talent. If you let in Canada then I believe you have to let in Mexico as they are realistically able to turn into a positive revenue stream for the league faster than a Canadian franchise. If thats the case then Go Mexi's...

    To keep the thread on topic the cities MLS has to be in are:
    1. All existing period (even SJ)
    2. As many Major Media Markets as you can. Media coverage is crucial to our growth and national acceptance/popularity IMO. (i.e. Is your Major Lacrosse League really carry any weight if all your franchises exist in Flagstaff, Siox City, Topeka, Birmingham, Tulsa etc?)
    3. Seattle, Somewhere in Florida, St Louis, Philly...
     
  20. MT mojo

    MT mojo New Member

    Apr 23, 2004
    Montana
    I'll admit that I had to look up the word xenophobe as it was foreign to me. (How do ya like that pun?) Anyways, I don't think that the Toronto stadium is going to be that much of a sweetheart deal. The primary tenant is going to be the Argonauts, and property of York University. This could mean that a Toronto franchise may not be getting as much revenue as the two previously mentioned groups. Also, IIRC, the place in going to have artificial turf. Since the CFL plays during summer and fall, the gridlines would be on the field for the majority of the soccer season.
     
  21. skyscraper

    skyscraper Member

    Dec 6, 2003
    Philadelphia
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    ...which it won't...
     
  22. BulaJacket

    BulaJacket Member

    Columbus Crew (hometown), Minnesota United (close ties), Colorado Rapids (now home), Jacksonville Armada (ties)
    United States
    May 9, 2003
    Ashtabula, OH / Denver, CO / MN / Jax
    Club:
    Colorado Rapids
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    The MAJOR difference in those two places is that one has a current and relatively strong soccer setup, with supported federation, first division league, etc. FIFA, fans, etc recognize it. Canada does not, as they collectively are only a small part of a second division multicountry league; Monumental flaw in that argument. This has nothing to do with the Mexicans, because they're already established (and how would their federation feel about what you're saying?). I'm sure FIFA and everyone else would love to have a strong soccer setup in Canada, but there isn't currently. And it is also debatable whether Canada would (be able to) support an independent quality league. Secondly travel isn't much more of a difference outside of places in central Canada like Edmonton, Calgary, Regina, Saskatoon, etc than it is to other US markets. MLS is already a coast to coast league. Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver are relatively close to the border and to major US metro areas. They aren't that far from places like Seattle, Portland, Detroit, Cleveland, Buffalo, Rochester, Boston, NYC, etc; It's not like they are located in the Northwest Territories.
     
  23. TopDogg

    TopDogg Member

    Jan 31, 2000
    Toronto
    Club:
    Toronto FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    No Mexican League teams will be allowed to start up in the US because US Soccer WILL NOT ALLOW IT. How hard is this to understand?

    If you're talking about Mexicans investing in the league, welcome to a year ago when it was widely known that Chivas would be starting an expansion MLS club.
     
  24. petersoccer

    petersoccer Red Card

    Dec 2, 2004
    Mississauga,Ontario

    The Toronto STadium is a Joint venture between the CFL Football Team and the Canadian Soccer Association. The football gridlines will be chalked in and not permanent. The facility will be the home training ground of the Mens and Ladies National teams. Football will use 9 dates in total and will not use the facility for practice.
    As for the player Ratio it will be reverse of the US teams, Canadians will get as many spots on MLS canada teams as Americans get on US teams.
     
  25. mls2atl

    mls2atl Member

    Sep 13, 2004
    Atlanta, GA
    Club:
    Atlanta
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    according to a report published by us soccer foundation in 2003 the south has the highest soccer participation levels of the entire us. 5,788,000 people participate in the south followed by 5,781,000 in the north central, 3,944,00 in the northeast, and 3,529,000 in the west. according to the report made by soccer silicon valley, florida is ranked 8th with 613,000 participants and north carolina is ranked 10th with 467,000 particpants. the others are:
    1.california (3 teams)
    2.new york
    3.texas (1 team)
    4.ohio (1 team)
    5.pennsylvania
    6.michigan
    7.new jersey (1 team)
    8.florida
    9.minnesota
    10.north carolina

    so that is why i feel that mls needs a team in the southeast. we have the highest participation levels in the nation and 2 of the top 10 states in participation are in the south.

    you can find these reports at
    ussoccerfoundation.org and soccersiliconvalley.com
     

Share This Page