Expand to St. Louis

I'm sure MLS will expand there when an interested investor with stadium in tow shows up.

Sachin

 

nothing more...???

 

everyone huh?

I was kinda missing a St. Louis thread, we haven't had one in at least 3 days now.

 

what else do you want? power steering?

 

yeah

mls rejected the one i have been working on in my parent's backyard because it didn't have power steering

and since i kinda messed things up when i was building the damn thing... i can't go back and put power in

 

you do bring up something that most people don't really understand (at least from my views of chicago sports and st. louis sports)

in st. louis there is 100% backing of their sports team from other teams... down the line, nobody says one bad thing

hell, they often don't really say anythign bad about their biggest rivalries... the cubs, the blackhawks, and the redwings

i'll listen to a whitesox game and maybe the announcers will throw in something about how hockey guys are stupid or whateve

you simply don't get that with a st. louis broadcast... it's unheard of

i can't even think of the number of times i have heard soccer mentioned on a cardinals radio or tv broadcast... and i don't just mean in the last few years... granted they don't happen frequently, but they do and the response is very positive... they point out slu and the talent in the area

st. louis is just special in those manners



but it is as sachin says

until there is an investor with a stadium... nothing happens

 

That happens a bit in Buffalo too --- the Bills and Sabres and Bisons tend to get a nice bit of synergy going, among the announcers certainly if not always the fans. Having the same sports network cover the lot tends to aid in that direction, but nonetheless, there is supportiveness. That's part of the reason I think a USL club would work out quite nicely in the B'lo (or St. Louis, for that matter), but there's plenty about that on the USL boards.

 

Re: Re: Expand to St. Louis

True...St. Louis has some of, if not the, best fans in professional sports. But, this is soccer, and professional competition to the citys crown jewel, the Cardinals. I just can't imagine soccer going head to head with one of the best supported baseball teams in MLB, and it's a pretty small market. Between their heavy support for the Cardinals, Blues, and Rams I would be a bit weary of just how much more these people can support.

If their was a good investor and stadium situation I would still proceed into to the St. Louis market with caution, although this only IMHO based on my years of living there.

 

Re: Re: Re: Expand to St. Louis

i don't think you get it

i can distinctly recall last year, listening to the cardinals local tv broadcast... the two guys started in on the possibility of an mls team coming to st. louis

they both said the city deserved it and should have it... cited players in mls, cited slu, cited past history

the following week, i was watching the fox game of the week... covered by st. louis' own tim macarver (generally a local yankees announcer) and joe buck

TIM started in on how st. louis should have a team in a game did not feature the cardinals

soccer is a weekly sport... with occasional midweek battles... you put a stadium in the burbs, with good highway access (i'd like metro access, but it's not like mass transit is popular there)

it'll do fine

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Expand to St. Louis

That definitely sounds positive, and St. Louis fans rarely dissapoint when it comes to supporting professional sports. Hopefully this will translate into some kind of investor interest.

I'm not sure where the city is in it's plans for a new baseball stadium, maybe something for soccer can be done with Busch stadium or the land that its currently on if this new stadium is built. Although there probably isnt a lack of available places, and considering that mass transit isnt as big an issue in St. Louis there should be plenty good location options.

 

I agree that the STL needs an MLS team. I can't think of a city that is better at supporting soccer in this country!! They deserve a team and as long as an investor with a plan for a stadium come forward they should be given a team. Honestly, I would say that STL, Rochester, Portland and Atlanta should be the next four teams in the league. If you want to expand the national footprint, these are the cities to do it. Maybe just maybe MLS will get things right this time around. Expand slowly and build up a big sense of wonderment about when cities are going to get teams and you just might bring an interesting element of intrigue into the league. Attention, attention of any kind is good for this league.

 

i believe that whenever they get around to building the new stadium, the current stadium will be razed and commecial buildings will be built in its place (at this point, who knows where that cards stadium would go... illinois, city, st. charles, ???)


unfortunately, i don't see there being a movement any time soon on a st. louis team... i don't believe any group has ever expressed interest in putting a team there... although i believe the area would be for it

and has been stated... no owner, no stadium... no team

 

I thought the Cardinal's new stadium was going to be built next to Busch, with the Busch being torn down and used as parking.

Also,

A stadium down in Soulard (you could tear down some of those old factories) would be sweet. Close enough to the landing metro stops to walk, too.

 

they haven't come up with anything confirmed on st. louis... other than a new stadium being needed

it could be placed anywhere

 

The Cards best option right now is getting a stadium from Illinois...if they wont build for their biggest sports team, why would St Louis voters build for a soccer team? and soccer at Busch would be death in that open-air sauna; at least there isnt turf any more (I remember players having to wear 3 and 4 pairs of socks to keep their feet from blistering back in the turf days...worst designed stadium ever ((new comiskey)) okay, second worst).

 

you do realize that busch is a typical cookie cutter stadium?

pittsburgh, cincinatti, san fransisco, san diego all had pretty much the same stadium (probably othes)

it was your basic large multipurpose designed stadium (nfl and mlb essentially)

turf, some design flaws in terms of being conducive to air flow, and st. louis heat & humidity made it hell for many a summers

it's quite a bit better now, but still horrible in terms of air movement... once they get a new stadium, this place is going down

 

I never thinked that St Luis was a better market for MLS, i allways see STLuis as a NFL-MLB city, but i am getting interested now...

mmm cardinals are doing good job isn't it????

Edgar Rentería is a good short stop! hehehehe

 

sorry, nacional... there is nothing for ya to get interested in


if it happens, it means i/o's get involved and make a stadium... the same as anywhere else

that hasn't happened yet

 

Comiskey gets a bad rap. Just because it doesn't have a lot of bells and whistles like the new/old parks, it is a good place to watch a game. Steep upper decks do you're not so far away. And a great food court besides.

 

Comiskey is what happens when someone is too close to a concrete contractor...it's ugly, feel like your sitting in an overgrowen highschool football stadium, all concrete and guard rails. oh, they've got bells and whistles, fireworks that echo around the ampi-theatre like eyesore. The uperdecks are almost a life threat, they're so pitched.

 

i like how comiskey is in the outfield, past the seats... nice means of walking around and still being able to see the game

as for the upper deck... the first row of that is farther from the field than the farthest seat in old comiskey

 

most stadiums are a great deal of concrete and guard rails... the especially look like that when empty... ala comiskey, if it was full, it would look a great deal better


as for the upper deck, has anyone ever actually been in the upper deck?? i thought it was just built for shade

 

TRUE, but even even Joe Robbie or the damned Q isnt as ugly half empty as Comiskey is almost full, theres just no attempt at polishing the turd really, the "upgrades" werent really much of anything, esp. when you compare the massive improvments at the Oakland Coliseum to the work done on Comiskey. Poor Sox...built their stadium 2 years too soon.

At $12 a seat, it's the cheapest place to sit/lean in the city.

 

oh, i've gotten those tickets before too (isn't it cheaper on mondays?)

i did't sit up there though, and thus my question

(it was damn funny too... i was in town for the fire game and went to the friday sox game... the fire game outdrew the sox)




as for how comiskey looks... i really don't think it's aesthetics are that bad... i think it's a bit uniform and doesn't offer the quirks of the new "old" styled parks

it still looks new... probably from lack of use