I'm not really sure what the value of expanding the league's footprint is, except in terms of adding valuable media markets, which San Diego and Cleveland are. Can't imagine many people from SD coming to Gals games right now, it'd be a nightmarish commute. If both teams are committed to building SSSs I'm very happy with the process.
We should be careful to just focus solely on expanding our league's "national footprint". Look what good that has done for the NHL. They've gone into untraditional hockey markets, and ratings, somehow, have remained stagnant even though they have expanded into a variety of markets. That should be the model that we should not follow in my opinion. What the MLS should weigh upon most is the potential of these markets for soccer, and how financially viable the potential owners are. We shouldn't just jump into this simply for the sake of a positive perception in the media. That is what the NHL did (plus the millions of dollars of expansion fees), and most importantly, NASL, which is a failure (whoever looks back longingly for NASL is a moron, except for the Cosmos, there wasn't another viable franchise in that whole league).
Also more detail in LA Galaxy thread - including Reader said MLS and MFL on AEG soccer channel? https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=78929
I'll be disappointed if I'm the first one to bring this up, but you're complaining about San Diego and Cleveland not improving MLS' "national footprint," when Houston is about 200 miles away from Dallas and Philly is even closer than that to both New York and DC?
From downton Los Angeles, California to downtown San Diego, California is about 130 miles.. In good trafic flow if you're going the legal limit of 65MPH it's 2 hours. I've gotten to San Diego from Long Beach in less than 2 hours. San Diego and Long Beach are 90 miles apart. Now a lot of the new fans at the HDC are from Orange County and they're even closer. The key thing is time of day of course and Saturday's wouldn't be bad for a 7PM kickoff.
I use to the trek from Manhattan Beach (very near Carson) to San Diego all the time when I lived in the Lipstick City area..2 hours on a decent traffic night is right on the money!.. San Diego vs LA in soccer could get nice and nasty over time..it would be fun to watch
Not to mention the fact that the promoters thought they could "roll out the ball" and draw a big crowd. Sachin
Yeah, because we all know Don Garber has more power than Tim Lieweke. Changing teams a couple of weeks before the game really helped too.
Re: Re: Expansion News -It's Cleveland and Chivas, apparently I am still seething from some ugly commutes the past month or so.... On the flip side, it's a straight shot down the 15 to Qualcomm for fans in The 909!!!
Re: Re: Re: Expansion News -It's Cleveland and Chivas, apparently Yup, it would be a much nicer drive to San Diego then the HDC on a week night, even if it is 30-40 miles further. But, it's long either way from where I am now...
There are still a lot of unanwered questions about Cleveland expansion, is it going to be a new investor (Wolstein?), and if so, does this guy have the dough to hang with the big 3 owners? And are they going to open a new stadium in Cleveland or start playing in Cleveland Browns stadium? As far as the natl footprint, it may not be spreading things around geographically, but between CLE and SD, the league is adding about 6 million to its base of potential viewers (they rank 16 and 17 respectively in their MSA sizes), which would be considerably more than adding say OKC and Rochester (though I agree they should try to expand to those places as well).
Adding San Diego and its 2,813,833 residents is signifigant in another way. The west coast is a large place. By adding San Diego travel costs in LA and San Jose just wend down a small amount. Not huge deal, but I guess every little bit counts. Like wise adding Cleveland and its 2,945,831 residents not only will have all the other positive effects others have stated, but i think that travel costs will be lowered for CLB. totally insignifigant I know, but the fact that by 2010 both cities are projected to have over 3 million residents is. San Diego will pass Cleveland and hopefully 1% of their residents will go to games regularly. Hell I have been Hopeing that one fifth of one precent of NY will go to games regularly. Buffalo, Erie PA, and Pittsburgh are all within driving range of Cleveland, so I can Imagine a few out of town fans making it to games regularly. I wonder how these 2 new owners actually stack up financially. they may somehow make money on the team, yippee, but if they dont, how much do they have to loose? the other 4 owners in MLS are each worth a few Billion. these guys sound like they only have a couple million to play with. It makes me a little nervous
The SD crowd at HDC is negligible. What it will do is promote the league so that more ppl go to opposition games in the nearby city. Say you really want to get a look at an interesting player/team but don't want to wait 3 months, then you can check 'em out. LA will definitely factor into attendance in SD, as there are so many ppl that go to SD/Tijuana on any given weekend...
This is a significant announcement, although it's not "official". The Galaxy FO KNOWS that they have alienated their #1 fans (season tix holders) by offering a ridiculous # of promotions that in essence showed that season tix holders overpaid for their overpriced seats. By 'tipping league's hand', they are attempting to show these fans that they are indeed valuable. Cleveland and Chivas it is...
I am torn with this announcement, as a resident of Buffalo. I don't know if I should start to make the commute to Cleveland and adopt them as my team (two hour drive) or if I should wait for Rochester... I honestly wouldn't mind trekking down to Cleveland for MLS and can envision quite a few people making the trip.. This is definitely a big plus for keeping the travel expenses down, which is a huge expense for MLS teams.. good move MLS, if Cleveland actually comes thru.. No way that the city takes more money away from education for a fourth sports venue.. We will see how this pans out..
Which is more than off-set by the 9 other teams now making extra trips to San Diego. This reasoning couldn't be any less relevant. MLS for the next 4 - 6 teams will and should always look at ownership and a place to play as the 2 most important items on placing a team. Vergera has the team and said he will build a place to play - they're just looking for a city. Cleveland came out of nowhere but they too must have some sort of ownership and stadium proposal. If Lanier in Hosuton or Allen in Seattle had any interest, no doubt they would have jumped ahead of Cleveland. But MLS no longer wants to pay rent to an NFL overlord. Market size and soccer history are of lesser immediate importance to MLS. Ownership and control of venure are paramount.
Is Cleveland really only a 2 hour drive from Buffalo? I'd make a point of catching Metro-Cleveland matches if so.
I'm just curious: over a year ago Garber said there would be two expansion teams by 2005 or 2006, and an announcement by this year's MLS Cup. Question: what would have happened if Gervera (sic) hadn't come along? Cleveland was a very late entry too. We might have ended up with zero expansion teams, as opposed to two.
I thought Leiwike said all that and Garber merely said that they hoped to announce plans (not teams) by the end of this year, which was later moved up to the Cup. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/soccer/mls/2002/mls_cup/news/2002/10/18/mls_garber/ is a pre-Cup story where it mentions Leiwike's statement, but adds nothing similar from Garber.