How far off is a national stadium?

Discussion in 'MLS: Expansion' started by scheck, Apr 13, 2007.

  1. scheck

    scheck Member

    Mar 13, 2007
    Denver
    Club:
    Colorado Rapids
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I'm assuming this is at least past the point where every MLS team is in a SSS, but it's an interesting question to me.

    A few things I'm pondering.

    What would the best city be? Are we thinking DC since it's the capital or would we want to stick it somewhere taking into account the population or how "international" a city is.

    What would the forseeable capacity be?

    Would there be a means to pay for it and enough interest in the reasonably near future? As of now international play is much more popular than MLS but I'm not sure on the finer details as to how much more.





    *Daydreams of a MLS cup selling out a sss of that size*:D
     
  2. ElJefe

    ElJefe Moderator
    Staff Member

    Feb 16, 1999
    Colorful Colorado
    Club:
    FC Dallas
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    It's moronic to have a single national stadium in a country that is large as the USA with a population as spread out as the USA's.

    But other than that, awesome idea.
     
  3. scheck

    scheck Member

    Mar 13, 2007
    Denver
    Club:
    Colorado Rapids
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I don't see how it's any more absurd than hosting the olympics in one city.
     
  4. vyertago

    vyertago Member

    Jun 8, 2006
    Do we have a national stadium for any sports? If we do I can't think of any.
     
  5. midwestsurfer

    midwestsurfer New Member

    Jun 7, 2005
    Honolulu~Tulsa
    Nah. I don't think its going to happen. Its great having the team travel around and give more people a chance to see them play. And I imagine US Soccer believes it makes more money this way.
     
  6. illwauk

    illwauk Member

    Mar 27, 2007
    Milwaukee
    Is a national stadium really necessary in the US? Besides, aren't the national stadiums in other countries usually occupied by other clubs anyway? So why not just designate an already existing stadium as the national stadium?
     
  7. elcapitan2

    elcapitan2 Member

    Feb 13, 2007
    Las Vegas
    I think it is a horrible idea, maybe it wouldn't be that bad to travel from the east coast somewhere to a DC stadium, but it would become very cost prohibitive for us on the west coast to see our team play. It makes a lot more sense to have the team travel around the country. Plus, since soccer is not hugely popular I think it would really hurt attendance having all the games in one city. I go to every game that is within reasonable travel distance and budget, one because I love US soccer, but two because there is not guarantee of when the next game will be close enough for me to go.
     
  8. elcapitan2

    elcapitan2 Member

    Feb 13, 2007
    Las Vegas

    The main difference is the Olympics is once every four years and USMNT game are much more frequent than that.
     
  9. Chowda

    Chowda Member

    Sep 13, 2004
    Rhode Island
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Yeah, the international press would love sending ten times the people to cover the olympics. Who's going to pay for the cross-country flights for athletes from poor countries? And that Olympic village idea was soooo 20th century.

    Good point.
     
  10. billf

    billf Member+

    May 22, 2001
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    There are so many high quality stadiums in the US, so many large cities, and the country is so big that this isn't needed. If there was one part of this country that you could point to as the soul of US soccer, maybe. But I'm not seeing that. I could see one stadium in each region being designated the go to place for big games. Columbus seems to have earned just about every qualifier against Mexico for instance.
     
  11. Knave

    Knave Member+

    May 25, 1999
    Things like that - traditional stadiums for certain specific games - seems defensible and perhaps even desirable to me.

    But there will never be a national stadium in the US. And there never should be for the reasons already stated by others.
     
  12. CL_2004

    CL_2004 New Member

    Sep 10, 2004
    Toronto
    The only reason to have a national stadium is:

    1) if SSS in the country are lacking.(Canada)
    2) if the country is small and the national stadium is accessible for a good majority of the fans.(England)
     
  13. SJJ

    SJJ Member

    Sep 20, 1999
    Royal Oak, MI, USA
    Club:
    Michigan Bucks
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    But that wasn't a "national/regional stadium" idea; it was more of a "put the games where we get the fewest Mexico supporters" idea. And on top of that, it didn't work. (It REALLY didn't work for the 2005 qualy.)
     
  14. NebraskaAddick

    Aug 26, 2005
    Omaha, NE
    Club:
    New York Red Bulls
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    On that note, I think Presque Isle, Maine would be a good place to build it.
     
  15. MCreek05

    MCreek05 New Member

    Apr 19, 2006
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    i was thinking more along the lines of Anchorage
     
  16. HSEUPASSION

    HSEUPASSION New Member

    Apr 16, 2005
    Duck, NC
    Cricket (Lauderhill, Florida) is in planning stages. Polo has one in Palm Beach.
     
  17. TCNJFan

    TCNJFan New Member

    Nov 12, 2006
    Fairborn, OH
    Like others have said, the US is just too big and has too many major cities for a national soccer stadium to work.

    Not having a national stadium is fine. Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and Spain play their competitive matches in more than one venue and nobody seems to complain.
     
  18. Net_Minder

    Net_Minder Member

    Nov 11, 2006
  19. mrecint

    mrecint New Member

    May 31, 2006
    Fishers, IN
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Well I can see the plans now...
    If we get the Olympic bid, and Chicago builds the 80000 seater for the 2016 Olympics and this will help the US bid for the 2018 World Cup.
    The WC finals could be held in the Olympic Stadium (Chicago is an easy drive from cities that can hotel many fans Milwaukee, Indianapolis, Detroit)

    After the US team wins that world cup....that will be our 'national stadium'. Hopefully by then, the MLS will be huge and the Fire and many Internationals would be home to that stadium. Because after the World cup, it would be known as a soccer stadium!

    It's a hope....
     
  20. TCNJFan

    TCNJFan New Member

    Nov 12, 2006
    Fairborn, OH
    I thought that Chicago's Olympic Stadium would be temporary. Apparently it would be reduced to a 5,000 seat stadium after the Olympics.
     
  21. Dont Tread

    Dont Tread New Member

    Feb 22, 2006
    Terre Haute,IN
    Well not technically a Ntl. Stadium but the NFL has Hawaii
     
  22. Net_Minder

    Net_Minder Member

    Nov 11, 2006
    That stadium can sure use a facelift.:rolleyes:
     
  23. time_drifter

    time_drifter Member

    Jan 6, 2005
    Wharton
    Club:
    Houston Dynamo
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Chicago's Olympic Stadium would actually be a good choice as a national stadium, but in a smaller capacity than the olympics. The Fire (or an expansion team) could move into it after the olympics are over.
     
  24. SideshowBob

    SideshowBob Member

    Jan 12, 2007
    Maryland
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Club de Fútbol América USA?
     
  25. HSEUPASSION

    HSEUPASSION New Member

    Apr 16, 2005
    Duck, NC
    Or to be torn down and totally rebuilt, talk about a hole. About an Olympic Stadium, remember that they have tracks.
     

Share This Page