Its official MLS and Chivas reach a agreement

Good:

MLS isn't letting Chivas have more internationals than the league allows.

NO second Los Angeles club

Team coming in 2005...not sooner.


Bad:

I truly hope that Qualcomm stadium is indeed a temporary solution

A 3rd team in California

Vergara is a pompous prick who I feel has no real respect for our league

 

And you said that based on.....

all that was said here in this forums was pure rumors about changing rules and else.... damn.. I'm laughing right now for the cryiers around here....

 

"Vergara said he is willing to invest $12 to $15 million to get a Chivas USA team"

Just $12 mil? I thought a franchise was $10 mil. A few years to get profitable, plus single entity meaning that you are carrying the losses of other teams. He's living in a dream world, surely?

 

"A team as popular as Chivas could really dominate, become the team with the most support in the league."


That's a pompous and arrogant statement. I feel that he's only saying that based on the fact that the team would be all hispanic players and therefore could beat everyone else.

Also....I'm still curious as to whether we should be trusting this guy. He seems more interested in his own self-interests than in the health and vitality of our league.

 

Garber said the league would not change its rules to allow the new Chivas team to sign more Mexican players.

"They will find ways, within our rules, so their team can have more of a Hispanic or Mexican flare," he said.

That quote from the article on foxsportsworld.com defintly puts a little bit of fear in me. So basically he is saying that they will loosly operate in the leagues rules but we will allow them loopholes to get around them.

 

I think the subtitle of the forum should read:

MFL expands her footprint across the USA.

Dont worry, I wont support. Even if America buys one, I still wont support. I only support one team.

I think its safe to say, Chivas will be the most hated team... something they are not used to in Mexico.

In Mexico, they are loved and Club America are hated. I dont know, i think the tables could turn if America also came into the picture. They would be loved and Chivas hatd

lol

 

Vergara said he eventually would like an exchange of players between his Mexico-based and U.S.-based teams. "We want talent from both countries to be able to play in both countries," he said.


This is another thing I don't like. I want a strong, awesome, talented, AMERICAN soccer league. I thought that the point of this league was to develop and nurture american talent...not Mexican talent. I don't want our teams playing in Mexico's league and I really don't want Mexico's teams playing in our league.

Oh well...

 

If our US teams have the opportunity to play in the Mexican league they should jump at it. It will only make them stronger.

 

Just to placate the ESPN.com bashers, I wanted to note that I put this story out on the site's homepage in headline news.

Rock on, MLS.

 

When I saw the headline on ESPN.com, I was pretty happy. And a lot of things in article made me happy, particularly waiting until 2005 & not allowing them to have an all-Mexican team.

So, all that's good.


But, yeah, what a prick this guy is. It doesn't seem like he's investing in the league, so much as invading California. You think he would offer up some bland corporatespeak like "we're excited about this new partnership & look forward to building on the wonderful fan base in US by reaching out to the Hispanic community". Not this "we have come to crush you" nonsense.

With that said - let's be happy we have a league & welcome the new investor.

 

I understand the thought of an American only league, but the whole Chivas USA thing (from MLS's perspective) is obviously designed to increase interest in the league among the 39 million Hispanics in the United States.
As the league grows more popular, and more money is generated, the the quality of play in MLS will improve and give the US players a higher quality to test themselves against.


It'll also give "us" a team to hate.

Chivas USA sucks.

 

And why is it bad to solidify a market in a state w/ a population larger than Spain?

Why is it bad to solidify intrastate rivalries?

Why is it bad to take advantage of the TJ market (will provide a bit of support as TJ has no MFL team, and a LOT of ppl have legal access to cross the border at will), plus the South Orange County market.

I don't know, but in an AP article they mentioned cleveland being the complete forerunner for the 2nd expansion team. So why isn't it "bad" that a state the size of Ohio (lower population than the LA basin) gets a 2nd team?

The "problems" w/ SJ have to do w/ management issues, NOT w/ the market per se. Remember, I'm a Galaxy fan, not a quakes fan, so I enjoy seeing them suffer. But as a fan of the league and a residence of the "market", they DON'T reach out beyond SJ, AEG has far too much on its plate, and SJ is the ugly step child of the company.

Should the league move Boston due to one bad year? No. KC sucked up until this year. Should we move them? No, b/c management has shown what good marketing can do.

 

Look at the numbers man, if all the Mexican soccer fans in this country or just a lot of them, become Chivas USA fans, then they are the most popular team in the league. Period. I know alot of people around here that like the Fire, but have said that if Chivas makes a team here, they would automatically switch alliances. I don't think that is being pompous, it is a real possibility.

 

So is the club really going to be called Chivas USA? Because that makes it sound like a farm team.

Plus only investing up to 15 million?...how much does the average investor lose a year in MLS?

Finally, Vergara better get on top of finding a stadium location.

 

You know, it wasn't too long ago that some of us were worried that investors in SEM were too cosy.

The last thing I'm worried about is someone with a drive to compete. You should be looking at that as a good thing.

 

I understand your points, but I don't see this as a drive to compete, but as a guy out to show how "superior" Mexican football is to American football.

See what I'm sayin?

 

The thing is, do you think he'd say anything different about Chivas de Guadalajara? Or Atleti (if he ever bought them?)

I guess I don't. Sh!t talking has a place in MLS.

 

And not to mention, the fifth-largest economy in the world? Might as well take advantage of that.

And San Diego is either the second- or third-largest city in the State of California.

Would seem like the most logical place for the expansion team being mentioned here, when you also bear in mind the Tijuana market as well (as UCLACarlos already mentioned).

 

2 things I don't likie:

1. This guy's only planning to invest 15 million.

2. This guy talks like he's expanding Chivas - not buying into the league.

So Vergara doesn't have a runaway success -

'cause a team of Chivas Martinez, Ramiro Corrales and a bunch of Chivas understudies will not be, and there's nothing Mexicans hate more than watching their boys get beat by gringos

- and he walks. Does MLS get a new owner for Chivas USA? I don't think so. It's clearly Vergara's baby.


Also - this deal's going to open up opportunities for Americans to play in Mexico. What, with Chivas? I don't think so. Not for Danny Califf anyway.

 

Chivas de San Diego

I don't know if anybody has brought up this point, but what if 5 or 10 or 20 (yeah, I'm optomistic) years down the road, Vergara decides he wants to get out of MLS, is he going to take the Chivas brand with him? Are Chivas de Guad. and Chivas de SD really going to be linked up in such a way that if Vergara decides he doesn't want to be in MLS any more that they will have to re-brand the SD team? Can you imagine if somewhere down the road, after 20 years of supporting a team, they had to change their name just because the the former owner owned the rights to the name? Boy, this brings up some weird stuff.