Yeah, It sounds like he's a baseball nerd and really doesn't care for Soccer. But just the idea of getting the Athletics in town is making him so wet that he's rambling on about baseball stadiums. He pretty much ignored Warren talking about how Baseball stadiums make for lousy soccer venues. The only reason some Soccer teams play at Baseball parks is out of necessity. It's no different than what Beckham has to deal with in Miami with all the Politicians telling him to build an oversized venue at a crappy location so their beloved Hurricanes can play there. On a side note, Boy, i hope this goes well. I'm not even a Californian or anything. But just looking at the Sacramento market from an outsiders view. They so deserve that team. And the market is so starved for top tier pro franchises when you relate it to their top 30 populated market status.
I guess you have to credit Smith for his diplomacy on that answer. It would be enormously expensive to make it work isn't nearly as unsparing as what I would have said.
If it's going to be the railyards, the ideal location is as close to downtown as possible, and as close to light rail/the station as possible. Looks like some roadwork has gone in already which may limit where it goes, unless they think tearing out the existing roads is worth it. Given existing conditions, Republic should have this location as their #1 priority location: That rectangle I put in is about 600x500 feet, about the size of an average MLS stadium. Could squeeze in a little tighter, or could be a little larger. Point is, this spot is immediately adjacent to the light rail Green Line, a planned stop for that location as has been pointed out. This is the sweet spot. It's my #1 and should be the team's #1. If we can tear out the portion of 6th street that has been put in already, even better to move it south = closer to downtown = closer to walk, ride bikes, etc. for all the people who live and work on the grid. What I've also dug up is an old plan for when the arena was proposed here, they had it located centrally near I-5. This may be a spot they are considering similarly:
The road network has changed from the illustration you posted. That was made in the mid-2000's- called the canal plan. It was my personal fave. Liked the walkable canal feature. As you can see on your google map photo, the 5th and 6th St bridges are oriented more north and south. 6th St is currently planned only up to Railyards Blvd (which you can barely see graded out on your google map). So there is room to drop in a stadium where you placed your red box. Wouldn't count on those roads that are just going in to be modified, though. Orienting yourself to the intersection of 7th St and North B St, you could place your red box on any of the corners. All of those options have potential (and the property on the north side of N. B St is city and or State owned property
The optics for this whole thing - and my personal preference - would be best if the stadium were in the bridge district in West Sacramento. As I stated in one of the facebook strings, having the TBB gassing up in Old Town and then marching across the bridge to the field would be the absolute tits. However, it was KJ and not Chris Cabaldon who was up there in PDX talking to the MLS suits. Fabian Nunez (the political muscle behind the Elk Grove push) was nowhere to be seen, but was definitely bitching high and hard in the BizJournal article linked earlier. I've never been a big fan of the whole "Railyards" thing. Maybe I've been living here too long, but I've seen way too many plans come and go for that area with phuck-all to be shown for it except the occasional street being paved through that area up to Richards Boulevard. The involvement of the Ranadive group and KJ would suggest to me that things may well be happening... ...but those of us who have been living around here for more than ten years know how stubborn empty lots can be in downtown Sacramento.
Twitter post from Elk Grove Mayor directed at Kevin Johnson. Really?!?! Follow up interview on channel 3 has him saying Sac should focus on Basketball and leave soccer to EG. Dude is not accepting reality. Too bad http://www.kcra.com/news/elk-grove-mayor-calls-sac-mayor-ball-hog-over-stadium/27368090#!byvEBf Don't be a ball hog @KJ_MayorJohnson Let's work together to bring #MLS to the region. #ElkGroveBleedsSoccer— Gary Davis (@GaryDElkGrove) August 6, 2014
In one way, that tweet's just pathetic. In another way, again, it may be an opportunity to build a big, compelling SRFC training facility and soccer complex in Elk Grove. Put a bunch of youth fields there. Maybe a 4-5,000 seat stadium for youth tournaments (and the USOC, perhaps). Everyone is happy, and SRFC got a first class training facility to boot. Rocklin used to make an industry out of hosting the 49ers pre-season camp. If Elk Grove wants to be SRFC's year-round Rocklin, and they're willing to put some resources into that -- well, SRFC should at least talk to them.
What an idiot. The guy is either a) clueless, or b) deliberately lying so as to rope his constituents and developers along. I think it's more b) than a). Bottom line is he sees it simply as $$$. He sees it as a tool to use to create more sprawl on the very southern edge of the metro region, where right now a testament to that stupid way of planning stands the skeleton of a never-completed mall that was killed at the housing bubble burst. He wants a stadium there so they can get developing again and bring more tax money and development to his city. That's all there is to it, and it's pathetic that he is saying something like that in public. Nothing against Elk Grove, but it's largely little more than a huge bedroom community sprawling great distances. It's one of the absolute worst places to put a stadium in the region. MLS has learned the mistake of building stadiums miles and miles out in the suburbs, they don't want to repeat it again. Build a stadium, Elk Grove, and you'll surely kill our chances of getting an MLS team.
There's a huge amount of information here ... Live chat on SRFC and Sacramento's soccer future - Ryan Lillis, Sacramento Bee For much, much easier reading, see the RSS feed for the chat.
Yup. Great chat session. Gonna be a long wait till September. And a longer wait till December (aside from the obvious fact that December is farther out than September )
This. If Dallas FC had it all to do again, do you think they'd put their stadium up in Frisco? Or the Rapids putting their stadium out in Commerce City? As much as I am loathe to give any sort of credit to Houston, they did it right with BBVA. I can only hope that Sacramento does likewise, and tells Elk Grove to piss off. The time of building stadiums in the 'burbs is long past. Besides, if you're gonna do a stadium out in the Sacto 'burbs, the more logical place would be out by Thunder Valley in the Roseville/Rocklin area.
Back when Chicago, FC Dallas, NY Red Bulls, Philly Union, and Colorado rapids were building their stadiums, there was less of an idea about demographics and location. They really just wanted these markets to get into cozy 18-25K Soccer only stadiums for as cheap as possible. However, I think Portland and Seattle opened their eyes to the "Millennial" demographic, young professionals who are abandoning suburban lifestyle for a more cozy urban appeal. They're less likely to own cars and use bikes, cabs, and public transit to get to work and entertainment. They seem to be the primary demographic that are embracing the euro soccer passion lifestyle over more traditional sports like NFL and Baseball. If you just look at the crowds at Portland or Seattle you pretty much see a lot of white "hipsterish" types in their 20`s and 30`s, with other demographics scattered around them. THIS is what MLS sees and wants to build on. MLS is always evolving it's goals based on what it can achieve. They are at a point now where they want to be more picky about their future franchise selections. They don't want floundering franchises stuck in less than ideal locations that can't carry their own weight. So their demands have become more stringent. They want soccer only/first stadiums. They want them around 20K with modest room to expand. They want them near mass transit. They want them in "entertainment" districts. They want strong corporate presence for sponsorship/advertising. They want younger growing cities with at least 1.5 million metro minimum. They want grassroots support with supporters. A regional media that has strong interest and funds for broadcast rights. MLS may make exceptions to some of these. But for the most part it think if you don't have 4-5 of them checked off you might not get much attention from them. -------------------------------------------------------- With those opinions I've stated above. Elk Grove Mayor might as well stop trying to start a fight. He won't win and it'll make for an ugly situation and bad publicity. I'm not even from the area, but I can look on a map and see that Elk Grove has no chance. Elk Grove is about as bad a location as Commerce city has been for the Colorado Rapids. MLS does not want another one of those. It's an extreme suburb locale with the larger population being in the opposite side of the downtown area. I'm not sure about mass transit, but looking at the light rail map, it looks like Elk grove isn't even on the Sacramento rail grid either. I can understand why a Mayor like the one in Elk Grove would be talking big. He's trying to change the fortunes of his town. Much like what Commerce City tried to do by funding most of Dicks Sporting goods park. But MLS has learned that having some desperate city fund your stadium isn't enough. A successful team needs to be optimally placed, branded, sponsored, publicized, and well funded. Elk Grove can't give them that.
MLS is interested in the Sac market because of Warren Smith and the Republic. MLS is visiting the Sac market and seriously considering it for expansion because of the Kings ownership group and Warren Smith. EG is not on MLS radar. If we relied on EG for our MLS aspirations, we'd be dead in the water. EG hasn't moved the expansion needle. Hell, EG mayor isn't even sure MLS will meet with him while they're in Sac
so now it really does look like "it's not if, but when". the question now is whether they get into MLS ahead of Minnesota for #24, or do they take Chivas USA's spot? or Sac and Minn could both get into the first 24 and Beckham in Miami could be the odd man out. as i've already stated repeatedly, i think MLS should drop Chivas and add Sacramento, Minnesota and Miami. but all the statements from MLS officials seem to indicate that they're stubbornly sticking to this LA2 idea with both teams sharing the Galaxy's stadium. it's a stupid idea for two LA teams to share a stadium in Carson, Chivas can't draw flies and are obviously losing the league money, and Chivas' stink has even rubbed off on the Galaxy i think, as the Galaxy rarely sell out their games. i don't understand why MLS continues with this bad policy, why don't they just fold Chivas when they could just as easily expand to LA later when they have their sh*t together better? couldn't they sell an expansion franchise for more $ at a later date than they could sell Chivas for now? i can't understand it. and i know this a Republic thread and not a Chivas USA thread, but maybe somebody smart can explain it to me?
This is exactly what I'm thinking. The league would be better served with all three of Sac, Min, and Miami in the league, rather than a second team in LA at the expense of one of those markets. I mean, LA is basically a one-team market right now, and the Galaxy can't even sell out their stadium on a regular basis or get the coverage they "deserve." Sure, add a second team in La again sometime down the road, like when MLS expands beyond 24 (which WILL happen, too many cities and moneyed interests begging for a franchise). But in the next few years, is it really going to hurt having just the Galaxy in LA? Is it really going to be better having an LA2 start from scratch at the expense of the three front runner cities?
Plus...fold league-owned Chivas, add MIN and MIA and SRFC - and then later add the second LAX franchise and its (probable) eight-digit expansion fee.
"Put it in the book and send him to the line!" Preki's never been at a loss for confidence. I think it'll require a bit more than seven or eight players, though.
I see nothing but positives having the Kings group involved. I agree that the SRFC marketing group has been fantastic but it's easy to sell a shiny new product. It's a lot harder to keep interest in something that's been around for nearly 30 years and the previous owners didn't even want you to show up because it went against their moving plans. The expertise the Kings group brings in terms of technology and social media is going to be what sustains the Kings (and Republic potentially) for the next 25 years. They appear to be on the verge of being trendsetters in the NBA and I don't think it would be that difficult for them to use a similar model for the MLS. You have to figure the MLS knows this as well, this isn't about just adding a team but adding a group of owners that could help take MLS as a whole to another level as well.
I think it's like this ... Long term, MLS wants two teams in LA (like NY). Right now they have two LA teams, but only one is viable or functional. But they're worried that if they fold the dysfunctional franchise, they'll never make it back there. Other cities with better immediate short term situations will come in and they won't be able to refuse them entry. Suddenly you're at 32 teams, and only one team is in LA. In other words, I wonder if the league is intent on keeping Chivas USA alive in some capacity precisely because there are so many other good candidate cities out there right now. To MLS the placeholder is worthwhile even if the placeholder is a total loser in every way for the next 10 years. As long as MLS remains in LA with two teams, they believe, long term, they'll come out ahead.
http://www.sacbee.com/2014/08/12/66...money-for-sacramento.html?sp=/99/101/104/245/ Interesting....I can't imagine if this is public now it hasn't been talked about between Kings, Smith and the city. Hopefully be fact thy met with MLS still is a good sign. Maybe land will be contributed?