According to this bit from something in today's "MLS Confidential"... The Chivas owner is still interested in LA for his MLS team: "He's also broached the subject about playing in Los Angeles, either at the Rose Bowl or the Home Depot Center. The decision of whether to go ahead for 2004 or wait until 2005 may rest on what he thinks can be done in L.A. on short notice. There would also be the matter of compensation paid to Anschutz Entertainment Group for infringing on its territory."
I have a feeling MLS is not too keen on the LA idea and wants him in San Diego or Houston. They're still trying to interest him in Houston, last I heard. I guess we'll know finally after the MLS Cup. I do suspect that the Rose Bowl might give him a good deal since they have no tenants other than UCLA football (and Jan 1 and a few concerts). Not that the Galaxy had that good a deal but just maybe better than San Diego will offer. I wonder if the "compensation" to AEG would be a whole lot less if Chivas LA shared the HDC? Lots of questions and no answers. I say put them in San Diego!
Sharing the HDC is a horrible idea. You don't want to dilute the fan base in Carson. I can't stand when teams in the same city share a stadium. If you think that the field at Victoria Street looks bad now, imagine two teams sharing the stadium.
The Rose Bowl would be the better option if he insists and wins on LA, at least until he builds a 2nd SSS in LA.. (fat chance). Anyway, the Rose Bowl option would also be a little better since now there is light rail service to Pasadena especially if attendence warrants (or they just do it) and they do a direct free shuttle for the stadium like they do with UCLA football now. But I think it's likely all academic as I just don't see them putting the team in the LA area anyway..
I agree that you don't want another team in the HDC, the pitch already can't hold up to the load of concerts and matches.
hopefully this guy will come full circle and back to putting his team is Houston. They've got a great stadium and the support for soccer is there. Everyone thinks Vergara is wearing the pants in this relationship, but i think MLS may actually be in control. If they keep letting this guy change his mind, it will be impossible to get a team for next season, setting up two expansion teams in 05, which is what MLS wanted all along.
He's building a new stadium in Guadalajara for Chivas, complete w/ all the modern amenities that are built for profit. I found the link on mls.net, "headlines" in Spanish. (sorry, but my internet connection is precarious, can't provide the link...) But LA is still not ready for a 2nd team. They would have to have a salary cap of at least 12 million to be able to afford to build quickly a very strong, recognizable squad that kicks ass. Or else, LA won't get behind it and the attendance would be San Jose-esque (which is still recovering from the Krafts).
Awful place now.. I think he'd be smarter to be further away from the HDC, meaning the Rose Bowl or San Diego .
Wolves has already weighed in, but what do the other L.A.-area posters think about the Coliseum or Rose Bowl options? I've been to soccer at all three, and I think the Coliseum would be great, from a fan's perspective. There are too many rules at the HDC. Not that I'm some rowdy fan, but people can't put up banners and there's no outside-stadium atmosphere. I miss the Galaxy at the Rose Bowl for the same reasons I rank the Coliseum as the best venue for Chivas. Like the RB, there's lots of open space outside for playing and gathering. They have independent food and merchandise vendors as if it's a real soccer game. All but one section is general admission. For the River Plate-Chivas game, I could pick from at least 50,000 seats before the crowd arrived. And the deal-maker: they allowed streamers from the field to the top deck. With that kind of atmosphere and cheaper ticket prices (as low as 15 bucks), I say Chivas could fill it. That of course would gut half the HDC.
Did I say "fill it?" I forgot there are more than 100,000 seats there. They could fill it enough to make it respectable. I think Chivas could draw 40-50,000. I don't think it's age is a negative thing. Something from the 70s is old. Something from the FIRST L.A. Olympics (1932) is a classic. Too bad there isn't much tradition of some great team there.
My opinion my be off-base since all I know of this situation is what I read here... ...but I'm beginning to tire of this guy. It sounds like he's going to be a constant headache if he ever does get in the league. And will he just take his ball and go home if the first few seasons don't go his way? He apparently cares little-to-nothing about the league - just what he can get out of it.
To share the Home Depot Center is a great idea to me. The fan bases would be COMPLETELY different and the rivalry would be magic. I am seeing a 2008 MLS Cup final the HDC with the LA Galaxy versus Chivas USA. My gosh, I'm gonna pee myself!
there is absolutely no way there is a second team playing in L.A. it's just not good for the league, so it won't happen. when you are struggling to gain a foothold in the marketplace, you don't saturate one area with your product. MLS is surely not stupid enough to put a second team in the area with the Galaxy, as this would be suicide to one of those teams. Let's get real here.
I'm would almost bet anything your right that MLS would not like to do it but then again, he's got something MLS wants.. Lots of $$$$ and an interest and commitment to the sport. He does have a lot of say in the situation. A compromise, if he is strong on a 2nd team in LA, could be something like.. "Okay.. We'll well go with it if you agree that the team could be relocated to San Diego if things look like they are not going to work out after a couple of years."
Big cities like Mexico City have more than one soccer team, so I don't see why it would be such a big deal for LA -- which is a huge, spread out geographic area. Plus it would cut down on travel expenses. However, if LA gets 2 teams they should play in different stadiums.
Not going to happen. There are too many other markets out there for them to take a risk on alienating the entire LA Market by forcing another team into the area. do other sports have 2 teams in a city? yes ..... but those were all done after many years of those leagues existence, when it was apparent that there was a MARKET for it. There is no such evidence that there is a market for a 2nd team in LA. This just isn't going to happen because the consequences of failure are too dire. it's just not as simple as picking the team up and moving to San Diego. san diego "fans" are not going to accept a team that didn't choose them in the first place, but comes crawling to them only after failure in LA.
Sorry Charlie ......... Mexico City has 20 million people. how much does LA have? Mexicans have a league which is WILDLY supported in general? What do we have? you cannot apply the same logic to a fledgling league like MLS, in a society that is still getting used to soccer, like the USA, to places like Mexico and Europe. Hell, there are 5 teams in London (or more). They are on a different level of support than we are here. They don't have to sell the game to the masses, and we do! Teams need to be placed geographically so as to maximize the marketing of the product (MLS). A second team in LA does not do this ....... it just dilutes the support for the team already in LA.