While I'm not keen on "1.0, 2.0, 3.0," there are real shifts which have happened. 1.0 was a period of catering to families, low player pay, secondary tenancy, unsuitable stadia, various experimental rule changes, few owners, and massive financial losses. Several of the biggest mistakes were rectified relatively quickly, but the league was still not profitable. The league was afraid of repeating NASL's expenditure mistakes and overexpansion, but hadn't figured out how to generate revenue. The shift to 2.0 required a couple core aspects: control of facility revenue and broadcast revenue. During the early "MLS 1.0" era, many investors departed, until a ten team league had one owner with six franchises and another with three. Phil Anschutz and Lamar Hunt were absorbing losses from nearly every MLS franchise. The remaining single-team owner was Robert Kraft with the New England Revolution. Kraft didn't sell his team because while it lost money as an individual venture, it generated revenue for Gillette Stadium, also owned by the Kraft Sports Group. Then there was Columbus Crew (now Mapfre) Stadium, built by Hunt when renovations of Ohio Stadium meant that the team either had to relocate or build their own facility. Though it had taken a significant capital investment, control of its own facility meant the Crew generated ancillary revenues from operations like parking and concessions, and not limited to just Crew games, but also from events like music concerts. The formation of Soccer United Marketing in 2002, which successfully packaged and cross-promoted the US Men's National Team with Major League Soccer, was the other crucial requirement for future league growth. While not part of Major League Soccer, SUM was owned by the same group of individuals. The league no longer bought time from broadcasters to show games nationally. The income wasn't substantial, but it was now an asset appreciating in value rather than a cost needing to be absorbed or offset. The earliest events that one can point to as "MLS 2.0" are the opening of the Home Depot (now StubHub) Center in 2003, the new home of the LA Galaxy; or the attraction of new ownership in 2004, when Anschutz sold the Colorado Rapids to Stan Kroenke and expansion rights were granted to the new owners of Chivas USA and Real Salt Lake. Attracting new investors indicated a growing belief MLS could be viable. 2007 is mentioned as a big year for "2.0," and that's pretty justified. That season was the first time more than half the league played in facilities controlled by team owners, for example. Anshutz had sold half the teams he had once held, so the two men who once owned 9/10 clubs now held 6/13. The Designated Player rule was created to allow teams to sign famous players like David Beckham. Toronto was well-supported its first year, and the San Jose Earthquakes would be returning from a two-year hiatus the next season (again, with new ownership). Oh, and Red Bull's purchase of the former MetroStars led to allowing sponsors to buy prime space on the jerseys, and nothing says big-time like ads for multi-level marketing companies.
All I know is the way the Fire are being run, they are closer to MLS 1.0, then MLS 2.0 and not even close to MLS 3.0. This will continue to be true a long as Andi Hauptman is our owner. Please Don can you step in and get this asshole out of here. Thanks former season ticket holder.....
Just speaking from the terrace, the two distinct eras of MLS is when league HQ's changed their minds on the supporter culture for each of our teams. How our league's HQ in New York never foresaw Houston and Toronto doing what was done in the stands circa the 2006 and '07 seasons. This new mindset on an effort to let every city after that raise the bar even higher season after season for crowd interaction and overall atmosphere. To harness the organic culture each city offers and thus help grow the league's brand and market the sport. This was a terrific shift in mindset. Now here in 2015 our current era where league HQ's have changed their minds on the supporter culture for each of our teams once again. To now sanitize the supporter culture in MLS in order to promote, package and sell MLS as is the NBA.
I think we're still very much in 2.0 or whatever you want to call it. It started when Toronto came into the league, but going to a Seattle game in 2009 and 2015 is pretty much the same experience. Portland 2011 and 2015 is the same experience. Nothing at all wrong with that, stability is one of the best things ever. But there hasn't been a jaw-dropping, OMG-this-is-next-level-stuff since about 2011. I'll consider 3.0 starting when that happens. Winning CCL might be that moment. Or maybe LAFC or Atlanta will land a Messi or Ronaldo level player. Who knows. I just know I haven't had a "we've arrived" experience in a while.