Worked on this earlier this morning. What is portrays is the current and announced MLS franchises as of right now as adapted from CommonCensus' sport fan maps. Seattle and Philadelphia are on the map. Toronto is missing because CommonCensus didn't include Canada (though it should). At CommonCensus people say what team they root for and where they live. This shows the geographic spread of a team's appeal. I adapted this map from CC's NBA and NFL maps. To get KC, I took in the NFL map and to get Columbus, I'm just assuming NBA Cleveland as a stand-in. Click image for larger version. OK, what I was trying to find was the geographic holes on the league. I started thinking about this because of the questions brought up by MLS Rumors and Kartik on the state of t.v. and MLS. Kartik points out that since 1999 the national t.v. deal for MLS has atrophied from 15 network airings to 2 network games and dozens of cable games. MLS Rumors points to a situation in San Diego where viewers can't seem to get a local news station to cover MLS. What I got out of those posts is that there seems to be a disconnect between how an MLS team is treated in its home market and how the sport is treated nationally. If there isn't a team (say like in San Diego) the league itself might not even exist. I think that reason (as portrayed by the map above) isn't yet a national league. The league is growing (I think at the right pace), but is missing across the entire south and the upper midwest. It seems to have saturated the Northeast, but there are sizable chunks of total midwest and southwest that haven't been taken up yet. I'm interested in what everyone else thinks. Am I off-base here?