Year-to-year agreements does not mean one side can terminate an agreement. They generally automatically renew unless a certain criteria aren't met and without knowing what those criteria are...
Seems like Columbia or the Triad could support an independent team, don’t they? In fact, High Point was talking to USL about expansion: https://www.uslleagueone.com/news_article/show/1083576
These were the average attendances of reserve teams in USL in 2019. The first 3 are hybrids so that model makes sense from a commercial viewpoint but I don't think most teams care. Reno 1868 FC - 4,313 Rio Grande Valley FC - 3,812 Tacoma Defiance - 2,636 Real Monarchs SLC - 1,983 Portland Timbers 2 - 1,899 Atlanta United 2 - 1,754 Loudoun United FC - 1,381 North Texas SC - 1,367 LA Galaxy II - 881 New York Red Bulls II - 852 Swope Park Rangers - 505 FC Tucson - 961 Bethlehem Steel FC - 478 Orlando City B - 203 Toronto FC II - 168 Red Bulls 2 play in Montclair. But if an independent team started up in Montclair I think most local fans would switch.
Let’s say you’re right and USL can’t walk away from the agreement. Clearly MLS can and has for most of the teams so I don’t think it can be quite as restrictive as your painting it out as.
Hell they could put them in Davidson where the "Charlotte" Eagles used to play for that matter. It all depends on what they consider a "different" market. Both Fort Mill and Davidson are more less in Charlotte. High Point and the Triad, not to mention Asheville or even Asheboro are closer than Columbia. As is Greenville-Spartanburg - which is quietly becoming a major metropolis of its own.
It's also a good way for third-parties to explore potential soccer markets. Let's say Charlotte FC go into partnership with Greensboro Grasshoppers and the team attracts 5,000 per match. You could see Greensboro saying tyvm, you've helped us prove that we can support pro soccer, we're going to start our own team. There are 180 cities with populations over 150k in the lower 48, so the more pro soccer teams we have the better.
I mean if you go back far enough a group Winston-Salem was angling for an MLS expansion team, but some of you might not have been born in those days. I remember when they hosted MLS pre-season exhibitions in Winston-Salem and Greensboro in back to back years (both involving Miami FC which was run in those days by the late great UNCG alum Doug Hamilton).
Yeah, just dishing out areas within a 100 mile radius of Charlotte, I think Gastonia, Fort Mill, or Kannapolis would be the best bet. Winthrop University in Rock Hill has a soccer field and as @Expansion Franchise mentioned, there's an USL1 ownership group for the Triad region.
In 2022 the New York metro will have 6 teams, 2 x D1, 2x D2 and 2x D3. New York City New York Red Bulls Queensboro FC New York Red Bulls 2 New Amsterdam FC New York Cosmos NYC may add a reserve team, probably based at their academy/training center in Orangeburg.
Couple of things. At the time the agreement between MLS and USL was written, USL was in the midst of a rather pitched battle with NASL and it was nip and tuck as to which side would come out on top. Getting an influx of MLS teams was hugely beneficial for USL, so the agreement may have been beneficial to MLS. There is such a thing as mutual consent. If USL no longer wants the MLS teams in their league(s) and the MLS teams don't want to be in the league(s), USL isn't about to stand in the way of them leaving. The issue at hand here is an MLS team that may not want to leave, so mutual consent may not be a factor. NYRBII also aren't necessarily like most other MLS2 teams. While they definitely aren't getting good attendance, the team itself has been competitive for most of its history. Last year was the first time they failed to make the USL playoffs and they've made it to the finals 3 times, winning once. This season isn't looking to be much better than last, so that may be changing, but if they can put out a team that, unlike the other MLS2 teams, is competitive against the USL teams, USL might not care about the attendance too much.
Probably the reason RB2 are not as competitive is that they're promoting players to the first team at an earlier stage. Just to back that up: RBNY youngest starting XI by av. age: 2021 - 22.7 vs. Nashville 2020 - 24.5 vs. Miami 2019 - 23.9 vs. Dallas 2018 - 24.3 vs. Houston 2017 - 25.6 vs. KC
Not really. I mean, according to John Prutch they are members in good standing in NISA, but so is Atlanta, so given that they don’t have a stadium or a team or whatever, they’re as much of active soccer team as the Rhinos have been for the last 3 years.
I guess I don’t really understand why we’re speculating over what USL might have recourse to do or not do over this comment: which is a far cry from “kicking them out” or even that USL would do anything.
Shuart and Belson Stadiums are still a possibility as is the Rocco D. Commisso Stadium (cap 3,500) at Columbia University in Manhattan.
Right, but there’s no team to play in them. There is no staff. There are no full time employees. This is the point: the only part of the Cosmos right now that is remotely related to the game of soccer is the ball on their crest.
Rocco has an advantage that the other NISA owners don’t have: he can afford to mothball his team while the rest of NISA works through its prisoner’s dilemma with USL/MiLS or shows signs of stability (despite his sitting on the sidelines being a factor in NISA’s perceived instability). He’s rich enough that he can restart the operation on a moment’s notice, and his club is worth something for someone to have ideas and buy it and try to start a USLC club in the abandoned Staten Island stadium or in Brooklyn or something. There is basically no incentive for the Cosmos to return until NISA has enough clubs to try a D2 and he can come barnstorming back to his throne (setting aside that the Cosmos weren’t competitive at all in D3).
He is partially distracted with his new plaything in Italy. Also, he wasn't really interested into investing his team in Division 3, as its now a vehicle for legal fees. You guys don't really need the Cosmos to "shows signs of stability" - just prove it without them. (Also, again I don't get why you're so worked up about a developmental league, but sure, MLS definitely betrayed USL and NISA , lol) Sure...this is all speculative. Cosmos historically had many owners past and present with...questionably bad business practices and leadership, thus further deteriorating the brand into a cross between Sears and an Atari. Anyone won't probably be so forgiving this time around. I mean...
Why is the goddamn ******** are we talking about an NISA team on hiatus that shares a name with a team that died 37 years ago, as if they ********ing matter? Seriously. I don't even know if their Giorgio-Chinaglia-in-short-shorts fetishist fans even like soccer. Edit: The absolute funniest thing in the entirety of BigSoccer is when someone acts like the Cosmos name has any actual value in the Year of Our Lord 2021.
Let's see what Charlotte actually does when, you know, they're a real team. Maybe their d-3 team plays games in a different market, maybe not. Maybe it's in another part of the state (or in SC). Maybe it's driving distance from their training facility. Which they don't seem to have yet, either. Nor do they have a coach (who may have an opinion about where the d-3 team trains and plays), and just a handful of players. So, maybe they'll launch their MLS team in Charlotte next season, then expand their Carolina footprint the following year with this d-3 team. All I really know about this franchise is that they seem to have commitments for a lot of season tickets, and that Tepper appears to have pulled a bait and switch regarding the playing surface at the stadium. I'll take a wait-and-see attitude regarding what they do with their d-3 team.
Didn't see this posted anywhere, looks like STL will have a team ready to go for the development league next spring. https://www.stltoday.com/sports/soc...cle_424248dc-5533-5a6d-969a-ff8a372cd47c.html No team name or location is mentioned.