Soccer specific stadiums are nothing more than a big, fat, wet dream. Let's face it, there just aren't any suitors out there who are willing to spend so much on a league who's potential is unclear and future uncertain (Hunt and Anshutz are not enough to grow this league). MLS needs to grow. A LOT of potential fans are being wasted. Having been on these boards for awhile, I have witnessed the patience and interest of soccer fans in places like Detroit and Houston wear thin. Having lived in San Diego and Minneapolis, I know. Our interest in the league is fading into apathy, and it's because we don't have teams to support. There's only ten teams for crying out loud. Since the league's impossible expansion prerequisites have failed to create any growth, it's time the league changes it's direction in regards to expansion. BS posters frequently mention that the Hunt-Wizards and Kraft-Revs partnerships with the stadiums and management are good situations (good, not great), so why don't they look for more NFL owners who own stadiums? Lurie, the Philadelphia Eagles owner has expressed interest in owning a team. And I'm sure other NFL owners would be interested too since they want more events for their stadiums. They'll be inclined to stick with the league as owners since they'll be making some revenue of MLS as stadium owners. Or in the case of Seattle, many citizens are expecting an MLS team, since it was promised as a part of selling the idea of a new stadium for the city in the first place. I'm sure many people in other cities with public-financed stadiums feel the same as Seattle does about getting good use of the facilities. Colorado played hardball with Mile High stadium and got a better lease, the same is in the works for Chicago at Soldier Field. The key is to just avoid miserable deals like Giants Stadium and RFK. Is it not true that the NBA had its beginnings as a league whose owners were primarily NHL owners looking to fill dates in at their arenas? Look at the NBA now. Most importantly, if MLS EVER enters an era where suitors are lining up to build stadiums and become owners, it will be on the merits of the sport and league itself, the league must prove itself first by developing a decent sized following, and a respectable footprint. Use the NFL owners/stadiums to get to a larger footprint, let the league grow and see what becomes of it. More teams and more cities will make more fans. Who knows, maybe someday the league will average 35,000 and won't even need to leave NFL stadiums. As far as I'm concerned, screw worrying about these soccer-only stadiums. We can share with football, and it may even evolve into a beneficial partnership. If MLS earns some respect for being a decent league, perhaps the NFL will respect our league more, and learn more about soccer etiquette, and such issues as grid-lines won't even be an after thought to soccer fans, as it will have readily been taken care of. Nearly all of the new NFL stadiums built in the last several years have had soccer dimensions in the back of their minds when being designed. They are all first class facilities. Many of them are in downtown locations. These are good things. The stadiums I have in mind are Lincoln Financial Field (Philadelphia), Ford Field (Detroit), Reliant Stadium (Houston), Seahawks Stadium (Seattle). Bring the size of the league to 14 with these four cities. From there, see if that stirs the pot a little bit, and eventually expand into 4 more cities. Now I'm not all about COMPLETELY piggybacking off of the NFL. I'm just suggesting that MLS needs to expand into the #6th (Philadelphia), #8th (Detroit), #10th (Houston), & #13th (Seattle) largest markets in the United States by any means necesary. With all of that said, I am not denouncing soccer specific stadiums. If someone wants to build one, great. But if the league is only waiting for these pipe-dream fantasies like Milwaukee, Winston-Salem, McKinney, Trenton, etc...then we will be resigned to clinging to our 0.0001% chance that one of these will be built for the forseeable future.