America : um , MLS ? Did you just let in Cincinnati? MLS : hold my beer... Let the rivalry smack begin.. though they do have more recent USOC success . Also about time for the Midwest takeover of MLS. Someone should send "a guy they know" to talk Sac and Phoenix out if their bids. We need Indy and Detroit to slap around.
Indy, Detroit, and while I'd love to see Madison get their first pro team (if Austin, TX can get one why can't Mad-town), I like it too much there to hate them, so let's set up a Green Bay team so we have someone we can beat up on north of the Cheddar Curtain. Can't wait for the first road game- not only will there be more Fire fans at the stadium, but given their rapid depopulation, might even be more Fire fans than people in the whole damn city. (assuming, of course, there is still a 'Fire' to be a fan of, but I digress)
Austin is the 11th largest City in the United States, at a tad under 1,000,000 (964,000 and change). Madison is 81st at 250,000. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_by_population Austin is the largest city on the US without a "Big-5" (NBA, NFL, NHL, MLB, MLS) major league team US cities with populations greater than Austin without an MLS team: Phoenix San Diego San Antonio Cities smaller than Austin with an MLS team: Columbus Boston(ish) Seattle Denver Wash DC Portland Nashville Columbus Orlando Miami Atlanta Cincinnati KC Minneapolis Cities smaller than Madison with an MLS team: (which has only 50,000 more people than Aurora, IL)
Austin as a city is large but its MSA is much smaller - 30th in the country. It's also growing rapidly, something St. Louis is not and most likely will not. (In the top 25 MSAs, guess which one is the only one growing more slowly than St. Louis? ) Having one city be geographically primate over an MSA while having it expand rapidly has tremendous advantages when trying to plan a stadium over a more mature MSA. Some disadvantages, too. I'm happy St. Louis is getting a team but were I in charge of running things I probably wouldn't have given them one.
Yeah. Reminds me of the NHL. Who was the genius who put the Hawks and Red Wings in separate conferences? Not to mention five of the original six in one conference.
Salt Lake proper has fewer people than Madison, but it's arguable whether or not they count as an MLS team. BUT, sure if you want to answer my rhetorical aside with, you know, actual facts and data then it certainly does seem make my post seem ridiculous. But, you should know, that I like both Madison and Austin, they are both college towns and state capitols, and from my posting history and our few in person meetings you're undoubtedly aware that objective data and facts mean nothing to me at all. (PS - Aurora should have an MLS team too.)
Fixed your post! I do like both Austin and Madison, as well. I was not enamored of Madison when I lived there in the Winter of 1984-1985, but I like it quite a bit now.
Wings are the worst part of chicken (next to gizzards, perhaps). What a waste of times, in relation to the small amount meat. Buffalo is a suburb of St. Louis, which itself is a suburb of Detroit. Oh, you meant hockey or something.
Guarantee you they become Kansas City’s rival. That will leave Us and Minnesota are the only two teams without real rivals.
I always hoped Milwaukee would get a team for that reason, but it doesn't appear as if they are on any expansion radar. Next closest we could probably hope for is Indianapolis.
The question was a team close to Chicago (FIRE), can't get any closer than another Chicago team and it would force Andi to start caring or just sell his share of the team.
I would just appreciate if the Chicago Fire were competitive, or, better yet, dominant, so we would not have to give a crap about "rivals." In 1998-2003, I relished beating Columbus and New England (probably our two "rivals" at the time), and we did consistently. Never really saw KC (the team second closest geographically) as a rival in those early years.