Even A-League Sounders fans are having a hard time not going hmmmmm at this one: 1. NFL Seahawks hire brother of MLS owner conglomerate. 2. Then team website says "MLS still on radar," and points to New England Revolution NFL-MLS model. http://www.SeattleSounders.net 3. Then staffer tells booster club member: "Keep your ears open for an announcement about Seattle at MLS Cup 2003." 4. Sounders sign on to Seahawks Stadium for 2004, hint at option for more years, citing desire to keep pro soccer in the facility until...??? The talk is bubbling again here: http://soundercentral.com/board/viewforum.php?f=13
In all seriousness though, best of luck landing a team. I've never been to Seattle but have always wanted to. An MLS team would give me even more incentive to visit.
I've been to Seattle before and let me tell you... IT KICKS ASS. Friendly people, gorgeous landscape, great coffee, and a generally laid-back way of life. To me it kind of reminds me of a European city with an american layout (downtown, then suburbs, etc). My dad and I went there back in 95 and visited Nintendo of America (a dream come true for me). Anyways, Seattle is a huge media market and I think that they would definetely support a pro-soccer team there. I hope to god that these new rumors are true because it would be trully awesome for Seattle to become a part of this great and growing Div. I soccer league. Bring back Miami too!!
By the way, I think it would be perfectly fine to have a team in Seattle in Seahawks stadium temporarily until an SSS is built. Hell, that's what they're doing in San Diego with Chivas anyways.
The ENTIRE Northwest is a soccer-friendly zone. Portland and Vancouver BC are the other "Missing links" in the MLS chain. Until Seattle and these other two are in the league, MLS is not "complete." Since the league really wants a team here (Seattle) we are likely to come before the other two, deserved or not. Seattle fans support MLS coming to ALL THREE NW Markets: Over 12 million untapped TV's in this region. http://soundercentral.com/
Good news for Seattle out of the AEG camp. http://www.ussocceruk.com/news/?CatTypeId=2&ContentId=1028
BABY steps man...baby steps. Eventually MLS will tap the Northwest region (well, I don't know about Vancouver though). You guys should be happy that MLS is (sorta) keeping its promise to get you guys a team. Don't worry about the other two markets for now, they will come in time. And what do you mean by MLS not being complete without those three cities? Philadelphia, Minnesota, New York, and Miami also contribute to MLS not being complete.
Let me just add a "ditto" to sounderfan's assertion that the entire Northwest is soccer friendly. As pro-soccer as Seattle might be, I believe Portland is an even stronger pro-soccer market, and if done right, could be the most passionately followed team in MLS. The missing link is an owner. Anyone got 25M in between couch cushions?
I know, and I agree too. I'm just saying that he should realize that it's going to be little by little before MLS invades the entire northwest. It just sounded like he was being very unrealistic in his post and expected MLS to add all three markets in one fell swoop. It will take time and PATIENCE regarding the rest of the markets there. Until then be happy that MLS is for the time being adding one of those markets and recognizing that the northwest is a sound region for having a team. Also, if the Sounders get upgraded to MLS entirely (which I think is a good idea...Seattle did use to be part of a Div. I league), you guys should change your teams name to Sounders FC, instead of Seattle Sounders. It sounds pretty badass to me.
Thanks for the AEG link! That's likely what the Sounders front office guy was alluding to. So, 2006 or 2007 is a possibility for Seattle! Seems a long way off! I wonder if our A-League Sounders should start building a team that can just "jump into" MLS when the time comes? That is, if they are going to be involved. It seems they will be, based on the rumblings.
Seattle is a good choice but... ...I hope for your sakes that they don't try to do another NFL/MLS stadium thing. The fact that the new owner in Denver wants to build a SSS, even though he has a pretty good deal at Invesco, that should tell you something. If there is one event in the history of the MLS that showed the viability of the league, it was when the HDC opened and people realized how successful it was going to be. Big NFL stadiums suck for socccer!
Agreed. Although there seem to be some AEG connections with Seattle so I'm thinking that they'll have an SSS up within 2 to 3 years of operations. Hey, going to the game tomorrow?
You should read the Revs board to see how well this NFL-MLS partnership works there. NFL people marketing a soccer team, a stadium that is too big for the Revs, and declining attendance despite a pretty good team the last two years. I'd be willing to bet that most Revs' fans aren't too happy with how the NFL-MLS thing has worked out there.
NFL Stadia bad? I generally agree. But this puppy was built for soccer. Seahawks Stadium is the exception to this rule. The lower bowl is a beautiful 30,000 seat stadium pushing out towards the field of play. When the A-League Sounders had 25,000 there in 2002, in felt "full." Here a two photos of what a 25,000 crowd looks like at "The Hawk." When ManU and Celtic visited, it showed as one of the premiere soccer venues in the world: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/photogalleries/sounders89/thumbnails.html
Seahawks stadium might be good for soccer but that doesn't mean that it'll be profitable. Now as far as marketing and whatnot for the team that won't be much of a problem as the Sounders will be affiliated with AEG but the fact remains that SSS's translate into money-making operations, which is what this league needs right now. Again, I'm okay with the Sounders playing in Seahawks stadium as a TEMPORARY solution. Within 2-4 years though, an SSS should be built and that's where you guys should be playing.
Those are great shots no doubt, but they're field level. There's still 42,000 empty seats that aren't in these photos (Seahawks website says the stadium holds 67,000 regular and up to 72,000 with additioinal seating for special events.) I just don't see how a stadium at only 37% of capacity can feel full.
The design has the lower bowl "pushed out" toward the field of play. The upper stands are steep and act like a "roof" over the lower stands. Unless you stare up there, you don't even notice the "empty seats." Somehow they have managed to recreate this sort of intimate feel---given respectable crowds. I agree that an SSS is ideal. However I doubt that then end result would have the great location and lower-bowl intimacy that now exist at "The Hawk." Anything over 15,000 will have the place rocking. The Sounders had almost 8,000 for their US Open Cup match with the LA Galaxy in 2003, and the stadium (only one side open) seemed loud. Now, with only one side open the stadium seems too big. Then you get to stare at field level empty seats. I assume an MLS team would have both sides open and draw more fans than the current A-League Sounders do.
Re: Re: Seattle: Under the Radar and on to the Pitch? The problem is NOT with the model. It's with the personnel. The exact same model works well in KC.
Hmmm. This sort of partnership, in an "NFL Stadium," or NO team. Let me see... It's looking OK to me!