You routinely confuse your opinions with facts. In a nutshell, that's why I don't value any of your opinions.
LAFC is Chivas done right. There's the Cosmos, Strikers, Wolves, Roughnecks, Steel, Armada, Fury... But they are the clubs that have chosen a connection to the past. There are plenty of teams and fans who would prefer not to associate with the epic fail that was NASL.
The Seattle fans wanted continuity. The Earthquakes disappeared in 2006 and were revived in 2008. https://www.seattlemag.com/article/throwback-thursday-40-years-seattle-sounders-soccer
And Austin joined MLS when it met the expansion requirements. Ditto St Louis. The MLS grows to ownership/markets that meet their criteria. Same for USL. The point is about the fact that the "closed" or "US" system doesn't keep it from happening. There's 100 or more variables, sure. There's 100 or more in pro/rel too. Fact is though, teams do, have, and can come back in our system. The system doesn't prevent it from happening. As you've helped show, there's a track record of cities/markets/teams coming back. It's literally in the history of our sports. When teams do disappear it isn't the sporting structure that keeps them gone. Indeed. I'm thankful though because Will Clark is my favorite all time player and that'd never have happened playing for the NY version. yeah, it does. Just goes to illustrate the justification needed to have things for M. More on that in just a sec ... Darlington FC Sure, go on about the phoenix and et al. They were expelled from the FA and had to reform/rename (Darlington 1883 by rule of the FA due to being a new club). Ho Hum .... and here we are. Goalpost moving 101, courtesy of M. It's not my opinion that clubs fail in pro/rel set ups. That's fact. We're well aware that you don't value facts as they usually go against your opinion. In a nutshell, this take is why nobody values your "input" in this discussion.
OMG no. MLS is a closed league. It is not "open to anyone that meets the expansion requirements" (Don Garber choo-choo-choosing you is not a valid criteria). Ask Sacramento. Or San Antonio. Nope! It's why SD 1904FC eventually resuscitated NISA's lifeless corpse. It's also why Oakland Roots are in it. You think there's no market for gridiron football in St. Louis, Missouri? San Diego, California? The reason why there are no professional football teams in those places, is because the local government and/or citizenry did not feel like getting extorted by billionaires to build a new stadium. Seattle just doesn't want a pro basketball team enough? Quebec City just isn't a good enough of a hockey town? It's no south Florida, that's for sure!
I don't have to ask San Antonio, I'm from there and was involved in the start of this modern soccer scene back before the Scorpions were founded. Of course, there's that underhanded deal with Precourt that kind of skews that discussion into something else entirely. The league is (as are the other US leagues) OPEN to new teams. The way to get there is vastly different but they aren't closed. You can't "win" your way in, no (though lately in soccer it hasn't hurt to have been a successful lower division club). Sacramento JUST hit all of the buttons in JAN with the new owner ... Thought the Roots were supposed to be Founders Cup, not USL ... And if I'm remembering correctly, SD1904 didn't meet the USL reqs (local ownership, balking at the fee) This circles it back to the harsh reality of the fact that sports are business. "Wanting" something just doesn't cut it (in this conversation). Corpus Christi LOVES football ... zero percent change it could support an NFL team. Ditto baseball and an MLB team. Hell, upon inception the Ice Rays fans were voted best fans of the league 3 out of their first 5 years of existence ... but the NHL in Corpus makes less than zero sense. He says routinely typing "HTTK" in his long winded ranting about unfair treatment and other garbage posting rather than discussing the topic he so vehemently wants to discuss ...
That is NOT what "open leagues" means. They are not open! Their inception predates Founders Cup, but it wouldn't have mattered, USL East Bay already existed at that point. It seems the issue was on the USL side, but it's hard to imagine it was local ownership (Bob Watkins seems to live there). It's always been assumed that somebody else had the territorial rights, although it's never been clear if that was what is now the franchise held by Warren Smith and Landon Donovan, some other claimant, or if because they were originally planning on playing in Oceanside, if somehow Orange County can claim that.
USL requires 20% (I believe) local ownership and again, if I remember correctly Watkins doesn't own 20% (Ba and the other players own majority). Watkins had even spoken about it publicly that they'd talked to dozens of local folks and that they were all for soccer in San Deigo but nobody was willing to pony up for it though. At the time of denial their exclusive negotiation period subsequently ran out. I do remember that a different franchise having the "rights" to the territory isn't why they were denied (the process never would have happened if there was already a claim). Ironic statement. Cartel Effective Cartel Cartel Cartel
Only two Football League teams have disappeared in the last half-century... unless one's definition of "half century" is contorted from reality.
Why is it always the Football League vs. US lower leagues? It's been shown rather conclusively that England's level of lower league support is almost unique in the world, with only Germany having anything close to the level of stability in England's lower leagues. England is the outlier, not the norm. Also, it should be obvious that clubs with decades of history, in the country's most popular sport, are likely likely to have more robust support than clubs that have existed for only a year or two in a sport that most people in the area barely notice.
Maybe that "robust support" is not unconnected to the fact following a lower division team in a pro/rel pyramid can be more of a rewarding experience than being permanently consigned to a specific lower league regardless of performance on the field of play?
It seems equally obvious that plopping a team with no support, no history, and no connection to the community into the deep end seems like a risky proposition. It can work, especially if the expansion team goes out of their way to do the above (Atlanta United, Forward Madison, New Mexico United), but it's an expensive way to vet your business model.
Hereford United, Darlington, Chester City, Rushden and Diamonds, Halifax Town, Scarborough, Aldershot, Maidstone United, Newport County and Bradford Park Avenue. Yep, that's two.
Aldershot and Maidstone United. But you knew that. So, yep, that's two. Not sure what your point is here. If the Football League were a closed league, 3 of those teams would never have played in the league anyway. And the rest would be deadwood cluttering up the league, thus excluding others from outside the league from competing there.
One of these days, the owners will get it through their thick, gelatinous billionaire brains that the fans are the ones who matter.
I think MLS does a really good job of that, much better than English clubs, many of whom who seem to treat fans as a nuisance, and much better than other major US sports. For most of those clubs relegation from the Football League was part of the process of going defunct. Darlington was a member of the Football League for 9 decades. They went bust. Another club was formed in their wake. With no pro/rel Scarborough would almost certainly have been elected to the League, Rushden and Diamonds probably too. Former Man City manager Brian Horton used to brag that he'd never been relegated. What he missed out was that he'd been sacked before that could happen. You seem to have a similar grip on reality.
I disagree. Darlington was the most egregious example - George Reynolds?? Chester and their insane American owner? Several others were basket cases before relegation or, in the case of Bradford PA, before they failed to gain re-election. Really, you can probably only pin pro/rel as a significant cause on Scarborough and Halifax. Yes, Maidstone got promoted but their demise was due to another asset-stripping owner. Doubtful. Scarborough's strongest days were actually in the late 70's before there was pro/rel. R&D I doubt the league would have touched given their locale. I think you're actually talking about yourself there. Not a good habit.