USFL will restart next March; not as a competitor to NFL but as an ally USFL is making a comeback, but unlike last time, it's not going to serve as a direct competitor to the NFL. This time, those in charge of running it want to make it more of a developmental league that will begin next March. In that way, the USFL will compete somewhat with the UFL -- which perpetually seems on the verge of shutting down anyway. to the AP, the cities that are being considered for USFL franchises are: Portland, Ore.; Salt Lake City; San Antonio or Austin, Texas; Columbus or Akron, Ohio; Oklahoma City; Omaha, Neb.; Raleigh/Durham, N.C.; Birmingham, Ala.; and Memphis, Tenn. “These are cities with underutilized facilities at that time of year,” Cuadra said http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/e...rch-not-as-a-competitor-to-nfl-but-as-an-ally
Birmingham's facilities are underutilized at all times of the year. UAB sometimes plays as few as 5-6 home games and there's a decent bit of high school football played there, but that's it. When the Birmingham City Council voted to have artificial turf reinstalled in the stadium that pretty much eliminated international soccer (of which Birmingham got a decent bit, surprisingly.) Birmingham has always had among the best (if not the best) attendance in these lesser leagues. I can't imagine they wouldn't put one here.
Truth. Americans, Stallions, whatever team was there, people showed up. Was Legion Field not keeping the grass a financial decision? I didn't know where UAB played because I see LF only once a year, for the Classic. Do Parker and West End and Hayes and the other city schools still play there? I'm not at all surprised that Bham got so many WCQ matches and friendlies, because the GA Dome is indoors. But Nashville was probably always going to take over as the Southern venue for international soccer, I think- I went to the Trinidad/Tobago WCQ a couple years ago and LP makes Legion Field look like a dump.
I suppose that was the rationale. They said the turf wasn't holding up because of all the high school football. I'm not sure which high schools play there now, but I know that was the reasoning when the switch was made. I also know that Legion Field lost the Super Six to Tuscaloosa and Auburn though, so that's six less games a year. Legion is a dump for sure, but the attendance in Birmingham has always been a good bit better than that in Nashville for whatever reason. Futbol Capital of the South I suppose.
I always thought one of the major problems with the XFL was the timing. They started the season after what is (supposed to be) the best game of the season, the Super Bowl. Of course people complained about poor play. I'd start my season the week after the NFL draft. By that point people are comping at the bit for football, and there'd be enough of a gap from the Super Bowl where fans might be a little bit more forgiving of a poorer standard of play. But I can see where they'd choose March, especially if the idea is to make this a developmental league. Even if you play an abbreviated season, you need to give players a chance to rest before the NFL pre-season if you want to give them a decent chance to make a team.
Here is why Charleston, SC should have a team in the new USFL: http://carolinasportsthoughts.blogspot.com/2012/05/usfl-and-why-it-should-be-in-charleston.html
I've been to Charleston, and wouldn't recommend it for much of anything. That's not a dig at the people in general --I've met some thoroughly decent folks from there-- but the overall atmosphere is just a bit too... mint julep and magnolia scented, like Savannah, Montgomery and parts of New Orleans. It really felt like an ugly trip back in time.