I'm not talking actual criteria. I'm talking SUPPOSED criteria of the combine BS forum. For instance, Seattle plays in Qwest, people forever were crying about Seattle not getting the bid because of Qwest. In reality, many of us know Qwest will work well, because it is owned by the club. With RSL, same situation. With Chivas, Same, with TFC. What was it that people were crying about for them? I can't remember, but everybody interjects their supposed facts that are really just assumptions. Sadly there are loads of actual facts out there to go on, yet they are often ignored. Such as the Saputo bid, or the Whitecaps announcement that they will be making a bid, similar to Portland's which will likely be down the road a couple months. Then we have cities like Vegas and Atlanta where we have heard nothing about an actual or potential bid, we know no details, so we push them out and focus on those that we do have details for. See, it's not that Atlanta won't be it, but there is no basis for discussion for them since so little is known. Right now we know a lot of cold hard facts about the situations in St. Louis, Montreal, Portland and Vancouver. The question I have is, if a club like the Dynamo can sell 50% controlling interest, why can't Cooper come up with some investor like that for St. Louis. If I had the money, I'd be calling Cooper today. Seems like a great opportunity. Strange how it comes so easy for Seattle, Montreal and Vancouver, and to a lesser extent Portland, but Cooper is just having a dick of a time getting the proper investors.
You don't get it. Seattle could have and would have played at Qwest even if Vulcan wasn't involved. It was part of the charter that was put to a vote to build the stadium. Seattle has/had a play to play. St. Louis doesn't and WON'T unless things change. Portland and Vancouver have a place to play as well. Having the government on board IF........... is nothing like having a stadium.
The cold hard facts in Portland are that no plan has been revealed. It is all talk at this point. How is that any different than what's been going on in New York? And New York actually has a wealthy owner with a proven track record of sports ownership, owns the land the proposed stadium will be on, and offers all kinds of synergistic business opportunities. He's also met directly with the supporters groups there. And MLS has been chasing a second New York team since 1996. So why are we supposed to talk about Portland, but not New York? Furthermore, you can't even include Portland in the group with Vancouver, Montreal, and St. Louis. All three of those cities have put in formal bids with MLS and also have iron-clad stadium situations. Portland has a horrible stadium situation with only the hope of possibly alleviating such situation (with no possibility of that until next year) and has not put in a formal bid to MLS. - Paul
Dude, come on. Vancouver has not put in a formal bid yet, they have announced their intent to place a formal bid today, as has Merritt Paulson who is working on his formal bid, he just has farther to go than Vancouver, because frankly I think he wants to do it right and have all the guarantees he needs, unlike what RSL and San Jose had, or what Vancouver will likely have. If anything it's my opinion that Cooper and Saputo are way ahead of the game, something that I've been saying for a long time. Cooper just needs a little oomph, and Saputo... well, he needs MLS to say yes and then expand HIS stadium. Paulson and Paulson and Kerfoot and company still have a long ways to go by comparison. Don't get me wrong, I hope sincerely that all 4 get in one after the other, that would be only fair considering where they are in the process and they plans they all have. However, I cannot imagine any of the bids competing with Montreal's.
No. Qwest would not have been in any way viable if they were charged rent, and I have no reason to believe that Vulcan would have just let them play there without charging a hefty fee. It was a necessity to allow Vulcan and Paul Allen as part of the ownership to allow for profitability at Qwest. As for St. Louis, the ownership status could change in a matter of days. I still believe that it's all up to them. If they get the owner by the MLS Cup, then they'll get spot 17, because they're bid would become the best one, above even Montreal, who is the next farthest ahead in my opinion. I still think Vancouver needs to show some progress on the SSS. Or get the owner of BC Place to waive rent and concession fees somehow.
Seattle would have paid rent......yes, but not a huge fee like some other franchises may have. You either don't realize or refuse to hear that Qwest, First and Goal/Vulcan were mandated, according to the proposal that BUILT QWEST, to make it available for professional soccer. Paul Allen has always been soccer friendly. First and Goal only charged only charged $6000/game for the Sounders to play at Qwest. That's 600 tickets @ $10....... not too hard to do. You are also missing the point entirely......... SEATTLE DIDN'T get a franchise until they met the financial requirement. Which would have included being able to be financially profitable! We had a stadium....... we needed better ownership. St. Louis has a stadium PLAN with ownership that doesn't meet the leagues demands at this point. SO what does the St. Louis bid and Seattle's bids prior to Roth and Allen have in common? LACK OF CASH AND SUPPORT FROM THE LEAGUE!!!!! Get it? You want to think this is all about Paul Allen but it's not......... Roth is the majority owner who put Seattle over the top. Allen and Carey just made it that much stronger.
If you actually knew anything about our local derby which has been going on for the past 34 years, and potentially may transcend 3 leagues it might make sense to you. This Seattle club still is run by the same people that have been running it rather successfully in recent history (just has some new primary investors and owners), and given the long history between the two clubs and 2 years minimum of open talk of bidding for MLS by Vancouver it does seem logical to assume that Seattle (all alone in their region unlike any other US or Canadian club in MLS) would consider the implications of a likely local derby. How it would clash with other clubs in the league comes into play as well, but in terms of long term identification of a club connected to its community compared to other local communities whom would factor into their business plans and models would be discussed, but is probably not primarily nor the only reason the colour was selected. I was just arguing that it lended some weight if you considered it rationally given the history between two clubs.
Has BC place been approved as an appropriate venue actually? I just remember Garber saying they would like to hear more. Did he actually say during the allstar game that BC was approved, or are we just inferring that based on the continued mention of Vancouver and the current reality of their stadium situation?
You must be kidding. How are you, in the process of correcting someone else's view, claiming that it is a FACT what you think is the true rivalry in the Northwest. This not only contradicts the irony of your own behavior, but is just one more example of you pushing something as fact that is not or cannot be. From your liberal understanding of the concept of Facts to your perverse compulsion, I have the opinion that: Bright=Zero credibility
I doubt anything has been formally laid out yet, as far as I know there is just discussions which I assume are bargaining back and forth for the right price. There keeps being mention of a hefty lease, but I haven't read any first hand information on it. If someone knows anything about it. It just seems rather likely considering there's litte point in renovating a large stadium so that it has a retractable roof for outdoor events without considering soccer as a potential tenant. Tradeshows and spring break amusement parks is probably not what they want the stadium for after the Olympics, like how it is now when the CFL's Lions end the season. http://www.whitecapsfc.com/archive/feature05160801.aspx BC Place Stadium is owned by the Province of British Columbia through PavCo who runs the events. Similar (I believe) to Toronto's situation with BMO Field where the City of Toronto or the Province of Ontario own it (not 100% sure, just what I've read off of TFC posts).
It is a fact that Seattle and Vancouver have played each other more times than any other pair of North American teams. - Paul
I didn't say Paul Allen was the only reason Seattle got a team. Far from it, of course. But I still don't think Qwest would have been viable without his support. Vulcan was mandated to make it available for soccer, meaning making it available for rent. But he wasn't obligated to give favors and offer a low rent fee. Regardless, I think the plan from the beginning of the Seattle bid was to have Vulcan involved at some point. As for St. Louis, from what I've heard in interviews with Cooper, they're actually pretty advanced in the investor search. Whether that's true or not remains to be seen. But I do feel that if they do manage to get the investor before the MLS Cup, they're team #17. They're the last of the older expansion bids remaining, with Philly and Seattle getting their teams, so it seems right to me that they get this time to get they're stuff together.
It really is amazing you got that yellow card Ecktoss. I just can't imagine who would be so petty as to hand you a yellow. Its a rivalry between the 3 Northwest clubs, dates back years. It might not be Yankees-Red Sox, it might not be Roma-Lazio, it certainly isn't Man U - Man City, but its still a rivalry. Fans and people who aren't fans go out to see their team hopefully beat on the other 2 Cascadia clubs. It might not be known to you, but then again, that might actually re-inforce the argument frankly.
Apart from having played the most matches against each other than any other clubs in North America, let alone the Northwest. Its even a battle at the women's level. The two clubs play for the Western Conference Championship for the right to play in the W-League final on Saturday. http://www.whitecapsfc.com/schedule/match07260802.aspx
Regarding St. Louis...... Cooper has been saying this for a while..... which is why I said their bid gets weaker as other markets get stronger. Both Vancouver and Portland...even Montreal for that matter, could start playing NEXT year if the league allowed it. St. Louis could not. It would also be a dis-service to fans in St. Louis to hurry the introduction along. Having 18-24 months to build club infrastructure is quite beneficial as Philly and Seattle will prove. If Cooper were to get things done in the next month or so...... I'd agree with you that 17 or even 18 is likely..... but there's that word IF. I hope they actually do.... so we can get past the lingering question of St. Louis.
So are you stepping back from your claim and just trying to point out which teams have played eachther lots? If you want to try to support your initial argument about the true rivalry in Cascadia, the leap you would still have to make is somehow showing that the number of games played between two teams is an absolute indicator of the true rivalry between two teams, as a general rule in sport. Since you like "facts" so much , here's one: the Colorado Rapids have played the Galaxy more times than either team has played RSL or Chivas respectively. Are you trying to tell us that LA doesn't have a rival in Chivas or San Jose, or that Colorado and RSL can't be considered rivals becuause of the respective count of games played. REALLY? Either you know you are blowing smoke or your understand of the concept of a "fact" is as poor as your understanding of the term "media market". Either way, you're really stating your case for what I believe is as follows: Paul Bright=ZERO CREDIBILITY
Eckstoss, you appear to have an issue with the facts. Vancouver and Seattle have not only played the most games of any pair of North American cities, many of these games were important playoff games. Seattle and Portland do not have that kind of history. The true rivalry is between Seattle and Vancouver, who are both known for winning championships. So it is not just a rivalry due to proximity and familiarity, it is also a rivalry of traditional powers. Where does Portland fit into that? It doesn't. It was the last team in the NASL, the first to leave. And it took Portland until 2001 to get their team back, and only because a minor league baseball team created you to fill more dates. Meanwhile, Seattle and Vancouver have been battling since 1994. The current perspective you have is absolutely one-sided and is not shared by the vast majority of Sounders fans. Any semblance of rivalry between Portland and Seattle is the direct result of the constant blustering about it from down south, possibly helped by a little pity thrown your way by Seattle fans who just mildly go along with your insistence. - Paul
There is no doubt that the best historical soccer rivalry between clubs in Cascadia is that between Seattle and Vancouver. There are many reasons, but mostly it comes down to the fact that in whatever leagues they've met in, both of these cities' teams have been highly competitive. Sounders-Caps, 86ers-Storm, Sounders-Caps. So from a sporting perspective, it is not even close (PDX). The highlight of the year for Seattle and Vancouver is topping each other, not PDX. We've met each other in the playoffs numerous times and fought for division titles many times. The NASL Timbers were not very good. The USL version has had some moments, but not many. Rivals are chiseled over years of glorious victories and bitter defeats in do or die matches. Vancouver and Seattle have a shared laugh at the Portland fans' giant egos, and that does get some rivalry juices going. On the pitch and about the sport though, it's SEA / VAN by a mile. Portland fans hate us (Seattle), but we just can't sustain any real season to hate them back. So supporters may have rivalries, but guess what? There is more to a club than its supporters, and more to rivalries, too. First ever match between the two: Seattle beat Vancouver 2-0 on June 9, 1974. *Neener* Vancouver fans were traveling to Seattle by the thousands and chanting 'oogie oogie oogie, oy oy oy' long before many PDX newbies were born.
Gotta agree that Seattle vs Vancouver has been the significant rivalry for most of Cascadia's pro soccer history. Portland fans spend FAR TOO MUCH time worrying about ANYTHING Seattle. It's ******** Shittle this and fxck Shittle that. Really boils down to the little man complex of being from the Nortwest's second city. It would be far easier to take Portland's fans seriously if they could just admit that their team doesn't always play well and might actually be losing because they are terrible instead of blaming the ref for everything that ever goes wrong regarding Timber soccer. Portland goes on a skid...... it's those cheating refs. Seattle goes on a skid.... like now... and their fans can at least admit that the team is playing like crap.
The first ever event at BC Place stadium as well was Vancouver Whitecaps 2 : 1 Seattle Sounders on June 20, 1983. Drives up and down the I-5 for away games was not uncommon and Seattle games are traditionally the larger draw here in Vancouver. I watched their first ever USL playoff battle in 1994 (I believe, it may have been 1995, I was a kid) which went to a tie breaking shootout back under the old APSL dribble from the centre rules. Seattle won a heartbreaking (for Vancouver) away shootout to go on in the playoffs. Between them theres countless titles at the levels of soccer they've played together in, I'm going to miss them and the great games during that middle period between Seattle going to MLS and Vancouver joining again.
I'll agree on that one too. I described in another post that a Seattle/Vancouver derby is a lot more like a tennis rivalry. A lot of respect. I don't go punching up Sounders fans in urinal lineups and flaming internet boards when they beat us, fair game, we'll get you next go around. Those two sabres have been rattling for well over 30 years, and will continue to rattle well beyond another 30 all in friendly competition with a high level of intensity. It would be nice to have Portland up there too, but I just think we might have more of an edge than they do.