Actually, I think that the SSS issue will really be coming into play with the next round of expansion and that's the real reason why MLS expansion into Canada is a real possibility. It just seems to be that those cities that have new SSS either built or on the boards (i.e., Rochester, Toronto, Houston & Vancouver) will have a big leg up over otherwise excellent candidate cities (such as Philadelphia, Seattle or Portland) all other things (i.e., a deep pocket I/O) being equal. The bar has been raised, like it or not.
It's more complicated than just having an sss. Just because toronto is building a stadium, it does not mitigate the economic albatross canada places around the neck of any American sports league it participates in. The NHL is a great example: it's a canadian sport, and yet it took The United States to make a viable professional league for it. One reason for the current hockey lockout is because canadian teams are not able to turn a profit because of canadian taxes and exchange rates with the American Dollar. The lack of profitability is not limited to canadian teams of course, but teams in canada have it even harder because of their socialist economic system that brings everyone else in the league down. it drains the profitability of those teams and then they scream for economic parity, to bring the playing field down to their level. canadian-market teams have also struggled in baseball (montreal) and basketball (vancouver), whether because the American sports did not translate north or because of the economics, but apart from toronto there doesn't seem to be any canadian city that wants any American sports leagues outside of hockey. Soccer is not an indigenous American sport, so the canadian taxes and not the lack of translatability (is that a word?) would be what drags the league down to its socialist level. F*** canada!
As the thread starter, I just have to say that I was caught completely off-guard when told about the possibility. But my original source was someone who would know. If you have more than one source, I'm sure we've both talked to the same person.
more than one, and probably. One also specifically characterised it as being 'not instead of Toronto' but as the leader of the two if judged head-to-head; but more likely seeing both. two Canadian teams (one east and west) might be more platable to some than just one.
Can somebody please explain to me how BC Place with field turf qualifies as a SSS? Or is there a new stadium I'm missing. Swangard is a 6,000 person no-frills track stadium in Vancouver. Surely that's not the issue, upgrading that would be harder than upgading a place like Mitchell Field in Long Island to MLS standards...too expensive as a short term solution and not quality enough as a long term one. I'm all for Canada having two teams (Montreal and Toronto, preferrably, since Vancouver and Seattle are in the same market and Seattle deserves a team), but they need to follow the rules just like the American teams.
BC Place is currently the only stadium in Vancouver that has the needed capacity. Swanguard can be increased in capacity for a temporary basis. This seems more the case if Vancouver wants to be a venue for the 2007 WYC.
IF (and its a big 'if' at this point) Vancouver joins the league in 2007, they'd have to play at least their first couple of seasons at BC Place (which has a brand new FieldTurf tray system as opposed to the permanent 'uni-surface' system) unless Vanncouver somehow gets a new SSS up and running in 2 years time. There have been rumblings that the Whitecaps are looking to build an SSS (in the 20-25k range) in the near future, and the prospect of hosting some matches during the '07 WYC could help speed that project along. /they'll follow the same rules as every other team. The rules will just be different then than what they are now.
Well of course the player rules will change, but that wasn't what my post was about at all. The rules will already be changed when Toronto enters the league, player-wise.