News: Wednesday, Dec 23, 2015

MLS, USL, ehh, close enough for the New York Times.

 

i'm sure it's me, but honestly i have no idea what this means.

and this reminds me of when sarah fisher crashed with lyn st. james on the first lap of the indianapolis 500.

 

The San Antonio Spurs signed a 20 year lease with the city/county who recently bought the Scorpions stadium. While they are attempting to join MLS, at this point they only have a USL team to use that lease.

The New York Times may or may not know what is going on.

 

No plans to counter St. Paul's Minnesota United bid - yet

Pioneer Press

 

https://www.facebook.com/nycfconline/videos/455837367935231/

Henry explaining Guardiola's tactics at Barca. Off topic, but if you're a footy nerd like me, you'll enjoy this

 

Yeah, very disappointed in this NY Times article. I like to think that they were the last bastion of great printed press in the US, but this article was just plain bad. I suggest, focus on the Red Bull and NYFC and drop half hearted attempts like this.

 

The blurb there now makes even less sense:

They have a lease to the stadium, they have a USL team that is going to play there in 2016, and there is no guarantee of an MLS team whatsoever. Sheesh.

 

NYT didn't write it, it's an AP article, and AP has always been a widget factory news organization, far more focused on grinding out a lot of articles than taking the time to make them thorough.

 

So? If the New York Times printed it without even a superficial fact-check from its sports department, the Gray Lady deserves the scorn.

 

We don't know that they printed it. In fact, I'd bet you they didn't.

 

The AP story is reported on the website of the New York Times. Whether it is in the dead-tree edition as well is immaterial to the issue whether the Times is engaged in shoddy journalism.

 

Nothing I love as much as people arguing semantics in the news feed. So here..

now stop.

 

For someone who complains about these threads getting diverted into devisive issues, this pointless comment is incredibly ironic

 

i checked. it's on page b12 of the '100% recycled paper' (as if that weren't a limited resource too) print edition. it's not an article. just a blurb in the 'sports briefs.' but yeah, i'd say the sports editor who let it pass doesn't seem to know much about mls.
by the way, there's also a page of other soccer news in the print edition, with a main article about fifa setting up as an injured party and another on arsenal looking good for a title run because leicester will fade.

 

Multiple Listing Services?

 

did you mean diverted away from decisive issues? or did you mean it as it's written? or something else entirely unrelated to what you actually wrote?

 

Spellcheck strikes again. I edited it to what I intended to say: divisive.

 

Indeed. Also, New England Mutiny? WTF.. at least they didn't copy the mutant bat.