What would you like in a new stadium?, v. 7.0

I'd like to see new ownership. Ambitious about MLS and the San Jose Earthquakes.

 

And you expect to find them where? And you expect a stadium to get built how?

Right now we've got an ownership group that's dedicated to the game and to our city so much so that they're building a privately financed stadium. They're having trouble on field, but that doesn't mean they're a bad ownership group.

 

Because they had a two year run up from the moment they were granted the team until day 1, and even more time before they were granted the team to prepare (not including the fact half their ownership group also owned the USL team before that). And by comparison our ownership group has actually been at this less time than they have. And our owners didn't have a ready made newer soccer capable stadium like Qwest lying around.

 

Well then maybe I misunderstood you. I thought you were insinuating their owners were better than ours. I was just trying to explain why they might be more successful right now not necessarily better.

As for Qwest having field turf, yes it does, but other than that it's a vastly superior venue to any venue in the Bay Area (if not all of California).

 

Because they have a ********ing NFL franchise in their city...

 

Falvo, it was 3 things. 2+ years of run up to the first game, for a new team, and a ready built downtown stadium that is great for soccer (other than the fake grass). It's the same formula that made Toronto successful as well.

Unfortunately SJ has no downtown stadium. We didn't have 2+ years, we had 6 months run up. And we're not a new team, we're like trying to plant a crop in tainted soil. Considering those factors, we're doing just fine off field. Now if we could just turn it around on field.

 

I agree with need strong and good players on the pitch, but the player side of a FO acquires those strong players

And no Chivas/Sounders isn't what was being referred to. Did you see any highlights of the Revs/RB game?

 

Are you seriously deflecting the notion that the common ownership has benefited the Sounders significantly? They get a shiny, new, tax-payer-funded facility and don't have to compete in marketing against an NFL team, instead getting promotional tie-ins. Our ownership brethren have such weak support that they're looking to move. Plus, they play in a different city with a venue we hate sharing.

 

Seattle isn't that far above the Quakes. They had a better start and are still just hanging on. SJ pummeled them 4-0 and the Sounders are currently tied in points with that abortion of a team we saw last night. Color me unimpressed.

 

This thread is being closed. It's over 500, not really on topic at present, and we can have a staidum plans based stadium discussion starting shortly.