From what I understand, it is not a direct referendum on McKalla. And city council could adopt the stadium deal as an ordinance to finalize it (which could THEN open up that ordinance to a referendum?). Regardless, PSV can pull out of the lease deal/contract if a referendum endangers the deal. But why would they? There us literally zero chance that incompetent, cash poor fool and his minions (Greeley, Andy L) can convince ANOTHER city to give them a stadium deal. Or that MLS would give them another market to screw up. This is it for them. Austin or bust. I am a little fuzzy on the referendum details. Both this one in particular & generally relating to overruling council actions.
It looks like Austin FC is on their way, like it or not!! https://www.mlssoccer.com/post/2019...5-additions-front-office-including-academy-gm So all you doubters and PSV haters, it's time to accept the fact that the 27th club in MLS is going to be Austin FC.
Wrong!!! No public vote is needed. The lease agreement for McKella Place has been signed and approved!! The petition is just bull sh*t from a local community group which has no power or merit.
Seriously? You're responding to something posted 3 months ago. Lots has changed since then. Get a life. Not to mention I was responding to someone talking about St Louis, and NOT Austin.
Look, Broccoli FC/El Tree is probably going to happen. I just want that out there pre-rant. But their supporters are going to have to understand some things. And I would suggest walking small at first. Or expect some pushback if you don't. 1) You have the most hated owner in all of sports. He is a liar and two faced charlatan. These are FACTS. Not opinion. 2) You have some of the most hated FO people in all of soccer (Greeley especially). Again, facts. Just ask Fire fans if you believe not Crewville. 3) The behavior of some of your supporters cheering for the relocation of another club (who were the founding member of the league and whose owner literally saved the league AND is the home of Dos a cero) p!ssed off just about everyone with any passion for soccer in america. As a result, you probably have the most despised fan base as well (though we realize that was certainly not ALL Austin footy fans). 4) A lot of folks with no dog in the Columbus fight, but who want soccer to succeed, truly think MLS would have been MUCH better off with Spurs owning a team in SA rather than PSV getting one in Austin. Especially if one precludes the other. SA got screwed hard in this whole affair and that needs rectification. Put that all together and you are going to have a lot of folk rooting for PSV to fail, if not Austin. Yes, I know you are happy to get a team. Bully for you. But it was supposed to be 2019, right? Or am I mistaken? And it sure is not going to be the Crew. I would not count your chickens quite yet. Yes, I think all is good politically in Austin. But MLS has announced teams before that never happened (Cleveland in 2004/5). And Miami, announced in 2014, still is not playing. Sacramento looked like a sure thing as well. Now, what could go wrong with building a stadium on a former toxic waste dump that exploded the last time soneone tried to build on it? Golly, I have no idea. But I would have my fingers crossed until someone not on Austin/MLS payroll sounds an environmental all-clear. I do not (yet) see an Austin crest on the MLS site, while Nashville and Miami are displayed. Perhaps that changes soon. But as of now, you are still in the probably zone. And two years away. At best. Just because PSV hired on the Vichy-Crew lickspittles & water carriers into Austin does not prove much. Other than no one else wanted to hire them and no one else wanted to work for PSV. Though PSV actually having more than 1 employee is a step in the right direction, I will admit. End of rant.
I think you two will be very upset to see this then 1082762101259669506 is not a valid tweet id Austin at #27. MLS hasnt been quiet about it either so i dont understand how some were still having this debate after the playoffs. Should probably change the title of this thread to #28 and #29 Thank you, next
Again, we'll see. And like I said pre-rant, I think [DELETED] probably does lace them up in 2021. A lot can go sideways in two years. I would think something along the lines of a citizen issue, environmental issue, or PSV running short of cash somehow or the project running way over on the city side causing a problem. I am expecting a lot of gray area in the Austin announcement on the 15th and a lot more concrete stuff in Crewville today. Garber was in Miami in what, 2014? Again, we'll see. Maybe I am totally wrong. But the fact remains you have a bunch of liars and charlatans running that club who have never successfully run anything before between them. And I will root against them in all their endeavors while I still draw breath.
What are you expecting? Its a League entrance announcement. There's already a stadium contract, already front office members, already office space, already a technical director, they plan to have an academy for 2019, what more do you need to hear for a team starting two years from now? (possibly 2020 because I think Nashville has an ongoing lawsuit on their fairgrounds stadium lease)
Also, on that note, Nashville didn't even have a place to play when they were announced. Miami was literally just an ownership group, hadn't even decided where to put a stadium. They are hiring people concurrently with Austin FC. And not only that, but Austin FC has the upper hand on any new entrant, because it has direction from inside the league already (B/c If Austin FC isn't successful, all the owners of MLS suffer). The only details left that could be made out as important is a new training facility ( supposedly a private deal) and a coaching staff, which wouldn't make sense to hire until we have players to train. But I would like to see a Head Coach hired early and have time to work with the academy.
Well, since it was billed as a press event (in Columbus at least), I was expecting some questions & possibly sone answers. Stadium timeline. Keeping the SC? Academy/Affiliate questions. Any more FO/coaching hires? Does Onstad stay? Perhaps announce the Robinho signing. Ticket updates. Or at least an announcement of another date when questions could be asked or answered. We did not get any of that. We got in Columbus today what I expect in Austin on the 15th. Though I do certainly get why Garber did not want to take questions. That would have gone sideways. I will note Garber did say 27 teams and 21 stadiums early on in his remarks. So he is certainly counting Austin as in. From a league standpoint, I think this is certainly true. By my count, the non SSS teams are NE, Sea, Van, NYC, & Atl. Maybe he is not counting Cincy yet? Though there is sharing going on some places (BMO, Providence, Houston). Austin is next up.
Definitely would not have been a smart choice to be berated by Columbus fans. I thought that the Columbus press event was later today? I meant to watch it. Nevertheless, I wouldn't expect your new ownership to know all the details yet. especially since they really have only taken over in the last month or so. As for Austin, a lot of our information is already out there because the PSV team has been working on this for a while. We have a gantt chart for stadium construction that was released with the leasing contract. Now we need the Sporting side to be brought in, which I don't expect at the announcement next week. One thing that might need clarification about Austin from a league perspective is why they are still considering a 2020 start. That's one of the things we might hear in Austin on the 15th
BMO is probably #6. Shared with the Argonauts. Owned by the city. More like Century Link and Gillette in that the football team and MLS team are both owned by the same people. But CFL != NFL. Nippert is a temporary home.
My most two hated teams have been the Chicago Fire and DC United. I think now the Columbus Crew have entered that hollowed area. I will cheer for all the opponents of the above 3 named teams from now on.
Well, Austin & PSV up next on the 15th. Had not heard 2020 was being considered. Would prefer to keep an even # of teams, but if #28 is not coming until 2022 then that will not matter. Though they way MLS did the Cincy expansion draft suggests they prefer pairs. Gonna need a place to play if 2020 is the goal. Temp home would take some of the time pressure off for 2021, at least there would be a fall back if delays hit. But I doubt PSV pays money they do not have to. Regardless, we will hopefully get more info next week.
Yep, if all continues to go well Austin will nab the 27th expansion team slot. I suggest that it would be more reasonable to imagine Austin joining the league in 2021 or 2002 since PSV will be putting together a front office, players and a pitch to play on from scratch.
The only reason I see Austin starting in 2020 is if the league gets greedy and wants Precourt to start making money.
You're welcome. Red Bulls are aww right.... can't hate'em. Can't hate LA or Seattle or Portland. Just Chicago, DC and now Columbus (this is a probationary year.. maybe they get off the list next year...) DC and Chicago are there forever.
I'm not so sure. Precourt will have to find a place to play, which seemed to have been the biggest obstacle to moving the Crew and playing in 2019. Dell Diamond and UT seem to not be options - most likely because they would cost too much. Do you seriously believe that the Crew would be in Columbus if Precourt could have found a temporary site? If Precourt had somewhere to play, he would have moved the team, and Columbus's best case scenario would have been an expansion team in 2021.
I believe the Columbus judge allowing a toll on the original lawsuit that extended litigation more than 6 months is effectively the reason Precourt sold the crew. What I meant by Precourt starting in 2020 is that other owners are likely to have to share profits with him, decreasing their overall margin. so to them its a "sooner the better" type of thing.
I'm not sure I understand what you're saying re: 2020. I can't imagine PSV being profitable that year, needing to lease, well, everything, in order to field a team. At least historically, stadium lease agreements have been terrible for MLS clubs. They don't have leverage regarding scheduling; only get a small cut (if anything) of ancillary revenue streams (parking, concessions); its tough to pull in the kind of corporate sponsorship you can in your own stadium; teams often don't have much say over stadium operations. And of course, they have to pay a hefty sum just to use the stadium for a few hours a week. Sorry if I'm misinterpreting what you were saying. You'd know the Austin market better than me. But it's hard for me to envision a 2020 kickoff in Austin, or that the league would be pushing PSV to go that route.
He's saying that in 2019 and 2020 Precourt will be taking a draw from the SUM money but not contributing anything until his team starts play. So the sooner the better from the other owner's perspective.