Omigosh not Raleigh, I'm so off-kilter. I need to seriously think before I post. Tepper=Charlotte. I totally meant Charlotte and let myself get sucked in by the rhyme while I was typing on my endorphin high from the Sacramento announcement. Mea culpa. C-h-a-r-l-o-t-t-e next with Tepper's money. San Diego's dead until they show a pulse on the stadium front. Anybody from the Southwest (Phoenix or Vegas) had better have a perfect (read: cash-flush) bid and an answer to show why Summer temperatures in the dry heat won't be significantly different than they are in Eastern soaking humidity. I think that's easier to show with straightforward science than most believe, but they've got to overcome the weight of perception, which is plenty difficult. People flip about the raw numbers on the temperature out there, but once the sun's lower or set, it gets a lot less scary. When you start comparing with other locales and the way their humidity factors into the heat index, well ... at least we're not trying to play a winter schedule in the great white north. So, I see five tiers: 1. Developing bids that seem like they're viable if they continue to shape up well. 2. Bids that are comatose until they resolve a fatal deficiency, then become instant darling bids 3. Everybody else, who need lots more money, leadership, money, community enthusiasm, a billionaire, and other viable plans 4. Bids we don't see coming yet. 5. Dead bid 1: *Ahem* Tepper *cough* Charlotte, Phoenix, Vegas (I still have a hard time believing it, but apparently they're serious) 2: Detroit (stadium), San Diego (stadium) 3: Raleigh, Indy, Tampa, etc (I guess Louisville, but Cincinnati seems too close to share the regional market share, and so does Indy if they get serious.) 4: Your guess is as good as mine. This is where places like Pittsburgh, Milwaukee, New Orleans, etc. live. It's not that they can't, it's that nobody's put themselves out there yet. 5. RIP San Antonio Sorry Team Raleigh. In my very humble opinion, y'all have a waffle-lot of work ahead. The dream's not dead, but making it come true's going to need a lot of effort to get ahead of the competition and seal the deal.
Question ?? from Australia and was wondering. Is the 2026 world cup, having a positive effect on those willing to bid for a team??? and if so will there be a drop off post the world cup in 2026.
There was a lot of interest prior to the world cup bid and win so I don't think it's really changed since. More than likely MLS will hit it's max before the World Cup starts so they won't be adding anymore after. They should stop at 30 teams (size of the NBA and MLB) or 32 teams (size of the NFL and NHL). 32 is more likely as the Sacramento Republic were just granted "promotion" as the leagues 29th team starting in 2022.
IMO MLS will keep expanding as long as they can keep raising the expansion fee and the new market seems viable. So I think they'll certainly go to 36 teams and maybe beyond that.
Call me skeptical. I think they'll announce Charlotte as 30 sometime in the next year or so. It shouldn't take too long for them to stand up a team. This is assuming BoA is acceptable to the league. Beyond that? All bets are off. 32- maybe, but when? Three years, Five years, ten years? Going to 36? Maybe, but again, when? 2035? 2040? MLS is no longer a bargain basement league. I think a lot of the excitement a couple of years ago was the sense that an MLS team could be had relatively cheaply... It was (and still is) a cheap way to become a pro sports team owner compared to the big four US sports leagues. But, current fees are thinning the herd of potential owners. Further increases in expansion fees will put a damper on expansion.
A metro area of 1-3 million can support an MLS team. There are quite a few of those. Lots of cities would like to be on the map with a major league team. Places like Tulsa, Memphis, Birmingham, etc. If a suitable ownership group is available with a good stadium site (and likely public support), there's no reason for MLS to pass on the market. Some place that consistently draws 20K fans would be thriving and 15K might be acceptable. SLC is smallest metro area currently in league at 1.25 mil and they're doing fine.
RSL paid an expansion fee of $7.5 million in 2004, about $10 million today, adjusted for inflation. Rio Tonto stadium cost just over $100 million, about $130 today. St. Louis paid $200 million expansion fee, along with $250 million for their stadium. Do you really believe someone in Salt Lake City would pay $200-250 million plus $200 million for a stadium today?
Roughly estimating, it seems that MLS has been asking that each expansion fee be $10M times the number of existing clubs at the time.
I'd guess the practical lower limit is closer to 2 million than 1 million. You're quoting the Salt Lake City MSA population, but keep in mind that the MSA excludes the Ogden and Provo/Orem areas, which are part of the CSA. The population within 50 miles of the stadium is more like 2 million, and the CSA population is 2.4 million. Nashville is the smallest CSA of all the current or announced future MLS cities at 2.1 million.
Very possibly, yes. While local ownership is preferable since they usually have political muscle and civic connections, it isn't necessary. See Austin, Columbus, Nashville, Miami, etc. If a potential lead investor sees an opportunity in MLS and a mayor wants a summer time major league sport, then things become possible. The investor will want local partners, a good stadium site, a public contribution, etc. For someplace like Albuquerque or Memphis it's doable. Getting 300K fans to come to games over the course of a season isn't insuperable.
Nashville is the 32nd largest CSA. If we eventually fill in the larger CSAs (Detroit, Phoenix, Indy, etc), there are still places which could support 18K average attendance 17 times a summer. They'd need ownerships willing to write a big check and local support from the government and business community but there should be at least 4 and likely 8 or more.
Are you the guy who thought there was gonna be a pause after 16? 20? 24? 28? 32 is a certainty. 36 is even money. Possible beyond that. We will get to 32 before WC 2026. Bank on it. Most probably western teams (PHX, SD, LV) after #30 if they can come up with a viable stadium/heat solution. Once half the league is in warm-ish spots, they can move the schedule up a bit and have less early season games in the cold. This paves the way for 36/38 games instead of 34. Making 34/36 teams more probable. Warm/Dome: Houston, Miami, LA (2), Orlando, Atlanta, Vancouver, Austin, Sacramento, San Jose = 10. Warmish/Tolerable: Dallas, Portland, Seattle, Nashville, (Charlotte), + 2 of Phoenix/SD/Las Vegas. 4 Now. Possibly 7 soon. After that? At least half of continued expansion will be warm. Warm contenders: Tampa, Raleigh, San Antonio, PHX/LV/SD loser. Cold: Detroit, Indy.
No. I really didn't start posting until about 3 years ago. I figured then they were going to 32. Nice round number. Lots if possibilities. Not like 29, a prime number. No way to divide it nicely. In 2017, we saw a lot of early excitement from the potential cities/owners which diminished as the year went on. My feeling was that as these groups learned what MLS was about, how they ran the business, costs, maybe expectations of the owners, who knows, but these groups lost interest. I think MLS has a lot of first dates with potential owners, but not a lot of second dates. I'm not sure how big the league will ultimately be. My gut feeling is that the logistics of operations, scheduling, etc will make expansion beyond 32 unappealing to the league. But, the driving force will be willing owners able to get stadiums built in cities. I'm thinking they are running out of additional willing owners as the price for teams rise. I think we'll see more expansion in USL. It's cheaper, and a smaller stadium will do. It's an exciting gane, too. The quality of players at that level is not far off what MLS had just a few years ago. I'd like a system similar to minor league baseball.
after 30 they can slow their roll and take their time at expansion and look for truly perfect candidates that check all boxes to emerge. Theyll be fine if that takes 10, 15 years I think. MLS would be smart to put out some subtle messages about curtailing expansion for awhile after 30 (even if thats not the case) just to put the impetus on places like Charlotte, Vegas, and Phoenix. My inside track for number 30 is still Vegas. Its the most exciting emerging sports market in the country by far, and I think MLS will be very interested in that. Phoenix's silence is just deafening.......they gotta at least start to kick up some dust.
but in other news, St Louis's new stadium looks fun. https://www.prosoccerusa.com/mls/ex...nsion-stlouis-unveils-stadium-plan-2022-betz/
The only way it takes 10-15 years to go past 30 is if there are no markets ready to get in. If by this time next year there are St Louis type markets ready to go with approved stadium plans and rich ownership groups, we will be welcoming in 31 and 32. Agreed about Vegas and Phoenix. Vegas seems exciting and so do the Lights. Phoenix seems to be pulling a San Antonio and fading away due to nothing ever happening anymore. What the hell are the Spurs ownership doing?
Spurs ownership i think knows that San Antonio is RIP so arent gonna put money in it anymore. Unless MLS has told something to Phoenix behind the scenes to not even try, theyre a different story; both markets are big enough for it to not be just Phoenix or just Vegas. That said, given proximity, there is some credence that there is somewhat of an expansion rivalry there, and Vegas is well ahead of the pack much due to Phoenix sitting on their hands and not doing much of anything.
This feels like it's a pretty good fit. With 36 teams and 4 divisions (yes, spread into 2 conferences to organize playoffs), you get: 14 games home and away against division opponents. (Divisions make sense in the U.S. due to geography and a history of it in other leagues) 24 single games against each other team in the league. (Sort of NFL-ish) Total: 38 total games, the same number as a single-table home-and-away schedule in the top-flight national circuits, but with more teams. I think this fits the American sports league mindset. More than 36 and things break into smaller divisions or require years where some teams don't even play once. (40=10x4-team divisions, 6 home-away, 30 single ties? That might be asking too much) I know, single-table, promotion-relegation is the only acceptable way for many of us who look at overseas leagues from geographically more compact countries with long histories of club sports. Who am I kidding, we're talking about European leagues. Tradition, competition, everybody-plays-everybody, the best and mediocre stay and the up-and-comers get a shot at the top flight. That's not the kind of country we're talking about. Our U.S. sports history doesn't look like that, and our leagues didn't develop like the sports club leagues in Europe. The U.S. developed on a franchise model, regardless of the fact that we use the word clubs sometimes, and gave up on single table when we started moving far enough west. 36 makes sense. I'm not sure I can see more than 7 further cities we could add, and that's assuming they figure out a bunch of solutions to problems. Until then, there aren't even that many. SD (Stadiums and money talk, and the stadium's death rattle was a while ago.) Charlotte (A matter of time, Tepper's cash and the city's consent.) Vegas (Money and city enthusiasm talks.) Phoenix (Where's the talk? It seems like there should be more going on here.) Detroit (Money can't speak loudly enough to be heard over the deafening silence after its stadium plan went over with a thud) Indy, (Kinda skeptical, would they add it between Chicago, Cincy, and C'bus? Maybe with the right money and a stadium plan.) OKC (Kinda skeptical, would they add it between Dallas, KC and Denver? Maybe, with the right investor.) ... Then who? Tampa? (Skeptical, but hey, they added Austin) Louisville? (Skeptical, crowded neighborhood if C'bus, Cincy, and Indy) Raleigh area? (Probably not with Charlotte, but with the right amount of interested money I don't think I'd rule it out 100%. I'd rule it out 90-99% though.) Pittsburgh? (crickets) Milwaukee? (more crickets) N'awlins? (some more crickets) San Juan, PR? (Forget crickets, we're talking cicadas and fireflies too)
I think teams would be playing 40 regular season games under your proposal with 16 rather than 14 divisional games. If the NFL can have 32 teams, MLS can easily have more, especially with 3 in Canada. Apart from ownership and stadium issues, MLS teams only need a market that can support crowds of 18-25K 17 times per year rather than 50K+ 8 times a season. If there's no MLB in the market, so much the better.
No, you're right, I didn't math that correctly. I was unconsciously doing the math for a 32-team, 8x4 configuration, instead of a 36 team 9x4 alignment. (would fix above, but can't) So yes 16+24 = 40, which is almost certainly too much. I still don't see them slowing down enough to prevent 36, so on the way there I think they're going to need to figure out how to justify skipping a few of the single-game matchups while maintaining a geographically sane schedule. Honestly, the official alignment probably is less important, so long as everyone's clear that certain matchups are timzeone or travel doubles, and others will either be singles and/or skipped on a schedule. Whichever that means, I think there's the list of markets and investors starts to get thin after 36. There's a real-world practical limit somewhere, and it's probably at around 36. Whatever other noise I'm creating through inattention to mathematical detail, I don't want to lose the train of though where I agree with you. It's going to slow down getting to 36, and after that's going to be a tougher sell.
36 teams. Two 18 team conferences. No inter conference matchups. 34 game schedule. Playoffs with 7-8 teams from each conference, knock out style. This makes the conference championship more meaningful. Gives more weight to both the regular season and the playoffs. Also builds rivalries. Keep it simple.
I get that simple has its appeal. I'd honestly be pretty cool with it. I can't bring myself to believe that MLS will give up on inter-regional play. Even if they emphasize a region, they're unlikely to give up the others. I'd be fine with a skip-year for some or many matchups, so they play 2 out of 3 years, with an off year (so home year, away year, off year). I don't imagine the league office will love it at first, but they're going to need to concede to the reality that not all the teams can play all the time in a monster league. It will give them a lot more breathing room to work with if they're not going to give up on regular circulation. I think they'll hang on to regular circulation more than they'll hang on to simplicity. I think I'm taking us into "league design" and away from "who's next," so I'll back off on this and say that the "who's next" question is going to continue to include enough east-west balance that we can probably still divide at the big river and cherry-pick a couple teams/matchups from one side or the other to even it out, like we've been doing for a while.
Spurs ownership have done nothing since they bought the team. They have made no advancements in anything even before they knew about Austin.
oh that i agree with, they are were "phoenixing" it up hard. Their silence cost them. Granted, MLS absolutely didnt help matters with that crooked AF deal with austin
Honestly, if anyone were betting, this is the direction that MLS is headed... More so, if could predict, I’d wager that the CCL becomes extinct. Some want it to be the UEFA CL but in truth, a game in Nicaragua is never going to have the marketing power to really push the needle. To put it bluntly, we need an international tournament/league where all the teams appear major league. And, with the joint World Cup in 2026, my money is on a “North American Leagues Cup” with the top 16 teams in MLS versus the top 16 teams in Liga MX for a home/away tournament style tournament that becomes the money maker in North America. (Possibly, that could be expanded to top 20 MLS, top 19 Liga MX, and top 1 CPL, but that’s a discussion for a later date). MLS West 1. Los Angeles FC - 2. LA Galaxy 3. Seattle Sounders 4. Portland Timbers - 5. FC Dallas 6. Minnesota United 7. Sporting Kansas City - 8. Vancouver Whitecaps - 9. Colorado Rapids 10. San Jose Earthquakes 11. Houston Dynamo 12. Sacramento Republic 13. Austin FC 14. Real Salt Lake 15. Las Vegas Lights 16. Phoenix Rising 17. New Mexico United 18. San Diego Loyal Alternates/USL independent clubs: Oklahoma City Energy, San Antonio FC, Tulsa Roughnecks, Union Omaha, El Paso Locomotive, Fresno FC, East Bay, Riverside*, Des Moines*, Corpus Christi*, Boise*, Santa Barbara*, Dallas-Fort Worth*, Ventura County*, San Fernando Valley* MLS East 1. Atlanta United - 2. New York Red Bulls 3. New York City FC 4. Philadelphia Union - 5. DC United 6. Inter Miami CF 7. Toronto FC - 8. Saint Louis - 9. New England Revolution 10. Orlando City SC 11. Chicago Fire 12. FC Cincinnati 13. Montreal Impact 14. Nashville SC 15. Columbus Crew 16. Charlotte* 17. Indy Eleven 18. Detroit* Alternates/USL independent clubs: Tampa Bay Rowdies, Birmingham Legion, Raleigh FC, Charleston Battery, Greenville Triumph, Tormenta FC, Louisville City, Harrisburg FC, Memphis 901, Pittsburgh Riverhounds, Forward Madison, Rochester Rhinos, Chattanooga Red Wolves, Ottawa Fury, Richmond Kickers, Hartford Athletic, Cleveland*, Milwaukee*, Lansing*, Jacksonville*, New Orleans*, Asheville*, Columbia*, Wilmington*, Worcester*, Dayton*, Grand Rapids*, Knoxville*, Hampton Roads*, Buffalo*, Baltimore*, Greensboro*, Little Rock*, Jackson*, Mobile*, Cape Coral*, Lexington*, Syracuse*, Long Island*, Staten Island*, Providence*, Burlington*, Manchester*, Bridgeport, New Haven*, Portland*, Fort Wayne* NORTH AMERICAN LEAGUES CUP Group A New York City FC Los Angeles FC Pachuca Club Tijuana Group B Inter Miami FC Dallas Monterrey Necaxa Group C DC United Philadelphia Union Puebla Atletico San Luis Group D Toronto FC Vancouver Whitecaps Toluca Queretaro Group E Portland Timbers Seattle Sounders UNAM Pumas Leon Group F Atlanta United Minnesota United Club America Santos Laguna Group G LA Galaxy New York Red Bulls Cruz Azul CD Gualajara Group H Sporting Kansas City Saint Louis Club Atlas Tigres ...Now, that’s a tournament that can make money and be prime time on TV.