I'll tell you how. St. Louis has had a red circle around it since MLS started. It is a city with long soccer history and has been mentioned as a target city since day one. If St. Louis is ready then they are going to get a team over any other city that's left. San Diego is another city that has that leeway as well. MLS have always been a bit gun shy of Sac. St Louis, now, crosses all the T's and dots all the I's that Sac and Phoenix do but because they have always seen St louis as the mythical holy land of days past, they get first.
https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis...6x9I0lSiH1szw03ddcf82&t=1551381110&j=86933871 We both St. Louis and Sacramento meeting the expectations of MLS expansion, maybe they will award both at the same. It's possible. The "Soccer Don" was asked that very question in the attached article by Taylor Twellman.
As a STL resident, don't know that they have. I'd give the nod to SAC on Stadium plans & overall attendance. Ownership group is heavily in STL favor though. STL 'minority' partner J. Kavanaugh is worth aboout 1.9 billion by himself (Forbes has Burkle at 1.5 billion) The Taylor family is worth about 12-15 billion depending on source. STL is no slouch on attendance, they average about 4500, while playing in a 5000ish seat stadium right now. Kavanaugh owns ST Louis FC, their stadium park, and Scott Gallagher soccer club, the largest youth soccer grouop in the area. the current. Ideally, Garber announces 28/29 at our near the same time, SAC in 2021/2022?, and STL a year later. (I think STL would be aiming for a 2022 start at best)
This..... Award SAC & STL near same time, SAC starts play first, STL the following year. Keeps the "final" 30th spot open, drives PHX, DET, etc... to get something done, then.... Surprise... we're going to 32. Wash, rinse, repeat until the money/interest dries up.
------------------- Would there be any chance if STL wanted to start before their stadium is done, that Busch Stadium is an option or even the old dome? They could use the current soccer park for a USL or PDL team, and using Gallagher to feed as well (?) Sound like the have some options.
A chance, well i guess. I wouldn't think the CARDS would be willing to share for a full season though. They may be willing to help with a stadium delay though, figure just a couple of games. The Dome would probably be more accommodating of a full season, but would be far from ideal. My understanding is the USL team & Gallagher is expected to remain at Soccer Park.
The Dome in Saint Louis doesn't have a wide enough floor to accommodate a soccer field. They have played exhibition games there, but with a field that is narrow. The cost to renovate has been put at 200-300 million. If the Yankees accommodate NYCFC, why wouldn't the Cardinals do the same?
Well, there's the obvious answer that the Yankees are co-owners of NYCFC. It's in their own interest to give the soccer team somewhere to play, even if it's in the baseball team's stadium. So there's some tolerance for the weekend-date-hogging and field-wear-and-tear, a la tolerating your little sibling until they can grow up enough to get their own place. (I bet good gate revenue helps too.) The Cardinals don't have a similar ownership stake - or even an individual representative choosing to be in the ownership group, IIRC - of the current STL MLS bid.
I understand that but Bill DeWitt is a good corporate citizen. They have had several games at Busch Stadium. Man City Chelsea. The USWNT have played a few exhibitions there. All of these games in season. The USMNT has played a WC qualifier there albeit November. Argentina Bosnia played a friendly. SIU-Carbondale (Division 1AA) played a football game there which more or less turned into a quagmire and ruined the field for the last month of the season. I think Bill DeWitt would be more flexible than you think. You must not be from Saint Louis.
How so? FIFA international pitch is 110-120 yds x 70-80 yds. NFL playing field is 120 yds X 53 yds. NFL also dictates 6 ft (2yds) out of bound lines around the field, plus at 24 foot deep bench area on each sideline (8 yds) plus 6 foot clear (2 yds) behind each bench, then a "recommended" 12 feet (4 yds) to any wall. 53+2(2+8+2)= 77 yds. not including the extra recommended space. https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/2018-nfl-rulebook/
The Dome is probably at least 77 yards wide at midfield but the space won't be that wide at the corners. That's where older NFL-specific stadium often fall short. That 8 yard deep bench area only extends between the 30 yard lines. Lots of stadiums cut the corners to improve the angle of the view for the seats near the end zones so the available space isn't 77 yards wide there. Also, that rule book you cite has the dimensions for stadiums built since 2016. St. Louis Dome was built in 1995.
There's also the issue of MLS having a major boner for NYC and being willing to overlook the stadium situation since it meant getting a team in NYC.. St. Louis, on the other hand, seems to be more of a "nice to have" for MLS, so they won't likely be interested in having games at Busch Stadium when they can just hold out for a SSS. Supporting evidence for this would be Minnesota United, who, despite the Twins being partial owners of the team, played at the UofMN's football stadium instead of at Target Field.
Take a look for yourself, not much if any pinching in the corners. https://seatgeek.com/images/seatviews/2779/type/nfl/size/640/333.d3e1f8.jpg Looks like a 110 X 70 will fit easily.
Then why did they play the USMNT qualifier in November 2015 at Busch then? They could have sold 70,000 seats easily. Would have had to truck in grass for the field. The City is also doing a booming convention business now that the Rams are gone. They don't have to reserve the Dome for three out of four weekends as they did with the NFL. The other thing is Reggie Bush sued the Rams and won a considerable amount of money because he was hurt due to concrete ringing the playing surface and being so close to the field. The Dome is not suitable. The way Garber has always talked about Saint Louis is that they have always wanted a franchise in the city. We shall see. If Sacremento is named and Saint Louis isn't named, the main investor Carolyn Kindle Betz has said she will walk away. So again, we shall see.
To date, there have been five soccer matches played at the new Busch Stadium. The U.S. Women's National Team has played one of those matches. Of the five matches, three took place during the Major League Baseball season. A sixth soccer match - the second appearance by the U.S. Women's National Team - is scheduled for May of this year. As you mentioned, the Southern Illinois University-Carbondale football team hosted Southeast Missouri State in a game at Busch Stadium in September of 2013. Additionally, the St. Louis Blues hosted the Chicago Blackhawks in the National Hockey League's 2017 Winter Classic game. So, after the U.S. Women's National Team hosts New Zealand this coming May 16th, there will have been a grand total of eight non-baseball sporting events contested at Busch Stadium over 13 years, with just four of them having taken place during a Major League Baseball season. Contrast that with the reality of a St. Louis-based 28th Major League Soccer franchise having to host up to 20 regular season home matches at Busch Stadium... during the same Spring-Summer-Fall portion of the year that the Cardinals contest the home portion of their MLB schedule... in a single year. Plain and simple: we'd be talking about an entirely different "kettle of fish". Which, to my mind, raises the question of whether it is a fait accompli that "flexible... good corporate citizen" Bill DeWitt would be willing to let a St. Louis MLS franchise set-up shop in Busch Stadium for a season or two while its own soccer-specific stadium was being built? Maybe he would, maybe he wouldn't. Only time will tell.
Would he do it forever and ever like the Yankeees appear destined to host NYCFC (by the way what is up with that - both the Yankees and MCFC have enough money to build a stadium on their own don't they? When will MLS put pressure on NYCFC to build a stadium?). No Bill DeWitt would not do it for as long as the Yankees have. Would he do it short term maybe for one season (or half a season, a month (the Rams played a few games at Busch Stadium in their first season in Saint Louis)). I think he might. The other poster dismissed the notion out of hand. That is misguided. https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis...uis-mls-dream-team-came-together-and-why.html The link above where the lead investor for Saint Louis says if Saint Louis isn't picked as the 28th team she may walk.
Those are all one-off events, as was stated by another poster. Having a soccer team there regularly (even for half a season) would be a very different story. Also, I'm guessing you completely ignored my profile and signature. Typical internet citizen, I see. I lived in STL for the first 22yrs (~78%) of my life and was a member of both Eads Brigade and Laclede's Army.
I pay ZERO attention to profile and signature. Since you were in Lacledes Army and Eads Brigade that makes you a better fan? They are one offs. Agreed. However I believe he would listen and consider. Just my opinion. Funny how no one has answered my questions about NYCFC.
I did. Because MLS had a huge boner for having a team in NYC, so they were willing to make an exception for NYCFC that they are not likely to make for a St. Louis team.
I understand that. But the question was when does MLS hold NYCFC to the same standard (downtown SSS) as they want to try and hold everyone else to (except Seattle, New England, Chicago, Colorado, Dallas, KC, Atlanta, Vancouver, Portland)?
I was there too, looked ok to me. I've shown the math, and pictures that it will work. I also stated I think we'll just have to disagree on this point.