I didn't suggest that Ft Wayne should have an MLS team either did I? Oh, by the way, who was your home grown World Cup star in Korea?
Not sure what you mean.......? I'm not in St Louis, just like the city for it's support of teams. As for Boston area, you already have a team in the Revs, no matter how much we'd all like them to go away
You have to wear a condom anyway don't you..? You sound like a dick and probably look like one so to be safe you'd better wear one. I can tell you've spent a lot of time in Seattle Dorothy..?, or did you see it from the top of the last twister you went by on..?
Re: Re: Wich city should get a MLS team? No kidding. What a complete tool. Seattle has some of the best Spring to Fall weather in the USA. Since MLS doesn't play a Winter schedule (when it rains in the Pacific NW) weather should actually be a DRAW for Seattle.
Anyone of the following would be a great city to house a MLS franchise: Baltimore Trenton/Philly Milwaukee Seattle Toronto Montreal Detroit Cleveland Hartford
very well said. i guess whatever podunk town in georgia clint mathis is from should have an MLS team, too. go fort wayne pistons.
OK so I voted with my heart for San Antonio. So sue me for that one (can't you blame me). But I feel that the cities should be: 1. Rochester 2. Seattle 3. Houston 4. Minnesota (Minneapolis/St. Paul)
Ok now lets not bring Canada into this, A-League already made that mistake IMHO. See Soccer leagues focus on ONE country unlike all the other American sports who incoporate Canadian cities like we're one country. I dunno I just don't wanna see it. anyone with me...
Being from St. Louis, I'm glad to see it mentioned so much, but unfortunately I have to admit it will be a while before it gets consideration. There's really no appropriate stadium for them. You've got the downtown stadiums which aren't set up for soccer and are too big anyway. Then, you've got soccer park, which is too small. I do think the city and surrounding areas would support a team, and likely support it more strongly than most current MLS cities. I just don't see anything happening until some money man starts the ball rolling by building a place to play.
Re: Re: Wich city should get a MLS team? Hey I know Cory Has had a few too many cups of Coffee this morning, but dont be talkin' bad about The Fort.
Minneapolis would be a pretty good choice. There is a stadium in the northern suburbs that could easily be brought up to standards -- though it might be a bit small. Our A-League team regularly draws in the 3,000-4,000 range -- more when MLS teams come calling.
Tampa, a longer way down the line. Providing they get a stadium built. In the next couple of years my vote is for Philadelphia and possibly something nearer the south like Atlanta.
I didn't say anything about Seattle, I think that would be a good place to play if MLS had a stadium to play in, and not an astroturf football stadium. 25,000? maybe because all the Seattle seahawks fans wanted to get a look at their new stadium and this was the first chance? That number isn't impressive, give me the season avg for the sounders then we can start talking. Although I was impressed with the turnout for the Honduras friendly earlier in the summer up in Seattle. Rochester came from everyone that says move to Rochester..what they get about 10 or 11,000 a game? aren't those the kind of numbers that get bashed in the attendance threads..
Philly then your city. Noone mentioned Atlanta, Indianapolis, Birmingham (Alabama Slammers), San Diego, or Sacramento.
I don't know about the soccer following here in phoenix, fans here tend to border cali fans with their malaise toward any sports teams. I lived in Chapel Hill for a few years and soccer is def. ingrained in the whole Triangle area-Def. would be a kick ass place for MLS to go....Portland and Seattle have awesome sports fans for any sport....but not here in the desert. And we def. don't need to be doubling up any cities yet.
I voted for New York because: 1. I want Metro out of GS, and if the Harrison stadium project goes south, I'd like the team to move east -- into NYC, maybe Aqueduct,if that's still a possibility -- far away from the NJSEA. 2. The other places are TOO DARNED HOT in the summer for decent soccer.
Seattle I think would be the best bet, maybe St. Louis. Cleveland would be better though. We need an Ohio derby.