MLS expansion, relocation, etc... (leagues, popularity, league, group)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How many teams in your opinion should MLS cap out at? And which cities would you like to see ownsership groups established? Should any teams be relocated? Personally.. I'd like to see a 2nd NYC area (Brooklyn or Flushing) team, and ownership groups established in St. Louis, Miami (again), Atlanta, Minnesota. I also wouldn't mind seeing Chivas relocated to San Diego. Should MLS eventually go to a promotion/relegation system?
20 seems feasible in the near future, but I wouldn't want much more than that. There are too many teams in the rest of the US's leagues. Maybe a total of 24 would be good in the long term. But for now we're looking at 19 in the next two years, and a probable 20th not much later.
As to where the teams will be - well, it depends on who has the money to buy an expansion and build an SSS. I don't like relocation much, but wouldn't mind seeing Chivas move south to San Diego either (and get a new name).
I don't think NYC needs another team - one team per metro should be fine for now.
Pro/reg will never work in MLS - at least not for decades, if ever.
They should cap out at 20 which is likely to be a 2nd NYC team. After that, the league needs to focusing on stablizing what is there, developing talent, and growing the league. Then, after about 5-6 years, they should add 4 more teams over a several year period. After that, be done with it. Cap it at 24.
Pro/reg will never work in MLS. Owners will never go for their team being dropped down to 2nd division. American sports fans will not sport it. It is too foreign a concept too them. Although, I think it should be implemented into all American sports.
I will never hope for any franchise to be relocated. I have gone through the pain of almost seeing my team move away and I would never wish that to any MLS fan.
I wish St. Louis could get a solid ownership group so that we could finally have a true rival in Kansas City. But, after the latest debacle with the Women's and 2nd division team, it may never happen.
I wish St. Louis could get a solid ownership group so that we could finally have a true rival in Kansas City. But, after the latest debacle with the Women's and 2nd division team, it may never happen.
St. Louis does have a pretty strong ownership group for AC St. Louis, the newly created USSF D2 team. They were one of the frontrunners for starting the NASL (2010). Unfortunately that failed, but that's a whole other story: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASL_(2010)
The MLS is still a relatively young league. The league hasn't even reached 20 teams yet and they've been expanding each year for the past couple years. An expansion/relegation system would require (to be successful and keep things exciting) at least 3 tiers in the promotion/relegation system and would require AT Least 12 teams per tier (where as of now MLS and USSF D2 meet that requirement). What's missing is that 3rd tier, which won't come for awhile. The USL is struggling with keeping just one semi-pro league, as some of you may know with what happened to the USL split up last year.
I would love to see a promotion/relegation system here in the US. But for now, the USL needs to get their act together, and the popularity of the game needs to grow a little bit more so that we can get more interest groups in markets in other U.S. cities.
Start stacking teams in the same metro only when the sport's fully established; there's still much of the Midwest to tap into, the bay area, etc. Don't forget Montreal in 2012 folks.
Detroit
Cleveland
St Louis
San Francisco/Oakland
Milwaukee
Minneapolis
Phoenix
Atlanta
Lots of areas to tap into, but they've been doing a great job as of yet though (last 4-5 years).
In my opinion, neither Los Angeles or New York should have second teams. Not unless the teams they currently have are drawing 35,000+ a game, which is impossible given the capacities of their current stadiums. I also agree that Chivas should be moved to San Diego (or maybe Phoenix) so they can have their own metro area.
St. Louis would be great if they have a solid ownership group. However, a team needs to be placed somewhere in the Deep South (Nashville, Birmingham, Atlanta, somewhere like that), as that is the only region that is completely devoid of teams right now. Minneapolis-St. Paul is another possibility.
As for pro-rel, I would say that is likely decades away at this point. Essentially we need to have at least 40 teams plus a team-driven organization, not one where the league owns the contracts, etc.
Let's take a look at this season's attendance records. Average home attendance by team.
Chicago Fire, 14,306 avg. home attendance
Chivas USA, 14,222
Colorado Rapids, 13,716
Columbus Crew, 13,984
D.C. United, 14,606
FC Dallas, 11,239
Houston Dynamo, 15,442 Kansas City Wizards, 10,005
Los Angeles Galaxy, 20,687
New England Revolution, 11,286
New York Red Bulls, 16,276
Philadelphia Union, 19,169
Real Salt Lake, 16,277
San Jose Earthquakes, 9,515
Seattle Sounders FC, 36,139
Toronto FC, 20,588
Based upon average home attendance, I would wonder how St. Louis could support a team adequately when Kansas City apparently cannot. Only San Jose has a worse home attendance record. Again, why was San Jose given a franchise?
The largest support appears to be in the Pac NW. But we will see what happens when both Vancouver, BC, and Portland receive teams. Of course, people in one city are probably not going to attend matches in another city.
And Cleveland? What, does MLS need a perennial underdog, loser?? Sorry.
I'm pretty sure Kansas City sells out just about every game. Their stadium only seats about 10,500 and is a baseball stadium. Plus, they are getting a nice, brand new soccer specific stadium next year I believe.
I'm pretty sure Kansas City sells out just about every game. Their stadium only seats about 10,500 and is a baseball stadium. Plus, they are getting a nice, brand new soccer specific stadium next year I believe.
Didn't KC play in a gridiron stadium several years ago? It seems like they had much better attendance when they were (1) winning, and (2) in a gridiron stadium.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
