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.
Still, wouldn't it make sense for NJ to have its own team and NYC have its own team?
That's what you are not understanding with your post in this thread. Cities or states dont have teams. Ownership groups have teams and choose to have their teams play in certain places.
It makes sense if there is an ownership group that wants to have a team in NY and another that wants to have one in NJ. That's all that matters.
As mentioned above, the Red Bulls will be playing in NJ starting next season. Their stadium is pretty much done.
If an ownership group such as the Mets owner is granted a team, the team may play and be name after NY.
Location: New Albany, Indiana (Greater Louisville)
11,974 posts, read 25,480,204 times
Reputation: 12187
I think a great name for the future STL team would be the St Louis Flow - it makes me think both of the Mississippi River and the great blues music there.
It makes sense if there is an ownership group that wants to have a team in NY and another that wants to have one in NJ. That's all that matters.
As mentioned above, the Red Bulls will be playing in NJ starting next season. Their stadium is pretty much done.
If an ownership group such as the Mets owner is granted a team, the team may play and be name after NY.
The Red Bulls have been playing in Jersey since 96. I can't remember the exact location, but I believe its maybe only a mile or two away from Meadowlands.
And the reason the Red Bulls don't get any support is not because there is no market for soccer, its that its easily been the worst-run franchise in the history of MLS. If a team was put in Queens there's definitely room for two franchises to exist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by censusdata
I think a great name for the future STL team would be the St Louis Flow - it makes me think both of the Mississippi River and the great blues music there.
And the reason the Red Bulls don't get any support is not because there is no market for soccer, its that its easily been the worst-run franchise in the history of MLS.
Despite what supporters of the game never stop insisting, the truth is that there's no market for soccer in the New York metropolitan area. The only time that game ever drew fans was when Pele played for the Cosmos. Period. If a metropolitan area with 15 million people doesn't support the game, then the game should stop smashing its head against the wall and go somewhere else.
I think a great name for the future STL team would be the St Louis Flow - it makes me think both of the Mississippi River and the great blues music there.
I think a great name for the future STL team would be the St Louis Flow - it makes me think both of the Mississippi River and the great blues music there.
So fans of that team would be called Flowers...right?
Despite what supporters of the game never stop insisting, the truth is that there's no market for soccer in the New York metropolitan area. The only time that game ever drew fans was when Pele played for the Cosmos. Period. If a metropolitan area with 15 million people doesn't support the game, then the game should stop smashing its head against the wall and go somewhere else.
That's just ignorant. You think a city of 15 million people doesnt have enough fans to average 18-20K people once a week? Especially a city that is as diverse at NYC?
That is almost statistically impossible.
The current NY MLS franchise has been one of the worst ran franchises in the history of sports. That's why they dont draw. It isnt the sport.
When Red Bull Arena opens next season, that will change. Red Bull will actually start paying attention to the team, hiring a proper staff, and doing the type of marketing that needs to be done for it to be successful.
Location: New Albany, Indiana (Greater Louisville)
11,974 posts, read 25,480,204 times
Reputation: 12187
Does anyone think Columbus was a bad choice over Cincinnati? According to Wikipedia the Crew has the lowest cost to put be the main jersey sponsor ($1 million per year)
Does anyone think Columbus was a bad choice over Cincinnati? According to Wikipedia the Crew has the lowest cost to put be the main jersey sponsor ($1 million per year)
What does that have to do with Cincinnati? Also, Salt Lake is lower.
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.
