No new soccer specific stadium for San Jose???

[BayernTFC]

I read the following post on MLSR today:

Remember this article about San Jose's stadium plans? (http://www.mls-rumors.net/2009/07/stadiums-san-jose-stadium-to-get-three.html) Well it turns out that the only reason we will see those ultra secret stadium renderings is because the process has stalled to the point where the owner is questioning whether to built it at all. San Jose fans better get used to Buck Shaw for the foreseeable future. In what amounts to what many may view as the league's biggest "bait and switch" move, owner Lew Wolf is lamenting the fact that San Jose is a weak and damaged soccer market. Anyone who reads MLSR could have told him that. And remember San Jose was awarded an expansion team only after Lew Wolff vowed to build a soccer specific stadium.http://www.mls-rumors.net/2009/08/stadiums-new-san-jose-earthquakes.html



Here's the original article from the San Jose Mercury News:

http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_13154971?nclick_check=1


But Tuesday he backed off the projected opening date of 2012 that Quakes officials have targeted. Ownership needs to secure naming rights to provide steady financing for a privately built facility. They are struggling to generate sponsor interest in difficult economic times.


"You can't do it out of magic," Wolff said. "There's no sense



building a stadium unless you have some flow of revenue."
The club plans to unveil architectural renderings of the facility next month in hopes of attracting sponsors. Wolff worries the team's fan base isn't deep enough to show potential sponsors that the South Bay is a soccer hotbed.
"It didn't catch on the way I thought it would," Wolff said. "I thought it would naturally fall into place.
"We expected to have a waiting list — before we fielded a team. While we did OK, it is about half of what I expected."



Imagine that. An expectation that everything will just magically fall into place. Nica and easy like. Honestly, who needs a plan? Things will just sort themselves out...I am encouraged that Lew Wolff has what it takes to eventually turn things around though. Who wouldn't be with comments like this:

"I don't give a damn what the fans say. It is not something that happens overnight."

[Keystone FC]

So this could mean a number of things.
1. Wolff is looking to unload the Quakes and get some money out of it before it goes under. Saputo maybe? They already have the Impact colours.
2. Wolff is looking for a way to get the SSS he wants by making these comments in hopes the city council will buckle and give in.
3. Wolff is looking to possibly move the franchise (a second time) to say St. Louis, San Francisco, Atlanta, Miami by making these comments in hopes to arouse these markets to step in and make a deal which may lead back to #2.

This is going to get interesting. This along with the USL thing going on.

[flatpicker]

I have a feeling the look of North American soccer will be changing quite a bit over the next 5 years.
At this early stage in professional soccer development in NA, a lot of education will be happening where owners and potential buyers will learn more and more about what the right markets are and who the target audience is.

[rocker]

I don't get this Wolff dude... he had major problems with getting a new baseball stadium for the Athletics (they've been talking about it forever at many diff sites). He's always got plans but never seems to come through.

Also, his proposed stadium for the Quakes was only 15000 or so seats and the price was even less than BMO (I saw a 40-50mil price tag).

He already got a great deal from the city in a land flip, so not sure what else the guy needs. He must really be hurtin financially.

[Dub Narcotic]

This SJ franchise has turned out to be a complete joke. Seattle has mostly washed away the bad taste, now we need Philadelphia and New York to step up next year.

[BayernTFC]

I have a feeling the look of North American soccer will be changing quite a bit over the next 5 years.
At this early stage in professional soccer development in NA, a lot of education will be happening where owners and potential buyers will learn more and more about what the right markets are and who the target audience is.
Professional Soccer isn't exactly in its infancy in North America. MLS was established in 1993 and the NASL was established in 1968. This is the second incarnation of the San Jose Earthquakes in MLS and the third time around if you include the San Jose Earthquakes of the NASL.

Here's a good site for some historical information on American soccer as well as American and Canadian Professional soccer leagues:
http://www.sover.net/~spectrum/

[mighty_torontofc_2008]

So this could mean a number of things.
1. Wolff is looking to unload the Quakes and get some money out of it before it goes under. Saputo maybe? They already have the Impact colours.
2. Wolff is looking for a way to get the SSS he wants by making these comments in hopes the city council will buckle and give in.
3. Wolff is looking to possibly move the franchise (a second time) to say St. Louis, San Francisco, Atlanta, Miami by making these comments in hopes to arouse these markets to step in and make a deal which may lead back to #2.

This is going to get interesting. This along with the USL thing going on.


Keep the team in California....San Diego, Oakland or Anaheim...the latter having no NFL competition...It would be Nice if San Jose keeps their team
but a SSS is needed now not 5yrs from now.

[Cannon]

There are already 2 teams in the LA area, why have a 3rd? There's no point.

[kodiakTFC]

There are already 2 teams in the LA area, why have a 3rd? There's no point.

Chivas and LA get great attendance and from what I understand are a big ratings getters. The state can have 20 teams if they can support it better than the rest of the country.

[Toronto Ruffrider]

Chivas and LA get great attendance and from what I understand are a big ratings getters. The state can have 20 teams if they can support it better than the rest of the country.

LA may get good attendance, but Chivas is at best average in that regard. This is the same team that had a season ticket base of under 1,000 heading into the 2008 season. Chivas' attendance numbers are only really impressive when that team plays against LA. When Chivas' ticket sales are combined with those from San Jose - before and after the original team moved to Houston - I am not a believer in the superiority of the California soccer market.

[Ossington Mental Youth]

There are already 2 teams in the LA area, why have a 3rd? There's no point.

there was a history there and they figured that the history would bring back the people in numbers, im sure the MLS isnt happy about this at all

[prizby]

This SJ franchise has turned out to be a complete joke. Seattle has mostly washed away the bad taste, now we need Philadelphia and New York to step up next year.

New York??? Did i miss a new franchise allocation?



There are already 2 teams in the LA area, why have a 3rd? There's no point.

San Jose is in nothern california...not anywhere near LA



its a shame to the san jose fans that their owner is taking a dump on them again...the hardcore san jose fans, even though there numbers are few, are some of the best in the MLS.

[Cashcleaner]

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is why Florida won't or shouldn't get a team.

San Jose had a club earlier on and guess what? Nobody wanted to watch the team and they moved to Houston. Now a new club is back and operating in the SJ area and guess what? Nobody is watching them now either.

MLS must have surely come to its senses by now and recognized that it can't keep awarding franchises to cities with no reasonable interest in the sport. I'm confident that once Garber sees just how profitable Seattle, Philly, and Vancouver are, he'll understand what prerequisites are necessary for a stable and financially-viable soccer franchise. That means good-bye to Miami and/or Tampa Bay.

[Ossington Mental Youth]

Godwilling cashcleaner, god willing

[kodiakTFC]

LA may get good attendance, but Chivas is at best average in that regard. This is the same team that had a season ticket base of under 1,000 heading into the 2008 season. Chivas' attendance numbers are only really impressive when that team plays against LA. When Chivas' ticket sales are combined with those from San Jose - before and after the original team moved to Houston - I am not a believer in the superiority of the California soccer market.

1. Seattle Sounders FC 30,204.00
2. Toronto FC 20,277.55
3. LA Galaxy 19,292.44
4. Chivas USA 16,211.44 (+13.48% from last year)

4th out of 15 teams.. how are they by any margin "at best average."

Funny note: San Jose is "7th" with "15,692.09" because of that one double header at candlestick. rofl.

[CoachGT]

I didn't think that San Jose was lacking in support when we were there last year. The main issue with their attendance is Buck Shaw - it is a small stadium, part of Santa Clara University, and as such, has limited alcohol availability (beer tent only) and no tailgating of any kind. From what I gathered, it sold out or came close every game, and they have strong supporters groups. I don't honestly think the fans are the issue here, it has more to do with someone getting a stadium on the cheap (as in, paid for by someone else).

[flatpicker]

New York??? Did i miss a new franchise allocation?




I think he was talking about NY having their new stadium, which hopefully will boost support.

[boban]

Professional Soccer isn't exactly in its infancy in North America. MLS was established in 1993 and the NASL was established in 1968. This is the second incarnation of the San Jose Earthquakes in MLS and the third time around if you include the San Jose Earthquakes of the NASL.

Here's a good site for some historical information on American soccer as well as American and Canadian Professional soccer leagues:
http://www.sover.net/~spectrum/ (http://www.sover.net/%7Espectrum/)
1996 was its first season.

[Toronto Ruffrider]

1. Seattle Sounders FC 30,204.00
2. Toronto FC 20,277.55
3. LA Galaxy 19,292.44
4. Chivas USA 16,211.44 (+13.48% from last year)

4th out of 15 teams.. how are they by any margin "at best average."

Funny note: San Jose is "7th" with "15,692.09" because of that one double header at candlestick. rofl.

You have to take MLS attendances with a grain of salt. Very few teams legitimately sell close to all of the tickets they reportedly distribute. Most teams have been papering their houses for years. Back in 2005, for instance, Chivas' official average attendance was 17k, but it only actually sold 12k tickets per game. Given that the MLS average attendance - excluding TFC and Seattle - hasn't changed a whole lot since 2005, I think it's fair to say that the likes of Chivas are still fudging their numbers.

Until I see evidence to the contrary - and what Chivas reports on MLSnet hardly counts - I will only regard three teams in this league as legitimately drawing large crowds, and only three teams being significantly above the average. TFC, Seattle and LA are outliers in this league; the rest of the teams, including Chivas, are the norm.

[olegunnar]

I have a feeling the look of North American soccer will be changing quite a bit over the next 5 years.
At this early stage in professional soccer development in NA, a lot of education will be happening where owners and potential buyers will learn more and more about what the right markets are and who the target audience is.

I agree with your point, but I would word it a bit differently.
We're at an early stage of the re-branding of professional soccer in NA.
Not saying kids and families are bad (that's just for you JonO) just saying that the most successful $$ wise franchises have bought into a more worldly view of support as opposed to the NA view.

Also don't forget ESPN just bought a whole bunch of rights too, so many games (They've got EPL games on ESPN2 every Saturday now) and they'll use that as a platform to push their 2012 coverage.

Watching the LAG/Fire game was encouraging. ESPN had a countdown to 2012 (290 days). At halftime they showed EPL highlights (compared to sportsnet showing hockey and baseball during our halftimes). They promo'ed their EPL coverage constantly.

From following NCAA football I know very well how influencial ESPN/ABC/Disney can be when there's money on the line. That's where TSN got the "if it's not on our channel it doesn't deserve being covered" mantra from.

I think we're at a launching pad for the growth of the game in NA

[BayernTFC]

1996 was its first season.
Yes 1996 was the first season, but MLS was formed in 1993:

MLS CHRONOLOGY: 1993-PRESENT

December 17, 1993: In fulfillment of U.S. Soccer's promise to FIFA, World Cup USA 1994 Chairman and CEO Alan I. Rothenberg announces the formation of Major League Soccer (MLS) and unveils the league logo.
http://web.mlsnet.com/about/

[flatpicker]

I agree with your point, but I would word it a bit differently.
We're at an early stage of the re-branding of professional soccer in NA.
Not saying kids and families are bad (that's just for you JonO) just saying that the most successful $$ wise franchises have bought into a more worldly view of support as opposed to the NA view.

Also don't forget ESPN just bought a whole bunch of rights too, so many games (They've got EPL games on ESPN2 every Saturday now) and they'll use that as a platform to push their 2012 coverage.

Watching the LAG/Fire game was encouraging. ESPN had a countdown to 2012 (290 days). At halftime they showed EPL highlights (compared to sportsnet showing hockey and baseball during our halftimes). They promo'ed their EPL coverage constantly.

From following NCAA football I know very well how influencial ESPN/ABC/Disney can be when there's money on the line. That's where TSN got the "if it's not on our channel it doesn't deserve being covered" mantra from.

I think we're at a launching pad for the growth of the game in NA

well put... the expands on my post nicely...

[Keystone FC]

Keep the team in California....San Diego, Oakland or Anaheim...the latter having no NFL competition...It would be Nice if San Jose keeps their team
but a SSS is needed now not 5yrs from now.

San Diego was mentioned (Briefly) as a new home for Chivas so that may be a possibility.
San Antonio has been brought up again as an expansion franchise. Wouldn't that be a kick in the nuts for SJ fans to have their 1st franchise move to Houston and then have this one move to San Antonio.
San Jose...supplying soccer franchises to Texas since 2005.:D

[Cannon]

Just an FYI but my earlier post was in reference to the post made by mighty_torontofc_2008 where he suggested that the Earthquakes move to Anaheim. ;)

[Cashcleaner]

Keep the team in California....San Diego, Oakland or Anaheim...the latter having no NFL competition...It would be Nice if San Jose keeps their team
but a SSS is needed now not 5yrs from now.

Guys. I...I....I really don't know how to say this. I mean, wow. This is...hard to do, really.

I, uh. I think I...agree with Mighty.

[Keystone FC]

Guys. I...I....I really don't know how to say this. I mean, wow. This is...hard to do, really.

I, uh. I think I...agree with Mighty.

REPENT, REPENT, THE END IS NIE!!!!
:D