PDA

View Full Version : Which MLS expansion franchise will be the most successful?



Cashcleaner
04-15-2014, 01:03 AM
There's been quite a bit of talk over the last few weeks regarding the future MLS expansion plans for New York, Orlando, Miami, and Atlanta; and I say it's time we have yet another completely speculative and unscientific poll on which of those four future clubs will see the most success - either on or off the pitch.

New York City, New York
Population: 19,949,502 (metro area)
Franchisees: New York Yankees and Manchester City FC
Nearest MLS competitor: New York Red Bulls

Orlando, Florida
Population: 2,223,674 (metro area)
Franchisees: Flavio Augusto da Silva and Phil Rawlins (owner of Orlando City DC)
Nearest MLS competitor: Miami

Miami, Florida
Population: 5,564,635 (metro area)
Franchisees: David Beckham, Simon Fuller, Marcelo Claure
Nearest MLS competitor: Orlando

Atlanta, Georgia
Population: 5,457,831 (metro area)
Franchisee: Arthur Blank (owner of Atlanta Falcons)
Nearest MLS competitor: Orlando

Redcoe15
04-15-2014, 04:22 AM
New York, by far, because the league will bend over backwards to see it succeed. The southeast teams, far less so.

Detroit_TFC
04-15-2014, 08:07 AM
I'm troubled by the NYC, Miami and Atlanta roll outs. Contrast it to Orlando City, who spent years working towards it, has built up a base of supporters, has a stadium construction deal, etc. NYC won't flop in a commercial sense because of the backers and it is part of MCFC's long term player development scheme. But support wise, seeing 10K in Yankee Stadium is going be horrible. Miami and Atlanta are concoctions straight out of the MLS main office, their prospects are worse.

The only hope is that there are enough best practices established now around the league that the new teams have something to aim at, but I'm not optimistic.

ryan
04-15-2014, 08:16 AM
New York, by far, because the league will bend over backwards to see it succeed. The southeast teams, far less so.

I'm not so sure. I think because MLS failed in the SE before, that they will do whatever they can to ensure one of those teams becomes 'top tier' in the league. I'd put my money on Miami being that team.

Dreadlocks
04-15-2014, 08:49 AM
I'm guessing the lure of South Beach and David Beckham's connections will mean success for Miami. I think they'll be able to attract the right players for the market and thrive.

TorontoGooner
04-15-2014, 09:47 AM
I'm guessing the lure of South Beach and David Beckham's connections will mean success for Miami. I think they'll be able to attract the right players for the market and thrive.

Agreed. Though NY is also an incredible place to live, the idea of playing football for a living and spending your time off on beach will be too big a carrot for most. It's how LA managed it, and with flight times back to Europe only around 7 hours or so, many 'big' names for La Liga, the Premier League, Serie A etc will be atracted to Florida

ryan
04-15-2014, 11:27 AM
Also the reduced fee to get the expansion franchise may mean they have some leeway in the coffers to make a 'TFC-esque' splash when they put that team together.

prizby
04-15-2014, 11:53 AM
Orlando, Florida
Population: 2,223,674 (metro area)
Franchisees: Phil Rawlins (owner of Orlando City DC)
Nearest MLS competitor: Miami


Don't forget Flavio Augusto da Silva

notthesun
04-15-2014, 11:53 AM
Short term, Orlando, long term, New York.

OgtheDim
04-15-2014, 11:56 AM
Orlando.

There are long term issues for both Atlanta and Miami as far as ownership is concerned (Beckham will not be hands on for the next 20 years and the Atlanta guy is 71)

The hubris of MCFC in running NYCFC would be my concern - they keep thinking they are getting stuff and then running into local issues.

Areathrasher
04-15-2014, 02:02 PM
Another one for Orlando.

Have a decent level of support, stadium deal and shrewd ownership.

Also like how they are trying to postion themselves as Brazils MLS team.

mowe
04-15-2014, 02:21 PM
I'm excited to see what kind of DPs NYC signs. They've done a good job of hiring the right people to run the team. Starting off in Yankee Stadium is not ideal but a location in the city will make a world of difference. I don't think they'll have trouble attracting fans.

Miami is another team that could get some top players, it's probably the most appealing American city to foreigners. But it all hinges on locking down their preferred stadium location, there are some big hurdles to cross there. I think a team there would work but they have a long way to go.

Orlando seems poised for success, a huge plus for them is getting a brand new SSS in their first year. Could be anywhere from a Philly to Portland level of fan support there. How successful they'll be depends on how much cash their owners are willing to spend. If Kaka is really a done deal then that's a great start.

Atlanta is the big question mark. Blank seems like a good owner, but they're going to be playing on turf in an NFL stadium. I have no clue if they can attract an MLS fanbase.

james
04-15-2014, 06:05 PM
1 error, New York metro population is not 8.4 million, that is just the city population, metro is bigger.

But anyways all these teams have some concern going into these new markets. Atlanta not planning to build a soccer stadium at all and instead plan to play in a massive NFL stadium is probably the biggest concern for me. Yes its a new stadium, but we have seen a lot of teams look really bad when playing in a NFL stadium. They probably won't sell record breaking tickets like Seattle, and while Vancouver seems to not look to bad playing at BC place by selling the lower half of the stadium it still doesn't mean people want to see more and more of these NFL/MLS kind of stadiums. Many people would like to see teams have Soccer specific stadium plans when joining the league. Atlanta also has shown some troubles selling tickets in different sport markets in this city of Atlanta, will soccer just be another one of them?

Miami will they actually get this dream stadium built? Miami a very hard place to sell sport tickets.

Orlando has probably had the most thought out plans for stadium, future players, exc. But is Orlando a big enough city to support a MLS team?

New York, I think if they get a stadium built in New York City (not in New Jersey and not out in the burbs) then this could be huge, they will most likely sell tickets, it could be huge in a untapped market, a massive market at that. But the worry is actually getting a stadium built in the city. There is very little space, I know New York has plans and ideas where to build the stadium, but until shovels are in the ground this is no done deal. And they also talk about playing in Yankee stadium for the first 3 years (if there lucky 3 years) and I can say this brings back some bad memories of Kansas and DC United playing on Baseball fields. And there is a smaller issue but still none the less, will people who support Man United or Liverpool or whoever want to support a team with connections to Manchester City? could that effect enough people to not want to support this team?

ensco
04-15-2014, 06:15 PM
Write in ballot:

Toronto FC after Leiweke leaves

Kaz
04-15-2014, 08:34 PM
None.... I honestly have no faith in any of these franchises.

Anyone or all could fold... which is really bad for MLS.

MLS needed to wait 3-5 more years, to let NASL franchise grow and see if they could actually be supported.

with NYC having no stadium plan legitimately suggest a lot of bad news. The Fact that the Red Bulls still struggle to get 20,000 out regularly suggests a half assed 3 season deal in Yankee stadium is not a good sign.

Florida has already lost 2 franchises, and it is totally possible they will loose two more.

Atlanta is a professional sports black hole.

All 4 could fail and all four failing could kill the league, the press would have a field day with it.

Initial B
04-15-2014, 08:55 PM
None.... I honestly have no faith in any of these franchises.

Anyone or all could fold... which is really bad for MLS.

MLS needed to wait 3-5 more years, to let NASL franchise grow and see if they could actually be supported.

MLS doesn't want NASL to grow. They want to kill it and then offer the orphaned franchises a "deal" for a $5-10 million franchise fee to join MLS2, a Tier 2 feeder league to MLS that may, someday, allow their teams to be able to get promoted to MLS. If the NASL owners don't want to go along with it, you can bet their supporters will be howling for them to join just for the dream of playing in the big leagues. Any team that doesn't go along with it will be forced by the USSF to join USL Pro. Eventually at some point, then Promotion/relegation becomes possible becaue everyone will have bought into the MLS system. Basically you'll have North America's first and second divisions all under the single-entity system. They've already brought USL Pro into the fold as willing farm teams, so now only NASL lies outside their control.

Kaz
04-15-2014, 09:18 PM
MLS doesn't want NASL to grow. They want to kill it and then offer the orphaned franchises a "deal" for a $5-10 million franchise fee to join MLS2, a Tier 2 feeder league to MLS that may, someday, allow their teams to be able to get promoted to MLS. If the NASL owners don't want to go along with it, you can bet their supporters will be howling for them to join just for the dream of playing in the big leagues. Any team that doesn't go along with it will be forced by the USSF to join USL Pro. Eventually at some point, then Promotion/relegation becomes possible becaue everyone will have bought into the MLS system. Basically you'll have North America's first and second divisions all under the single-entity system. They've already brought USL Pro into the fold as willing farm teams, so now only NASL lies outside their control.

This is conjecture and opinion.

james
04-15-2014, 09:57 PM
None.... I honestly have no faith in any of these franchises.

Anyone or all could fold... which is really bad for MLS.

MLS needed to wait 3-5 more years, to let NASL franchise grow and see if they could actually be supported.

with NYC having no stadium plan legitimately suggest a lot of bad news. The Fact that the Red Bulls still struggle to get 20,000 out regularly suggests a half assed 3 season deal in Yankee stadium is not a good sign.

Florida has already lost 2 franchises, and it is totally possible they will loose two more.

Atlanta is a professional sports black hole.

All 4 could fail and all four failing could kill the league, the press would have a field day with it.

I think a team in New Jersey where the Red Bulls play is not the same as playing in the very densely populated city of New York. New York playing in New York City has a much higher chance of selling much more tickets then in New Jersey. However I do agree playing in Yankee stadium is not a good thing. It could look ugly with the baseball diamond, and the fact the baseball stadium is in a different shape to what soccer field is like. Many seats will be very far away from the field and the views could be bad. Also playing in Yankee stadium many fans might not take this team serious. If they think the stadium will be built by say 2018, then why not let them join the league in 2018 or by the very least wait to shovels are in the ground? same goes for Miami? why the rush? is this stadiums going to actually built? and Atlanta I think should have to have a Soccer Stadium, I don't want to see any more teams playing in over-sized stadiums even if they hide the empty seats. Orlando might be the best new team with more planning behind it, but people still worry if Orlando is a good soccer place and is Orlando big enough?

It seems a lot of people on this board and across MLS think the league is growing to fast now. Is MLS jumping the gun here? why do they need to have all these teams join in such a short time? Could they not wait 3-5 years for all these teams? They either are getting greedy and just want the money fast, or they seem to think that because all recent new teams have done well that they can just go to any city and it will all work out well with good attendance. They might be going over there heads a bit, and this might be trouble for the league further down the line if these teams don't get these stadiums built and if Atlanta can't support a team well in a big stadium!

Kaz
04-15-2014, 10:33 PM
Size of the town I'm not too worried about. Regina has 30-40k out a game for the Roughriders and the city has a metro Population of only 210,000. If the support is there the size isn't as important.

If NYFC had a stadium in place close to the Island then they'd be find.. but remember Redbull Arena isn't that far from anywhere. From the Prospect park area of Brooklyn it's the same distance as Yankee stadium. It's actually closer and easier to get to from Downtown.

The biggest issue with the Red Bulls is the "stigma" of Jersey.

ExiledRed
04-15-2014, 10:35 PM
whatever happened to the st louis bid?

james
04-15-2014, 11:02 PM
Size of the town I'm not too worried about. Regina has 30-40k out a game for the Roughriders and the city has a metro Population of only 210,000. If the support is there the size isn't as important.

If NYFC had a stadium in place close to the Island then they'd be find.. but remember Redbull Arena isn't that far from anywhere. From the Prospect park area of Brooklyn it's the same distance as Yankee stadium. It's actually closer and easier to get to from Downtown.

The biggest issue with the Red Bulls is the "stigma" of Jersey.

Orlando City population is 249,562 in 265 km sq. land. In comparison Mississauga is 713,000 people in 290 km sq. It shows Orlando really is a sparsely built city and even more sparsely built metro areas. But that said Salt Lake is pretty small right? they seem to do alright, so maybe you are right. I guess its just hard to picture Soccer being a well supported sport in a small market in USA where traditionally Soccer may be played by many, but not really followed TV wise or attending games or having favourite teams.

Ya and I did here Red Bull stadium is close to Manhatten. It really does make you wonder tho why people just won't travel to Jersey? but honestly look at New Jersey Nets, they move to Brooklyn and now there are a hot ticket. New York Islanders plan to move to Brooklyn in 2015 I believe. New York City is where its at, and many people want to stay in the City. Jersey must have some stigma. The New York Subway system is handy tho to, I know it does connect over to Jersey, but its not everywhere like it is in New York City. That probably helps a lot to, easy tansit on the subway system if its in the city.

Yohan
04-15-2014, 11:04 PM
The question that everyone should ask is, 'why are billionaires, who usually don't make stupid business decisions, decide to invest in MLS'. Usually, they know more than we do when it comes to making smart investments.

Apparently there are 3 different billionaires bidding for Minneapolis MLS franchise.

ensco
04-15-2014, 11:34 PM
whatever happened to the st louis bid?

No money

http://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/dailyrft/2013/11/soccer_major_league_messi_ronaldo_ibisevic.php

ExiledRed
04-16-2014, 12:04 AM
No money

http://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/dailyrft/2013/11/soccer_major_league_messi_ronaldo_ibisevic.php

so, not unviable?

Cashcleaner
04-16-2014, 12:29 AM
Don't forget Flavio Augusto da Silva

Thanks, Priz. Fixed!


1 error, New York metro population is not 8.4 million, that is just the city population, metro is bigger.

Thanks, James. Also fixed!


whatever happened to the st louis bid?

Once the MLS starts putting a plan in place for a 30-league team (and I certainly wouldn't put it past them), I think both St. Louis and Minneapolis will be two candidate cities Garber would be the most interested in expanding to next.

molenshtain
04-16-2014, 01:35 AM
I'm in the same boat with the people who are worried in varying degrees for each team.

Orlando: I think this team is the most likely to succeed, to be honest, since they're the only ones that will have an active fan base when they enter the league. They are also the only ones who'll be playing in a stadium that fits their expected capacity early on. The owner also seems to have enough connections and gravitas to be able to get some reasonably big name players to come over if that's their plan. all in all, I'd say Orlando looks to be in good hands, despite the obstacle that is being in Orlando.

ATL, Miami and NYC all look like huge wildcards though. Atlanta could work; for all intents and purposes they seem to have an owner that's very committed to building a stable and financially viable franchise. playing in the Falcons new stadium is going to be a huge issue if they can't figure out how to zone areas of it off properly. Though, the stadium looks honest to god like one of the best I've seen, and, the way it's structured, I could see it working if executed properly. but, like other's have mentioned, It's Atlanta. they support their sports teams like a noose supports a hanged man.

Miami and New York are in the same boat to me. Neither of them are going to have stadiums ready for their opening season, and we now know that New York won't have one for at least their first three, which is incredibly worrisome considering how fucking god awful Yankee Stadium is for watching soccer. The sight lines are about as bad as you could imagine. It just was not at all designed for any sport other than baseball. Where Miami are going to play their first season I'm not sure but there aren't a lot of good options out there for them either. It's all nice and grand to put out these extravagant stadium designs and promise MLS how great it's all going to look but It's not going to mean much if they end up getting pushed back and pushed back, at which point I fear they won;t have a chance to see the building of the stadiums through.

Both teams might very well buy and market themselves to relevancy for their first few years which might give them a bit of leeway, But nobody is going to treat those two like small town Portland or RSL when they entered the league. You can most certainly gaurentee that people are going to notice all of those empty seats and that's not good for anybody.

the big thing is going to be execution. if they all do it right, this could be huge, even redefining for the league. But it could just as easily end up going the other way. Not necessarily crippling the league, but If these Franchises fail it would put a massive dent in the upward trajectory and push for relevancy that MLS as a whole has been fighting for since It's inception.

Tread lightly, Garber.

molenshtain
04-16-2014, 01:57 AM
Also, not that I mean to at all interject my own politics into this, but can we 1) stop calling New York Energy Drink by their "official" name? they're a walking advertisement for a fucking beverage. Let's not dignify them by calling them what they want us to call them. And 2) how are we exactly going to deal with City's owners? I'm sure teams such as Portland, Chicago, Philly, The Whitecaps etc. who are all very vocally pro LGBT and generally in favour of Humans being nice to other humans, are going to have a very, very, serious issue playing against a team whose owners seemingly enjoy committing Human Rights Violations. I'm just saying, it's some stuff to think about.

ensco
04-16-2014, 05:20 AM
Also, not that I mean to at all interject my own politics into this, but can we 1) stop calling New York Energy Drink by their "official" name? they're a walking advertisement for a fucking beverage. Let's not dignify them by calling them what they want us to call them

1) I'd be thrilled to call them the Metrostars again.
2) How about something other than BMO Field, while we are at it? I'd call it Miller Field, after the person who is most responsible for this city having a team today.

mowe
04-16-2014, 05:29 AM
Also, not that I mean to at all interject my own politics into this, but can we 1) stop calling New York Energy Drink by their "official" name? they're a walking advertisement for a fucking beverage. Let's not dignify them by calling them what they want us to call them. And 2) how are we exactly going to deal with City's owners? I'm sure teams such as Portland, Chicago, Philly, The Whitecaps etc. who are all very vocally pro LGBT and generally in favour of Humans being nice to other humans, are going to have a very, very, serious issue playing against a team whose owners seemingly enjoy committing Human Rights Violations. I'm just saying, it's some stuff to think about.

1) A sponsored team name is really not that different from a sponsored stadium or jersey. We are well past the tipping point in that regard. Red Bull's investment is responsible for that gorgeous stadium and Thierry Henry in MLS. As long as it's a net positive I'm sure even the most die hard MetroStars fans are okay with it.

2) Depends on how strictly they boycott countries that commit human rights violations. I doubt NYCFC will pose much of an issue.

Cashcleaner
04-16-2014, 01:01 PM
Also, not that I mean to at all interject my own politics into this, but can we 1) stop calling New York Energy Drink by their "official" name? they're a walking advertisement for a fucking beverage. Let's not dignify them by calling them what they want us to call them. And 2) how are we exactly going to deal with City's owners? I'm sure teams such as Portland, Chicago, Philly, The Whitecaps etc. who are all very vocally pro LGBT and generally in favour of Humans being nice to other humans, are going to have a very, very, serious issue playing against a team whose owners seemingly enjoy committing Human Rights Violations. I'm just saying, it's some stuff to think about.

I know I'd prefer the name Metrostars over Red Bulls.

As for Al Mubarak and ADUG,I have my doubt there's going to be any serious backlash against them from any other clubs of fans in the league. Nobody seems to be bringing up the massive numbers of worker deaths building facilities for the 2022 World Cup in Qatar (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/04/15/staggering-number-of-workers-die-as-qatar-prepares-for-world-cup/?tid=hp_mm). I think there are some matters people choose to overlook, but I applaud you for bringing it up molenshtain.

Areathrasher
04-16-2014, 08:15 PM
Atlanta already have over 1000 deposits for season tickets. Not bad.

molenshtain
04-16-2014, 11:34 PM
1) A sponsored team name is really not that different from a sponsored stadium or jersey. We are well past the tipping point in that regard. Red Bull's investment is responsible for that gorgeous stadium and Thierry Henry in MLS. As long as it's a net positive I'm sure even the most die hard MetroStars fans are okay with it.

See, I have to seriously disagree with you there. The team name is the identity of the club. That, along with the fans, are supposed to be the things that never change. but the fact that people think they can change the identity of a club that they have zero connection to as a way to sell a product that has nothing to do with the team is fairly heinous in my opinion. The fact of the matter is that it should not at all be okay for a team and it's fans to bend over backwards for an owner just because he has money, because at the end of the day, they don't care one bit about the fans. They care about making a profit. And when they come to the realization that owning the team isn't financially viable they'll dump them and go buy some other team and rename them again. it's not like they haven't, in fact they've done it multiple times in Europe. Then what happens? do they go back to being the MetroStars? do they continue to be free advertising for Red Bull? does somebody else buy them and insert their own product into the team name? This is very different from a sponsored stadium or jersey.

Hull City (full name being Hull City Association Football Club) fans, for instance, are doing the absolute proper thing in this regard. Their owner has recently bought them and brought them up to the Prem and now maybe on to Europe via the FA cup. but he want's to cut all that hullabaloo after "Hull" and just call them "Hull Tigers." He has told the fans he could not care less about them, dislikes the name of the team citing the fact that "City" is "too common" and "a lousy identity". he told a guardian journalist that if he owned Manchester City he would have renamed them "Manchester Hunter". He says the reason for the name change is to create more revenue by marketing it with a shorter, more understandable name to foreign markets. and, in response to "City 'Till I Die" chants from supporters vehemently opposed to the name change because of the connotations it carries, he said "They can die as soon as they want, as long as they leave the club for the majority who just want to watch good football." This is the type of people you let into football with the attitude that your club's identity is entirely for sale, given that you invest in players to keep all the casuals happy.

Red Dragon Franchise FC ( or Cardiff City, as some of you may know them) are another, similiar story. but I'm sure you can find the gory details for that one on your own. I know many people who are utterly distraught over that situation and now feel they have had their club ripped away from them because a rich man with no ties to the area decided he wanted to wag his cock all over the Malaysian peninsula.

I understand that this is a young league and under most circumstances we are really just looking for all the help we can get. but by tolerating some of it, we're tolerating all of it in the future. I for one know how absolutely devastating it would be for me and many others here if Somebody from half-way around the world decided to buy us, change our name, maybe the colors too, not because he had any fondness for the club but because he thought it would increase his bank roll and make him look good to all of his other billionaire buddies back home. We can't just accept what's given to us because we're young. It set's a precedent.

Cashcleaner
04-17-2014, 01:20 AM
Hull City (full name being Hull City Association Football Club) fans, for instance, are doing the absolute proper thing in this regard. Their owner has recently bought them and brought them up to the Prem and now maybe on to Europe via the FA cup. but he want's to cut all that hullabaloo after "Hull" and just call them "Hull Tigers." He has told the fans he could not care less about them, dislikes the name of the team citing the fact that "City" is "too common" and "a lousy identity". he told a guardian journalist that if he owned Manchester City he would have renamed them "Manchester Hunter".

^ Never before have I felt such an urge to cock-punch a total stranger.

On a similar note, I have the same opinion on the marketing geniuses who came up with "FC" Dallas or "Sporting" KC. Kansas City is actually the worst offender because they tried so hard to push some big lie that there was going to be a multi-sports club with possibly basketball, hockey, or other teams in the mix. I didn't buy it for a second, but I'm kinda surprised that many did. Heck, I remember when the Rapids were seriously contemplating calling themselves Colorado Arsenal with an equally weak explanation.

molenshtain
04-17-2014, 01:48 AM
^ Never before have I felt such an urge to cock-punch a total stranger.

On a similar note, I have the same opinion on the marketing geniuses who came up with "FC" Dallas or "Sporting" KC. Kansas City is actually the worst offender because they tried so hard to push some big lie that there was going to be a multi-sports club with possibly basketball, hockey, or other teams in the mix. I didn't buy it for a second, but I'm kinda surprised that many did.

Have SKC not followed up on that plan? I thought I'd heard that there was some progress on that end but what do I know. to their credit, they do now probably have the most extensive academy and community outreach programs in the league.

Cashcleaner
04-17-2014, 02:00 AM
^ What plan? I don't believe they were ever seriously considering creating a multi-sport organization.

And don't get me wrong, I actually have a bit of respect for the team and quite like it's fans. I like how KC is a bit of a lonely island for soccer in the region and yet they have a great stadium, good supporters, and a team that actually plays with heart.

But the name is bullshit. :D

Yohan
04-17-2014, 02:26 AM
^ What plan? I don't believe they were ever seriously considering creating a multi-sport organization.

And don't get me wrong, I actually have a bit of respect for the team and quite like it's fans. I like how KC is a bit of a lonely island for soccer in the region and yet they have a great stadium, good supporters, and a team that actually plays with heart.

But the name is bullshit. :D
the name is just as BS as Toronto FC, which is about most Euro poser name as it gets in North America.

just as Real Salt Lake became a name of pride for those supporters, and any other 'stupid' names that are prevalent in MLS, who cares what the team is named, as long as the people that support that team take pride in the name and the colours?

Cashcleaner
04-17-2014, 02:42 AM
the name is just as BS as Toronto FC, which is about most Euro poser name as it gets in North America.

just as Real Salt Lake became a name of pride for those supporters, and any other 'stupid' names that are prevalent in MLS, who cares what the team is named, as long as the people that support that team take pride in the name and the colours?

How can it possibly be? The name of our city is Toronto and the club's identity highlights that. We're not Toronto Arsenal. We're not Sporting Toronto. We're not Real Toronto. There's absolutely no connection between us and any other specific club. TFC can stand by it's own identity because of that.

You can argue about the originality of our name, but that's something else entirely.

OgtheDim
04-17-2014, 06:15 AM
the name is just as BS as Toronto FC, which is about most Euro poser name as it gets in North America.

...


If you don't brand the team with a nickname like all leagues but MLS, then FC is about as bland and as unposer as you can get.

Abou Sky
04-17-2014, 07:34 AM
Real means 'commissioned by the King'

RSL wins for most poserish name.

Kaz
04-17-2014, 07:48 AM
Well the FC is Football Club in Toronto's case.. it wasn't originally of course (and still isn't).. but it's plastered all over the place now.

And Football Club, Soccer Club in the Canadian tradition is perfectly fine.

Montreal has a big HC on it's jersey that stands for Club de Hockey. (no not habs)

The Leafs official name is the the Toronto Maple Leafs Hockey Club.

So it's not that big a deal. TFC's original marketing stupidity was it to be FC so not to alienate anyone.. pft. It may not be official but Football Club has actually kinda become the identity in much the same way as some dumb ignorant yank said the H in Montreals HC was Habitant

The names I don't care about.

We often times get overly outraged at things in a manner the suggests that people are too stupid to figure things out.
The Japanese have baseball teams with company names in the team names.
Asian music is often manufactured.

I have never even associated the Red Bulls with the Energy drink. I think most people if given a little common sense can figure it out.

This anti-overt corporate sponsorship stuff needs to be tossed a side a little.



As far as stupid MLS team names. Sporting KC, and Real Salt Lake are the number one and two offenders to me, but as has pointed out, as long as the fans embrace it who cares.

james
04-17-2014, 12:56 PM
Well team and names matter to many people. But if the change happens and the fans are all for it then I don't see any harm. But you can see in Salzburg it pissed some fans off, fans who grew up and followed a team there whole life and then had that ripped away from them. Well all you got to do is see the history of FC Red Bull Salzburg and SV Austria Salzburg. Red Bull Salzburg had there 80th birthday this year, however Red Bull Salzburg did not celebrate it because as far as Red Bull Salzburg is concerned the team history has nothing to do with the team today and are not 80 years old. Where as the newly formed SV Austria Salzburg celebrated there passed history and celebrated 80 years!


http://www.ultras-tifo.net/images/stories/reports/2013-2014/austria/salzburg80/4.jpg

http://www.ultras-tifo.net/images/stories/reports/2013-2014/austria/salzburg80/6.jpg

http://www.ultras-tifo.net/images/stories/reports/2013-2014/austria/salzburg80/9.jpg


http://youtu.be/20DgArtLUak


http://youtu.be/Q5LBn7acFVM

james
04-17-2014, 01:09 PM
I also hate the owner of Cardiff City. The teams nickname for over 100 years is the Blue Birds, and some owner buys them and turns them red because in Asia red is good luck. Well the problem is you purchased a team in Cardiff, it has different history and beliefs, why do you go to change what the people of Cardiff like?

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/71958000/jpg/_71958107_cardiffprotestgettyjpg.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BjWabKMCQAAMTWa.jpg

http://i3.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article1836433.ece/ALTERNATES/s615/Cardiff-City-v-Charlton-Athletic-npower-Championship-1836433.jpg

And then Hull City fans, maybe the name change is a bit suttle due to the fact that Hull crest does have a Tiger on it and it does say "Hull City A.F.C, The Tigers", but why go against the history of a team that the fans obviously are proud of being Hull City not Hull Tigers? He wanted to call it Hull Tigers because he believed in Asia it would sell more shirts if they were just called the Hull Tigers. It seems to me like it wouldn't sell more shirts, and Hull City fans probably just feel it's a slipperly slope down from there to losing more of the Club you love and support.


it reads a "Hull City a club not a brand"
http://www.thisishullandeastriding.co.uk/images/localworld/ugc-images/275786/Article/images/19799473/5290592-large.jpg

jaahuuu
04-23-2014, 08:17 AM
If NYFC had a stadium in place close to the Island then they'd be find.. but remember Redbull Arena isn't that far from anywhere. From the Prospect park area of Brooklyn it's the same distance as Yankee stadium. It's actually closer and easier to get to from Downtown.

The biggest issue with the Red Bulls is the "stigma" of Jersey.Closer from Downtown, yes, but not necessarily easier. Using public transportation you'll have to take the subway and switch to the PATH. You can take the subway from anywhere in NYC right to Yankee Stadium.

The stadiums may be the same distance from Prospect Park, but it takes longer to get to RBA on public transportation (by about 15 minutes) with more changes. I've never driven to Yankee Stadium, but last summer I drove from Gowanus (just west of Prospect Park) to the NJ side of the Holland Tunnel, the 7 mile trip took 4 hours.

Kaz
04-23-2014, 12:02 PM
Closer from Downtown, yes, but not necessarily easier. Using public transportation you'll have to take the subway and switch to the PATH. You can take the subway from anywhere in NYC right to Yankee Stadium.

The stadiums may be the same distance from Prospect Park, but it takes longer to get to RBA on public transportation (by about 15 minutes) with more changes. I've never driven to Yankee Stadium, but last summer I drove from Gowanus (just west of Prospect Park) to the NJ side of the Holland Tunnel, the 7 mile trip took 4 hours.

You should have driven faster. ;)

That is clearly a worse case, and you can take other routes (like the Narrows bridge)

The point was that the Red Bull Arena isn't that far.

I go to BMO or Skydome from Brampton by Go Transit people take it all the time, and it's not quick.

I'll use Brampton as I know it. There are 4 routes to get from Downtown Brampton (Queen and Main) to BMO.

Drive (about 30-40 minutes or 40-60 depending on several factors) - Cost Gas and Parking ($10-15? I don't drive)

Go Transit to Union Street Car to BMO (or walk) $20.68 ($14.68 walk) (60 minutes)

Bus to Square One, then to Islington Subway then to BMO $11.60 (almost 2 hours)

Bus to Port Credit - Go Train to Union $12.40 (in theory($14.45 max)) (about 80-90 minutes)

People will do it if the team has the support.

jaahuuu
04-23-2014, 12:26 PM
People will do it if the team has the support.Exactly, asking people from NYC to go to the other side of the state line is like asking them to go to the other side of the planet.

I understand traveling to support a team. The cost of gas/tolls/parking from my house in Tonawanda to BMO is more expensive than my ticket to the game, if I help with the tailgate, and get a few player autographs after the game it's easily 12 hours from when I leave my house to when I return.

pdogg
04-23-2014, 12:40 PM
You should have driven faster. ;)

That is clearly a worse case, and you can take other routes (like the Narrows bridge)

The point was that the Red Bull Arena isn't that far.

I go to BMO or Skydome from Brampton by Go Transit people take it all the time, and it's not quick.

I'll use Brampton as I know it. There are 4 routes to get from Downtown Brampton (Queen and Main) to BMO.

Drive (about 30-40 minutes or 40-60 depending on several factors) - Cost Gas and Parking ($10-15? I don't drive)

Go Transit to Union Street Car to BMO (or walk) $20.68 ($14.68 walk) (60 minutes)

Bus to Square One, then to Islington Subway then to BMO $11.60 (almost 2 hours)

Bus to Port Credit - Go Train to Union $12.40 (in theory($14.45 max)) (about 80-90 minutes)

People will do it if the team has the support.

As a fellow Bramptonian, I'll chime in that those times above are close to best case scenarios. Given that most games are on weekends, the service on public transit is diminished and the waits between bus/trains are quite significant. You may be able to time it to be at BMO in 60 minutes using the GO Bus/Union method - but I have found that coming home the same way is upwards of 2 hours after the game ends.

Kaz
04-23-2014, 03:46 PM
As a fellow Bramptonian, I'll chime in that those times above are close to best case scenarios. Given that most games are on weekends, the service on public transit is diminished and the waits between bus/trains are quite significant. You may be able to time it to be at BMO in 60 minutes using the GO Bus/Union method - but I have found that coming home the same way is upwards of 2 hours after the game ends.

Well ya the travel time and total time can be a little different.

For Colorado The biggest issue is actually getting to the train, I can't do massive crowds, even if I did you couldn't have gotten to the west platform after the game the tunnel was insane. I got on the train at 7:19 hit port credit took the bus to Steeles caught the Brampton connection as was home before 9. I waited an extra train there was another train that I could have taken earlier, I just didn't want to be in the over crowded space.

Driving I'm sure coming home from the game could take a while.

My experience can vary though, I get to games before the gates open, and I usually stay in town a while after the game, I am rarely in a big hurry... it's the advantage of being sad and alone :)

Of course that just proves the point. People will take transit, and will pay the money.

But New Yorkers (and the Red Bulls ownership should have known this) are super prejudiced against going to New Jersey for anything. (granted part of that is because it is surprisingly difficult to do)

JonO
04-24-2014, 12:22 PM
Kansas City is actually the worst offender because they tried so hard to push some big lie that there was going to be a multi-sports club with possibly basketball, hockey, or other teams in the mix. I didn't buy it for a second, but I'm kinda surprised that many did.

Don't know enough about KC but I thought I had heard they were pushing the "Sporting" aspect. Found this article (http://www.sportingnews.com/soccer/story/2012-09-05/sporting-kc-kansas-city-mls-us-open-cup-livestrong-park) from 2012 which says:


Sporting Club already is more than just an MLS team. Some 75,000 youth soccer players throughout the region compete as part of the Sporting Club Network, an affiliate program that gives them all the thrill of wearing an SKC logo while creating a pipeline for the very best that feeds into the club’s development academy. Coaching assistance and resources and facility access also are available, and the program has grown to include rugby and lacrosse teams. Free membership in Sporting Club is available to fans as well and includes several perks, including special events and discounted or even complimentary tickets.


While it makes people feel part of the club, it gives the club a reliable and ever-increasing, base of potential customers. Sporting Club now has about 180,000 members, and the 200,000 mark is expected to be surpassed soon.

Cashcleaner
04-25-2014, 12:17 AM
^ Actually...yeah, I guess I'll concede that. Originally the owners of Sporting were thinking BIG and wanted an umbrella organization for multiple pro teams (which is very common in Europe), but I guess this is close enough.

http://www.sportingkc.com/scn/members

james
04-25-2014, 08:04 PM
Most people in NYC don't drive, due to heavy traffic and insane parking prices (if you can find one). Every other city in USA car rules the way. Maybe the journey from NYC to Jersey is just to much of a pain in the ass for most to be bothered to transfer trains and all that bull shit into New Jersey, compared to Yankee Stadium. Also to mention The Bronx has 1.5 million people on its door step and Manhatten has 1.6 million across the bridge and then millions of tourists and day trippers. Its just in the heart of the population, and Yankee stadium probably has more exciting things near by. You could make a whole day of it going to a soccer game and then jumping the subway to a bar, restaurant, clubs, theatres, central park, endless amount of stuff really. New Jeresey my guess is you get there, and get out as soon as you can, lol. People just don't want to be there, and it might be longer journey even tho its not that far due to train transfers and such.

Fort York Redcoat
04-29-2014, 02:23 PM
Also, not that I mean to at all interject my own politics into this, but can we 1) stop calling New York Energy Drink by their "official" name? they're a walking advertisement for a fucking beverage. Let's not dignify them by calling them what they want us to call them. And 2) how are we exactly going to deal with City's owners? I'm sure teams such as Portland, Chicago, Philly, The Whitecaps etc. who are all very vocally pro LGBT and generally in favour of Humans being nice to other humans, are going to have a very, very, serious issue playing against a team whose owners seemingly enjoy committing Human Rights Violations. I'm just saying, it's some stuff to think about.

Your Call to Arms may fall on deaf ears but I share the sentiment and do my best to use city names when talking about our league vs nicknames I'm not fond of. I suppose I'll have to start calling them New Jersey once the second team arrives.

BuSaPuNk
04-29-2014, 05:53 PM
Your Call to Arms may fall on deaf ears but I share the sentiment and do my best to use city names when talking about our league vs nicknames I'm not fond of. I suppose I'll have to start calling them New Jersey once the second team arrives.

I prefer the Shite Bulls. :p

molenshtain
05-30-2014, 12:50 AM
Just a heads up, prices for NYC FC tickets came out today. decent pricing structure but their most expensive season ticket is about 3k.... yeesh

Also, If you want a little fun, hit up their supporters forum. they're gonna wear badge of "most entitled supporters" on their fucking sleeve like no one else. I hate them already.

lot of people on their though.

Wagner
01-20-2015, 10:27 PM
The new Atlanta stadium is insane.

in the video, they show the MLS club playing in the new stadium.

http://gizmodo.com/a-closer-look-at-the-retractable-roof-of-atlantas-bonke-1680757940/+kevindraper



www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPKP7FaiqEE

MLS shows up around 2:44


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPKP7FaiqEE

ManUtd4ever
01-20-2015, 10:46 PM
Wow.

BuSaPuNk
01-20-2015, 10:49 PM
Pretty impressive stadium. For everything but MLS.

I have no faith in them filling that like Seattle can. It will be New England and Washington v2

TFC07
01-20-2015, 10:56 PM
I would love to go for a game (either MLS or NFL) just to be in that stadium. Atlanta is going to be nice addition for MLS. Well done ATL!

OgtheDim
01-20-2015, 10:58 PM
Nice stadium, and glad its open air, of a sort. But, turf is still turf. And if they don't get 20K, its going to sound empty.

Cashcleaner
01-21-2015, 12:01 AM
There's a lot I like about that stadium and a lot that I don't. Honestly, I looks awfully claustrophobic in some sections with the way the structure sorta encloses everything. Has a great external look, though. I like the overall design, I'm just a little leery about the cavernous interior.

molenshtain
01-21-2015, 12:05 AM
Pretty impressive stadium. For everything but MLS.

I have no faith in them filling that like Seattle can. It will be New England and Washington v2


I follow a few beat reporters and general media personalities from ATL and there does seem to be a reasonably stupid amount of hype around this team already, as surprising as that is. They've sold a ton of season tickets already for a team that won't start until 2017.

Gazza_55
01-21-2015, 02:13 AM
Nice stadium, and glad its open air, of a sort. But, turf is still turf. And if they don't get 20K, its going to sound empty.

They will have over 20k season tickets sold by 2017 and their goal is 25k. Not a big fan of the turf but Atlanta will do really well because of their owner.

NYCFC has over 11k STH and Orlando just reported they passed 10.000.
The best thing MLS has done in the past decade is pick expansion cities. Chivas was bad but RSL, us, Vancouver, Seattle, Portland, Philly, Montreal, NYCFC, Orlando, Atlanta and lastly LAFC are all great - it's really quite remarkable.

Miami won't get a stadium deal done in the near future so Minnesota and Sac Republic will be in the league before them I believe.

BuSaPuNk
01-21-2015, 08:52 AM
I follow a few beat reporters and general media personalities from ATL and there does seem to be a reasonably stupid amount of hype around this team already, as surprising as that is. They've sold a ton of season tickets already for a team that won't start until 2017.

That's great and I hope they have a soild launch. However with that said historically Atlanta is one of the worst pro sports towns in terms of attendance in the US.

If the team struggles after the sparkle of newness is gone, in that building it will be like the Revolution v2. And that's not good for anyone.

habstfc
01-22-2015, 01:00 AM
They will have over 20k season tickets sold by 2017 and their goal is 25k. Not a big fan of the turf but Atlanta will do really well because of their owner.

NYCFC has over 11k STH and Orlando just reported they passed 10.000.
The best thing MLS has done in the past decade is pick expansion cities. Chivas was bad but RSL, us, Vancouver, Seattle, Portland, Philly, Montreal, NYCFC, Orlando, Atlanta and lastly LAFC are all great - it's really quite remarkable.

Miami won't get a stadium deal done in the near future so Minnesota and Sac Republic will be in the league before them I believe.10k and 11k that's it. Season starts in less than 2 months.

greatwhitenorf
01-22-2015, 03:08 PM
That Atlanta Stadium video is quite the monkey spank.

Loads of trim, well-dressed single women - none of them look over 28! - just loitering around the joint, texting, ordering drinks or just waiting for YOU! to show up and take them away to another fantasy.

I'm not convinced the Atlanta Renovators (owned by Home Depot's Arthur Blank) will do any better than any other Atlanta sports team not named Falcons or Braves. The Braves were so taken by life in downtown Atlanta that they are moving out to a distant new stadium in a posh suburb largely inhabited by white Caucasians.

Gazza_55
01-22-2015, 10:35 PM
10k and 11k that's it. Season starts in less than 2 months.

You're kidding right.

That makes them the 4th and 5th highest in MLS history.

Defoe
01-22-2015, 11:31 PM
The new Atlanta stadium is insane.

in the video, they show the MLS club playing in the new stadium.

http://gizmodo.com/a-closer-look-at-the-retractable-roof-of-atlantas-bonke-1680757940/+kevindraper



www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPKP7FaiqEE

MLS shows up around 2:44


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPKP7FaiqEE

WOW!!!!! So nice


I think Orlando will be most successful. Less competition in their city and more spanish people. I see them both doing well.

habstfc
01-23-2015, 03:23 AM
You're kidding right.

That makes them the 4th and 5th highest in MLS history. I thought Orlando especially was this super city for soccer and MLS 10k doesn't seem too impressive. 4th and 5th highest in MLS history, that can't be right.

Gazza_55
01-23-2015, 02:29 PM
I thought Orlando especially was this super city for soccer and MLS 10k doesn't seem too impressive. 4th and 5th highest in MLS history, that can't be right.

Only expansion teams to have more are Seattle Portland and TFC.

habstfc
01-24-2015, 02:39 AM
Philadelphia and Vancouver I believe had more than that as well. I know Vancouver had at least 15k season seats when they entered.

OgtheDim
01-24-2015, 07:34 AM
Only that many in New York though.....

Gazza_55
01-24-2015, 06:57 PM
Philadelphia and Vancouver I believe had more than that as well. I know Vancouver had at least 15k season seats when they entered.

Not even close. Vancouver had 8200 and Philly 6600. My company had season tickets for both Philly and Vancouver at the time. Credit to the Whitecaps because they have risen to 13k (2014 #) but it took 5 years to do it.

james
01-26-2015, 12:36 AM
The new Atlanta stadium is insane.

in the video, they show the MLS club playing in the new stadium.

http://gizmodo.com/a-closer-look-at-the-retractable-roof-of-atlantas-bonke-1680757940/+kevindraper



www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPKP7FaiqEE

MLS shows up around 2:44


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPKP7FaiqEE


I don't really like it actually. Stadiums are becoming to flashy and to many distractions that are not the game. I like more basic stadiums where you go to watch the GAME! Don't need so much massive score boards and shops and box offices and open space. I prefer BMO field, its being renovated but the main basic structure is still there, not flashy, my kind of stadium.

james
01-26-2015, 12:39 AM
Only that many in New York though.....

its bad for New York I agree. And they are playing at Yankee stadium. It might look really bad. And due to the awkward shape of baseball stadiums used for Soccer its not like Vancouver or the new Atlanta stadium where unused seats are easier to hide, Yankee stadium with 20k fans might not look good on TV with 30k empty seats.

OgtheDim
01-26-2015, 07:19 AM
its bad for New York I agree. And they are playing at Yankee stadium. It might look really bad. And due to the awkward shape of baseball stadiums used for Soccer its not like Vancouver or the new Atlanta stadium where unused seats are easier to hide, Yankee stadium with 20k fans might not look good on TV with 30k empty seats.

Especially as they

a) put supporters in the second tier behind the goal, not the bottom tier

b) put away supporters Far away

http://newyorkcity-mp7static.mlsdigital.net/elfinderimages/StadiumMap-edit5v14-01.jpg

habstfc
01-27-2015, 01:18 AM
Not even close. Vancouver had 8200 and Philly 6600. My company had season tickets for both Philly and Vancouver at the time. Credit to the Whitecaps because they have risen to 13k (2014 #) but it took 5 years to do it.Don't want to get in a pissing contest with you but I did some research. They (VWCFC) had 15,500 season seats in their inaugural season (2011) it dipped to 13k in 2012, 2013. I don't know what they had last year.

james
01-28-2015, 03:21 AM
Especially as they

a) put supporters in the second tier behind the goal, not the bottom tier

b) put away supporters Far away

http://newyorkcity-mp7static.mlsdigital.net/elfinderimages/StadiumMap-edit5v14-01.jpg

well it is common that away fans are put far away from home supporter ends, almost always located at opposite ends, and sometimes away fans are put in the highest seating area in the stadium Barcelona, Inter/AC Milan and Boca Juniors stadiums to name a few stadiums where away fans are opposite ends but also often way up in the sky, its like being in the rafters of the 500's at sky Dome, or actually even worse at Barcelona that stadium is massive and away fans way up there out of sight.

But the stadium looking at that map looks awful for sight lines for Soccer. At least NFL stadiums are in a rectangle field often the stadium is built somewhat the same shape as a soccer stadium, Baseball tho, its just awkward close to more like a triangle. I hope NYC don't play there for long. I actually wish they just played at Red Bull arena until they got a stadium built.