Streaming now from the Crew website:
http://www.thecrew.com/news/2012/02/...don-garber-6pm
Not sure what the Don will be speaking about just yet
Printable View
Streaming now from the Crew website:
http://www.thecrew.com/news/2012/02/...don-garber-6pm
Not sure what the Don will be speaking about just yet
apparently garber is a die-hard baltimore blast fan
Interesting stuff there. IMO the last thing you want is the league feeling they need to give your team special attention. I'm sure no one would admit it but I got the distinct feeling that a clock is ticking down on that market, and maybe for the Revs if not the Boston market. Ticking down to what? I don't know. Nothing will be done with the Revs until after Bob Kraft passes. With the Crew, I don't think there timeline is as long.
Their stadium is pretty new isnt it? I'm sure they'd be contractually tied to it for at least 10-15 years after it was built, if not longer. Unless some new owner REALLY wants a team and would pay whatever the buyout clause would be. Or some owner comes in and does something like what happened with the Seattle SonicsQuote:
Originally Posted by Detroit_TFC
"I promise even though I'm from Oklahoma City I'm not interested in moving the team there"
"I promise even though I'm from Oklahoma City I'm not interested in moving the team there"
"I promise even though I'm from Oklahoma City I'm not interested in moving the team there"
"WHAT?! The city of Seattle won't build me a brand new $800 million stadium on the taxpayers dime?! I'm moving the team to Oklahoma City!"
you mean crew stadium? it's not really new anymore, it was the first SSS in the league built in 1999.Quote:
Originally Posted by Waggy
From what I understand, CC and HSG are frustrated with the current site. They don't control any of the property (belongs to Ohio State Fair Authority or some such body) and as we know, dodgy side of town. Took them years to get a portion of the mud lots paved due to state bureaucracy, etc. Would rather have facility closer to downtown and OSU. As is typical, HSG doesn't want to write a check and public money is scarce. Even more so now as the city took a bath on the Blue Jackets stadium situation (CBJ couldn't generate enough sponsor money, city/county had to float new bond issue and totally rewrite the stadium funding deal, as I vaguely remember it).
I was at work so couldn't research it, seems like Crew Stadium was entirely funded by HSG, guess the state only provided the land. So they could move any time. Interesting. Well Orlando wants a club, there's obviously NY2 but other then that, I dunno what markets are out there. And Orlando is a bit of a long shot I think. Florida is where pro sports leagues expand to to die. I guess St Louis theoretically, or Indianapolis, but I dunno. Or I guess there's always Detroit, esp if they end up doing that crazy rebuild of the silverdome.Quote:
Originally Posted by justin
I definitely see a reckoning for Columbus, Chivas, NER and maybe Dallas in the next few years. It might be worth MLS' while to buy out their franchise licenses so they can collect the $50M expansion fee for new clubs.
http://sparklingophelias.files.wordp...llbeyours2.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by Detroit_TFC
When I first came here, this was all swamp. Everyone said I was daft to build a castle on a swamp, but I built in all the same, just to show them. It sank into the swamp. So I built a second one. That sank into the swamp. So I built a third. That burned down, fell over, then sank into the swamp. But the fourth one stayed up. And that's what you're going to get, Lad, the strongest castle in all of England.
^ ROTFL what a movie - "he's killed my auntie..."
My sense watching the Garber talk was that relocation is not out of the question (ie, the league is personally working with HSG to revive CC but if it doesn't work...).
AEG moved the Quakes and that was at a time of much higher insecurity about the league's future than there is now. Due to HSG's history as a cornerstone of the league, they (along with AEG and the Krafts) might be the only ones with the clout to do it. I'd say there is a 5% change of relocation.
http://www.mlssoccer.com/blog/mls-in...ner-don-garber
Here's a link to the video of the address made by the big cheese...
Thanks. It's funny how uncomfortable they all are in the Krew's chairs. They shift around so much before the session begins!
the Don is totally going to demand normal chairs going forward.
"But I don't want to marry her father. I don't love her"Quote:
Originally Posted by __wowza
"We need all the land we can get. We live in a bloody swamp."
Haha.
Those are the worst chairs ever for a 1 hour address. I don't think these guys are that short, but they look like hobbit's sitting in them with their feet dangling like that.
Of course HSG, being an NFL owner, knows all about how to use threat of relocation to bust the balls of local politicians, for stadium considerations. The Vikings are doing that right now in Minneapolis. So any implied relocation talk behind the scenes might be tactical.
i couldnt care less if New England are re-located to another city, as they are holding the league back by not trying to get a new stadium, the current NFL stadium looks terriable when 1 whole side of the stadium is completely empty. And they don't seem to want to invest any money to help the team grow in the future. As for Columbus i don't want to see them move, they have a stadium and they sometimes do have a good supporters end with hardcore fans, can be very loud sometimes. I enjoy hating them and they also a good location for away trip for TFC and Chicago fans!
all other markets are a gamble now...Miami maybe. Florida pro teams seem to often struggle, seems people just don't want to spend money to go watch sporting events in Florida. Detroit is a big gamble as the city is pretty much decaying away. places in the mid west like Indianapolis, Oklahoma aren't the biggest cities and aren't preferred options for pro sports (however kansas fans have been getting behind the new Sporting Kansas and i would of never thought kansas could support a MLS team). NY a 2nd team?? gamble because they already struggle just to support the 1 team they have. St.Louis?? possible the best candidate to support a team...but is there anyone there with deep pockets?Quote:
Originally Posted by Waggy
Their best bet right now might be Orlando if the USL Pro team there aren't just using the "we want to play in MLS one day" line as a marketing tool.
http://www.myfoxorlando.com/dpp/spor...cer-in-orlando
The league is healthy and that's all I care about.
Dallas to Orlando.
NE to NY2- THAT would piss some people off.
Columbus to St.Louis.
I could see this happening. I truly wouldn't wish it on any supporter that loves their team but it the way it is in NA.
Dallas to Orlando doesn't make sense - the talk is for Orlando City to move up.
Houston has shown that people in Texas can support a MLS team...that kind of makes me wonder if Dallas just didn't make the mistake of building there stadium way out into the country side they may not have such shit attendence. Same can go with Chicago, all tho they are getting some games near full capacity other games the stadium is half empty, if the stadium was actually in Chicago i think they actually might sell out the stadium all the time.
The league has to make an effort in Dallas, it is too big a market with too many potential supporters with too much money. Also, a new stadium would fix a lot of their problems. It would be nice if the rich MLS owners started financing these new stadiums themselves. I do not see why that would not work instead of trying to extort local goverments in a deep recession. The money could be structured as a low-interest loan to the club or whatever, and hopefully they could add some free land from the municipality. 80-100M split over 19 clubs is really not that much.
They could just transfer the franchise, not the club (like how the Seattle Sonics are owned by the city of Seattle, but their NBA franchise and license went to Oklahoma city. Same deal as when the Browns became the Ravens)Quote:
Originally Posted by TOBOR THE GREAT !
My 2 cents: This is the next major step the league needs to make. It seems like theres a few categories of MLS teams
1) Widely established, basically big 4 sport status in city (Toronto, Seattle, Vancouver, Portland)
2) Very successful at the gate, growing the brand and starting to get tv notice (Kansas City, Houston, LAG, Montreal, Philly, New York, Chicago, Colorado, Salt Lake City)
3) Still have potential to grow (San Jose, Chivas, DC, New England)
4) Why in gods name did you even try to put a team there (Colombus, Dallas)
If 2 teams from the 4th tier (or even 3rd) could go somewhere where they'd at least have potential it'd really strengthen the league. There aren't many weak sisters anymore. Fixing them HAS to has to has to be a serious priority for Garber
* aside, I counted the teams I listed like 3 times, compared them to the MLS standings a few times and couldn't figure out why I was at 19 and who I was forgetting. Freaking unbalanced league.
There is a common thread there in the shape of Hunt Sports Group that should not be ignored as a factor.Quote:
Originally Posted by Waggy
Columbus got in because they had a very successful season ticket drive prior to the launch of the league because people there were desperate for a "major league" team of any description. Later they got the Blue Jackets and that angle wore off leaving a pro soccer team stuck in one of the least cosmopolitan of large American cities. Birmingham, Alabama might have been worse but it's difficult to think of too many more.
With Dallas the problem is location within the metropolitan area. They need to be close to the Hispanic population in a more urban setting but are stuck way out in the boonies (bit like playing in Whitby in a Toronto context) in what is very much high school football country where soccer is still seen by some as a subversive pseudo-Communist activity.
well columbus has the 32nd highest metro population in USA and 15th highest city population. Some other teams in MLS are very close in population as well. Heres some Metro populations rounded to the nearest 100,000 as i couldn't be bothered to type the exact population.Quote:
Originally Posted by CSO_BBTB
metro population:
23rd. Portland - 2.2 million
29th. Kansas City - 2 million
31st.San Jose - 1.8 million
32nd. Columbus - 1.8 million
50th. Salt Lake City - 1.1 million
there are many other factors into city populations tho. Some cities land areas are much more massive then others. Boston vs Dallas for example, Boston small city in land area but high density populated city with a big metro population where Dallas is a big population city but very spaced out over a very large area of land. Or Philly vs Phoenix, even tho phoenix city has a higher population then philly, philly has about 1 quarter the land size area as Phoenix and philly has a much bigger metro population then phoenix.
City Population:
15th Columbus 787,000
22nd - Boston 617,000
23rd Seattle 608,000
26th - Denver 600,000
29th Portland 583,000
37th - Kansas City 459,000
125th - Salt Lake City 186,000 (note Salt Lake City and Kansas have smaller city populations that are also half as densely populated per land area as Columbus is)
But overall long story short, Columbus is not the biggest city, but not the smallest either. There are other teams in MLS with similar populations or even smaller (kansas, Salt Lake) doing just fine and there really is only a few other options in USA to relocate columbus to that have a bigger population then Columbus and actually want a MLS team or could support a team any better then columbus can.