MLS Expansion

Not only have I been somewhat absent from these here parts (have you missed me?), but we at UF will readily admit that MLS is down there with the Hyundai A-League on our priority list. So, this is a two-fer-one post: my personal return to blogdome and our contractually obligated MLS post! Actually, we have had a fair number of MLS posts lately, which I believe far exceeds our quota.

You might recall that bids were due yesterday evening on two additional MLS expansion slots, with the Seattle Drew Careys set for next season and Philly the following year. In the end, seven cities put in proposals. As we covered earlier, the big news is Barcelona FC's proposal in Miami. However, the full list -- which was copied and pasted from Ives' post -- is fairly interesting and should make for a tough decision by that MLS dude Mark Abbott up there.

Atlanta (Arthur Blank)
Miami (FC Barcelona, Marcelo Claure)
Montreal (Saputo and Gillett families)
Ottawa (Eugene Melnyk)
Portland (Paulson family)
St. Louis (Jeff Cooper group)
Vancouver (Greg Kerfoot, Steve Nash, Jeff Mallett)

Get UF's thoughts on which should be the lucky cities to struggle to fill their 12,000 seat brand-new stadiums after the jump.

First off, notably absent from the list was a proposal from the NY Mets, who have talked about landing a team in Queens. Much to the New York contingent here on UF's dismay, the Wilpons decided to postpone putting in a bid so they can concentrate on more late-season collapses by the Mets. Also absent was a proposal from Las Vegas, although the idea of playing footy in 110 degree summer heat would be, well, insane (although Precious Roy would like to point out that it's a dry heat).

Right, so, which two teams should get the nod? Here's our votes:

Lingering Bursitis:

Miami -- any time you're faced with the words "Barcelona" and "investment", you have to say yes. Warm weather, huge latino population and a wealth of Blaugrana infusion. It can't fail! We'll see Barca's next superstars before Spain does!

Montreal -- a vogue pick, and one that could work tremendously well. Montreal is the epicenter of cooler-than-thou music, but the high French population will give them a leg-up when their citizenry grows tired of hockey. Toronto's working well, right guys?


Autoglass:

This one is obvious. Montreal and Miami -- two of all too few remaining North American cities that are actually unique and cool. (I mean, really, are Seattle and Atlanta, for example, all that different?). Plus the latino and
quebecois angle is cool. And Montreal-Toronto will make for INSANE
derbies with Toronto.


Ian:

St Louis -- Huge grassroots support for the game, would create natural rivalries with the other Midwest teams, not as much sports competition in the city from other teams.

Portland -- Rabid fanbase, natural rivalry with Seattle, large hipster population, only one other pro sports team in town. Potential for serious Nike funding....


u75:

Portland -- There is a hunger for pro soccer in the Northwest. Bringing
a team to Portland will set up a natural rivalry with longtime
opponents Seattle. Would be best if they agree to a soccer-specific
stadium, though PGE park is ready for them now.

St. Louis -- The home of American soccer, and still a hotbed for the
sport. Their inclusion could be a boost for KC, who need a boost to
jumpstart a flagging soccer-specific stadium drive of their own.


Fan's Attic:

Portland -- Obvious homer reasons aside, great fanbase with long history supporting soccer, no competing sports franchises on top tier, great weather for soccer, natural Seattle rivalry, proposed stadium in heart of city, and given the current economic climate may be a bit more feasible to retrofit an existing stadium to be soccer specific for less cost.

Montreal -- Canada will get another team, might as well be Montreal. Has Toronto as a natural rival, larger fanbase. Montreal has a better ownership group than Vancouver and Ottawa is smallest city being considered.


Spectator:

Miami -- As others have noted, Barcelona FC plus a city with large Latino population seems like a total no-brainer

St. Louis -- Growing up in the Lou, I distinctly remember the Steamers having a decent following at the old Checkerdome back in the 80s. Not sure why St. Louis has always been such a soccer hotbed, maybe all those Catholic and parochial schools, but I think the city could definitely support a team. Plus, no way that Montreal should get it with Gillette as one of the major stakeholders -- if he fucks up an MLS team half as much as he's fucking up Liverpool then, well, that would be pretty fucked.


Precious Roy

St. Louis -- It was the epicenter of soccer in America before there was such a thing. Weren't a number of the guys on the US team that beat England in 1950 from St. Louis? Like Scorsese with The Departed or Clapton with Unplugged, it just seems like St. Louis is due to be rewarded for a lifetime achievement award, even if they don't have the best plan on paper (and a caveat, none of us has seen any of the plans, so we're not really evaluating these along economic lines). Plus it probably helps stoke a rivalry with Kansas City.

Portland -- Similarly, this would make for a great geographic rival for the new Seattle franchise. Portland has already shown it has a strong fan base and putting another team on the left coast would make travel easier for some Western Conference clubs.


And, last but definitely not least, Sven:

Atlanta -- Despite what anybody says, an utterly crap sports town. So, why MLS continues to water down its product with meaningless expansion, why not put a team in Hotlanta for the locals to ignore so it can wither up and die? Granted, the Silverbacks (is that what they're called? the something-Backs) have themselves a decent thing going, but even all that Home Depot money doesn't make this a good idea.

Ottawa -- Are the NHL's Senators still in business? Or have they been moved to a much warmer American climate? While I can locate remote foreign countries that are enduring atrocities you only hear about on NPR, I can't even pick Ottawa out on a map. I can't help but think of 'Wayne's World 2' when Wayne and Garth are playing with the Chroma-key screen -- "Oh, Look! I'm in... Delaware." Ottawa -- Canada's Delaware? Then again, if Columbus can have a successful team, why not Ottawa (or Dover)?


Photo credit: thee MLS

Read more on "MLS Expansion"...

MLS expansion? Again?

Time is of the essence, or so the saying goes, and it appears that the MLS alarm clock has gone off again, causing them to leap from their comfortable chairs and scream the word everyone loves to hear: expansion.

It is a wonderful, romantic thought that the addition of more teams all over the country would inspire larger support for the game in general, but then again, we've been here before, haven't we? MLS Commissioner Don Garber is expected to announce today that the self-imposed ceiling of 18 teams will be raised to 24 MLS franchises by 2013-14. Amazing stuff. In addition to the addition of Seattle in '09 and Philadelphia in '10, Garber wants to add four teams in 2011 and at least two more by 2013.

And this is after he added Toronto and San Jose within the last two seasons!

It's a nice idea, to be sure, but we've seen it fail before. Considering that their prime targets for the moment (or, to put it in the MLS parlance, their "expansion priorities") are Vancouver and Montreal.

For those who are excited to finally see an MLS team in Seattle, is the Vancouver team really a wise move? And Montreal? Will they play indoors year-round due to the weather?

The spread of MLS to this point is agreeable, and it appears to be working. Most of the major soccer centers are geographically represented, as well as enough action in the nation's major media markets for it to be considered profitable and successful, which is what we all desperately want it to be. However, the NASL made the exact same mistake: hey, we're riding the wave of current success, now let's expand to every corner of the country and see what happens with our product!

The quicker you spread, the more danger you run of seeing your product diluted, not to mention the costs of creating franchises out of thin air. Who will pay for soccer-specific stadiums? [Just look at the problems Rochester had in paying for their new bank-financed and city-subsidized stadium, or even an established MLS team like DC United!]

Not only that, but where will all the players come from? It's tough enough for the MLS to retain its young stars thanks to the appeal of Europe, as well as the difficulty in finding top-class players to make the journey in the other direction.

MLS is very much flirting with the Icarus effect: their desire to expand and grow is so ravenous that they're losing sight of the #1 factor in their success: the overall quality of their product. MLB flirts with contraction all the time due to its bloated collection of teams and the massive disparity between the worst and the best.

The first iteration of the Premier League was 22 teams, and that lasted 3 seasons before they scaled it back to 20. FIFA wanted all top leagues in Europe to cull themselves to 18 teams due to the lack of quality for those minnows struggling to hang on, and while most have yet to make such a change, it is still within the realm of possibility.

I understand Garber's eagerness, I really do. His product has an established popularity due to the brand names and the promotion, but spreading it too quickly will only lead to another NASL situation. I'd love to see some figures from MLS about just how well they're doing, but for the moment, this pie-in-the-sky expansion plan should be put to bed. Otherwise, in 5 years time, we might well be putting the entire league to sleep.

Read more on "MLS expansion? Again?"...