It has been more than two months since Major League Soccer approved plans to add two expansion teams by 2011 and the speculation about which two markets will be chosen is rampant.
In every corner of the United States, and various parts of Canada, there is growing buzz about MLS potentially choosing them. There are the favorites, such as New York, and the darkhorses, like Ottawa, but we still aren’t close to knowing which two cities will receive teams.
What if it were up to you to decide? What if you could vote on which two teams joined MLS by 2011? Here is your chance. I want you to select two cities to be the next two to receive MLS expansion franchises:
Who did you pick and why? Share your thoughts and selections in the comments section below.
St. Louis is the obvious location to expand based upon the soccer heritage there and the ownership group working to put this together. It would also be a great rivalry with Chicago and, if it still exists, KC. I also think Montreal would be great in some ways, but wonder about a grass field and adding another Canadian team when there are several US cities wanting in to MLS. I don’t know why Atlanta doesn’t seem to be very popular either. It is large enough, with enough soccer going on there, but I don’t know its history of support for adult soccer. Can enough people get past football there?
Are you Vegas people nuts? You are seriously going to put an outdoor stadium in Vegas when during the MLS season the temperature is always over 100. That is the main reason that Miami and Tampa failed. Not only is it hot in Florida in the summer, the humidity is unbearable.
I don’t know. I saw a lot of empty seats in Columbus to begin the season. It blows my mind that Columbus would have any empty seats.
Cleveland.
At some point, MLS is going to get to big to have an uneven schedule as they do now. Do you think it is a better idea to go to a european fixture style or continue to have a conference setting. i for one would prefer a european fixture list, rather then playing one or two teams three times and others only 2…
I seriously wonder about Las Vegas. Would locals really support a team there?
Funny, but the 8 fields that the Silverbacks have seem to be quite full every night for games.
Simply saying that you can’t stereotype all of Atlanta and/or the south. Atlanta biggest shortcoming right now is its lack of a public ownership group — we’ve heard about Arthur Blank, but not much.
I’m not willing to ignore the entire south just because they might not be able to have good attendance — I think the same about LV, but the fact is that I really just don’t know. There are so many factors in having a successful team that I think you should be careful about the assumptions you make. Tim, not to say that you are wrong — there are plenty of people around here that live for college football, and their weekends are booked with going to those games.
The league should not expand any further. The quality of play diminishes with each new franchise. There’s not enough good players yet to feed an 18-20 team league in my opinion.
I think Atlanta is a poor choice mainly because the state of Georgia is all about football, not soccer. I think fan support in Atlanta would be lackluster.
St. Louis would be a great choice because of the obvious history and strong soccer knowledge base in the region. Miami is another logical choice. There’s a good fan base down there, particularly among hispanics, and you would see great support for a club.
As far as everyone’s ongoing comments regarding the salary cap, though I agree it significantly hurts our ability to bring in top talent, it also prevents teams from bankrupting themselves. Until the league begins to turn a profit on all of the upfront investment going on right now, it is wise to keep salaries in check. We don’t want this thing to go the way of the NASL. Once the “bank is paid off,” then the teams can ease up on the salary caps and start bringing in some of the type of talent that we ALL would like to see.
I picked Portland and St. Louis, Portland because of the rivalry they could have with Seattle. I picked St. Louis for a number of reasons, the least of which being that I’m from there and know the rich soccer culture that exists there.
A few of our high school programs are constantly ranked in the top 10, top 5 even, in the country. Scott Gallagher is also one of the best club teams in the country, based in St. Louis. In fact, at one point (and this may still be the case, but i’m not sure) there were more players from Scott Gallagher in MLS than any other club.
Throw in the sizeable Hispanic and Bosnian populations (Vedad Ibesevic, for example –> SBI had an article on him recently on “An American Influence”) and St. Louis is definitely a hotbed for American soccer.
(There’s also the fact that the 1950 MNT that beat England 1-0 had 5 players from St. Louis on the roster, which is pretty sweet. There’s a movie about that if you’re interested: “The Game of Their Lives.” Gavin from the band Bush is in it; that was just weird.)
I know that this is from left field, but I think San Diego could possibly support a team. I know there has been no discussion yet, no investors, no interests, but it has a great soccer tradition down there and I doubt that many people make the trek from San Diego to Carson City to see a game. Maybe in 2020.
Furball, how can you say that Portland fans are better than the teams you named. The Crew has one of the best and fastest growing supporters groups. Their fans have been going to games for the past 3 years “when they didnt make the playoffs.” So take your “great supporters” and try to win USL2. We need good teams as well as good fans
I would love to see St. Louis get a team for the simple fact that it has played a huge part in the history of soccer and it would do very well.
Also I would have to say Montreal. I am not a big fan of candadian teams but they just got a new stadium and they have very good fan supprt.
When the MLS does get 20 teams I would also love to see a promotion relegation idea put in. The only problem is the USL is trying to become as big as the MLS and I dont think the USL would take a back seat to the MLS, even though it already does.
Miami already failed once. Why would they try again? So Miami is out.
NY2 is out until NY proves it can support the first team in the market.
Atlanta is out, period. Worst sports city in America.
Canada is out until MLS fixes the asinine rule that considers American players to be “foreign” for purposes of Canadian teams. There aren’t enough good Canadian players to fill out two teams’ “domestic” requirements. (This is a simple fix: for all MLS teams, both Americans and Canadians are to be considered domestic players. I don’t understand why MLS doesn’t do this already.)
Where does that leave us? Vegas, Portland and StL. Pick any two.
St. Louis is an easy decision — geography, history and market size. If the guys there don’t have the group together, the league owes it to themselves to help make it happen. Then I would go Vancouver, so Canada has two teams to keep things alive north of the border for a potential expansion to 20 or 24 teams.
Furball,
Agree with your comment except lumping Real Salt Lake with other cities with poor attendance. Despite the dismal record of RSL since its inception, RSL has always been one of the top drawing teams in the league.
Atlanta…because I live here. And the south needs a team.
St Louis, because it is a great soccer town and has a willing ownership group.
As for the others…no opinion on LV, I think we should have teams in the south before more in Canada, Portland’s stadium is awful, and New York doesn’t deserve a second team because they won’t bother traveling across the river.
Miami so there is something in the south east, and Portland since there is such a rivalry between the sounders and the timbers
If KC consistently has the lowest attendance in the league, why not move the Wizards to StL? This opens up that market, and the league can still set up teams in Montreal and either Vancouver or Portland.
For the last time, an all canadian league is both impossible and stupid.
Sam-
Thats exactly what ive been saying.
Are you sure you read over what was there?
No cities outside of Mon, Van and Tor could support a team.
Portland is a bigger market than:
San Jose
Columbus
Salt Lake
Plus, we have always supported our soccer teams, no matter how bad or good they were. We were third in USL attendance in 07 with a top of the table team. We were second this year with a bottom of the table team. That is what MLS needs. True supporters who show up in good times and bad. Hear that Red Bull, Columbus, Real, NE, and Dallas?
NY2 and Vegas. NY needs a real team that is actually in NY.
I understand all of the arguments against Vegas, but frankly the league has a tremendous opportunity to pop the cherry, so to speak, of an un-tapped market that is dying for a major league team to support.
The concerns about heat and turf and what not have already been addressed in the stadium plan, so I’m not going to continue harping on those. Claims about Las Vegans betting against their own team are lame; not everyone in this town are gambling-fiends (most aren’t; take a walk through a casino and the only residents you see pounding away at the slots are the elderly–not the target audience that MLS is shooting for anyway).
The truth is, the league loses nothing by giving Vegas a try. If things really aren’t working out, then the league can move the team to one of those markets (like Portland, or Montreal) where they can play it more “safe.”
Is Vegas a gamble? Sure. That doesn’t make it not worth doing.
St. Louis and Portland.
Keep it in America
Montreal and Vancouver, becuase the support level is pretty much guaranteed. It just isn’t in most of the other choices, either because of stadium availability or lack of local pedigree (with St. Louis perhaps being the big exception.)
Beyond that, I’d suggest moving a few of the failing franchises — particularly Columbus and Chivas — before adding new ones. Columbus is a total failure; that expose in the Columbus Dispatch on their faked attendance numbers earlier this summer just proved it.
The jury is out on KC until the stadium is done, ditto with New York. But two new york teams WITHOUT a shared stadium is just inane.
And for god’s sake, let’s not see three divisions. Can we try to over-Americanize everything, maybe go back to shootouts as well? Sheesh. No respect for tradition. How about a single table, with the playoffs decided by the top eight, regardless of location?
Nah, that would be too fair and make too much sense. Instead, let’s split it up even further, so even more teams with records that wouldn’t make the post-season in other divisions get in. Cripes.
Miami and Atlanta? No chance for either. They are the two worst sports cities in the United States and I doubt they’ll get an MLS team any time between now and 2030.
Canada, you have a bunch of cities that are interested in teams to go with Toronto: Vancouver, Ottawa, Montreal, Edmonton. That is a solid core for an 8 or 10 team league. Just man up and say you are too crap to have your own league and need the mls to even have teams.
Enjoy your world cup qualification, too! 🙂
SDM – Dump of a stadium?? Seriously. So apparently character and looking very unique automatically means dump? I’d invite you to attend any match currently played at PGE Park, and I think you’d gain a whole other appreciation for it.
The plan to get PGE Park up to MLS standards really addresses the one major flaw in the stadium – no seats on the east side of the park right now. That would mean getting fans on three sides of the pitch, and increase the already vibrant atmosphere.
I’d love to see VAN and MTL get in for MLS as well, so I’m hoping the rumor that they’ll take 4 teams and not just 2 is really true. STL and MTL fill the midwest needs and gain rivals for existing teams, while PDX and VAN give MLS an immediate Pacific Northwest stronghold.
I think it’s important to first list the criteria for picking cities. Here are my criteria:
– local support for soccer
– wealth of talent in area (to develop in a soccer academy and increase the talent pool)
There are 3 cities that seem to warrant a franchise: St. Louis, Miami and NY
I ended up picking St Louis and Miami though I wouldn’t object to NY over Miami.
I think the key is that the fans will support soccer and the teams create an academy to develop local talent.
There’s a lot of kids that play soccer but can’t find the avenues to develop. Case in point is Jorge Flores of Chivas USA.
Also, equally as viable:
West
CD Chivas USA
Colorado Rapids
Los Angeles Galaxy
Real Salt Lake
San Jose Earthquakes
Seattle Sounders
Central
Chicago Fire
Columbus Crew
FC Dallas
Houston Dynamo
Kansas City Wizards
St. Louis United
East
D.C. United
Montreal Impact
New England Revolution
New York Red Bulls
Philadelphia Athletic
Toronto FC
I think Montreal and St. Louis. Both have stadium plans in place and good support. I’m interested in seeing if a second Canadian team can get the kind of support that TFC has garnered.
As a side note, I think that Las Vegas would be a great addition. Perhaps instead of buying a piece of the Crew the Vegas group can buy a piece of Chivas and move them to Las Vegas, since they are clearly not having the kind of success attracting fans in So Cal that they thought they would. That gives MLS 3 new markets.
question: is this the Final MLS expansion (for a long while)? Seems like quality of players/coaching/refs may not be able to keep up with this rapid expansion.
MLS in 2011. Top two teams from each division plus two wildcards make playoffs. Seeds 1-8 based on record, not division.
West
CD Chivas USA
Los Angeles Galaxy
Portland Timbers
Real Salt Lake
San Jose Earthquakes
Seattle Sounders
Central
Chicago Fire
Colorado Rapids
FC Dallas
Houston Dynamo
Kansas City Wizards
St. Louis United
East
Columbus Crew
D.C. United
New England Revolution
New York Red Bulls
Philadelphia Athletic
Toronto FC
Good point, Connor B about the SSS needing to be located in the urban core. I have bookmarked a great article from Steve Davis about that here.
http://soccernet.espn.go.com/columns/story?id=487388&root=mls&cc=5901
The problem is that first generation of SSS were built as multi-use “entertainment centers” in markets where it simply would’ve been cost-prohibitive to build in or around downtown areas. It’ll take a bold, imaginative and potentially politically risky planning paradigm shift on the part of both the teams of the local officials in each market to rethink that model. To many local government officials MLS is still an extremely young and unproven league and many metropolitan areas still have a “show-me” attitude when it comes to long-term investment in the league and aren’t going to cut it any development breaks. D.C. United’s stadium fiasco is a good case of that, especially since the outrageous baseball stadium deal for the Nats there hardened local politicians against any perceived concessions to pro sports. Until MLS shows that it’s a top-level sports league most cities in the U.S. will continue to treat the league like a red-headed stepchild and downtown soccer specific stadiums as an extravagant luxury unfit for challenging economic times. Red Bull Arena will probably be the first test (being adjacent to downtown Newark) to show U.S. urban planners whether or not this model could work.
How about none of the above? MLS’ product on the field is good, but diluting the player pool even further will only hinder the quality of play.
Montreal because, as was said, they have strong fan support.
Vancouver and Portland should make it because they would be natural rivals with Seattle.
St. Louis has problems but I would like to see them in eventually, and Milwaukee or Indianapolis to solidify the Midwest.
New York can’t make one team work.
Miami is a hotbed of Latinos who all love beisbol. Move further up the coast to Fort Lauderdale and add the Rowdies in Tampa (joining the USL in 2010) and you’ll have two viable franchise in Florida.
And that’s it. We’re done. Of course, who knows if there will be a league if the economy tanks further into depression.
Portland is too small of a TV market to make sense for the long term. Montreal and NY2.
I’d also say San Antonio makes a lot of sense: Hispanic population + big TV market + little professional sports competition + recent demonstrable success in Houston + Texas rivalry.
I chose Montreal due to their recent success and the prospect of an intense rivalry with Toronto.
I also chose St. Louis because of its history of being soccer friendly and good prospects for a successful franchise.
I don’t think Seattle and another Pacific Northwest team could make it simultaneously. Portland, Seattle and Vancouver all could be very successful on their own.
NY doesn’t deserve a 2nd team, yet. Let’s see how Harrison flies – I think it will do well. I’m recently from West Orange, NJ and a native NYer who grew up going to Cosmos games. (once played an U12 game at Giants Stadium prior to a Cosmos game in the pouring rain.)
I guess maybe its cuz TFC is in the black and helping develop (yes im reiterating this point) players for the USMNT.
God, why did they have to expand up here?
What a foolish move.
I picked Portland and Vancouver for many of the reasons stated above. I could just as easily justify Montreal for Vancouver.
Why not move the KC Wiz to St. Louis? Does anyone really think a SSS will help Wiz attendance problems?
I like the idea of moving Chivas to San Diego as well….
Screw the “US-city-only” approach. MLS needs more Toronto FC type fanbases – can’t think of a better way to sell the product to US natives who have no concept of what a true soccer atmosphere is like.
Tom-
Vancouver is perfect then having the same temperature as Seattle…
Montreal is not hotter or colder then Toronto (give or take a few degrees).
How was it a mistake to move into Canada?
The fact that a team has vocal support that sometimes shows up its opponents?
Failing greatly to see our point here, please expand.
I would prefer MLS not cannibalize USL and their associated cities, so I voted for St Louis and New York.
I’m also of the school that considers any proposal of more than 18 to 20 teams in MLS as seriously illadvised.
Mig-
HAHA
i understand your pain.
Sadly i always had to ask my sister (or even previously my irish roommate) specifics about the game of hockey.
They should take back my passport.
Think it was a mistake to expand into Canada and think it will just compound the mistake to continue.
As far as I can tell, Canada is it’s own country with it’s own federation. Unless the Canadians want to forfeit there place in FIFA, they should have their own league.
If we go into Montreal, you can kiss a reasonable MLS schedule goodbye. It’s too cold to play up there after November and it’s too hot to play in Atlanta and Las Vegas in the summer.
Of course we all know that if the money is right, Garber would put a franchise in the Aluetians (you can see Russia from there).
Montreal & Portland – 5.5hr trip to montreal or a 2hr trip to jerz…. going with montreal everytime.
Wonder if that contract that Montreal has about sunday games would be void if they joined MLS.
Sandro,
I’m begging you…let that question die. Between that and branding, no one ever talks about anything else around here.
mig,
In Harrison, NJ…literally on the border of Newark.
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&tab=wl
It would be wise for the MLS (given that a city has an owner(s) with sufficient capital) to consider fan attendance and participation as well as TV market. I understand the importance of TV markets. You have to be in major markets to get a good TV compensation which is a (if not the) major source of revenue for the league. However, the league badly needs to build “buzz” to get TV and prospective advertisers/sponsers and to build more interest in the soccer public. You won’t do this by having games in half empty stadiums with quiet crowds. You get “buzz” by having passionate, rowdy full houses, which shows well on TV and in other print media, draws more people to games who want to be part of the party. My inlaws, who never previously even heard of soccer, used to regularly go to Portland Timbers NASL games because they loved the rowdy, fun (sold out) games. People pooh-pooh the NASL, and yes, in the end they outreached themselves, but they were still on to something that cannot be discounted, in that in many markets they successfully built a solid fan base. The reason they failed was not because of poor attendance. I don’t think game atmosphere should be minimized as a very important component of league health.
STL because of its proximity to chi and kc and the fan base is there..
and then either portland or vancouver would be fine to give seattle a nice rivalry. IMO the best south east city would be charlotte.
Another team in NY, thats laughable, they cant even get 10k a game to see the Red Bulls. Canada is soccer crazy, and they support their teams. I would go with Montreal and Vancouver. My darkhorse choice would be Portland. The real question, can the talent pool sustain the need for more franchises? MLS is already diluted, they better raise the salary cap, if they start adding more teams.
Odd question but where IS the new NYRB stadium being built? Seems like I shoulda known that already but give a brother a hand here. Thanks.