Top Stories

MLS to introduce Montreal as 19th MLS Team


Major League Soccer and the Montreal Impact have scheduled press conferences for Friday morning, where they are expected to announce Montreal as the 19th MLS franchise. Montreal will join MLS in 2012.

Montreal will become the third Canadian team in MLS, joining Toronto FC and the Vancouver Whitecaps, which will begin MLS play in 2011.

What do you think of Montreal joining MLS?

Share your thoughts below.

Comments

  1. Let’s see how Portland fans turn out after 10 straight losing years before you assume that they can fill stadiums while the older teams are just doing something wrong…

    Reply
  2. I agree 100%. The name ought to be something French, and it definitely needs to be better than “Impact”. Otherwise, I think it’s just the right move.

    Reply
  3. Love this decision. We need teams in Ottawa and Calgary, too. And make sure all the stadiums have fake turf and plenty of snow blowers.

    Cannot believe how many people here are saying this is better than having a team in the southeast and then citing the Miami and Tampa teams as evidence. The league was not exactly high quality back then (and it is only slightly better now). Ridiculous. Atlanta or Charlotte or Raleigh-Durham would certainly support a team IF the product on the field is good. People in Durham and Chapel Hill know the sport, so they’re not going to support garbage.

    MLS will enter the national conversation if it offers entertaining, top-level soccer. This is not a charity. Expanding into Canada may be lucrative in the short-term but I do not see any real long-term benefits, especially if MLS is ever going to have a normal international calendar.

    Reply
  4. Hmmmm…..

    Let’s test that proposition. The baseball World Series began in 1903. Can we agree that from that time through at least the first half of the 20th Century, baseball was considered America’s national pastime — the preeminent team sport, by far? To use your words: “Ingrained across the American sports culture”? Interestingly, there wasn’t a single team west of the Mississippi River until the Dodgers and Giants moved to California in 1958. Somehow, baseball wasn’t considered a niche sport in few cities.

    MLS doesn’t need to be in every city. The NFL didn’t even have a Florida team until the NFL-AFL merger brought the Dolphins into the league. Atlanta came later. Tennessee came much later. Baseball took even longer to put a team in Florida, and neither team are hugely popular with big fan bases. There wasn’t a Colorado Rockies or an Arizona team until the 1990s — even the NFL didn’t come to Arizona until 1988. Yet, somehow, these leagues managed to be considered national sports leagues.

    Will the MLS expand beyond 20 teams? Possibly. It’s the natural inertia of these things, because the newer owners who’ve invested large sums to join the league (about $40 million in MLS) want to get reimbursed by newer investors. That’s what happened with the NHL and the NBA, as those leagues basically became pyramid schemes. Unfortunately, it means that a number of franchises do not succeed. The NHL almost went under because of over-expansion. MLS might go beyond 20 teams, but that doesn’t mean it would be a smart move.

    Reply
  5. Exactly….. more canadian teams in MLS means more oppurtunities to grow the game in Canada…. the more good national teams there are in ConCaCaf the better

    Hargreaves maybe would have played for Canada if he could have played in Toronto Montreal or Vancouver to start his career and the same goes for Jonathan DeGuzman….. how good would Canada be if those two were still in their pool

    Reply
  6. Well considering that MTL is just to the north of vermont and new hampshire you are getting a comsopolitan city added to MLS as well the nothern suburbs of NY, Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine…… that is pretty cool

    Reply
  7. I have no problem with Montreal coming on board. Along with Seattle, Toronto, Portland and Vancouver, we’ll finally have a good stable of teams that can actually fill stadiums in MLS.

    The rest of MLS needs to get their heads outta their @$$es.

    Reply
  8. oh yeah, the 15k at NYRB the last two games is just the marker MLS HQ needs to say “NY needs a 2nd team”. How about the marker being 30k before a 2nd team can be considered.

    Reply
  9. didnt they also have a very strong Mexican presence- Hugo Sanchez, Jorge Campos? More teams need to get fixed- Colorado, New England, maybe DCU, San Jose.

    Reply
  10. thats true about Dallas/Fort Worth too. Does more need to be said about using that criteria for MLS successful.

    Reply
  11. Gavin said in reply to Drew…

    …you must not follow this league.
    —————————————–

    You must not have a sense of humor — and must not understand that FC Dallas stinks and is not really in Dallas, or particularly near to Dallas.

    Reply
  12. sending the money to SJ and Columbus is throwing money down the drain. Not that those are bad markets, its just that those teams have owners who are not really interested in seriously growing their fanbase.

    Reply
  13. “Wrong. There are a ton of people here in Atlanta that would turn out for an MLS franchise”
    ————————

    Wrong. Prove it. You can’t. Atlanta can’t even support a USL team. Montreal has. Montreal wins.

    Reply
  14. MLS would’ve folded if not for TFC, the added expansion dough from Van, and the two Northwestern cities. Thats a fact! Just look at the measly 8k fans who attend games in Dallas, Colorado, SJ, NE, DC, etc. Hell, the Women’s league couldnt survive off 8k fans.

    Reply
  15. More Canadian teams than what? How does it make sense to put teams in a market that is totally disinterested in MLS, versus adding Canadian teams, where the locals are going mad for MLS?

    A wise person once said that you’re entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts. Learn from this.

    Reply
  16. I wouldnt stress any more canadian teams, frankly we cant support em to the level that would do the league justice, as a result we will see more teams in the second division which is fine by me and beneficial for both countries

    Reply
  17. this will be amazing for the league, theyve got great support and better yet will be the derbies with us (especially when we mash them home and away).
    Get over the anti canadian garbage, its a two country league and everyone benefits, especially with growth like this

    Reply
  18. When they played within Dallas proper they had good attendance, it’s when they moved out to the stix in Frisco is when people stopped going to watch FCD games.

    Reply
  19. Montreal is a great city for MLS because it has an ownership group and is in the process of creating a stadium out of Saputo. If the SE had those two they would have a team. If San Diego had those two they would have a team. Seattle didn’t have either one for a decade of MLS and that’s why they didn’t have a team. Also, USL attendance and/or international friendly attendance don’t seem to have anything to do with MLS attendance. Remember, Seattle floundered in the bottom third of USL/A-League/APSL, etc. attendance for years and years. New York will draw for a friendly but not for the Red Bulls even though they are the second best team in the league right now. Good for Montreal – now lets change the name and logo and we’ll be set.

    Reply
  20. “most European cities in North America”
    ___________________________

    What does that have to do with anything?

    Excellent point DYCS. Maybe we should find an area in North America that’s like Greece . . . oh yeah, we have California.

    What does that have to do with this issue? I mentioned Europe, isn’t that enough?

    – DYCS Poser

    Reply
  21. Garber is choosing the perfect Markets for Expansion…..

    Every recent expansion has one of the two following criteria

    Built-in rivalry

    Great Support in lower divisions

    St. Louis will happen once they can get good ownership instant rivalry with KCwiz and Fire

    Reply
  22. 13th and 7th ave man…I’m there a couple times of year seeing the sis. Love that place and would move there if Portland wasn’t so f’ing awesome.

    Reply
  23. I honestly think that Montreal is going to be a hit. For that matter..all of the Canadian franchises. Cosmopolitan cities = savvy futbol crowds.

    Vancouver, Portland , and Montreal are going to bring some juice to this league. Wait til the I-95 crowds see what the I-5 crowds in the PAC NW are going to do next year. I think it will be a jump-start. Perfect timing after a WC cycle…will be even better if the US gets out of the group.

    Reply
  24. Metro Montreal’s population is 4m, there’s plenty of soccer fans there.

    With the geography and politics, they’ll be natural rivals to Toronto, Vancouver, New York, and New England, so this will be good for that whole cluster of teams.

    Reply
  25. BK – I like your enthusiasm, but have to disagree. The purse strings are going to be way too tight for the next 10 years to do this. We’d have AYSO players on the bench.

    Big ups to Park Slope coming from Portland.

    Reply
  26. it was so obvious as both Fusion and Mutiny were retracted. Montreal is a way smarter choice than the Southeast, but they do need a team…where, I don’t know.

    Reply
  27. Yeah man…I really like that name, but I remember reading that the Olympic committee has some pretty stingent rules now on the brand…sucks.

    Reply
  28. Right people forget the Impact have been around for years and playing pretty good tier II ball.

    To be frank USL teams such as Impact often looked better on the field than MLS squads up to a few years ago, the quality gap was small because they weren’t constrained by MLS crazy salary rules, so a certain class of players could make more playing div II than MLS.

    Reply
  29. Aye, Second the motion. Along with corresponding our season with Europe, so we don’t lose players on loan throughout our season.

    Reply
  30. I beg to differ, I think MLS needs to go to 30 teams

    three divisions of 10

    east, central, west

    play everyone in ur division twice everyone else once. that is 38games, top 2 from each division make playoffs and 2 best 3rd place teams

    Reply
  31. I think MTL needs to really consider playing at the Olympic stadium…. they could draw 40k in MLS for sure, nothing is competing with them in the summer

    Reply
  32. Huge mistake if the intent is to leave MLS at 20 and a good idea is the intent is to keep growing the number of teams. Europe supports literally hundreds of 1st and 2nd division sides with a similar population and geographic area as U.S.-Canada population centers. If Montreal plus one is it, MLS will be leaving at least a dozen huge American metropolitan markets alone (including metropolitan areas that can support two teams), and large geographic swaths of the country, in favor of the smaller Candadian market in Montreal. I’m fine with Montreal if the league continues a steady growth to 40 teams. But 3 Candadian teams out of 20 in an ostensibly American league doesn’t make economic or practical sense and leaves MLS in danger of being seen as a niche sport in a few cities rather than something that becomes ingrained across the American sports culture.

    Reply
  33. Def would be NY team 2….. or NY team 1 actually cuz red bull ny is really red bull nj

    Alot of people around the country don’t get how much that means around these parts….

    Becks has been quoted in the past as saying that he loves Brooklyn and even named his son Brooklyn

    Reply

Leave a Comment