First, stop shilling for the Montreal Commerce Department!

Second, it would seem like Portland would be a smartish choice. You could leverage the Timbers popularity and start a rivalry with the Seattle Xboxes. As for a Southeastern entry, you might be able to go as far as Atlanta without killing off business there.

Just my $.02.

Puerto Rico would be nicer. Plenty of direct flights, nice weather, etc.

Miami failed once already... BLAHtlanta...

I think adding one more team from Canada would turn into an immediate classic when they play Toronto, which could be nice.

I hope MLS stops at 16 teams and follows FIFA guidance in that respect.

I need an AFTERMATH story on the united game last night! I'm going through withdrawls!

montreal has always been my top pick for a 2nd team in canada...or even next team in MLS. I think it would be much more of a success - attendance and atmosphere-wise - than anything they could put in the US.

My fear is that the actions of the Nationals will make it harder for you guys to get a stadium in DC. The city might be a bit gunshy after what they have pulled.

I don't know much about how the Whitecaps are supported, but Vancouver is a great city and would also be an instant rival with Seattle. I wouldn't mind Portland, either. Montreal would really give MLS a firm hold on the Mid to Northern Atlantic coast with DC, Philly, NY, Boston, and Montreal and Toronto. I know those last two aren't on the coast so to speak but you get the picture.

I hope MLS stops at 16 teams and follows FIFA guidance in that respect.

Posted by: juanma | July 13, 2008 2:35 PM
=========================================

Actually, the FIFA guidance mentions a limit of 18 teams. Further, it presupposes a single-table format; thus, their real concern is not the number of teams per se, but the length of the season (they want to limit it to 34 games). MLS' divisional format allows for a lot of flexibility in terms of creating a schedule of 30 games or so, even with more than 18 teams.

Wait, wait, wait......

What about Rochester going to MLS?

Would love to add Rochester or even the Battery to the list of MLS sides.

If it's a choice of Canadian cities, I'd prefer Vancouver and it's future cross border derby with the Seattle Sounders.

Montreal, however cool of a city, can wait.

What about Rochester going to MLS?
=========================================

That idea was viable years ago, but it hasn't had any traction lately. The MLS brass has concerns about whether St. Louis is a large enough market, which was apparently a large factor in why it was passed over in favor of Philly. They're clealry hunting bigger game nowadays.

Orlando!! It's a tough sell for the locals, but Disney is visited only by UK, and Brazil families more than US families. It would make a great addition to the ESPN area of the Park, and give families a night out thing to do since there really isn't much else to do there at night.

Montreal would be a nice choice...if only because it would make for sweet road trips. St. Louis wants to put a team in an outer suburb best known for a watertower in the shape of a ketchup bottle. Enough Said.

There's something goofy somehow when California has three teams, Texas has two and Florida has none. That aside, why not let teams like Rochester and Charleston compete for the opportunity to join MLS?

I think it's really hard to deny those attendance numbers - 11,000 per game average, while it's only above KC in MLS numbers, if you look at the games this year, there's nothing under 11K, mostly 12K and 13K. And that's without having your Beckham or Blanco games to bolster your numbers, or major rivalries. A built in fan base is a nice start. Plus, with only one other pro team in town, there's not much competition for sponsorships, corporate / luxury boxes, etc.

I'd love to have a Philly team and have another rival and road trip option, but if I was running MLS, I'd go with the sure thing in Montreal first and add Philly as #17 or #18.

I think that a second Canadian team would do well and infuse a lot of money and interest into MLS and the ideal site to do that would be Montreal. I sure would put a team there before I put another team in NY.

Speaking of Canada, here's a report on a game at BMO Field last Thursday, which should serve as a nice lead-in to that game that is kicking off on BSPN within the hour:

http://www.canadasoccer.com/eng/media/viewArtical.asp?Press_ID=3255

I'd love to have a Philly team and have another rival and road trip option, but if I was running MLS, I'd go with the sure thing in Montreal first and add Philly as #17 or #18.

Posted by: e | July 13, 2008 3:03 PM
=========================================

Most of us understand that Philly as #16, starting in 2010, is a done deal. Are you sugguesting that MLS renege on something that has already been publicly announced?

Goff,

Can anyone within the DC United organization explain why they put up with such awful treatment at RFK? Last night was a real excuse to not pay a cent in rent.

Its not bad enough that everyone in the DC Sports commission isn't in jail for the Nats stadium but the fact that they do such a bad job with RFK should be enough to at least have everyone who works there removed.

Maybe someone at the Post could do an article on the fact that Eric Moses and Ollie Harper are 100% clueless.

I would also encourage everyone to e-mail them:
emoses@dcsec.com
oharper@dcsec.com

Since DC United doesn't care about their ill treatment at RFK I guess its up to the fans to take a stand.

I like Montreal and Portland as 17 and 18. Two great cities with passionate fan-bases already established.

If the league feels it must go to 20, then maybe Vancouver, STL, Miami, or a team *actually* inside NYC (honestly, who wants to drive into the swamp for a bad team?).

I know Atlanta is a big market, but I don't know anything about the soccer environment down there. Miami can work if the stadium is actually in the city, unlike the last time around when it was waaay the hell out in the boonies.

Montreal would be a nice addition, if only for the confusion factor. Imagine visiting players wearing Bank of Montreal on their jerseys.

Orlando? Seriously? The tourists don't go there to watch soccer and wouldn't be a good fan base, unless the team plays at Disney World, then the daily Disney attendance (>40K) can masquerade as the team's attendance. Besides, Floridians have proven, twice, that they can't support an MLS franchise. No offense Floridians, I'm one of you, but if it ain't gridiron, you don't really care.

The next four teams need to be a good mix...

Portland (strong support, instant rivalry)

St. Louis (good soccer market, steady and reliable franchise)

Miami (south-west, latino fanbase)

Montreal or Vancouver (another Canadien team please! good support, rivalries, etc..)

NY2 would be nice. Also, move Chivas USA.

I'm with "whatsthedeal." If the Lerners don't have to pay for a brand new stadium and every advantage in the world, we shouldn't pay rent on the old, creaking, piss-smelling, poorly-designed-for-soccer games, lights-not-working nonsense.

Senor Goff,

Can you give us an injury report for DCU please? In particular, can you confirm or deny the rumor going around that Gallardo had to have surgery, and will be unavailable for 4-8 weeks?

Thank you.

Forgot to add the salient question: Does Steve want his next trips to Montreal to be all-expenses paid?

I would love it as well as MLS going to a single table

Miami (south-west, latino fanbase)
=========================================

Until recently, most of these people were of Cuban (think beisbol) heritage. There is also an admixture of people from island nations where people play cricket at least as much as soccer. This is probably changing, though.

Sports fans in the southeast are typically horrendous, especially atlanta and orlando and even miami. They don't support the teams they already have. I also don't think anyone's mentioned how ridiculously hot and humid those games would be.

Montreal!!

does Portland have a stadium in place? or do they still play on that rock hard artificial turf baseball field?

Montreal's advantage is the nice little stadium that is expandable that is already in place. And natural grass. Since Montreal gets far harsher weather than Toronto it makes you wonder how they are able to have real grass there.

I wish I were at the Dick right now. The Weather Channel reports that the temperature in Commerce City is 91F, with a dewpoint of 26F, for a relative humidity of a whopping 9 percent. By contrast, in Washington the dewpoint is 70F, for a relative humidity of 53 percent.

STL should get the next MLS team, especially after being used by MLSFO to get PHL to get their act together. No more Canadian teams please. No more artificial turf EVER!

Would love to see St. Louis join next, considering how close they were, the fact that its an American city, and their long soccer tradition.

Would love to see Montreal join next for all of the reasons Goff mentioned. Then would love to see a pair of teams out west, like maybe Vegas and Vancouver.

Portland is too small a market. With three teams in Canada that leaves 17 spaces in the US is Portland in that 17. Florida, NYC2 ST Louis, Somewhere in the southeast. Where does this leave Portland. What will each new team add to the value of the league. Vancouver is a much better rival for the Sounders anyway.

I love the idea for Montreal. Gives the league a bit more flavor, and (as its been said) they have a great fan base. If Montreal was given team in a more legit league than the USL (not to say that it isn't already, but obviously MLS's level of play and media exposure is higher), I would definitely think that attendance would jump.

Sir Goff,

I have wanted an ANSWER to this nagging QUESTION:

WHY(!) does MLS permit ARTIFICIAL turf fields???

Seriously...I want to know why. Please don't tell me it is STRICTLY financial. Do you feel the integrity of the American/Canadian version of Futbol is diminished through such compromise?

Lol...Another New York club? There shouldn't even be one now :)

Lol...Another New York club? There shouldn't even be one now :)

Posted by: Asher | July 13, 2008 5:18 PM

New Jersey has a team, not NY ;-) And even calling that group a soccer team is questionable....

A-Rod scores.

Put a team in Baltimore and Montreal.

Montreal is certainly a beautiful city. If I were a player or a coach planning to be in MLS for the next few years, I'd very much look forward to going there for games.
If there have a good stadium, and enough support for a team, I do not see a down side.

portland portland portland

timbers army. nuff said.

I'm all for Montreal.

Given how quickly Toronto took to TFC it's a given the Canadian market should be further developed - at a minimum two more teams. I'm not sure I know enough to weigh in on which city should come next but I would put a new Canadian team ahead of any US city.

I like the idea of a SE team. I don't know whether Miami or Atlanta would have the best chance of being a success.

I think a second team in NY in a lousy idea. MLS's growth would be better helped by expanding into a new market.

I'm hoping to see a team in Greenbelt

STL should get the next MLS team, especially after being used by MLSFO to get PHL to get their act together. No more Canadian teams please. No more artificial turf EVER!

Posted by: boda united | July 13, 2008 4:40 PM
------------

Used? Even when they admitted their financing was not at the level they needed to be?

Stop trying to be a contrarian jackass and see the real story. Philly got deep=pocketed owners and a stadium deal with significant state support before STL connected those dots.

Jeff Cooper did a great job getting them in the race, but they haven't reach the finish line.

Sir Goff,

I have wanted an ANSWER to this nagging QUESTION:

WHY(!) does MLS permit ARTIFICIAL turf fields???

Seriously...I want to know why. Please don't tell me it is STRICTLY financial. Do you feel the integrity of the American/Canadian version of Futbol is diminished through such compromise?

Posted by: another Ron | July 13, 2008 4:59 PM
-------
What is your opinion of the integrity of Costa Rocan football, especially that of Deportivo Saprissa and the Costa Rican national team?

Hint - do a little research on their field surface before you answer that question.

MLS must go to 20 and have a full home-away schedule with a single table... Playoffs i'm unsure about...

17 - St Louis
18 - Montreal
19 - Portland
20 - NYC

All 4 teams wil have a close rival with Chicago/KC, Toronto, Seattle, NJ

I can't believe NY is even in the question. The NYRB can't conjure up support. Ask the Chivas EEUU front office how easy it is to compete for fans in the same town.

Vancouver for 17th to be announced soon?

Bear in mind that some franchises WILL get moved over the years...

17a - First, move Chivas USA to San Diego (where MLS wanted the team to start with). Would give SD and that great market a team to support and quit the competition with LA for ticket buyers. Would still be a good rivalry for the LAG.

17 - St Louis - good soccer town and gives McBride a team to play for finally (he'll be in his 40's by then, but eh...)

18 - Montreal - for reasons stated by Senor Goff, plus they have a stadium already and we don't have to wait for that

19 - Portland or Vancouver - don't know the pluses and minuses of each but either could support a team

20 - Wild card: Charlotte - would put a team in the upper Southeast. Don't put a team in Atlanta - crappy sports town. Braves won for 15 years straight and didn't draw well, relative to success. Falcons and Hawks don't either. Traffic is a nightmare in that city and is my unscientific theory for why people don't go to games as much as they should... Miami - unless they can promise a downtown stadium, no thanks.

And to the DC City Council baseball backers, the Lerner family, etc. Thanks. We'll curse your names as we drive to DC United's new stadium opening in 2050...

Steve Nash, a potential investor in any Vancouver team, has said he hopes MLS will announce something expansion-wise around the All-Star game

The absolute maximum number of teams in MLS should be 18. Hopefully when Philly comes in 2010 as number 16, MLS will finally switch to a single table and have a balanced schedule. If they don't do it in 2010, they'll never do it. Number 17 should be St. Louis, 18 should be Vancouver or Portland. If you had to have a team in the South, move Chivas USA to Atlanta or Miami.

The picture currently on the USSF site shows the US team wearing blue kits. I only saw 5 minutes of the match, but I thought they were wearing white. Did they change at the 50 minute mark?

Say word Harry Nutz?
Vancouver is hella nice, I'm sure Montreal is lovely, especially if Goff gives it such a nice rating.
Portland has a lot of potential though, and tried and true soccer fans. It's sad to see the SuperSonics leave Seattle, but a whole new and exciting era of Pacific Northwest Rivalry could be on the Horizon if MLS expanded there.

With the strugle such as United are facing to build the stadium I think it would be wise for MLS to select places that already has stadiums ready to roll so I would say Yes to Montreal.

I have to agree with Goff. I was in Montreal when France was playing in the '06 WC Semis and I swore I was in Paris. The bars were packed, with people streaming out into the streets to catch glimpses of the game. The support for football was more than palpable, and the European-ness (is that a word?) of the city was very striking. I think it would be a great fit for an MLS franchise.

When you get the chance, go to http://home.att.net/~nasl/nasl.htm and look over team attendances from the NASL days in the "team results" section. Yes, it's like the stock market; past results do not indicate future performance. Still, Montreal, Vancouver and Portland all drew well for at least part of their NASL existences. I believe they are capable MLS sites. Atlanta refuses to support the teams it has; don't waste your time there or in Fla. cities where MLS has already failed. And KC? It was there for Lamar Hunt. He's gone (God rest his soul); the Wizards should be, too.

For what it's worth, Atlanta Falcons owner Arthur Blank is interested in bringing MLS to Atlanta:

http://www.ajc.com/search/content/sports/stories/2008/06/20/mlsatlanta_0620.html

Anyone know how well the Silverbacks do down there?

FIFA desires notwithstanding, I'd like to see a two conference, four division, five teams per division (20 total teams) setup eventually.

A 16-team league would lend itself to a four-division breakdown easily: DCU-PHI-RBNY-NER (MLS's Black and Blue division?); TFC-CLB-CHI-KC; FCD-HOU-COL-RSL; LA-CHV-SJE-SEA.

I love Montreal. It is a great town to visit, brilliant for its food, its culture and attractive cityscape. That being said, you have to look beyond the first level when evaluating its suitability for MLS. Unlike Toronto, which really is a global city, Montreal is not ambitious or grasping for stature. It is happy with what it is. The pace of life is different, the qualities people value are different and their interests are much different. People in Montreal really don't care much about watching competitions against US teams. They don't have the crazy desire to measure up.

Sure the Impact have done well and Stade Suputo gets a big gate. But it is almost on a dedicated minor-league format. Have you seen the prices they charge? Tickets are literally subsidized and cost almost nothing. It is designed specifically to be an affordable family fun-night.

Furthermore, it is a soccer-specific stadium the way Buck Shaw is. Amenities are completely lacking.

As far as some of the other options thrown out ... Portland makes a bit more sense. The team has a big following and the town/metro area is not really that small (esp compared to Columbus, KC or Salt Lake City). It is big enough and doesn't have huge competition (i.e. with Ohio State, NFL football, etc).

I am firmly behind an MLS team in the Southeast. It may not be in Atlanta, but there should be a team somewhere in the region. Perhaps a smallish big city like Birmingham or Charlotte would be a better bet if Atlanta does not come through with a really strong bid. On the other hand, the constant 'Blahtlanta' or 'Atlanta is a crummy sports town' stuff is pretty cliche. MLS has proven that the best 'sports towns' (Boston, New York, etc) don't always translate into the best MLS markets. Atlanta may be a great success.

Finally, options like Rochester are ten years too late. The city doesn't have the right demographics to support a top-tier league team. It doesn't have local ownership prospects with the cash-flow to support operations. Finally, the public is ticked off with the way the half-built Paetec Park project was carried out. They are not going to want to pony up more money that would be necessary to make it remotely conducive to MLS standards.

Charleston is a great USL-1 town. I love watching games at Blackbaud. But there is NO WAY the city will support a bigger team. The stadium would have to be completely rebuilt, which would be a shame because it is perfectly-sized for the town. The infrastructure (traffic/parking) for a much bigger (3x at minimum) stadium would be impossible on an island that is extremely expensive (unless you built the stadium elsewhere). Finally, there isn't really room to expand the stadium footprint a great deal without a lot of expensive engineering.

Someday I hope to see a lot of very strong USL1 teams in the Southeast ...

Atlanta, Charleston, Wilmington (move up), Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham, Orlando (Ajax), Tampa Bay, Miami, Memphis, Puerto Rico (if their new league doesn't self-sustain and absorb the Islanders) who can build their teams up to regular gates around 10,000 - 12,000 or so. It would be great for soccer if you could have 2 or 3 really strong clusters of teams in the second division ... organizations that make enough money to build development programs, scout (heavily and deeply) regional colleges and universities and extend the solid coaching and technical framework beyond what MLS teams are able to at the present time.

Tell those hosers to get their own damn league!

Ron I'm not trying to pile on but lots of places don't have the right climate to keep a natural surface in nice shape.
As noted Costa Rica, and other paradise locals like Hawaii have abundant rain fall, it literally rains almost everyday. I would imagine that would lead to very unpredictable times when the field should even be allowed to be played without shredding it.
I guess in a perfect world every Futbal team would have the dough to have fields to train on with natural and artificial surfaces to keep their Match pitch nice. Ask anyone who's played in places like Hawaii and Seattle what the fields at large look and play like.
Dirt, Dirt and more dirt.
What would really be a perfect world is if Stadiums like the one that the Arizona Cardinals play on were more common. Retractable roof and Pitch!

Florida can and does sustain professional ice hockey, jai alai, and basketball along with the other kind of football. It would never work on the "Space Coast" or in the panhandle, but Orlando or Tampa could support a team with the right amount of PR.

Liverpool_SC:

As the resident DC exile here in Birmingham, we can't support an MLS team. I'd like to see us get USL1/2 in the coming years.

Although our mayor has been clamoring for a domed stadium...Once the SEC gets off his back I'll propose it.

If MLS keeps growing and there becomes more than 20 viable markets between this country and Canada, Promotion and Relegation is going to have to become a reality.

what about the weather up there? the MLS season is longer than the USL one. wouldn't they have a lot of problems with scheduling home games in the beginning and end of the season?

Off topic -- tonight's SuperLiga:

NE Revolution 1-0 Santos Laguna, final

Chivas USA 0-0 Pachuca, early in the 1st

Suarez just clanked a PK off the post for Chivas...argh!

...aaaaand Ante Razov sends one home. Chivas USA 1-0 Pachuca

...and the Gophers score on a set piece. Chivas USA 1-1 Pachuca

great to hear support for Montreal as an MLS team in the US.
Honestly id say that it would be a fantastic plan, it would stir up a MASSIVE derby between TFC and Impact (on the size of Yankees/Red Socks in the US and Leafs/Canadians in Canada). Id also think itd be a smart move to include Portland, Vancouver and St Louis. I hate to say it but Florida has been a bust several times and NYC deserves to take a back seat as theyve failed (relatively speaking) with the Redbulls and there is massive support (financially and within the community) else where. Itd be amazing to see this go through.

Since someone's mentione SuperLiga agaain:
Does anyone know anything soccer friendly establishments in San Luis Obispo California?
I'm not sure about the Availability of Telemundo in the particular digs I'll be staying at, or in that particular region. I know Cal Poly has a soccer team worth mentioning, and it would be fun to catch some SuperLiga, at a local watering hole if the opportunity is there.
I promise to wear one of my United jerseys if you clue me in to the hook up.
Keep in mind the time difference, as I'll be looking for a spot that is officially down with Futbal if possible.
Thanks If ya know!
Vamos United!

Dadryan/Brian:

Thanks for responding to my ranting question about FakeGrass. I agree that pragmatically it enables the game to be played...any soccer is better than no soccer ;)

However, the MLS "can" dictate pitch requirement to FUTURE member clubs (no teams proposed for Hawaii or Costa Rica :)

I see no reason to allow another faux-field into the league. Furthermore, timelines should mandate member field upgrades. NE & NY should have stadiums with grass in place within 3 yrs - Toronto should ask the experts at Lambeau Field how they do it!

If we want MLS to be an internationally respected league then we must lay a better foundation ;)

Chivas USA 1-2 Pachuca now, 42nd minute.

MLS would be foolish not to award both Vancouver and Montreal a team, Vancouver has such a strong organization in place with the academy, and Montreal's support is exponentially better than Toronto's USL team had, and look at what happened once TFC was formed. As far as US expansion cities, I dont know, the strong favorite St. Louis for a good cross-state rival with for the Fire, and maybe Portland or a Florida team. I fear for the future of the USL, however, if all their top cities convert to MLS.

I live in the STL. Do not give us a stadium. Unfortunately they want to build the stadium in Collinsville, ILL. Now let me explain.

That is on the east side in Illinois -past the dump that is east stl. No one lives anywhere around there. Almost all the population is located in West, North or South county. On friday I drove past Clarksonville and from my it took 1hr and 5 minutes to get the the area of the proposed stadium. On top of that STL is currently fixing every highway and the main highway is closed for another 2-3 years.

Lets face in soccer in the country is not a hugely popular sport. So to gain high attendance numbers you need regulars. No one in Missouri is driving over an hour to go to Illinois to view a game live regularly. If the stadium is to be built in MO then talk to me. If not the MLS should put the teams elsewhere.

Do a Google search if you do not believe me and look at the map. You will notice all the infrastructure and suburb names on the MO side and nothing on the ILL. side.

Halftime: Chivas USA 1-2 Pachuca

It sounds like a home game for the Tuzos at HDC. Goats had the early momentum then Pachuca took control.

I'll rephrase: Any soccer friendly bars in San Luis Obispo California, that could be open and showing the DCU game on Tuesday?
I'm guessing that Telemundo is on every TV in most of California,
but I was wrong about easily watching the United game in Cumberland last night.
thanks

So Guzan is gone I take it?

Yeah, El Guzano is gone...another kid playing in goal for CUSA (not the kid from Saprissa though).

I did a Google search for soccer bars in SLO, didn't find anything there but if you can go down the road a bit to Santa Barbara, soccerbars.com has The Press Room.

I'm 100% in favor of moving the Expos to Montreal.

If the vacated stadium is unsuitable for DC United it could be used by the World Jai Alai League.

Final: Chivas USA 1-2 Pachuca

1. Miami does not count as a team in the southeast.

2. Montreal might get 11k per game but everything I've ever heard is that they give away most of those tickets and that the FO hates the supporters group and would be much happier if they disbanded.

3. Canada, blah.

Mmmm...interesting idea, putting a soccer specific stadium in Disney World. You could sell special park-game packages. And single game tickets for locals. You can work out separate entrances and security checkpoints for people who bought park tickets.

Large potential crowds for games that occur on average every other week. Would visitors to the park be interested in taking two hours out of their day to see a soccer match? Would this help or hurt Disney's other attractions? What are the cross-promotional opportunities for MLS and Disney? Could this help spread interest in soccer across the country?

Has a major league team ever connected with a major theme park? (The Mighty Ducks arena isn't real close to Disneyland). It's an interesting idea.

I'd like to see St. Louis first. Montreal would be a decent location for the next round after St. Louis.

As long as the ridiculous NY2 doesn't happen until NY fans show that they will actually show up for a non-spectacle game then it should be a complete non-starter.
Miami should be avoided like the plague but the Atlanta Silverbacks wouldn't be a bad move up. They already have a stadium and good fans.

I like Portland except that there are SOOO many teams on the West Coast and the league ignores the West Coast as it is (save for the Glas of course) which doesn't help marketing.

Disney/ABC/ESPN, enough said! IF they are on board with viewing rights then they should be on board with a team and promoting the league in general.

How many families, don't have children that play soccer in this country should be the question, and furthermore how many families make Disney world a vertual right of passage at least once?

Orlando would be a great market for an MLS Team. Middle Market, No Football or Baseball Teams, and no other sporting options from May until November.

Tons of room for a staduim as well.

Las Vegas must have really fallen off the list if Goffer didn't mention them in his list of possibilities.

What MLS needs is passionate fans, and it sounds as though Montreal could bring it, so I'd be in favor of MLS expanding there.

Re: Portland - Why are they called the "Timbers" (plural)? The "Portland Timber" is much better. Is sounds better and is grammatically correct.

"Timbers"? Yech.

Having lived in Atlanta for the past 12 years, I can confirm that this is "not a great sports town", as someone wrote earlier. The Braves don't sell out, nor do the Falcons or Hawks or Thrashers or Spirit or whatever the hell they're called. The Georgia Force, however, do sell out. I think that's important for a few reasons.

First, the Force's ticket prices aren't outrageous, like all the other sports. MLS, if lured to Atlanta, could compete for the affordable ticket dollar.

Secondly, Arthur Blank understands how to market a team, and to whom to market it. When he took over the Falcons, he immediately cut ticket prices and included MARTA (bus & subway) fare in the ticket packages, just to get butts in seats. It worked.

Third, I think there is an underserved market here, with lots of expats, super strong youth league structure (both Cletus and Josh Wolff are from here) and people who follow the game. The Silverbacks draw pretty well, and have their own complex not 10 minutes from the city center. See it here:

http://www.atlantasilverbacks.com/pro/stadium.php

So, who knows? It couldn't be any worse that KC or New York.

They're called the "Timbers" because each player is a "Timber" and together as a team they're plural.

both Vancouver and Montreal need to be in the league...Vancouver is a much bigger market than Portland is, so they would be first for another cascadian team and Montreal would have ready-made rivalries with TFC and the Revs (NYC, Philly, DC also, but not quite as much).

As far as STL, Atlanta, Miami, Orlando....we've pretty much figured out that any new team needs to be downtown and it's just not gonna happen for some of these places. Vancouver and Montreal both have the infrastructure to be in the urban core...it's a no brainer

the Silverbacks' stadium is still out in the burbs. No matter the promotional scheme, a team that you can WALK to and is near restaurants, bars, shopping, etc. will out-draw a team in the burbs.

RIGHT NOW - as of July 14, 2008, I would say that Vancouver and Montreal offer more competitive offers in terms of support, ownership, stadiums, etc than does St. Louis, Portland, Atlanta, Miami, Phoenix, Cleveland, Detroit, Indianapolis, Cedar Rapids, Boise, Bismark, Anchorage.

Despite the size of our country, I'd really hate to see us expand beyond 20.

15 = Seattle
16 = Philadelphia
17 = Vancouver
18 = Montreal
19 = St. Louis
20 = Southeast

Beyond that - we've got a good group of candidate cities. Cities, that if they could develop the infrastructure and could find owners who could handle the idea of promotion and relegation, sure.

However, MLS needs to not go past 20 teams and if it feels the need to keep growing, then it needs to find a way to introduce teh one idea that I think would be the most incredible and yet impossible ideas here. True capitalism doesn't work in American Sports. Instead - it thrives off the idea of false barriers to entry and illegal loopholes to solidify each league.

But for the love of a Single Table - no more than 20 teams. We still have an issue of fielding 560 solid players, which, by my count is about 336 more players than we have now.

A 2nd candian team would make sense.
I like Portland, St. Louis, and a 2nd team in NY.

Montreal should have an MLS franchise. As should Vancouver, Portland, San Diego, and Tampa Bay and, perhaps, Fort Lauderdale.

I live in Birmingham, AL and to me Atlanta is your best option in the deeep south with Charlotte in second and Birmingham a very distant third. As a native of Birmingham I can tell you that we are a very cynical town towards pro teams that does not appreciate soccer nearly enough to host an MLS team.

But interestingly enough there has been a 2-3 year argument for the city of B'ham to build a new stadium downtown for college footabll bowl games and expos/conferences. If they were able to draw a MLS team to fill the stadium, they could very possibly get enough public support to get it built.

Add Montreal
Add Vancouver
Move Kansas City to St. Louis
Move Red Bulls to NY City, Rebrand them
Rebrand Chivas USA
Add Portland
Florida has failed so give Atlanta a chance

Montreal and New York should be awarded the next two teams.

"Florida can and does sustain professional ice hockey, jai alai, and basketball along with the other kind of football. It would never work on the "Space Coast" or in the panhandle, but Orlando or Tampa could support a team with the right amount of PR"

I'm not sure I agree with this. Florida is pointyball football country first and foremost. The NFL and Arena league teams do well.

I don't think you can really call jai alai popular by any stretch of the imagination. It has a following because of the betting. Just like greyhound racing.

As for ice hockey, the Lightning do OK because they won the Stanley Cup a few years ago. But the Panthers play to a mostly empty arena.

The idea of expanding MLS back to Florida has to be understood in light of the dismal failure of the the Fusion and the lack of success of the Mutiny despite having some pretty good teams. People in Florida don't like to go sit outside in the middle of the summer. And Florida's economy is an even bigger mess than most of the rest of country.

Liverpool_SC said it best. Major League Soccer in Montreal won't work. Especially not if it is put in the same place as L'Impact. Part of the reason Toronto is so successful is they did away with all connections to the Lynx. If you are impressed by their numbers, you obviously didn't try buying a ticket. If you are impressed by their supporters you obviously didn't attend a game, where they've become marginilized by the FO. The Impact would have to market to an almost entirely different demographic who hold European soccer as the holy grail, if they want Toronto's success. Their current base of 11,000 fans would not be a great place to start looking for MLS season ticket holders as 2k-3k are usually government subsidized student tickets. Another 5k-6k probably pay less $100CAN per year for season tickets to attend a family fun night/kiddie carnival. Vancouver, on the other hand, charges MLS prices now for USL1 games and doesn't have subsidized attendance inflation.

As to your other points, Joey Saputo doesn't need any additional funding to feel very comfortable in the MLS owners club. He's a multibillionaire on his own that would do just fine moneywise.

PS----

Rochester and Charleston won't get into MLS because MLS has a TV deal. No one in their right minds running ESPN would agree to letting in the 78th and 98th largest TV Markets into the league.

That doesn't even bother taking into account all the other financial viability questions. Which there would be MANY for both clubs in different categories.

what about:

Phoenix
Las Vegas
San Diego

Give the southwest a chance.

I would like to see an MLS team in Dundalk, Maryland. Maybe it should be called WT United.

I believe that we need to sit on 16 teams awhile (amybe until 2014) before expanding to 18. Moreover, we need to get rid of Superliga before expanding to 18 teams...34 games in addition to Champs League and US Open Cup is already a packed schedule. However, I do believe that Montreal would be a good 17th team. And I do agree that there should not be another team in NY unless FC Energy Drink can consistently pack the stadium, which is something that may never happen. Finally, once we reach 16 teams, I see no further use for divisions/conferences...that is, it will be time for a single table...30 games, each team home and away. This is entirely logical, Don.

on the cross-promotion idea, I believe a WNBA team actually plays in an indian casino (in Connecticut?). or perhaps they used to; I don't really follow the WNBA.

I watch the WNT though, and thought they stunk up the joint last night. anyone else think they were more interested in trying to get Wambach #100 than in winning the game?

If we're going to have this many teams, PLEASE make a single table!!!

"Add Montreal
Add Vancouver
Move Kansas City to St. Louis
Move Red Bulls to NY City, Rebrand them
Rebrand Chivas USA
Add Portland
Florida has failed so give Atlanta a chance"

I like this, but I can't imagine the owners would or should rebrand RB or Chivas, given that they bought the clubs specifically to brand them. I would move Chivas to San Diego if the city would help with a stadium and I'd drop the Portland and Florida ideas in order to stay at 18 teams.

Vegas Vegas Vegas! Move KC or Chivas USA here (although I agree that the wisest thing that Chivas could do is rebrand their team).

Or Chivas to SD, and KC to Vegas. Hell, what do I care? I'd be happy if we even just had a USL side to root for. Just give me something here guys.

Any truth to those rumblings that now that Nike owns the USL (through its purchase of Umbro) it has decided to throw its weight behind it financially? There is talk (perhaps pipe dreams) of some upcoming proposal which would cause Vancouver and Montreal to stay in the USL and forego the MLS...any word on that?

Goff, you are right.

Montreal would be a great addition now that Uncle Joey has flip-flopped 180 degrees (before he had professed no interest in MLS and was very dimissive of the idea--now after seeing TO do it's thing, he really, really wants in).

I remember our family seeing the Montreal Manique play back in the day while we were on vacation up North.

I have "hated" Montreal at USL1/A-League level since 2004. I would have no problem learning to "hate" them at the MLS level. It would be an east adjustment, especially if Saputo and any current Impact players are making the move up.

@Drew-Roc, I agree with concerns about fact that the Montreal fans do not pay market price for tickets. They have been subsidized for so long that I don't know if some people could get past the big bump in ticket prices.

As a Puerto Rico Islanders fan, I will be the first to admit that we pay less than USL-1 standard price because the economics are so different in Puerto Rico. In my opinion, the difference is that the Quebecois have the ca$h to pay and won't. Someplace like Puerto Rico--the money just isn't there to pay that much for a ticket on a regular basis. Let alone more than $20.

I disagree with Drew about the need to brun all of the links to the Impact like TO did with the Lynx. Drew knows that the Hartnells were often ca$h strapped and the Lynx played somehere that I'm not sure was fit for a PDL club (Centennial Park). I'm not trying to disparage the franchise (who have contributed a lot to Canadian soccer) or the fans but It was completely 3rd rate stuff. I looked really, really "minor league".

I put Montreal in the category of the Sounders. No need to gut everything and completely rebrand. There is a great base to build on.

Now, if you can do the Gilete-Montreal Canadiens thing like TO did with the MLSE group then I think that you have the makings of a winner. That is a different deal.

Funny story...my wife and I are at our favorite pub here in ATL for dinner one Thurs and ask to put the MLS game on the little TV in the back. Our server's an Arsenal fan and says the room's empty save for a couple families wrapping it up so let's put it on the big 60 incher at the front. So we're watching Chivas USA, actual size, when 3 generations of a family wander in. Kids and parents seem intrigued. Grandpa takes one look at the set, turns to the room and demands to know who put the on Commie Kickball when there's Braves to be seen.

And that sums up my MLS in Atlanta argument. Contrary to many above reports, Atlanta is a HUGE sports town. But it focuses on College and the Braves (attendance figures aren't a good indicator of the love for the team here). The Silverbacks have a devoted but very small following. There is no interest in soccer outside of big international tourneys like WC and Euro. Most hardcore soccer fans I find follow the big euro clubs and know nothing about MLS other than it exists.

I really, really hate to say this, but there is no market in the southeast for an MLS team. Soccer is just too far down the pecking order, which I'd put as of NCAA Football, NFL, MLB, NCAA Basketball, NBA, NHL, Arena Football, NCAA baseball, and then maybe soccer.

I think MLS should look at the top drawing USL teams for expansion. A USL team that averages above 10K in attendance makes the most sense to me.

I really, really hate to say this, but there is no market in the southeast for an MLS team.
----------------

Grandpa is not going to be around forever. The demographics in Atlanta (where I was born) have changed so much (and continue to change) that the notion a soccer team could never make it is ... short-sighted.

The biggest problem an MLS team would have in Atlanta is getting all of the youth soccer kids off the fields in Gwinett County, Dekalb County, Stone Mountain, Conyers, etc in time to go to/watch the game.

I can't believe NY is even in the question. The NYRB can't conjure up support. Ask the Chivas EEUU front office how easy it is to compete for fans in the same town.

Posted by: Glaucon | July 13, 2008 6:59 PM-
---------------------------------------------
First off, the teams wouldn't be competing for fans in the same town. Notwithstanding MJ's regular plaints here, NYRB is a New Jersey team. And, even there, they have trouble. Nobody like to drive far these days, and wherever you are in Jersey, you have to drive far -- not too many soccer fans in Newark, I fear. Every decision surrounding that franchise has been a bad, shortsighted one.

MLS needs to be in NYC, and subway-accessible. Since the Harrison project is on, the move should be to put a team in Flushing, Queens. I don't see how that could fail, as that would be on the LIRR, too.

Honestly, I don't know enough about Montreal or Vancouver to choose between them as a second Canadian side. The problem that Canadian teams had in the past in competing with American teams was the $$ --- the relative weakness of the Canadian dollar. Thanks to the systematic destruction of this country wreaked by 8 years of Bush, that's on longer a concern. Portland's a cool city, but maybe it should wait until a move to 20 teams.

I watch the WNT though, and thought they stunk up the joint last night. anyone else think they were more interested in trying to get Wambach #100 than in winning the game?

Posted by: troy | July 14, 2008 11:20 AM
==========================================

I don't know about that. There weren't many obvious attempts to force the ball in to Wambach or anything like that. They simply seemed to be playing down to the level of a Brazil side that was not their best XI.

instant rivalry:

Montrealers HATE Torontonians & vice versa

Thanks to the systematic destruction of this country wreaked by 8 years of Bush, that's on longer a concern.

Posted by: Fisch Fry | July 14, 2008 1:07 PM
-------------------------------------------
Fry,

Always nice to see a perfectly good apolictical sports thread a politcial one.

I really enjoy your posts but come on Bro, that was a just a bit gratuitous.

Your point about the change in the value of the two dollars was an excellent one.

Liverpool, that argument is the same for any market.

I live in Atlanta, so of course I want a team here :)

Silverbacks Park isn't that far in the 'burbs -- it is on the Perimeter (Atlanta's Beltway) but closer in. Anyway, the site couldn't support an MLS team or stadium, so it is a moot point.

Here is my take, having lived in California (Bay Area), Missouri (South of STL), Georgia (South of ATL), and North Carolina (South of Raleigh):

1. Atlanta won't work. By and large, people in the south don't care about soccer at this point in time. Period. They are American football fans and NASCAR fans. They support the Falcons and the Bucs, and they are diehards for the Gators, Seminoles, Bulldogs, and Auburn Tigers. You can't go anywhere without seeing an American football or NASCAR hat, jersey or t-shirt. I've never seen a single article of soccer apparel anywhere in the south outside of a soccer field. Atlanta also is a traffic nightmare worse in my opinion than Los Angeles. I can't think of anyplace they could put the stadium that wouldn't take people 45 minutes-1hr of travel time, from virtually anywhere.

2. I think if soccer is going to work anywhere in the South, its going to be in Raleigh-Durham. Cary (a convenient Raleigh suburb) is about a 15 minute drive from downtown Raleigh, and has plenty of potential stadium sites. The region has a soccer pedigree born from the nationally prominent college teams at UNC Chapel Hill, Wake Forest, and Duke. Lots of children and adults alike play soccer in North Carolina. While NC is still a NASCAR-American Football state, those sports don't have the same stranglehold on sporting culture that you see in Georgia.

3. I feel that what you see in Kansas City is about what you'll get from St. Louis. You will have pockets of rabid fan support, but perhaps if the stadium is an hour away from STL, as some have suggested, people won't show up. Still, I think that STL has some good college programs, and might have potential. I understand that there are differences between STL and KC, but I think there are parallels as well with the culture and demographics of the regions. I would suggest holding off on STL until the KC stadium issue is completely reconciled. Although the KC stadium deal looks as good as sealed, if it falls through, perhaps an intrastate move to the west would suit the league better than two teams in the state.

Finally, my recommendations:
17: Montreal
18: Vancouver (contingent on stadium deal)
19: NYC2 (Jersey is NOT New York City)
20: Portland

Additionally, if Chivas USA doesn't improve and/or get their own stadium, I would recommend moving them to Portland, San Diego, or Raleigh-Durham (where ever they can get the best stadium deal). I think that there is a market for a second southern California team like Chivas, but the branding experiment has produced mixed results. Las Vegas and/or Phoenix will not work without an indoor SSS, which I don't see as feasible.

carrie you have no shame...
do you like soccer?