Gothamite

North American Pro Soccer 2019

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, dfwabel said:

You actually think he's gonna step foot on US soil anytime soon?

 

No. But in three, four years? Sure. It'll happen eventually, and it'll be Miami, LA or New York, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, DG_Now said:

 

No. But in three, four years? Sure. It'll happen eventually, and it'll be Miami, LA or New York, right?

More likely Clark County, NV jail as his first stop. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DG_Now said:

I want that Miami team since their logo is so sweet. And the idea of Ronaldo playing there is quite exciting.

 

On the other hand, Seattle already introduced pink to the league, so really what's the point?

 

Miami should just pivot into being a clothing brand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Red Wolf said:

 

Miami should just pivot into being a clothing brand.

 

I think branding and merchandising is a huge draw for a lot of would-be franchise owners. For Inter Miami, this really might be enough. Or they can just run an esports franchise instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, DG_Now said:

I want that Miami team since their logo is so sweet. And the idea of Ronaldo playing there is quite exciting.

 

On the other hand, Seattle already introduced pink to the league, so really what's the point?

 

Seattle’s pink is temporary.  Miami has a chance to make it a permanent part of the league. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, missed a chance to put a cap on this tangent.

On 4/19/2019 at 12:53 PM, Maroon said:

Except that the stadium plan put together in St. Louis actually was a perfectly viable plan. A $1.1 billion stadium was on the table that had the backing in place and secured, and it was rejected. In fact, the Commissioner was so supportive that the reason he rejected the St. Louis plan was because it asked for $300 mil from the NFL, which the Commissioner said couldn't happen, and then later that exact amount of money was offered to Oakland and San Diego (source: http://www.espn.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/19151732/why-st-louis-win-lawsuit-stan-kroenke).

 

I'm afraid your summary is not quote factually accurate.

 

It wasn't about coming up with a "viable" plan.  All St. Louis had to do was live up to the terms of the contract they negotiated and signed.  Which they absolutely failed to do, as determined by an independent arbiter.  That freed up the Rams to move, despite Goodell's best efforts to advocate for St. Louis and force Kroenke to stay.

 

As for the $300M, that's also not what happened.  As part of working behind-the-scenes with St. Louis, the Commissioner told them that a certain amount of money was available to teams but only after going through a specified process including an affirmative vote of owners.  The St. Louis side then decided that they themselves could side-step that process and commit the NFL to allocate those funds.  Goodell told them privately it wasn't happening, but they put it in their public proposal, perhaps out of some ludicrous notion that they could shame the NFL into going along.

 

The sense of entitlement in St. Louis was staggering, and that's why they lost the Rams.  They didn't bother to meet their own obligations, and then expected everyone else to bend rules in their favor.  Not even the personal intervention of the Commissioner on their behalf could overcome that arrogance. 

 

I really hope that your MLS group realizes, unlike the NFL group before them, that MLS may want to be in St. Louis but doesn't need to be in St. Louis and they certainly aren't going to bend any rules for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, DG_Now said:

 

I think branding and merchandising is a huge draw for a lot of would-be franchise owners. For Inter Miami, this really might be enough. Or they can just run an esports franchise instead.

 

An esports team that wears sweet Unnamed Due to Legal Reasons Miami Soccer Team caps instead of NASCAR-esque jerseys would be my favorite esports team that I never watch.

 

I bag on St. Louis a lot on account of it being a real bummer of a city, but they've been very unlucky when it comes to the NFL. The Cardinals of that era (and up until around the time they finally got a stadium in Arizona) were like the Clippers under Sterling. They made money, but the owners didn't care about trying to win and ran a punchline franchise. And the Rams always felt like they were on loan before being called up to the bigger city.

 

I do find the constant "woe is us" from St. Louis to be absurd. Like when they talked about the ratings in LA for the last Super Bowl being lower than when St. Louis played the Pats even though it meant more people in LA were watching than are in the St. Louis market entirely. Also, you can't complain about a city stealing a team from you when you stole that team from that very same city in the first place.

 

EDIT: I will say that most of my anti-St. Louis rantings are a gimmick that's slightly influenced by my Cubs fandom and my time living in Northeast Arkansas where every damn person is a Baseball Cardinals fan. I honestly haven't been to that city in well over a decade (current Busch was under construction) and that was a period of time where I found cities of that size intimidating, while I now prefer larger cities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was a nice way to respond after our first loss of the season. I wish LAFC played Seattle again later in the season, instead of next week (why MLS?), but I'm thoroughly enjoying this start to the season.

 

Onto.. Seattle again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FC Cincinnati got fortunate with semi-good weather in their first game against Portland, which was a magical experience, but their last 3 home games have been either cold or cold and rainy. I'm still waiting for a nice night to get to Nippert Stadium. You could say I'm a fairweather fan. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Rockstar Matt said:

That was a nice way to respond after our first loss of the season. I wish LAFC played Seattle again later in the season, instead of next week (why MLS?), but I'm thoroughly enjoying this start to the season.

 

Onto.. Seattle again.

 

LAFC really walloped Seattle yesterday and I expect more of the same Wednesday, though a lot of that depends on what team Seattle fields. Sounders definitely played a lesser squad due to injury, but I don't expect Ruidiaz back on Wednesday.

 

In any event, I don't think it would have made any difference yesterday. LAFC looks amazing and Vela is the best player in the league right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Rockstar Matt said:

That was a nice way to respond after our first loss of the season. I wish LAFC played Seattle again later in the season, instead of next week (why MLS?), but I'm thoroughly enjoying this start to the season.

 

Onto.. Seattle again.

The same goes for FC Cincinnati and Columbus. The rivalry will have two games in three weeks. I guess they picked a good month for the Hell Is Real Series

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎4‎/‎20‎/‎2019 at 3:13 PM, Gothamite said:

Sorry, missed a chance to put a cap on this tangent.

 

I'm afraid your summary is not quote factually accurate.

 

It wasn't about coming up with a "viable" plan.  All St. Louis had to do was live up to the terms of the contract they negotiated and signed.  Which they absolutely failed to do, as determined by an independent arbiter.  That freed up the Rams to move, despite Goodell's best efforts to advocate for St. Louis and force Kroenke to stay.

 

As for the $300M, that's also not what happened.  As part of working behind-the-scenes with St. Louis, the Commissioner told them that a certain amount of money was available to teams but only after going through a specified process including an affirmative vote of owners.  The St. Louis side then decided that they themselves could side-step that process and commit the NFL to allocate those funds.  Goodell told them privately it wasn't happening, but they put it in their public proposal, perhaps out of some ludicrous notion that they could shame the NFL into going along.

 

The sense of entitlement in St. Louis was staggering, and that's why they lost the Rams.  They didn't bother to meet their own obligations, and then expected everyone else to bend rules in their favor.  Not even the personal intervention of the Commissioner on their behalf could overcome that arrogance. 

 

I really hope that your MLS group realizes, unlike the NFL group before them, that MLS may want to be in St. Louis but doesn't need to be in St. Louis and they certainly aren't going to bend any rules for them.

 

You are correct that the city decided not to sink $700 million into the Edward Jones Dome renovations that were proposed by the Rams. You are, therefore, correct that the lease went to a year-by-year basis, so once the lease ran out of time the Rams could leave regarding their contract with the city.

 

However, the NFL's relocation policies contained in their constitution and bylaws also exist. I unfortunately cannot find a PDF copy of those bylaws online (I'm sure they're out there somewhere), so the best I can do for a reference is newspaper reports on what they say. Here's one from the Star Tribune: http://www.startribune.com/nfl-s-relocation-policy-and-procedures/148181325/

Contained within these policies is a requirement that there be negotiations in "good faith" with the community that the team currently exists within. C.3 states that taken into consideration is "the adequacy of the stadium in which the club played its home games in the previous season; the willingness of the stadium authority or the community to remedy any deficiencies in or to replace such facility, including whether there are legislative or referenda proposals pending to address these issues; and the characteristics of the stadium in the proposed new community;"  

 

C.6 and C.7 state that factors that must be considered, respectively, are: "the degree to which the club has engaged in good faith negotiations (and enlisted the League office to assist in such negotiations) with appropriate persons concerning terms and conditions under which the club would remain in its current home territory and afforded that community a reasonable amount of time to address pertinent proposals," and "The degree to which the owners or managers of the club have contributed to circumstances which might demonstrate the need for such relocation..."

SO, actually, yes, the viability of the plan proposed by the city is relevant and in question, as was the degree of good faith to which Kroenke negotiated. I'd argue, and the city is arguing in its lawsuit, that Kroenke never intended to stay in St. Louis.

EDIT: I will, add, though, that I entirely agree with this NYT article. As heartbreaking as it was for St. Louis and its Rams fans, and as much as I place the fiasco's blame on the shoulders of Kroenke, it could have been disastrous for St. Louis to keep the Rams. Frankly, the city didn't have the money to renovate the Dome and it wasn't going to have the money to build the riverfront stadium. The MLS bid is better for the city because it's going to be private dollars to build the stadium. Sure, there will be tax assistance, but there won't be actual public debt incurred on the stadium. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/16/sports/football/st-louis-should-be-glad-it-lost-the-rams.html

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ultra long term, soccer is probably a more viable option for a city anyway with the way football, just as a sport, is trending. 

 

St. Louis is better off without the Rams. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bucfan56 said:

Ultra long term, soccer is probably a more viable option for a city anyway with the way football, just as a sport, is trending. 

 

St. Louis is better off without the Rams. 

 

Agreed. Plus, St. Louis loves soccer. LOVES soccer. And with Sporting KC actually in Kansas, a lot of the state outside of the KC metro area just hasn't embraced them in spite their championship. A St. Louis MLS team has every opportunity to attract a fanbase in other Missouri cities like Columbia and Springfield. That's the inverse of the NFL, where basically everybody not in St. Louis or St. Charles was already a diehard Chiefs fan before the Rams even arrived.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like it if we heard less about 30 teams and more about shoring up the ship as is, given the sorry state of a few teams. But I guess every real league needs its stragglers, for relocation threats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stephen Ross' Relevant Sports sues US Soccer over refusal to sanction events.

 

Quote

According to the filing, Relevent was attempting to stage a match between Ecuadorian sides Barcelona SC and Guayaquil City FC, to be held May 5 at Miami's Hard Rock Stadium. As the national governing body for soccer, the USSF is charged with sanctioning all applications for international soccer matches held in the U.S.

 

The suit alleges that the USSF's decision to deny permission for the match violated its stated purpose "to promote, govern, coordinate, and administer the growth and development of soccer in all its recognized forms in the United States for all persons of all ages and abilities, including national teams and international games and tournaments" and that the USSF is required to sanction a match unless "the Federation decides by clear and convincing evidence that staging the match would be detrimental to the sport of soccer."

 

The suit goes on to contend the reason for the USSF's decision is that it "is economically conflicted and is abusing its authority, in order to protect Major League Soccer ["MLS"], a for-profit entity with which USSF has extremely close financial and personal ties."

1

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, sohiosportsfreak said:

Question about next year. Does Chicago jump to the West with Nashville and ?Miami? coming in?

Miami I believe is still a big IF, i dont think they have a temporary venue lined up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any chance Miami uses Hard Rock on a temporary basis or is that a no go?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.