Jump to content

Tampa Bay Rays: Escape from the Trop


So_Fla
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 6/1/2021 at 7:22 PM, waltere said:

I may be wrong, but isn't the case with MLS that their preferred option is an SSS, but they'll allow otherwise as long as there's ownership crossover between the team and the stadium, because it's about not having their teams be tenants of somebody else. Hence how Arthur Blank's Atlanta FC are allowed to share Megatron's butthole with the Falcons, NYCFC sharing with the Yankees, and I assume the Sounders must therefore share owners with the Seahawks.


You are absolutely correct.  
 

when the Sounders came into the league, they shared ownership with the Seahawks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Gothamite said:


You are absolutely correct.  
 

when the Sounders came into the league, they shared ownership with the Seahawks. 

 

Didn't hurt that the Sounders can nearly fill their NFL venue on a weekly basis. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, bosrs1 said:

Didn't hurt that the Sounders can nearly fill their NFL venue on a weekly basis. 

 

They don't, actually.  They don't usually open the upper levels, unless it's a rivalry game or playoff.  Not that I'm knocking them at all for that; it's still very impressive. 

 

But nobody knew that at the time they were admitted into the league.  That's not why they were allowed to play in an NFL stadium.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

They don't, actually.  They don't usually open the upper levels, unless it's a rivalry game or playoff.  Not that I'm knocking them at all for that; it's still very impressive. 

 

But nobody knew that at the time they were admitted into the league.  That's not why they were allowed to play in an NFL stadium.

 

 

No but I think it gave MLS the confidence to allow similar set ups going forward in ATL, NYCFC, Nashville, and even the move back to Chicago proper. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bosrs1 said:

No but I think it gave MLS the confidence to allow similar set ups going forward in ATL, NYCFC, Nashville, and even the move back to Chicago proper. 

 

It really didn't.   I can say that with absolute certainty for NYCFC. 

 

Nashville was admitted after they got their own stadium plan passed.  Atlanta got in under the rule that existed before Seattle was admitted.  If Seattle was that kind of game-changer, we'd see other expansion teams in NFL stadiums unrelated to their ownership groups.  Which we haven't.

 

And Chicago?   That's more desperation than anything.  But it's also not an expansion club.

Link to comment
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.