A couple days ago I wrote a post about how impressed I was with how Toronto supported its MLS team and opined about how the MLS needs to recognize that it should not try to drag new fans into soccer, but rather just focus on the ones that will come to it willingly (scroll down one post to read it). The fact that the bulk of people who already like soccer are either immigrants, typically from Latin America, or upper middle class white people with a taste for the eccentric got me thinking about what cities would best support an MLS team.
But before we begin with a list of where MLS teams should be, it’s necessary to point out where MLS teams currently are and are planned.
Where Are They Now?
In the East division you have: Chicago Fire, Columbus Crew, D.C. United, Kansas City Wizards, New York Red Bulls, New England Revolution, Toronto FC, and planned for 2010 they’ll have a team in Philadelphia.
In the West division you have: Club Deportivo Chivas USA (in L.A.), Colorado Rapids, FC Dallas, Houston Dynamo, L.A. Galaxy, Real Salt Lake, San Jose Earthquakes, and planned for 2009 they’ll have the Seattle Sound.
The first thing to say is I didn’t know they were planning to expand. This makes me think that the same people running the NHL business department are running the MLS business side. In other words, ARE YOU INSANE! DON’T EXPAND IF YOU AREN’T MAKING A LOT OF MONEY IN THE FIRST PLACE! Seriously, I majored in philosophy and have more business sense than these people. I wrote a whole post about how the NHL needs to contract because they over-expanded. The MLS is, just like the NHL, going to expand to the point that they dilute the talent pool so the quality of soccer gets even worse. Just think about the MLS taking cues from the NHL makes me crazy so let’s move on.
The second thing to say is that Seattle was going to top my list of where MLS team should be. So the MLS gets credit for that thought even though they are only getting to that city a decade after starting the league and doing so by expanding an already weak talent pool.
Third, they want to put a team in Philadelphia, the city with the worst, most fickle sports fans in the universe who don’t care about soccer. Are you kidding me?! Clearly, this post is needed urgently so let’s make our own list.
Ok, I’ll put forward my list with brief explanations and then you do the same. Remember, MLS can only support about 14 teams so no more than that, which means if you want to include Seattle you have to ditch a city where a team is currently located.
Where They Should Be
WEST
Seattle – A no brainer choice. They love soccer, they are white liberals, and they just lost their NBA team. That spells sellout soccer games.
Portland – Seattle needs a rival team and Portland is basically the same city (white liberals and soccer lovers) except instead of losing an NBA team Portland doesn’t have an NFL team.
San Francisco – The city also known as Mecca for white liberals who like eccentric things like soccer. And guess what, it seems like half the good U.S. soccer players come from the state of California and particularly its Northern region.
L.A. (rich people team) – This is a difficult one because they currently have two teams, one for Mexicans and one for celebrities. You’d think that one city shouldn’t have two teams because soccer wants to have a good geographic spread, but in this case I like two teams in L.A. so that one can be for rich people and the other for poor people, which creates an amazing dynamic and rivalry.
L.A. (poor people team) – This will be the Mexican one. However, you have to change the name from Chivas. I hate when soccer teams just use a name from some other club. Anyway now is a good time to mention that the MLS would have profit sharing so that this L.A. team could have a stadium in East L.A. and charge people $10 for a ticket and the celebrity L.A. team could use that big ass stadium they just build and charge the white folks higher ticket prices.
Salt Lake City or Denver – This is a toss up because neither one is a great sport’s city for soccer but there is enough of a base to merit a team in one of these cities. Salt Lake is probably the best choice because people in Colorado or too busy leading active outdoorsy lives to watch soccer. But Salt Lake would have to get a new name because stealing “Real” from the Spanish teams is ridiculous.
Dallas or Houston – Texas is big, but not in terms of soccer fans. Have one team for all Texas. Between these two cities just pick the one with a greater number of Hispanics because in terms of white liberal support it’s pretty much a wash.
(alternative: you could use Vancouver instead of Portland but I was afraid if I used Vancouver instead of Salt Lake/Denver then all the teams save one are on the Pacific coast)
EAST
Boston – The New England Revolution are already there and they have good ownership and solid fan support although they need their own stadium and have to compete with baseball season for interest among Bostonians.
Columbus – Ohio has great fans and there is nothing in Columbus except the worst named sports team in the history of the world (the NHL’s Columbus Wild). They are renowned for great soccer fans and soccer is big in this area so this is a no brainer. Plus, they got in a fight with West Ham fans this week!
D.C. – Lots of people from all over the world live in D.C. and they are joined by rich white people. D.C. is a good soccer town, plus no one cares about the Nationals. And once again, you’re in Virginia, which is a hot bed of soccer.
Cary – North Carolina needs a team because it, like Virginia is a soccer hot bed. You can’t put a team in Charlotte because it’s a crap sports town and no one cares about soccer. So put a team in Cary, where there is no pro team except the NHL’s Hurricanes (go Canes!). Cary, NC would be diehard for an MLS team. God only knows why the MLS hasn’t picked up on this.
Toronto – Read the post below this one. Great stadium, great fans, and that’s all you need.
Miami – Before you scoff at this let me say that I don’t really mean Miami, I mean Little Havana. That’s right, soak in the genius. When they tear down the Orange Bowl, put up a little stadium and be the East coast version of the Hispanic catering L.A. team. That is a license to print money my friend. The fans would hardcore and the atmosphere would be unbelievable in their stadium.
New York – I didn’t want to include NYC, but you can’t have a sports league without a NY team. So here’s my solution: put the stadium in Brooklyn. Cater to the immigrants and let the rich New Yorkers view soccer games as an opportunity to ‘slum it’ and prove their hardcore New York character (they love that shit). Also, they too have to change their name. Probably not a good idea to name your team after an energy drink.
Conclusion
So there you have it, a 14 team league that hits all the soccer hotspots. The best part about this is that you’d have a range of stadium and fan experiences. Imagine the raucous crowds in Little Havana or East LA, imagine the shiny new stadiums in San Francisco, Seattle and Portland, and imagine the excitement of watching the San Francisco team going to play in Little Havana! Anyway, I think all those cities could support an MLS team perfectly and would create great drama and draw on the social dynamics that soccer is great at exposing for better and worse. But let me know what you think and what your cities would be.
I think the Philadelphia group has been pushing from day one to get a team and just never did, so there must be a huge following in a really specific group of people there.
I really like the Miami idea, you’re spot on with the Little Havana connection. It also would be a place where people want to play, unlike, say Columbus or Salt Lake City. Cary is also right on, though they’d have to be called Carolina probably. They’ve got that amazing SAS Soccer Center there where they host the NCAA women’s final four and the ACC tournament (guys and girls, I think) as well as North Carolina high school state tournaments, already. So clearly they’d be willing to invest time/money. UNC and Duke both have stellar programs and there are a lot of rich white people there, haha.
Great great post though. Oh, one thing though, Columbus’ NHL team is the Blue Jackets. The Wild is the replacement for the North Stars in Minneapolis.
First of all, thanks for the hockey correction. In my defense though, fuck the Blue Jackets and the Wild. Hockey shouldn’t have expanded and now that they did, I can’t even keep track of the damn teams. I hate Gary Betman.
But back to soccer (the sport that could replace hockey if they run it right). Basically, I think the ideal situation is a city that has the an audience that is receptive to soccer and doesn’t have a ton of other pro teams. So Cary and Columbus are absolutely perfect since all they have is a hockey team. Then, Seattle is good bc it just lost its NBA team. So Philly makes no sense to me because they already have pro teams in every sport and their fans are HORRIFIC. So maybe there is a big soccer following there that I don’t know about, but I honestly don’t see that working out.
You’re right about Cary. UNC and Duke, the National teams practices there and plays internationals there, and NC and Virginia are huge soccer hotspots. Really the only hard thing would be coming up with a name (Carolina Blues? As a shout out to Duke and UNC?). But the fact that you and I are point all this out and there is not a team in Cary explains why the MLS is floundering.
Did I miss any cities in my list? Or would you take out SLC?
I would take out SLC for sure. I can’t say I actually know anything about the soccer culture there, but I just can’t imagine it’s a favorite place of players.
I think you’re right that the Revolution (and in terms of my post today, that should just be their name, if they want to include it. that might be kind of cool if they dropped the NE and didn’t pick up Boston) should move into Boston. Gillette is way out of town (actually it’s closer to Providence than Boston).
I like the Blues idea for a Carolina team, what if their two colors were the royal and the baby blues. That would be interesting. But there’s got to be a team in that area of North Carolina. They had one in the WUSA women’s league for cripes’ sake.
And I’d probably choose Houston over Dallas. Though I’d probably leave Chicago, I think that’s a good city to have a team in.
Yeah, I feel bad about leaving Chicago out. They actually do support the Fire pretty well. But if you take out SLC and put in Chicago all the teams are on the West Coast and Chicago would have to play in the western division. These are concerns.
And I didn’t konw that about Gillette. Yeah, all stadiums for soccer should be low key and fan friendly and located in cool areas of the town.
And I feel like Houston should be out Dallas as well.
“Smart people like sports.” Except for you apparently. Without going into detail, MLS has a pretty strong leash on expansion. They studied the NASL fallout to make sure it didn’t happen this time around. That is why their business model is set up the way it is, in fact many supporters are calling for the reins to be loosened to allow more expansion and allowing larger contracts to bring in more world class talent. I think MLS is right on course. Of course everyone will have their opinions but ultimately none of us are sitting in on the MLS Board meetings or got the financial or inside information that they do. With that being said, I found your hypothetical and ignorant article from your perspective interesting to an extent. Oh, and do a little research on how Philadelphia got a club and you’d understand why they did. Start here http://www.mlsphilly2010.com/
The faceless nature of the internet really brings out the best in people. Seriously, it’s a blog of random opinion, no need to get insulting.
And Trey, if you’re going with the “Stuff White People Like” methodology why not choose to locate the Texas team in Austin? That’s a veritable hippie enclave in the heart of Mexican immigration.
Ok KCO, despite the fact you think I’m an idiot, I went and took your advice to read the site you linked too. It is very well put together and very interesting. However, on that very site it points out that it has been 3 decades since Philly has had a pro soccer team. Still, they have a very rich history of soccer.
My point would be that while that rich history is great, it is after all, history. New York has a great soccer history with the Cosmos. They had Pele, Beckenbaur, and Jomo Sono (South African). And that team was embraced by the city and treated like rock stars.
Now, however, the New York team is an afterthought. So much so that their freaking nickname is an energy drink. They could walk down 5th avenue with shirts that said ‘i play for New York’s MLS team’ and no one would know who they are.
So while Philly has a great history, that doesn’t mean that the present will be sucessful. I would imagine that the demographics have changed in the 30 years. So maybe the soccer fans that were there aren’t anymore.
And my overall point isn’t that there are no soccer fans in teh cities I left out. But you need more than just a hardcore small group to make a pro sports team viable. I don’t see Philly pulling this off. Sure year one will be fun but then I think the excitement will wear off and you’ll end up with a nearly empty stadium.
Lastly, while we don’t have the financial details we do have common sense and an argument about what social demographics would be most support a soccer team. So while nothing we say should be taken as gospel truths, I would say that these opinions are based on rational thought and therefore if you care to disagree, which we encourage, you should seek to do so with a logical argument.
Interesting business model. Targeting a very specific audience with what seems like a niche product (for Americans) does lead itself into the don’t-expand thinking.
So if MLS were to go this route, how would you handle expansion?
Does the league still own a majority share in all the teams? If it does, that probably keeps the league relatively stabilized even if it over-expands. If teams control their own fates, then I think over-expansion will erode the ability of the league to stay together. Sort of like what happened with the NASL. The Cosmos had all this money and signed Pele, Beckenbauer, Cryuff (?) and sold all their seats and made tons of money, but the rest of the teams didn’t at all and that’s why the league folded.
Maybe the Galaxy and say, Toronto, do really really well but the new Philly team falls flat and so does KC, and those teams can’t afford to bring in better players, and eventually they’ll either fold or contract back to a manageable size anyway.
[...] then Philadelphia) can the league really afford to spread out any more? For more on this, check out The Stormy Present and the comments [...]
[...] Vegas, Portland, Vancouver, Montreal and Ottawa. Again, check out Trey’s breakdown over at The Stormy Present and comment [...]
..]”As a player, these are the games you want to be in.” forward Kenny Deuchar said. “It’s going to be enormous, the two games here. Hopefully that backing of the fans can help carry us through.”..]
[...] better each season. There are still major points of improvement that could be made (see Trey’s column last year, and one of mine that drew quite a few angry responses) but on the whole, the league is [...]