is it time for MLS to buy out teams with poor attendance?

Discussion in 'MLS: Expansion' started by OWN(yewu)ED, Feb 1, 2013.

  1. OWN(yewu)ED

    OWN(yewu)ED Member+

    Joined:
    May 26, 2006
    Location:
    chico, CA
    Im looking particularly at Dallas, New England, and Chivas USA. There are cities out there that are licking their chops for a team as it stands; Orlando looks very aggressive, Minnesota has a stadium deal in place, Baltimore seems ready and willing, San Antonio im sure would be more than willing to take up an MLS team, Sacramento could soon be without the kings. These teams have had the chance to re-invent themselves multiple times and/or get a stadium deal in place and are just languishing. its probably time we get some of these ineffective organizations out of the picture, and while buying out isnt ideal, it can sure as heck get a city with a more ideal climate to take a team in the chance and at the same time get rid of the eyesore empty stadia we see sometimes. thoughts?


  2. Yoshou

    Yoshou Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Location:
    Seattle
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    Country:
    United States
  3. jond

    jond Member+

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2010
    Location:
    Sky Diving
    Country:
    United States
    You don't think with Chivas and NE the product and ownership might be the problem?
  4. ElJefe

    ElJefe Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 1999
    Location:
    The 720, y'all
    Club:
    FC Dallas
    Country:
    United States
    I feel dumber for having looked at this thread.
    Boda United, AndyMead, aetraxx7 and 6 others repped this.


  5. Chowda

    Chowda Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Location:
    Rhode Island
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    He's convinced me. Give me my dollar back.
  6. 4door

    4door Member+

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2006
    Location:
    Chicago
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Country:
    United States

    2 things....

    1. Wizards to Rochester!!!!!

    2. The market will take care of it. If San Antonio wants an MLS team and it can put together a stadium deal and an investor group, then they are free to make an offer to any MLS team willing to sell. If indeed the new market will outperform the current MLS team then MLS will certainly approve the sale.
    Sparks27, aetraxx7 and redinthemorning repped this.
  7. soccersubjectively

    soccersubjectively Let us soccer

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2012
    Location:
    Little Rock
    Country:
    United States
    Piz-za!
    Piz-za!
    Piz-za!
  8. Beantowner

    Beantowner Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2005
    Location:
    HK / Shanghai / NY
    Club:
    --other--
    Country:
    United States
    In metro Boston, it's those 2 facts plus wicked whacked politics, zoning, MBTA subway access, property costs, and, not entirely redundant, the owner protecting his stadium investment.
  9. kenntomasch

    kenntomasch Member+

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 1999
    Location:
    El desierto
    Club:
    FC Tampa Bay Rowdies
    Country:
    United States
    #postsfrom2002
  10. Khkevin

    Khkevin Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2012
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Country:
    United States
    Every team is already controlled by MLS....
  11. kenntomasch

    kenntomasch Member+

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 1999
    Location:
    El desierto
    Club:
    FC Tampa Bay Rowdies
    Country:
    United States
    Here we go again.....
  12. Revolt

    Revolt Member+

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Location:
    Davis, CA
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Country:
    United States

    Indeed. If I had a dollar for every "Move Kansas City" thread, I would be a rich man.
  13. Len

    Len Member+

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 1999
    Location:
    Satellite of Love
    The one thing we should have learned from Kansas City is that it's all about ownership. Location of the stadium, or the city itself - while contributing factors - do not determine success or failure.
    HeMan and Antique repped this.
  14. kenntomasch

    kenntomasch Member+

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 1999
    Location:
    El desierto
    Club:
    FC Tampa Bay Rowdies
    Country:
    United States
    No, I meant with the "every team is already controlled by MLS" nonsense. I feared we were going to go down the 51% rabbit hole again.

    But your take is valid, too. Everybody has a permanent solution to temporary problems.
  15. Khkevin

    Khkevin Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2012
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Country:
    United States

    lol I meant that the league is kinda centralized like the NFL.
  16. AmeriSnob

    AmeriSnob Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2010
    Location:
    Queens
    Club:
    PAOK Saloniki
    Country:
    United States
    Is it time for BigSoccer to buy out posters with poor thread premises?
    AndyMead, aetraxx7, Beantowner and 5 others repped this.
  17. kombayn

    kombayn Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2009
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    Club:
    Real Madrid
    Seriously, the only team that has the potential to relocate will be Chivas USA, the Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel piece with Chivas USA, not only hurt the public image of MLS but the team itself which has a lease that is set to expire soon. I personally think Chivas USA will be sold to Beckham's Miami interests and relocated.

    As for the New England Revolution, I think they are still sitting on the plan in Somerville unless the City of Boston presents an opportunity. I could even see Connecticut looking into building a stadium for Robert Kraft, he can afford the waiting game with his team otherwise he would've left the venture years ago.
  18. HeMan

    HeMan Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2006
    Location:
    Earth
    The league needs Dallas and the revolution....


    The ONLY team that needs to move and should even be considered is Chivas and that's just because they are an abomination to the league with their outright attempts to be the worst franchise in American sports history. This league is just going to have to expand to 30-32 teams because there are so many good bids.
  19. Summerheat

    Summerheat Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2006
    Location:
    Fitzwilliam, NH
    Club:
    Newcastle United FC
    Country:
    --other--
    I wonder too if it is a conflict of interest with Kraft and his son owning the Revs AND the NE Patriots?
    I think the Revs would be in a much better framework if they were controlled by owner-operators who were mad about round football.
    Khkevin repped this.
  20. OkieZebra

    OkieZebra Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2013
    Club:
    Norwich City FC
    What on earth does conflict of interest mean in your world?
    AndyMead, Revolusean, aetraxx7 and 2 others repped this.
  21. Eleven Bravo

    Eleven Bravo Member+

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2004
    Location:
    Georgia
    Club:
    Atlanta Silverbacks
    Country:
    United States
    I have faith in the Revolution... They have a long and strong history in MLS, I don't want to see them go anywhere... except maybe to Boston proper.

    Now, something needs to be done with Chivas USA. That is just an abomination and an embarrassment. Personally, I think they should rebrand as California Empire FC/SC. And be considered the blue-collar team of LA but out in Riverside/San Bernardino while LA Galaxy is the celebrity white-collar team.
  22. BlueIntent

    BlueIntent Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2013
    Club:
    Manchester City FC
    I honestly think that MLS fans are way to concerned about attendances, I think "matchday income" and sponsorship revenue must be added to the picture before we can make a verdict on a team.
    As for NE I´m sure that a stadium in Boston proper would have better attendances, I´m also convinced that a Chivas with a new name (because the name itself alienates way to many people) and stadium somewhere in L.A might prosper.
  23. canammj

    canammj Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Location:
    CHINO, CA
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Country:
    United States
    No way on Dallas, they have a very nice SSS complex. Their situation is marketing and now since its Hunts only team after selling the other 2, I can see an emphasis coming from within.

    MLS is not leaving the Boston/NE market. The SSS would cure a lot of the problems even if the owner is still somewhat questionable about his goals with the team.

    Best bet is Chivas and I agree with the other post. Relocation of Chivas would then actually give the MLS a chance to go into 5 new markets- rather than the 4 that gets us up to the 24. So now you can take MIA, ORL,ATL to cover the south east and then 2 more markets in other areas to give an east/west balance or other gaps on the map.

    Chivas leaving LA may hurt Stubb Hub center from having fewer events and helping on the rent, but it may slightly increase LAG attendance for fans who simply enjoy going to see soccer.

    By having most teams in their own SSS, you will not see those teams contracted or relocated. They simply need to continue marketing efforts and put a good product on the field.
  24. SoccerPrime

    SoccerPrime Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Country:
    United States
    Its not the rent for the StubHub thats the negative about Chivas moving, its the fact that MLS will no longer have 2 clubs in the LA mega-region. 2 teams in the LA TV market is most likely more useful/profitable than a relocated team in say New Orleans, Nashville and probably Sacramento, minus the franchise fee.
    SYoshonis and redinthemorning repped this.
  25. BlueIntent

    BlueIntent Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2013
    Club:
    Manchester City FC
    I can just imagine Don Garber selling another LA franchise for $100m if Chivas relocate.. :whistling:
    tallguy repped this.

Share This Page