Share
597
Senior MemberSenior Member
597

PostSep 02, 2008#251

stlwriterman wrote:
Arch_Genesis wrote: I don't see Soccer being a Niche sport in this country for more than 10-15 years.


People have been making this argument for 30 years. For whatever reason, it hasn't happened.



And why, exactly, can't St. Louis support an MLB team, an NFL team, an NHL team and an MLS team? There's just not enough oxygen in this city for both the Blues and Cooper's someday soccer team? And so the Blues should go? That just doesn't make any sense.




its a scenario where the MLS league itself grew to the level of the NHL.



Could st.louis support the blues the cardinals the rams and the detroit red wings?



that is all I'm saying. why is that so hard to understand? Of course St. louis can support an MLS team now but I'm asking in the future.
1,768
Never Logs OffNever Logs Off
1,768

PostSep 02, 2008#252

Arch_Genesis wrote:^^



if (1) the MLS is to emerge out of a niche market, with (2) st. louis plateauing at its current population, one of our 3 major sport franchises would have to leave. It just happens to be my preference (3) that it be the blues. Don't get your panties in a bunch boys. Its not moronic, its not out of hatred of hockey,and I do hate hockey; (4) it would just be a necessary evil. This is mostly theoretical (5) by the way so again I stress cool your jets.



And yes I don't think the NHL is very popular its markets are very concentrated in the east and its not very successful at reaching other demographics. It has never been in its 100+ year history of the sport. Soccer is wildly more popular across the world (6) and I think overtime it will be more popular and profitable. I'm not calling for the blues and the NHL to laydown at this moment but if push came to shove, it would just be my choice to keep the MLS/WPS franchises. (7) The blues have a 40 year history of losing (8), what would you be hanging on to?



The Hawks won an nba championship here and were shipped out 10 years later. 40 years and no Stanley cup? I beam about the cardinals and their accomplishments I have no Civic Pride whatsoever for the blues. (9)



I'm not trying to pit Soccer vs Hockey btw. (10)



As far as the stanley cup being the most widely watched in the past 10 years? It was the detroit redwings, I hope that wasn't a shocker for you. (11)





1) I love it when people begin their argument with IF.



2) and then back it up WITH another theoretical.



3) Of course it would, you hate hockey and like soccer. But the market determines that, not you.



4)excellent oxymoronic contradiction.



5) You mean ALL theoretical, right?



6) This is not the rest of the world. Its St. Louis.



7) Again, because of where your personal interest and will to spend dispensable income lies, not in any real regional economic reasoning.



8) While Championships are the end all, the Blues have not been losing for 40 years. They have won consistently, including the longest consecutive playoff appearance by a major sports team in history. Thats not losing, its just not winning it all. And its still damn entertaining...well, if you like a that sort of...oh wait, nevermind.



9)Again, you counter my points about the regional benefit of a long term sports franchise with nothing but your own dislikes and preferences.



10) Its all you've been doing this entire time! Over and over again.



11)Not a shock at all. My point was made as a rebuttal to your insinuation that the NHL as a league was on shaky ground and that their TV deal wasn't doing them good. But you can make it about that. Why wouldn't you? Don't make a salient point, just try to jab with a red wing shot! Good for you, and your quick wit!



To recap, IF the MLS becomes a big 4 sport, AND we plateau in population, St. louis will have to lose a sports team and because YOU have NO interest in the hockey, NO pride in the team because you do not like the sport, and ARE a fan of soccer, so YOU would like to see the Blues be the franchise to depart. That is all fine and good, and you are entitled to that view. But quit parading it around as inevitable fact while backhanding hockey and the Blues at every opportunity you get. Its petty.



No go get your shine box.
1,364
Veteran MemberVeteran Member
1,364

PostSep 02, 2008#253

About St. Louis not being able to support the Cardinals, Blues, and Rams:



Rams had 98.4% attendance in 2007 for a 3-13 team.

The Blues were awful toward the end of last year. Attendance for the Blues last year was 92%

And the Cardinals have been in the top 5 in attendance since 2005. 2001 to 2004 they were in the top 10. This year's attendance is 90.2%.



Just looking at the numbers, it seems like St. Louis supports its 3 teams pretty well. What's soccer gonna hurt?



I really don't see why we can't handle 4 teams. I mean if it were basketball, which would require more attendance, I could see the problem.



But if the soccer stadium holds 20,000 and you'd have like, what, 15-20 home games?



I don't really see why the Blues have to go. Or why anybody has to go.



And has the metro reached its peak population? The city is just starting to grow again. The rest of the metro seems to be holding steady. I don't see anything hindering us from further growth.
597
Senior MemberSenior Member
597

PostSep 02, 2008#254

TheWayOfTheArch wrote:To recap, IF the MLS becomes a big 4 sport, AND we plateau in population, St. louis will have to lose a sports team and because YOU have NO interest in the hockey, NO pride in the team because you do not like the sport, and ARE a fan of soccer, so YOU would like to see the Blues be the franchise to depart. That is all fine and good, and you are entitled to that view. But quit parading it around as inevitable fact while backhanding hockey and the Blues at every opportunity you get. Its petty.


^^ I'm not beginning any argument with if I'm beginning a scenario.



I can't go around parading something as an inevitable fact if i use the word if!!!!! Now can I!?!?!?! To me the word if suggests a scenario a case a possibility. How about you? I happen to be a computer scientist and I've taken many a course in logic. Where's your logic??



All I've said from the beginning is that it would be my preference if ever said scenario arose that the blues leave town. My opinion my preference doesn't need to be grounded in anything economical whatsoever for me to state it. It can be grounded in ignorance for all I care.



You my dear boy however want to have an argument and I've noticed while you were highlighting me you so conveniently took me out of context.



Fact. Soccer is more popular world wide and it is my belief that overtime it will become more popular in the United States. I never said It was more popular in the United States. Again this is a belief, not a fact, not inevitable, never said otherwise.



(10) I'm really really not trying to pit soccer vs hockey, it was the necessary evil I made reference to. If i were wielding power and I absolutely had to cut a franchise in favor of the MLS/WPS it would be Hockey. I'm not looking to run your precious blues out of town.

The problem is you attacked my preference and baited me into chucking negatives at the NHL because I said it was a mess financially. It recently came out of a lockout. If that's not the case I will gladly stand corrected. Nevertheless grounded in ignorance or not if it came down to it, I'd prefer seeing the blues leave. Its pretty ignorant to think a league starts up to remain a niche league.



Oh I also noticed while you were tearing me down you didn't address:


Arch_Genesis wrote:And yes I don't think the NHL is very popular its markets are very concentrated in the east and its not very successful at reaching other demographics. It has never been in its 100+ year history of the sport.


I'm not asking you to but it was one of my points in arguing against the NHL and in favor of the MLS. You, however just want to believe I'm petty.



Oh and championships matter. They matter to me they matter to the players competing. I'm truly sorry I made a off hand comment about how the blues haven't won sh*t. Your civic pride is worth its weight, just the same as my civic cynicism and it should be treated with the same respect. I'm truly sorry. Oh and Billy Batts wasn't too well off after he uttered that line, just something to think about.
8,923
Life MemberLife Member
8,923

PostSep 02, 2008#255

Annoying
1,768
Never Logs OffNever Logs Off
1,768

PostSep 02, 2008#256

Oh I also noticed while you were tearing me down you didn't address:


Arch_Genesis wrote:And yes I don't think the NHL is very popular its markets are very concentrated in the east and its not very successful at reaching other demographics. It has never been in its 100+ year history of the sport.


See: Colorado, Dallas, Tampa Bay, Carolina, Anaheim, LA and the Bay Area. Thats if you don't count the Minnesota Wild, and western Canadian teams. Another one shot down!
arch genesis wrote:
It all goes back to St. Louis not being able to support 4 teams.



The MLS/WPS will be bigger than hockey, but thats not something I'm hoping for.


That is what started this rigamorale. And if you concede your ignorance, why make any statement about the NHL, or Blues, at all.



I'm glad you're excited about the MLS expansion. So am I. Leave it at that.



In 15 years you can PM me and gloat, IF you are right.



IF the bait and switch from stating economic infeasibility to support 4 teams to the NHL franchise obviously being the one to leave since the MLS will break into the mainstream to claiming theoreticals and personal preference can be construed as your logic then by all means, program yourself some more loopholes. Its an interesting act to watch when you jump through them.
597
Senior MemberSenior Member
597

PostSep 12, 2008#257

I told TheWayofTheArch no hard feelings so I think we've both just agreed to disagree and let the argument lay dormant for the time being. :wink:



Anyway I just wanted to drop this link by, on the unveiling of the St. Louis Team Name and Logo.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJLO6YBPaUI



Its a unisex team name so if the reports of the MLS and WPS teams being named the same it'll definitely work. :wink:
362
Full MemberFull Member
362

PostSep 14, 2008#258

So, just "Saint Louis."



Interesting. I suppose since the company is called United, that "United Women" or something will be used to refer to the team for the time being.



I am also sure that before long the team will get an unofficial name.



Glad the women's team is moving forward. I think that will be a nice addition for the City and a good pairing for the men's team. Now, they just need to get the MLS men's team awarded and Cooper is going to have a real nice setup.



Hopefully we will hear about the men's team soon.
597
Senior MemberSenior Member
597

PostSep 16, 2008#259

we just got hometown girl Lori Chalupny, Hope Solo and Tina Ellerston.



International draft is next week.
1,768
Never Logs OffNever Logs Off
1,768

PostSep 16, 2008#260

I actually just read that this morning. Gotta like Hope Solo as our keeper.
597
Senior MemberSenior Member
597

PostSep 18, 2008#261

Little Egyptian wrote:So, just "Saint Louis."



Interesting. I suppose since the company is called United, that "United Women" or something will be used to refer to the team for the time being.



I am also sure that before long the team will get an unofficial name.



Glad the women's team is moving forward. I think that will be a nice addition for the City and a good pairing for the men's team. Now, they just need to get the MLS men's team awarded and Cooper is going to have a real nice setup.



Hopefully we will hear about the men's team soon.

For the first year, at least, the WPS team will be known simply as "St.

Louis," with no nickname. Cooper is continuing to work toward getting an MLS

team, and if that happens, the clubs could share a name. He said they would

revisit the subject after the first season. In the meantime, he said,

"everyone will know where we play." (Though the team will play its first

season in Edwardsville.)


http://www.womensprosoccer.com/newsitem ... am=stlouis



Yup. still waiting on an mls team. I wish he'd start building the stadium now though.
12K
Life MemberLife Member
12K

PostSep 19, 2008#262

So both the men's and the women's teams will share the same name. I know there's a "shirts and skins" joke in there somewhere...
362
Full MemberFull Member
362

PostSep 20, 2008#263

Not sure I love the same name for both teams. It really will show the unity of the organization ... but I am a little afraid that with the same name the women's team will be overshadowed by the men's team. If it is just "United" or something who is going to buy the women's United jersey when they could get the men's jersey and theoretically support both squads.



I just don't want to see the women's team too overshadowed here. Clearly they are going to be overshadowed to some degree and that is natural, but I do really think the women's team could do well in Saint Louis and I think women's soccer is an especially good sport for young women and I think there should be a distinct identity that they could get behind. This is especially true since relative to the talent in the rest of the world, our women's team is going to be waaayyy better than our men's team.
1,585
Totally AddictedTotally Addicted
1,585

PostSep 20, 2008#264

I thought the women's soccer league went bankrupt a few years ago?
60
New MemberNew Member
60

PostSep 21, 2008#265

Shimmy wrote:I thought the women's soccer league went bankrupt a few years ago?


That was the WUSA. The WPS is basically a reset with the exception that STL has a team this time.
1,585
Totally AddictedTotally Addicted
1,585

PostSep 21, 2008#266

Ah, gotcha.
2,821
Life MemberLife Member
2,821

PostOct 16, 2008#267

ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH

10/16/2008



Jeff Cooper and his St. Louis United group don't have a Major League Soccer team yet, but they learned on Wednesday who they will be in competition with — off the field — to get one of the league's next two expansion franchises.



Groups in seven cities, including St. Louis, submitted expansion applications by the league's deadline and will now go through a lengthy review process before two teams will be added to the league. The other cities pursuing teams are Atlanta, Miami, Montreal, Ottawa, Portland and Vancouver. A decision will be made no later than the end of March 2009 for a team to start play in 2011.



The other ownership groups include an NFL owner (Arthur Blank of the Falcons), the owners of two NHL teams (the Canadiens and Senators) and the owners of two prominent clubs in European soccer, Barcelona and Liverpool. In the face of that, Cooper likes his chances.
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/sports ... enDocument
1,585
Totally AddictedTotally Addicted
1,585

PostOct 16, 2008#268

jlblues wrote:
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH

10/16/2008





The other ownership groups include an NFL owner (Arthur Blank of the Falcons), the owners of two NHL teams (the Canadiens and Senators) and the owners of two prominent clubs in European soccer, Barcelona and Liverpool. In the face of that, Cooper likes his chances.




I don't.
597
Senior MemberSenior Member
597

PostOct 16, 2008#269

Shimmy wrote:
jlblues wrote:
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH

10/16/2008





The other ownership groups include an NFL owner (Arthur Blank of the Falcons), the owners of two NHL teams (the Canadiens and Senators) and the owners of two prominent clubs in European soccer, Barcelona and Liverpool. In the face of that, Cooper likes his chances.




I don't.


Don't forget Steve Nash submitted plans to the MLS as well. The son of Paulson, the senate economic genius, also submitted plans. Certainly tough competition but Cooper has been trying longer than anyone who has submitted a proposal.





http://web.mlsnet.com/index.jsp



Mark Abbot in reviewing the bids said:



"a very ambitious project for a SSS in Collinsville, IL"



Lalas asked "What holes have been filled?"



Abbot: "They have made considerable progress on the financing of that stadium, so we're very interested in continuing discussions in that market."



Abbot is the President of MLS. I think Cooper is going to get this done. I'm curious who his investors are though.
362
Full MemberFull Member
362

PostOct 17, 2008#270

Just because there are bigger names in the other bids, I wouldn't count out Saint Louis. Saint Louis' proposal is the best developed, period. Other cities (Atlanta) are "searching for a location for a potential stadium" or (Miami) "playing in a college stadium with artificial turf" or (Portland) "we'll renovate an old stadium" or (Vancouver) "we'll play in a monster stadium built for the Olympics that will be 5/6 empty every game" ... well, you get the picture.



From reading a little on this all, Saint Louis looks in the best position if the investors have deep enough pockets for MLS' liking. Cooper has it all in place and even though he has more competition now, his plan is the most feasible to accomplish two of MLS' main goals: (1) start play in 2010 or 2011 and (2) built a revenue-controlled, soccer specific stadium.



My guess: Saint Louis + Montreal (I think they (and I) would prefer Vancouver here, but Montreal is the second most ready to go bid and has deep pockets).
1,585
Totally AddictedTotally Addicted
1,585

PostOct 17, 2008#271

Yeah, but weren't we much farther ahead of Philly (it was Philly, right?) when they were awarded the team?
362
Full MemberFull Member
362

PostOct 18, 2008#272

Shimmy wrote:Yeah, but weren't we much farther ahead of Philly (it was Philly, right?) when they were awarded the team?




Well, that true.



Who knows? We'll just have to wait and see what happens.

PostNov 18, 2008#273

Pujols is on board.



Awesome. Not much else to say really, but awesome. This should give our bid the star power it was lacking previously. With Bernie confirming a major European investor is on board, it is hard to see MLS saying "no" at this point.
4,553
Life MemberLife Member
4,553

PostNov 19, 2008#274

I wish they'd put this thing right up next to the Washington Park Metrolink. There is a good deal of developable land just to the north of it, and it is right along I-64. I think that would be a real boost for attendance and ridership. One of the Bizjournal articles says that the development includes a planned light-rail station, but who knows if that would ever happen.



If the stadium is right near Fairmont Park I suppose there could be some synergy there, although I never associated horse race gambling with soccer moms.



In any event, whether there are soccer hooligans or compulsive gamblers frequenting the area, they will be drinking at these events and a metro station will be much easier and safer than a sea of parking.



Not sure what my point is, I just want to be able to use metrolink to go to games and/or races. After the Prop. M vote, I guess the only option for expansion is the Ill. side.
1,585
Totally AddictedTotally Addicted
1,585

PostNov 23, 2008#275

^The stadium isn't really too close to Fairmount Park. Maybe in terms of distance, but there's a highway and cornfields between them so the roads go around.
Read more posts (41 remaining)
Share