My pick is the Mules -- love it! Let's make it that!pattimagee wrote:Just a few historical/State themed ideas:
Inter-STL (Like that one)
STL Gunnars (Former team name)
STL Mules (Mule is the state animal)
STL Flyers (Spirit of St. Louis)
STL Masoners (STL Brick)
STL Sting (Bee is the state insect - popular stl name)
STL Crinoid (State Fossil - hehe)
STL Mine Dogs (Dogtown/Purina/Dogwood Tree)
STL Brewmakers (Beertown)
STL Lagermen
STL Berliners
STL Rivermen (Definitely a good one)
STL Ragtimers (Blues/Jazz)
STL Mound Builders (how STL got started)
STL Gaels (Irish heritage)
STL Natives (Tribute to our Native American Heritage)
Who is "the group that was leading the effort for (St Louis) MLS"? Is that the NFL task force?
And hopefully the Mayor and Governor are paying attention, as they have been called out for not being in touch yet!
And hopefully the Mayor and Governor are paying attention, as they have been called out for not being in touch yet!
- 9,539
Don't think its the Task Force.jakektu wrote:Who is "the group that was leading the effort for (St Louis) MLS"? Is that the NFL task force?
And hopefully the Mayor and Governor are paying attention, as they have been called out for not being in touch yet!
Don't be so sure.dbInSouthCity wrote:Don't think its the Task Force.jakektu wrote:Who is "the group that was leading the effort for (St Louis) MLS"? Is that the NFL task force?
And hopefully the Mayor and Governor are paying attention, as they have been called out for not being in touch yet!
- 2,053
I think this was the most telling thing I've seen this past week regarding the MLS.
"In addition to his save-the-Rams effort, Peacock was quietly networking St. Louis to identify and secure investors/owners for an MLS team here. It would be improper for me to break a confidence and reveal specific names, but Peacock was confident of having the financially robust owners to back the project."
(http://www.101sports.com/2016/01/15/the ... d-the-mls/)
"In addition to his save-the-Rams effort, Peacock was quietly networking St. Louis to identify and secure investors/owners for an MLS team here. It would be improper for me to break a confidence and reveal specific names, but Peacock was confident of having the financially robust owners to back the project."
(http://www.101sports.com/2016/01/15/the ... d-the-mls/)
- 9,539
^ not according to what the MLS wants...urban setting
the Rams park entire site is 15 acres...only about 6 is open fields.....
![]()
the Rams park entire site is 15 acres...only about 6 is open fields.....
Rams Park could be gifted to an MLS ownership group to be used as a training ground and future soccer academy.
So if you give them ground in the city plus Rams park. That's a pretty nice package for an ownership group.
So if you give them ground in the city plus Rams park. That's a pretty nice package for an ownership group.
- 8,904
Is there enough room south of the Scottrade Center? (South of Clark b/w 14th and 18th). People are familiar with that location and it would allow shared parking with the Scottrade Center and support the new US and restaurants on Clark over to Busch III + great access to transit.
- 9,539
^ dont think so...maybe 7 acres plus not sure how it will look once the Transit Center expands.
I like these 2 sites.
have it right next to the street.
![]()
have it right next to the street.
- 1,868
We should have the team play in the street, the way it was meant to be played. Seating would be in overhead balconies.dbInSouthCity wrote:^ not according to what the MLS wants...urban setting
I doubt i fall the pieces could come together but love the thought of extending Clark through Union Station to a new 21st/22nd street Blvd, a refurbished metrolink tunnel with station moved into the tunnel and build a MLS stadium between Union Station and a new blvd. Maybe one day you get NBA into Scottrade and you now have four pro sports teams on Clark Street.
.
My second choice is north riverfront / on northside of Laclede's Landing.
Both have great access and transit, will built upon existing built environment and the added foot traffic to existing businesses As noted in previous post. Both areas would be part of additional projects such as the 21/22nd street interchange rebuild and or GRG north riverfront trail.
In other words, why try to build in another neighborhood when your trying to sustain Grand Center/Wash Ave-Convention Center-Laclede's Landing/Union Station-Scottrade-BPV corridor.
.
My second choice is north riverfront / on northside of Laclede's Landing.
Both have great access and transit, will built upon existing built environment and the added foot traffic to existing businesses As noted in previous post. Both areas would be part of additional projects such as the 21/22nd street interchange rebuild and or GRG north riverfront trail.
In other words, why try to build in another neighborhood when your trying to sustain Grand Center/Wash Ave-Convention Center-Laclede's Landing/Union Station-Scottrade-BPV corridor.
I honestly think there are dozens of excellent sites for an MLS stadium in the city. Some which have been mentioned, others that haven't. I don't think we can really go wrong.
I do favor the North Riverfront or near Union Station ideas myself. The ones at/near Pevely intrigue me as well.
I do favor the North Riverfront or near Union Station ideas myself. The ones at/near Pevely intrigue me as well.
- 20
I'd really like to see the North Riverfront developed, in almost any functional way. I also really think a sports stadium there would be really cool. But there are many places that it seems logical to put a soccer stadium.
I'm not a soccer fan really but I really hope this happens. I'll learn to be a soccer fan pretty quick if it does.
I'm not a soccer fan really but I really hope this happens. I'll learn to be a soccer fan pretty quick if it does.
- 8,155
^ me, too... don't know if I'll ever be a hooligan but if I get to set off a smoke bomb I just might be in! Put it decently close to metrolink and some bars capable of soccer friendliness and you've got a winning combo. Put it wherever would make for the most cost-efficient location w/o destroying existing urban fabric.
Pevely sites just don't make as much sense to me. Yes, their is availability and on top of SLU south campus. Yes, near the Grand metrolink station. But, your pretty much away from Midtown & still a fair walk to the Grove and is RW really going to be excited about setting off a smoke bomb next to a hospital?
.
Heck, for that matter start talking to CORTEX/Lawrence group now and put it at the Federal Mogul site!!! RW can set off his smoke bomb on the newly refurbished trestle on his way back to the Boyle Metrolink station and your not to far off from Vande/just as close to the Grove
.
Heck, for that matter start talking to CORTEX/Lawrence group now and put it at the Federal Mogul site!!! RW can set off his smoke bomb on the newly refurbished trestle on his way back to the Boyle Metrolink station and your not to far off from Vande/just as close to the Grove
I'm surprising myself at how excited I'm getting about this possibility.
Twin Cities.com - Here's the skinny on St. Paul's MLS stadium
http://www.twincities.com/localnews/ci_ ... ls-stadiumMinnesota United FC has an agreement in principle with the St. Paul mayor's office to build a $120 million Major League Soccer stadium on 10 acres of vacant land at Snelling and University avenues, near the Green Line. It would seat about 19,000 fans.
The team would build the facility using private money, and it would remain tax-exempt.
A Major League Soccer stadium will be built near Snelling and University avenues in St. Paul. The stadium would be publicly owned and sit on land leased by the city from the Metropolitan Council.
- 8,904
$120 million isn't all that much. KC sporting stadium was $200 mill last decade.
Are most MLS stadiums privately funded?
Would an MLS team with more home games have a similar economic economic impact vs a NFL team?
An MLS team may have more games but NFL teams have many more players to tax and most of them likely make significantly more money than MLS players.
Off the top of my head I'd estimate 75 or so players and coaches for an NFL team and maybe 1/3rd of that in an MLS team....
Are most MLS stadiums privately funded?
Would an MLS team with more home games have a similar economic economic impact vs a NFL team?
An MLS team may have more games but NFL teams have many more players to tax and most of them likely make significantly more money than MLS players.
Off the top of my head I'd estimate 75 or so players and coaches for an NFL team and maybe 1/3rd of that in an MLS team....
There is no question that an NFL team is going to bring in far more in any sort of income tax than an NFL team. (However, from the City's standpoint, if the headquarters was in city limits, it might not be so far off what the Rams were paying in earnings tax for 8 games a year.)
But as far as daily economic impact, I do wonder if a sold out 18-20,000 stadium for 17 games a year could come fairly close to the impact a bad Rams team drawing (realistically—not just the inflated attendance numbers) 45-50,000 a game for 8 games.
(And no, it's not fair for me to project bad attendance for the NFL and great attendance for the MLS. This is just me considering a scenario.)
I'm betting the NFL still brings in a bit more in tax revenue there. Especially at this point in the two league's lives. But I think there will be a time when that starts to even out and the MLS becomes the better of the two to have.
Additionally, I think we're going to start seeing a lot more exhibition soccer games and/or USMNT and USWNT games played here once we get our own stadium.
So the short answer is that I doubt the soccer stadium is going to bring in more tax revenue than an NFL stadium, but I think it can be close. And I think if we're smart about this, we can make up a lot of that impact just because an MLS stadium is so much cheaper.
But as far as daily economic impact, I do wonder if a sold out 18-20,000 stadium for 17 games a year could come fairly close to the impact a bad Rams team drawing (realistically—not just the inflated attendance numbers) 45-50,000 a game for 8 games.
(And no, it's not fair for me to project bad attendance for the NFL and great attendance for the MLS. This is just me considering a scenario.)
I'm betting the NFL still brings in a bit more in tax revenue there. Especially at this point in the two league's lives. But I think there will be a time when that starts to even out and the MLS becomes the better of the two to have.
Additionally, I think we're going to start seeing a lot more exhibition soccer games and/or USMNT and USWNT games played here once we get our own stadium.
So the short answer is that I doubt the soccer stadium is going to bring in more tax revenue than an NFL stadium, but I think it can be close. And I think if we're smart about this, we can make up a lot of that impact just because an MLS stadium is so much cheaper.
- 43
What about razing St. Louis market place for an MLS stadium? Access to 44 and great neighborhoods nearby
- 8,904
Isn't STL marketplace pretty full with Kmart, Club Fitness, Charter, Switch, and Dancewear Solutions? Let's find a development that isn't thriving.siu850956106 wrote:What about razing St. Louis market place for an MLS stadium? Access to 44 and great neighborhoods nearby
The talk about this since last week is a growing crescendo, Garber has been asked about it several times, local sports media outlets that only mention soccer once a month have filled about years quota.
While part of this talk is being generated as a reaction (think firing on the first girl who smiled at you after a bad breakup) There was momentum before and a whole lot of sponsorship dollars just freed up.
Play for the expansion round most likely be after 2020
Viable ownership group is the elephant in the room, and always has been, but there is some talk out there.
Peacock has been in contact with Garber for a while, there may be an assembled group led by him (Like Stillman did with the Blues) that could make a run
While no names have been leaked there are some candidates
Local -
Jim Kavanaugh - Good first year with FC, great public relations guy, knows the game
Bill DeWitt III - Yankees partnered with NYCFC and the DeWitts like the game - also would be a good way to expand their brand,
Out of town -
Shad Khan - Deep pockets, loves the game, owns Fulham in the UK, lives close by, familiar with the city, seems to be a committed owner with his patience with the Jags who are not in a good situation
The league also has a history of pairing money people who want a piece of ownership with cities that they have little relation to.
A lot of leg work has already been accomplished on the N riverfront site, MLS stadium would require less buy out and demo - I would imagine that it would be the path of least resistance and the preferred site.
20,000 expandable to 30 seating would be ideal 200 to 250 million would buy one of the nicest in the league, most likely some public money but a fraction of what was offered the Rams
Many of the stadiums also act as concert venues - which would be nice to add a couple of dates per year
A creative sort would even probably be able to figure out how to integrate the Cotten Belt building into the stadium
Of course we are not alone... MLS popularity increases every year since the contraction turmoil and small crowds of the early 2000's after the 3 year honeymoon the league enjoyed after its launch. Every WC year the fan base seems to get an extra jump.
Sacramento - is pretty far ahead of everyone - good fan base, stadium plans in place, good ownership group, uncrowded market
San Antonio - money is there, but looks like they are also pursuing the Raiders - Maybe more then the city can handle
Charlotte - Has talked much about MLS, but struggles in the USL
Raleigh - See Charlotte only in the NASL
Indy - good support, good owners but 3 pro teams in Indy might be asking too much
Louisville - Nice support for the USL team, not sure if the will is there to get a stadium built, currently problems between them and the minor league baseball stadium where they play
San Diego - Not talked about a whole lot but if the Chargers go, they become an interesting candidate - though it would also be the 5th team in Cal if Sac goes - maybe more then the league wants to have there
Personally - I thought that we would be an OK candidate with a new stadium (MLS still prefers SSS over football stadiums) If we had renovated the dome there is no way we would be on the radar, we might be the second favorite after Sac now
While part of this talk is being generated as a reaction (think firing on the first girl who smiled at you after a bad breakup) There was momentum before and a whole lot of sponsorship dollars just freed up.
Play for the expansion round most likely be after 2020
Viable ownership group is the elephant in the room, and always has been, but there is some talk out there.
Peacock has been in contact with Garber for a while, there may be an assembled group led by him (Like Stillman did with the Blues) that could make a run
While no names have been leaked there are some candidates
Local -
Jim Kavanaugh - Good first year with FC, great public relations guy, knows the game
Bill DeWitt III - Yankees partnered with NYCFC and the DeWitts like the game - also would be a good way to expand their brand,
Out of town -
Shad Khan - Deep pockets, loves the game, owns Fulham in the UK, lives close by, familiar with the city, seems to be a committed owner with his patience with the Jags who are not in a good situation
The league also has a history of pairing money people who want a piece of ownership with cities that they have little relation to.
A lot of leg work has already been accomplished on the N riverfront site, MLS stadium would require less buy out and demo - I would imagine that it would be the path of least resistance and the preferred site.
20,000 expandable to 30 seating would be ideal 200 to 250 million would buy one of the nicest in the league, most likely some public money but a fraction of what was offered the Rams
Many of the stadiums also act as concert venues - which would be nice to add a couple of dates per year
A creative sort would even probably be able to figure out how to integrate the Cotten Belt building into the stadium
Of course we are not alone... MLS popularity increases every year since the contraction turmoil and small crowds of the early 2000's after the 3 year honeymoon the league enjoyed after its launch. Every WC year the fan base seems to get an extra jump.
Sacramento - is pretty far ahead of everyone - good fan base, stadium plans in place, good ownership group, uncrowded market
San Antonio - money is there, but looks like they are also pursuing the Raiders - Maybe more then the city can handle
Charlotte - Has talked much about MLS, but struggles in the USL
Raleigh - See Charlotte only in the NASL
Indy - good support, good owners but 3 pro teams in Indy might be asking too much
Louisville - Nice support for the USL team, not sure if the will is there to get a stadium built, currently problems between them and the minor league baseball stadium where they play
San Diego - Not talked about a whole lot but if the Chargers go, they become an interesting candidate - though it would also be the 5th team in Cal if Sac goes - maybe more then the league wants to have there
Personally - I thought that we would be an OK candidate with a new stadium (MLS still prefers SSS over football stadiums) If we had renovated the dome there is no way we would be on the radar, we might be the second favorite after Sac now