urbanSTL

The Central Scrutinizer wrote:...I suspect it will be quite popular the first year, but then as people tire of the drive, the bloom will be off the rose. What sucks is that when the team fails in 7-8 years, the suits at MLS central will think "Hmmm...and I thought St. Louis was supposed to be a soccer town. I guess not".



I think for comparison, one can look at the St Charles Family Arena and what a disaster that turned out to be.

CS, is the Family Arena a disaster? Not trying to be contrary -- I always thought it was a lame idea, so I don't know what expectations were for the arena and how well it's living up to them.

The games will be largely on the weekends. Traffic won't be an issue. It's ten minutes from downtown. The suburban location is necesssary to include the development of youth soccer fields, which MLS is very fond of (see http://pizzahutpark.com/TheSoccerPark/t ... fault.aspx) and which will help ensure the long-term viability of the project.



Given the preference for youth soccer fields and the large land area that is therefore required, this location is a win for the City. It is a ten-minute drive from downtown and is within five minutes from three of the reigon's marjor artieries (64, 70, and 255). Some folks remain concerned about traffic. But don't forget -- this isn't the NFL we're talking about . Stadium capacity will be 25,000 tops, and many of those who attend will be driven by their parents. That sort of attendance on a weekend afternoon is not going to generate onerous traffic.



On top of all this, building the stadium in Collinsville helps -- perhaps marginally, perhaps materially in the long run -- solidify downtown as the reigion's core, something that's important to downtown's ultimate success, and in turn the success of the reigion. Building this stadium in St. Charles or even, say, Fenton, isn't nearly as positive, long term, for the reigon.



Of course, it goes without saying that the primary investor here -- Jeff Cooper -- is from Illinois and would probably be far less likely to back a Missouri project. Since having an investor -- and no competing group has stepped forward -- is the most significant factor in the region getting a team, those who would boycott a stadium built in Illinois should recognize that their choice is likely between an Illinois team or no team at all. If, given that choice, an alleged backer would not support the team for the sole reason that it is based in Illinois, I think it's fair to (a) assume that person wouldn't be a core, long-term supporter of Major League Soccer in St. Louis, and (b) therefore look past that person's present concerns about location.

The suburban location is necesssary to include the development of youth soccer fields

How about the open prairie clost to DeSoto Park?

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Saint+Lou ... 8&t=h&om=1



Or the industrial corridor near Manchester/Vandeventer?

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Saint+Lou ... iwloc=addr



Or (my favorite) the Marketplace further west on Manchester?

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Saint+Lou ... iwloc=addr



I know that any of these would be very difficult to pull together, but there would actually be places for families to eat, shop or do other activities close by. Not to mention that the stadium/soccer fields would be closer to more people and more readily accessible by mass transit. All of these are large enough for a stadium, more than a dozen soccer fields and parking. What a statement it would make to put this in the city!

Grover wrote:...Or (my favorite) the Marketplace further west on Manchester?

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Saint+Lou ... iwloc=addr

Grover, the marketplace on manchester would be great! It's "almost" in the suburbs, close to the city, and good highway access.



But... God! I really don't want another stadium on the I64 corridor! My drive home (Frontenac to Tower Grove) is already bad enough on Cardinals / Rams / Blues / whatever nights! Can't the rich west countians with season tickets who only go to show off and network find something else to do -- or another way to drive in?

What we will get is a stadium surrounded by a sea of other fields, surrounded by a sea of parking lots, with plenty of SUVs and mini-vans hauling annoying families with annoying kids who are only there to see the fuzzy character mascot and carry on annoying conversations on their cell phones.

I understand that this is the model that MLS believes to be successful, but I just don't agree. I think that people will gravitate towards something that accessible. Is there a need for a dozen youth soccer fields in Collinsville? This will basically be a big recreational complex in the countryside requiring thousands of parking spots and really only accessible to kids whose parents can drive them (and possibly teammates) to the site and then sit around until the game/practice is over. Does MLS just look at current demos for soccer moms and figure that everyone can/will drive/park/stay? What about the thousands who could be introduced to soccer?

Grover wrote:

The suburban location is necesssary to include the development of youth soccer fields

How about the open prairie clost to DeSoto Park?

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Saint+Lou ... 8&t=h&om=1



Or the industrial corridor near Manchester/Vandeventer?

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Saint+Lou ... iwloc=addr



Or (my favorite) the Marketplace further west on Manchester?

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Saint+Lou ... iwloc=addr



I know that any of these would be very difficult to pull together, but there would actually be places for families to eat, shop or do other activities close by. Not to mention that the stadium/soccer fields would be closer to more people and more readily accessible by mass transit. All of these are large enough for a stadium, more than a dozen soccer fields and parking. What a statement it would make to put this in the city!

You're missing what MLS wants. None of these sites are near big enough to support the sort of facility MLS is looking for. Again, I would direct you to the above link diagraming Pizza Hut park. Note that a soccer pitch is approximately 100 yards.



Would it be great to have a stand-alone field in an urban or neighborhood area near pubs and the like? Yes. Is that going to happen any time soon? Of course not. Let's not let the perfect (an English footballing enviornment) be the enemy of the good (a professional soccer team in St. Louis) here.



Will the MLS get to the point where it need no longer rely so heavily on the support of youth teams? Hopefully. But let's not kid ourselves: it's not there -- not by a long shot -- now. To get it there, we need to support efforts to build soccer's popularity among kids. This stadium proposal does that -- and in a location that's just about as accessible to downtown and the city core as possible, given the need to build youth fields.

sda wrote:Funny you should make this point, as the two most densely populated black and Mexican areas in St. Louis are within an eight-minute drive of the proposed site. This site, in fact, is right in the middle of the reigon's largest Mexican community. The fact that the Latino community has consistently been the MLS's most loyal supporter in many, if not most, league markets makes this site even more attractive.



Ideally, of course, Metrolink will eventually run to the stadium. But in the meantime, buses certainly -- without question -- will run. Can't your "thousands" just take the bus? Isn't that what most of them would have to do anyway? If you say the location is too far for them to travel, I'd counter by pointing out that there is likely no closer location to St. Louis's primary minority areas where an MLS complex could be built. If you'd respond to that point by saying that the stadium should just be built without the complex, I'd ask what does more for introducing kids to soccer: having a 20-25,000 seat soccer stadium in the heart of the city that hosts 2-3 dozen soccer events a year, or having a complex 10 minutes out with enough fields to give tens of thousands of kids each year -- if not more -- top-notch fields to play on.

You saved me from typing - thank you and well said.

Do kids in St. Louis really need an introduction to soccer?? Practically every kid in St. Louis grows up playing soccer, not to mention there are about four or five large soccer complexes in the St. Louis area already for kids to play soccer at.

appraisalman wrote:Do kids in St. Louis really need an introduction to soccer?? Practically every kid in St. Louis grows up playing soccer, not to mention there are about four or five large soccer complexes in the St. Louis area already for kids to play soccer at.

It's a fair point, and one that cuts against the above logic for putting a stadium -- without a complex -- in the city for the purpose of exposing 'thousands' to the sport.



My suspicion, though, is that a 10-12 field complex would indeed increase the amount of youth soccer played in the reigon. Most of the complexes you reference are a good distance outside the city on the Missouri side, and are in various conditions. This would be a top-notch facility in an area that frankly could use one. Plus, if the scope of the complex were large enough, I think it's fair to assume that the complex would attract youth soccer players from around the reigon (and perhaps the country) to camps and tournaments. Add to this the exposure an MLS team would automatically receive from being centered in the best and perahps biggest youth soccer facility in the reigon, and it's a win/win.

It'll be interesting to see if interest in MLS soccer takes off now that David Beckham is in the league.

how the heck can an mls team afford to pay 250 mil towards a nearly washed up beckham???

There's an article in today's PD that talks about a St.Louis lawyer vowing to bring an MLS team to STL by 2008.

bpe235 wrote:how the heck can an mls team afford to pay 250 mil towards a nearly washed up beckham???

From ESPNs Soccer Site.....

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/columns/st ... ls&cc=5901



Updated: Jan. 12, 2007

Debunking the myths behind Beckham's contract

Jen Chang, ESPNsoccernet

However, on closer inspection, one can see that the reported contract estimates have been carefully worded. AP reported that the Galaxy, citing industry experts, said the Beckham deal "is worth more than $250 million in salary and commercial endorsements." The key phrase to note here are the words "commercial endorsements" and not the word "salary." It's actually more an estimate of what people think he could potentially earn as opposed to what he will receive annually in paychecks from MLS and the Galaxy.



The reality is this: The salary portion of Beckham's deal is relatively minuscule compared to the huge figures being bandied around and is well in line with what most top soccer players around the world currently earn. Bear in mind also that Beckham probably decided only on Thursday to sign with MLS after Real Madrid's contract offer almost certainly would have required him to take a pay cut (this is conjecture, though, since the details of his negotiations with Real Madrid have not been made public).



A league source confirmed to ESPNsoccernet's Kristian Dyer two weeks ago that the offer on the table from MLS to Beckham was a four-year deal worth $36 million (at $9 million annually). Reuter's Michelle Nichols reported Thursday that MLS sources say his annual playing income is only in the "single figure millions." Even if MLS upped its original annual salary offer, the logical assumption is that it would only be by a few additional million or so per year.

Im not holding my breath on anything sports related... 1st we were to get the St. Louis Stallions... that expansion football team that went to Carolina... then the all powerful Lauries were going to bring us an NBA team... which obviosuly didn't happen. But hey -if it does happen we get another I-70 series and now we can play up the "interstate" rivalry with Chicago - seeing as the team is in Illinois)

Kroenke seems to have had success with owning pro sports teams so why doesn't he bring one to STL?



I know he has a minority stake in the Rams but he owns everything other than the Rockies and Broncos in Colorado. He seems to have a good touch when he's in control, unlike his brother in-law.

appraisalman wrote:It'll be interesting to see if interest in MLS soccer takes off now that David Beckham is in the league.

I played soccer when I was a kid and enjoyed it. However, I couldn't care less about Beckham and his quest for riches in America. It may cause a minor spike initially, but it will wear off.



As for pro soccer in St. Louis, I have no opinion.