urbanSTL

^I don't want to get too out of hand here, but I would have loved to play either of these teams with my SLUH '05 squad, or seen CBC's '05 squad play them (4th and 1st in the nation during the season, respectively). I think both of our teams could have probably beat either. Certainly would have drawn a crowd, at least.

MLS is what needs to happen. AC StL may hold us over for a few years, but it makes me horribly sad to say that if we don't move up (and PLEASE, PLEASE! bring back the St. Louis United logo, that logo was awesome!) pro soccer in StL may fade into oblivion for an extended period of time. It would be a terrible missed opportunity for the MLS, they and potential investors are drastically underestimating the rise of soccer as a whole as well as our market.

^ ^^ My understanding was that Cooper was keeping the STL United logo for an MLS team and AC STL for the current NASL team. I just hope that Cooper is willing to be the Jerry Clinton of the MLS and step aside if & when the time comes. Hopefully he will work with or hand over control to a deep pocket group, if one ever steps up. I didn't like the fact that he seemed uninterested in United Plaza when proposed. Will he interfere of a 'real' investment group steps up and bumps him out of the picture?

Regarding the logo for STL United, let's hope that a future franchise can take on that name. Please don't come up with some bad name like the Wizards, Earthquakes or Galaxy. I want a traditional name like STL United. Guess the conversation is moot until someone steps up and gets us a team.

PS_GO USA!!!!!

Dead. Again. No surprise.

http://www.stltoday.com/sports/soccer/a ... mode=story

Apparently the self-proclaimed "Soccer Capitol Of America" doesn't support soccer.

That is very dissapointing to see. It is a shame. You would think that they would like to capitalize on the natural rivalries that already exist between KC and StL and StL and Chi.

I was actually thinking about this today, and basically came to the conclusion that MLS in StL is doomed to fail unless it is established in the city. I don't think Colinsville or Fenton would work at all. Too bad the city couldn't get anything together for the ownership group the last time around. Maybe if we get a second chance we can pull something together.

It would be horrible to never see StL get a shot.

the central scrutinizer wrote:M.L.S. Finding New Center in Pacific Northwest

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/15/sport ... 15mls.html

Next year, M.L.S. will add a team in Montreal, and perhaps a second, the league’s 20th team, in the New York metropolitan area in 2013. During his conference call, Garber said the league could be larger than 20 teams and mentioned San Diego, Arizona, Las Vegas, Detroit, San Antonio, South Florida and Atlanta as possible expansion cities.

Who's missing?

A money man who loves soccer and is willing to finance a soccer stadium that is suitable for the MLS, that's who. Even then, you want someone with enough money so that his losses gives him a tax break instead of someone who is hoping to turn a profit in its third or fourth year.

Cooper is no Checkett's and even Checkett's has to admit that it was other people's money who got him a hockey team and they who taketh away. Unfortunately for soccer fans, it makes more sense for an aspiring pro sports owner to buy out the Blues and an NBA team to fill out the Scottrade center once the Peabody Opera House opens.

I wonder if there is a cross-ownship issue with Kroenke owning the Rams and an MLS team or with him owning Arsenal and an MLS team. He may be the best hope for bringing MLS to St. Louis. Not saying that he even thought about it for one second, but he obviously has ties to St. Louis and ties to soccer. It is amazing that such a "great soccer city" hasn't even come close to landing an MLS team.

Kroenke has enough money to own anything he wants including multiple franchises. He wouldn't have to make that choice. MLS would be a drop in the bucket for him. The real issue with him buying an expansion team or anyone moving a team here is the fact that we do not have a venue.

Kroenke already owns an MLS team in Denver

^ You are right, nix Kroenke from the list.

arch_genesis wrote:Kroenke already owns an MLS team in Denver

I do think Kroenke's business model in Denver (before buying the Rams) of one owner owning mulitple pro sport teams, outside of baseball and football, in one city would be ideal for St Louis not only for getting a pro soccer team but actually keeping the Blues. The goal should be to get both NHL & NBA in Scottrade Center and and a MLS/Soccer field, even if it is temporary, next to Scottrade/Union Station. Scales of economies for back office/marketing/facility management works in sports just as any other business and St Louis needs these economy of scales to compete with bigger metro areas.

^I'm on your side dredger I'd love to see both but most people look at extra teams as a breaking point (especially NBA) and not something that would help. Could you detail 'economies of scale' a bit more? Thanks

arch_genesis wrote:^I'm on your side dredger I'd love to see both but most people look at extra teams as a breaking point (especially NBA) and not something that would help. Could you detail 'economies of scale' a bit more? Thanks

I wish I could back up my claim with hard numbers. Still working on convincing my boss that we can dredge mud cheaper then the next guy without going too low to lose my job out of the deal.

Kroenke remains a big factor in St. Louis getting MLS whether he actually owns the team or not. Why? Because he's going to want a new, probably open-air stadium for the Rams. And an MLS team in St. Louis would give him 15 more events to generate revenue at the stadium.

MLS says they generally prefer soccer-specific stadia - but two of the newest expansion teams, Seattle and Vancouver, play in their city's gridiron football stadiums. So it's not a deal-breaker if everything else is lined up.

Let's say Kroenke doesn't own the team, or isn't allowed to by MLS (and I'm not convinced that would be the case). If that mythical money man ever appears, and there's a new Rams stadium in St. Louis, it would be in Kroenke's self-interest to promote the bid among his fellow MLS owners.

Even in a best-case scenario where a billionaire turns up tomorrow wanting a team (paging Shahid Khan!), this is all 10-15 years away. But Kroenke buying the Rams can only be good for St. Louis's MLS hopes.

the central scrutinizer wrote:M.L.S. Finding New Center in Pacific Northwest

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/15/sport ... 15mls.html

Next year, M.L.S. will add a team in Montreal, and perhaps a second, the league’s 20th team, in the New York metropolitan area in 2013. During his conference call, Garber said the league could be larger than 20 teams and mentioned San Diego, Arizona, Las Vegas, Detroit, San Antonio, South Florida and Atlanta as possible expansion cities.

Who's missing?

Has St. Louis been blackballed for some reason? I'm not trying to suggest there's something sinister at play. But I find it odd that St. Louis keeps getting snubbed.

Is it Jeff Cooper, or more likely, his inability to find suitable investors before? Is it the potential for over-saturation, which is the most likely reason that we've never seriously pursued an NBA team? It just seems odd that St. Louis can't even make the short list. Detroit also seems to be an odd choice. It's a great sports town, yes, but the economy there is in shambles.

threeonefour wrote:

San Diego, Arizona, Las Vegas, Detroit, San Antonio, South Florida and Atlanta as possible expansion cities.

Has St. Louis been blackballed for some reason? I'm not trying to suggest there's something sinister at play. But I find it odd that St. Louis keeps getting snubbed.

Is it Jeff Cooper, or more likely, his inability to find suitable investors before? Is it the potential for over-saturation, which is the most likely reason that we've never seriously pursued an NBA team? It just seems odd that St. Louis can't even make the short list. Detroit also seems to be an odd choice. It's a great sports town, yes, but the economy there is in shambles.

Looking at the list of "possible expansion cities" listed above, take out Detroit and a few shared characteristics emerge:
1 - Warm weather,
2 - Growing economies(sort of)/population
3 - Large & growing Hispanic demographics. -- As a sweeping generalization, Hispanics love soccer. Also, its nice to watch outdoor sporting events in warm weather (unless its football).

Detroit has, I believe, the largest Middle Eastern-American population in the US. Don't know one way or the other, but maybe they're also soccer nuts.

Sure St. Louis has some Bosnians & we're getting more immigrants from other countries, but could the other "possible expansion cities" have a leg up on STL and that's why they're getting looked at for a team?

Alex Ihnen wrote:There's not a demographic reason why St. Louis would be a worse soccer town than those mentioned above.

With what reasoning?