urbanSTL

Good article from the Houston Dynamo site, praising STL soccer players.

http://www.houstondynamo.com/news/2014/ ... -soccer-pr

This is also a good chance to congratulate Brad Davis for getting picked on the 30 man roster for the USMNT World Cup squad. Let's hope he makes the 23 man roster and the trek to Brazil. Too bad Tim Ream missed the cut. He should have made it. That would have been 2 STL'ers & former SLU Billikens, on the USMNT 30-man roster. I'll be happy if Brad makes it.

USA Today call St. Louis "Soccer City USA" along with Seattle and LA - I nice plug

http://worldcup.usatoday.com/2014/06/15 ... 27386120=1

Also did anyone catch ESPN broadcast of Bosnia V Argentina yesterday - Vedad scored - and St Louis and Bevo were mentioned

^I have to admit, I was very disappointed with the turnout for the Bosnia-Ivory Coast game. It looked very empty on TV and if I'm not mistaken, they said only 14K showed up. That did not do anything for the national perception of soccer fans locally. I know that was not a marque match-up, but it would have been nice to get over 30K or more.

I will say this. The crowds at the Amsterdam Tavern and other pubs, for the World Cup, have been amazing. Go to the Amsterdam's Facebook and watch the videos from the games. Awesome!

DogtownBnR wrote:^^^blzhrpmd2: With all due respect, I have to disagree with you. I actually like the circle logo better. I voted for it. I did like the river flowing on the shield, but I really liked the 1764. Also, I just liked the simple and compact look of the circle. I will say this. I wish they would have used something close to the STL United logo, with the St. Louis statue from Art Hill. Maybe they could use that on the shoulders or something, maybe add an Arch in there somewhere.

For the traditional approach the team is going with, the circle is a better choice. Need to keep things clean and simple. As for the STL United Logo, they want to stay away from it. It is related to SLSG (ST. Louis Scott Gallagher) and there are many other select soccer groups that don't like SLSG. The owners didn't want to lose fans because there was a connection to SLSG. Long story with STL soccer politics. ST Louis FC wants to start their own identity.

^^That's too bad that the logo is affiliated with SLSG and SLSU (IE.. Jeff Cooper's effort). It was unique and cool. The fleur de lis is very common on City flags and is on the N.O. Saints helmet. The Saint Louis Statue is unique (at least I'd assume) to STL. All in all, really like the logo and hope it is the logo of an MLS franchise here some day. I think many of us felt having Jim Kavanaugh involved was always the ideal scenario. He has lots of money and loves the game. Now all we need is to support the team and get the franchise to the next level.

I find both logos dull and uninspired, personally. And I really hope that when the time comes to take the step up to the MLS, they'll really invest in a quality identity over something so generic.

I'm not sure how they went about getting these designed, but I know they could have gotten a better product.

For now, this will work. It's decent. But down the line I hope they'll upgrade.

MLS and Sporting KC promoted this heavily as the place to go watch the game. Videos of BPV looked pretty packed, but the interior space isn't as large Power and Light.

That said, this is an impressive crowd.

Having a major MLS team in your town is a big plus. Also, KC gets USMNT games occasionally. That helps build the fanbase there. I'm sure soccer will eventually get bigger in KC, over STL, if we do not get a team. Just like hockey is way bigger here in STL. Obviously, having a pro team is a huge factor. I bet anything, we could draw those types of crowds, if we had an MLS team & a team sponsored event here. KC has the edge right now, since they have a great venue, great franchise and no competition for SKC. The Royals are usually bad and the Chiefs play in the MLS offseason. This all leads to what they have in KC. I would say, this youngest generation, growing up with Sporting KC and their venue, will increase KC's visibility as a soccer town and create a lot of home-grown soccer talent. You now see a lot of STL kids in the NHL. The Blues played a big role in that.

Moral of the story.. STL needs an MLS team and venue!!! The sport is growing by leaps and bounds in the US. If we do not get a team soon, we will be left out. They can only expand so much. I can say this... A decade ago, you didn't see kids and adults wearing soccer jerseys, like you do now. Go to the mall, you'll see all kinds of jerseys from EPL, LA Liga, to Serie A. ESPN and NBCsn carry EPL games too. The US is much more of a soccer nation than before. I hope we do not get left out, by not being part of MLS. We absolutely should be!

dweebe wrote:Deadspin's article about the moment when Portugal tied Sunday's WC game with around 10 seconds left.


(Picture from Kansas City's Power and Light District)

Did Kansas City draw this huge crowd because:
-they already have an MLS team?
-they really are a strong soccer city: even more than St. Louis?

Soccer mania in KC is relatively new phenomenon, as little as 8 years ago you would 7,000 at a Wiz game - not that much more then SLU soccer attracted -

A few years ago there was only one place on the Plaza that carried EPL games - I think there are more now - but mostly suburban - a soccer pub opened in Johnson County - kind of like a Hot Shots but built around soccer -

The Amsterdam has been at capacity like an hour before kick off of US games - places like Scottish Arms, Barristers, Tigen, I-Tap have been packed wall to wall as well as BPV

Amsterdam is pretty much as good a footy bar you will find anywhere - to best of my knowledge KC has no straight neighborhood type pub dedicated to soccer like it

In general this WC has galvanized the US fan base beyond anything I have ever seen

^Very true on the 'soccer - mania' thing in KC. It is a recent phenomenon nationally. I'd say, mid-2000s, we started to see a shift. After the excitement of the 2010 WC, featuring Landon Donovan's goal in stoppage time against Algeria, global soccer has seemed to really take off in the US. I think that ESPN and other networks have played a huge role in that. Not to mention, unlike some sports, soccer is loaded with global superstars like Ronaldo, Messi, Rooney and even Clint Dempsey or Tim Howard here in the US. Just look at how Amsterdam Tavern has grown into the place to be for soccer fans, in a short amount of time. I remember when they opened, thinking how much potential that place had. It has been realized. Along with that growth has come a USMNT that consistently fields a competitive team, even more so than England, in recent years. SO many factors are at work, building the game in the US. Back to MLS. As the league grows, so does interest from multiple cities, big cities like Minneapolis, Phoenix and others, while Atlanta, Miami and NYC (2nd team) are finally getting their teams. I get pretty fired up, thinking that we will be left out, when STL is such a hotbed. I just hope JK and STL FC take off. It will take grassroots support to get us there. Getting a venue, that is another story. If JK sees a growing franchise and huge fanbase, who knows, maybe he can round up an investment group, with his own cash leading the way. That is our best hope at this stage. If the Union Station stadium deal is legit, that furthers our chances. I think Kroenke was a pipe dream. I'm starting to think he wants out of STL. If the LA Gunners deal is true, I think he does want out of STL. Anyhow...GO USA!!!

I think most of you are blowing this all out of proportion. Saint.Louis is equally as relevant as the other cities you all mention.
We don't necessarily need a MLS team to validate our history in soccer as Saint.Louis still to this day is a great leader in molding great soccer talent all of this without the influence of a MLS team.
Saint.Louis is a very undervalued under appreciated city by it's own residents.
We are truly blessed with the assets that we have here but people are still not satisfied.
If it was meant for the MLS to be here then they would have already been here & to be honest i just don't think the commissioner is a fan of Saint.Louis. There's a lot of people who dislike Saint.Louis to dislike it.
Someone brought up Portland & I'm sorry to say Saint.Louis is far more better than Portland.
We have MLB NFL & the NHL i also believe the Rams will stay in Saint.Louis it's just hammering out those differences as the case with every other city.
Portland has MLS great hiking biking & other things & of course other great amenities.
We could very well equal that if our leaders tried harder. Saint.Louis isn't a pig you put lipstick on to make it look pretty it's already a beautiful city in its own way.
What I'm saying is that We don't need the MLS to validate our spot in soccer it will happen if it's meant to happen.
What would you all do or say if we didn't have the MLB NHL or NFL.
We simply take everything here for granted & constantly use other cities as their grass is greener on the other side factor & ours is just brown we don't stand a chance compared to them.
To sum it all up i would love for the MLS to be here we've already proven last year we can support the MLS with the 2 big soccer friendly events held here.
It's all about $ @ the end & the commissioners willingness to say he wants Saint.Louis to be a front runner for a MLS team.

<dreaming>NYCFC is starting in 2015 and will play its first MLS season (maybe more?) until they get a planned purpose built stadium. It is a partnership between Manchester City and the New York Yankees. Would love to see a partnership between Arsenal (Kronke) and the Cardinals (DeWitts) to do the same here. Having ties to both the EPL and Cardinals might gain some interest from a broader audience, especially kicking off the first season in Busch before moving to a soccer only stadium.<\dreaming>

Regarding KC, Overland Park has a huge youth soccer facility that puts Scott Gallagher Soccer Park to shame (and that is pretty nice). It draws all sorts of youth national competitions.

http://www.stltoday.com/entertainment/t ... 585ae.html

Media Views: Soccer City? St. Louis is 37th in TV ratings

There’s been a case of mammoth malaise in St. Louis, once the American hotbed of the sport, according to a significant measure tool. While TV ratings aren’t yet available for the United States’ game Thursday against Germany — the Americans’ only loss thus far in the tourney — the St. Louis figures for the U.S. team’s two games before that not only were abysmal for a town rich in soccer history, but neither time did St. Louis even match the national average.

And in ratings for the tourney as a whole, St. Louis is mired in a tie for 37th place nationally.

“Wow! I’m taken aback by that,’’ said Bill McDermott, who played on NCAA championship teams at St. Louis University in the late ’60s. He is reporting on this year’s Cup for KMOX (1120 AM), marking the 12th time he has covered soccer’s biggest tournament at either the network or local level. “I’m at a loss. It’s tremendously disappointing to hear that.’’

St. Louis soccer glory days clearly are in the past — and rapidly becoming the distant past...

St. Louis now doesn’t even match cross-state rival Kansas City as a soccer mecca, as that market has surpassed the Gateway city as the soccer capital of the region. KC has a Major League Soccer team in the suburbans, playing in a stadium that has hosted U.S. national team games. In St. Louis, talk of getting a team in MLS has been just that — talk — and several recent attempts at fielding even low-level pro teams have failed, though another one is scheduled to try to make it next year.

And Kansas City beat St. Louis by 19 percent in the TV ratings for the first two U.S. games, and is 25 percent ahead in ratings for all Cup telecasts.

It's pretty straight-forward. The MLS has grown the game in nearly every market it's in.

We don't have that here.

It's absolutely as simple as that.