urbanSTL

dmelsh wrote: ↑

Mar 28, 2017

user28 wrote: ↑

Mar 28, 2017

Isn't there an opportunity for the national mens and women's teams to be located here if we get a team? Or at least a significant amount of training and exhibition games? I'm not sure why I believe that but I think I read that somewhere


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes if the stadium is built STL will be a major player in USMNT and USWNT games for both friends and WCQ.

FYI, in Costa Rica right now and their WCQ game is about to start. The place is crazy. Everything is packed. Can only hope STL can experience this if the stadium passes.

St. Louis did just host a World Cup Qualifier in 2015 at Busch Stadium. A new stadium isn't a prerequisite for hosting more games, but I think it would put us in a regular rotation and perhaps gives us games in the hex against bigger opponents.

The big tournaments, Gold Cup, Copa America, World Cup (if they are hosted in the US again) would be at big football stadiums, so there is no chance for those at the new stadium, but I think we could land fairly regular friendlies. However, unless it is against a big name opponent, friendlies aren't usually a big deal.

Between both the Men's and Women's National teams, I think we could expect the new stadium to host an average of 1 game a year (and that is probably the best case scenario).

As for whether Prop 2 will pass, as others have said, the enthusiasm gap and likely low turnout are probably the biggest advantages SC STL has. I think if turnout is as low as the last mayoral election (25k) it will pass. The higher the turnout, the less likely it is to pass. One note on the enthusiasm- it was reported that at yesterday's SC STL pep rally, a large majority of the attendees were not city residents.

I do think that SC STL is fortunate that there was no organized opposition. I'm a bit surprised that Rex, or some like-minded anti-tax group didn't wage a "no" campaign.

Also, Prop 2 dodged a bullet when Bruce Franks cancelled his write-in campaign. I think that could have brought out more no votes.

One wild card that could factor in would be any significant high-profile crimes happening between now and the election (particularly one on the MetroLink that could scuttle Prop 1). Valid or not, I have seen many people respond to some recent crimes with dismay that the public focus was on soccer instead of safety.

Overall, I have always thought that Prop 2 faced an uphill battle. However, with the $1M pro campaign and some of the public support it has been receiving, I think SC STL has some momentum. Ultimately, I do think it will come up short, but I believe it will be close.

9ine Runner wrote: We're down to 1 black-american major league professional athlete in St. Louis and he just got here. MLS isn't going to come in and replace that for me.

Ryan Reaves is black-Canadian and a crowd favorite If you're looking for black guys to root for.

moorlander wrote: ↑

Mar 29, 2017

9ine Runner wrote: We're down to 1 black-american major league professional athlete in St. Louis and he just got here. MLS isn't going to come in and replace that for me.

*2

Ryan Reaves

Ryan Reaves is Canadian, plays hockey, and is bi-racial, but I'll allow it. 2. It still isn't healing any wounds from the NFL's exit. I don't care for Hockey I gave it a shot, I can't do it. The point is black kids don't play hockey in St. Louis and they don't play soccer. There's never going to be a David Freese moment in St. Louis for a Jayson Tatum, Brad Beal or Ezekiel Elliott, kids I've watched come up through high school. Their professional careers will pass without ever playing here even as visitors. MLS isn't going to fill that hole, it'll be great for people that like soccer, but that's it.

9ine Runner wrote:

moorlander wrote: ↑

Mar 29, 2017

9ine Runner wrote: We're down to 1 black-american major league professional athlete in St. Louis and he just got here. MLS isn't going to come in and replace that for me.

*2

Ryan Reaves

Ryan Reaves is Canadian, plays hockey, and is bi-racial, but I'll allow it. 2. It still isn't healing any wounds from the NFL's exit. I don't care for Hockey I gave it a shot, I can't do it. The point is black kids don't play hockey in St. Louis and they don't play soccer. There's never going to be a David Freese moment in St. Louis for a Jayson Tatum, Brad Beal or Ezekiel Elliott, kids I've watched come up through high school. Their professional careers will pass without ever playing here even as visitors. MLS isn't going to fill that hole, it'll be great for people that like soccer, but that's it.

You sound like Arch Genesis. New name?

Btw I agree. I don't see MLS as filling the NFL void.

I'm disappointed you don't see soccer as a gateway for inner city children to have positive role models and supportive extra cuticular activities, seeing as an MLS team here would be supported by and would support the city and metro community greater than the rams ever did/could. Not to mention that there are a great number of blacks, and even greater minorities, that play on professional and semi pro teams that are used and could be used as positive role models here in St. Louis.

This is all without saying that pro athletes are probably the least useful role models for kids since their profession is the least likely career path they will be able to follow, not that it's bad to idolize them anyway


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

moorlander wrote: ↑

Mar 29, 2017

9ine Runner wrote:

moorlander wrote: ↑

Mar 29, 2017

*2

Ryan Reaves

Ryan Reaves is Canadian, plays hockey, and is bi-racial, but I'll allow it. 2. It still isn't healing any wounds from the NFL's exit. I don't care for Hockey I gave it a shot, I can't do it. The point is black kids don't play hockey in St. Louis and they don't play soccer. There's never going to be a David Freese moment in St. Louis for a Jayson Tatum, Brad Beal or Ezekiel Elliott, kids I've watched come up through high school. Their professional careers will pass without ever playing here even as visitors. MLS isn't going to fill that hole, it'll be great for people that like soccer, but that's it.

You sound like Arch Genesis. New name?

Btw I agree. I don't see MLS as filling the NFL void.

Yes, formerly Arch Genesis.

And that was my big point, the other part was just a sobering realization that struck me when Taylor Twellman was talking about never having the opportunity in his MLS career to play or score a goal in St. Louis.

Footy McFooty Face Is Stomping Competition In Vote For MLS Team Name

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/ ... t=20170328

user28 wrote: ↑

Mar 29, 2017

I'm disappointed you don't see soccer as a gateway for inner city children to have positive role models and supportive extra cuticular activities, seeing as an MLS team here would be supported by and would support the city and metro community greater than the rams ever did/could. Not to mention that there are a great number of blacks, and even greater minorities, that play on professional and semi pro teams that are used and could be used as positive role models here in St. Louis.

This is all without saying that pro athletes are probably the least useful role models for kids since their profession is the least likely career path they will be able to follow, not that it's bad to idolize them anyway


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We just don't connect with soccer, and were never included in the game in any great numbers throughout St. Louis' rich and lengthy' history of soccer. Part of it's our segregated region, another part is we simply like basketball and football. It's only today, when black votes in the city are needed, that there's been a mild push for inclusion. Inner city kids aren't lacking in positive role models in the way of sports, there's plenty. We just don't like the MLS in great numbers. And why do we have to like soccer? Why is it disappointing that I don't see soccer as a gateway for inner city children? It all feels like an effort to make others comfortable - my soccer loving, craft brewery loving, fedora wearing black friend. What is it? Why did social media react the way they did to the black guy discovering blues hockey and calling it 'lit'? That crowd at BPV was bearded white guys, the same as any FC game, the same as any soccer bar in St. Louis. Like I said initially, MLS and NFL are two entirely different fanbases, with little overlap, so let's just stop with the narrative that this fills the void left by the Rams. That's all I'm saying.

Lots of black St. Louisans like soccer, they just tend to be immigrants

Define lots. Black st. louis (Af-Am, Immigrants) is a little over 500,000 in population. How many are 'lots'? Enough to be representative of the larger community? And why is it so important that we like soccer? Bottom line, this team is primarily for white people, that's been reflected in soccer since soccer has been in St. Louis and that's what the stands will look like in 2020. Immigrants still tend to prefer their home country teams/leagues to the MLS.

I am disappointed personally since soccer is so internationally, racially, and men/women inclusive in addition to it being to insanely cheap to by a ball and play at a park that to be able to support it as a community (especially for those communities that can't afford or don't have access to the resources other sports require like a basketball court at public parks). Soccer in St. Louis has a past as great as baseball, so I see the area really getting behind it, meaning even our most disenfranchised communities can see themselves represented in and supported by a major league sport, not to mention the most popular sport in the world which might be these communities first introduction to what it feels like to be part of a world class city with international recognition.

No soccer isn't going to save our city and no it's not going to save our inner city black, or poor, populations. But it is an incredible opportunity with limited availability that could be significant for multiple generations of people in the area.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

user28 wrote: ↑

Mar 29, 2017

I am disappointed personally since soccer is so internationally, racially, and men/women inclusive in addition to it being to insanely cheap to by a ball and play at a park that to be able to support it as a community (especially for those communities that can't afford or don't have access to the resources other sports require like a basketball court at public parks). Soccer in St. Louis has a past as great as baseball, so I see the area really getting behind it, meaning even our most disenfranchised communities can see themselves represented in and supported by a major league sport, not to mention the most popular sport in the world which might be these communities first introduction to what it feels like to be part of a world class city with international recognition.

No soccer isn't going to save our city and no it's not going to save our inner city black, or poor, populations. But it is an incredible opportunity with limited availability that could be significant for multiple generations of people in the area.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

How poor do you think Black St. Louis is? We can afford a basketball, a basketball isn't the cost of 10 soccer balls. Black St. Louis isn't full of barefooted children using rolled up socks for soccer balls. We have a middle class.

The simple fact is St. Louis is still a midwestern white/black segregated city mired in racism. That's why soccer in St. Louis doesn't mirror soccer internationally. Soccer has been in St. Louis longer than black people we've had all this time to 'assimilate'. The Stars, The Steamers, 10 SLU Championships. It hasn't happened and I don't see the MLS transforming St. Louis into a rainbow utopia either, even in the absence of our preferred leagues. And if MLS ratings are accurate, I don't see the MLS moving the needle in international recognition.

But If bridging the divide is that important and sports are the only way to do it, let's play 3-on-3 basketball at Forest Park sometime and then go to an MLS game. A little bit of both, a little cultural exchange.

I was trying to get at soccer, through this MLS franchise, could tap the potential that past franchises have not, and that it would be a positive for all poor disenfranchised groups, not just black. Also there isn't a basketball court at forest park or other major parks as far as I know. And buying one for your home or community is far more expensive than soccer on a grass field. I feel like our disagreement is getting no where. Maybe we are arguing different points


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's effect would be negligible. The poor people of St. Louis don't need soccer, what St. Louis needs is structural change. An MLS team isn't going to do that anymore than any sports franchise that's come before it. And you're right there isn't a basketball court at forest park, that was my attempt at sarcasm. Anyway, I've clogged up this topic long enough, if you think MLS is really going to do so much for so many people then more power to you.

10% of MLS players are black, only slightly better than MLB (whatever happened to the days of Ozzie Smith and Ray Lankford?). If we were picking up an MLS team instead of an NBA or NFL team, I would see your point. However, StL doesn't have a shot at either of those leagues in the foreseeable future, so there's not really an opportunity cost here, sports-wise. Economically it seems likely to be a wash.

Last night on the radio Jim Kavanaugh said the city needs to be more progressive and build the stadium. I wish WWT had been more progressive and built their HQ downtown.

Listen March 28 8-9pm
http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/audio/sports-open-line/

We had a canvessor stop by our house in Lindenwood Park yesterday in the mid afternoon. My wife happened to be home and got a yard sign from them. I assume the last minute get out the vote effort is in full swing if canvessors are out during the day time on a Tuesday.

LordOfLindenwoodPark wrote: ↑

Mar 29, 2017

We had a canvessor stop by our house in Lindenwood Park yesterday in the mid afternoon. My wife happened to be home and got a yard sign from them. I assume the last minute get out the vote effort is in full swing if canvessors are out during the day time on a Tuesday.

Hill neighborhood was canvassed last Saturday. They did our entire street and my parents as well who live on the other side of the Hill. Wash U/SLU soccer players

9ine Runner wrote: ↑

Mar 28, 2017

cardinalstl wrote: ↑

Mar 28, 2017

I think if this fails it will be a giant missed opportunity for STL. It provides us with a great new venue and amenity for the city. Healing part of the wound that the Rams created when they left us with just 2 sports teams. In addition to MLS games, we should get some international games, and possibly some D2 football playoff games. I'm for any reasonable development that brings more people from outside the region to spend their money here. Plus it replaces an ugly inefficient interchange. Over time it will likely spur other developments in the area.

The Atlanta Falcons and Atlanta FC are both owned by Arthur Blank, they share a stadium together, there's 3% overlap between the two fanbases. SC STL isn't going to heal the wound of the Rams leaving. I wish people would stop bringing that up. Is this whole thing about getting over the Rams? Are we giving away $60M just for not being Kroenke? I'm sick of hearing about it. We're down to 1 black-american major league professional athlete in St. Louis and he just got here. MLS isn't going to come in and replace that for me.

Right or wrong, the number of professional sports team in a city partly represents the clout of that city. It provides extensive exposure and more importantly things to do for its citizens. The fact that a city of St. Louis's magnitude only has two is disappointing, especially with the way Kroenke trashed STL on his way out. It would be great to get back a third team that is well supported and successful. I just think it would be a missed opportunity if we passed on this to continue our momentum as a city.

Also I'm not quite sure what race has to do with this conversation what so ever.

cardinalstl wrote: ↑

Mar 29, 2017

Also I'm not quite sure what race has to do with this conversation what so ever.

Seems as if this poster doesn't care for sports that do not have large numbers of athletes that look like him or her. It's the same way in the NFL and NBA, you don't see many white fans at those games...oh wait.

pdm_ad wrote: ↑

Mar 29, 2017

cardinalstl wrote: ↑

Mar 29, 2017

Also I'm not quite sure what race has to do with this conversation what so ever.

Seems as if this poster doesn't care for sports that do not have large numbers of athletes that look like him or her. It's the same way in the NFL and NBA, you don't see many white fans at those games...oh wait.

No, it was a random passing realization, I love my Cardinals just fine but for blacks seeing ourselves represented has always been important. It just so happens the two leagues we're more present in aren't in St. Louis anymore. In St. Louis we went from dozens of black athletes to 1 (or 2) just like that. I'm sorry if that being important to me is a problem for you.

And look man, facts are facts, in regards to soccer in St. Louis you don't see a lot of black people in the crowds. So cut the noise about it being a team that'll unify St. Louis across racial lines or heal a wound left by the NFL.

9ine Runner wrote: ↑

Mar 29, 2017

pdm_ad wrote: ↑

Mar 29, 2017

cardinalstl wrote: ↑

Mar 29, 2017

Also I'm not quite sure what race has to do with this conversation what so ever.

Seems as if this poster doesn't care for sports that do not have large numbers of athletes that look like him or her. It's the same way in the NFL and NBA, you don't see many white fans at those games...oh wait.

No, it was a random passing realization, I love my Cardinals just fine but for blacks seeing ourselves represented has always been important. It just so happens the two leagues we're more present in aren't in St. Louis anymore. In St. Louis we went from dozens of black athletes to 1 (or 2) just like that. I'm sorry if that being important to me is a problem for you.

And look man, facts are facts, in regards to soccer in St. Louis you don't see a lot of black people in the crowds. So cut the noise about it being a team that'll unify St. Louis across racial lines or heal a wound left by the NFL.

I never said it was a problem for me, you are projecting. What I am saying is that it doesn't matter to me if the athletes on the teams that I root for are White, Black or any other race.

And I never said anything about MLS healing racial wounds. Other than that, spot on!

It's a matter of personal perspective whether it will heal any wound left by the NFL. For some it will and for others it won't. You'll probably see the voting bear that out.

Just sent in my absentee ballot, voted yes on both 1 and 2.

I do not believe that this could pass. I'm sure I've said it enough on here but I don't see it passing. Voters don't want to give corporate welfare to millionaires.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk