Expansion Rumors Megathread
- Thread starter MagnusPax
- Start date
The link is to an "under construction" page for the NASL team, and it's a teal tinted photo with orange text. No announcement, but I'd say that's at least an indicator they are leaning towards those colors.
I agree that this sounds promising. The U of Miami wants to build a 40k seat stadium, which is large but not so large that it would be cavernous for MLS, if well designed.
The key is for Beckham to own the stadium, and rent it to the U. Or at the very least, be co-tenants with equal rights.
I really believe this is a new, league-wide idea to co-op stadiums with universities.
LAFC with USC, Miami and even we are linked with Columbia University. Hoping to catch those college kids who are a major demographic for soccer in the country right now. Obviously, each situation is slightly different and I think the league would still prefer downtown stadiums first and foremost but in our larger, more dense cities this seems to be the new playbook.
I assume that the league really wants teams in these cities; otherwise I don't think that they'd allows multipurpose stadiums used by more that just the MLS team.
Looks like Miami FC is going to jump on the teal and orange color scheme: http://miamifc.com/
I hope Beckham goes for a bright pink like Grasshopper Zurich's away kit. It would be very "South Florida" and very unique to the league.
Miami Vice FC
You would be incorrect.
Quick list of the MLS teams that share:
- LA Galaxy/Cal State at DH
- Houston Dynamo/Texas Christian
- MLS Atlanta/Atlanta Falcons
- Portland Timbers/Portland State
- Vancouver Whitecaps/Vsncouver 86ers
- FC Dallas/Every HS in or near Frisco
And those are just the ones that are being built or just recently were built. We're not even taking into account the Revolutions or Soudners of the league.
I was unaware of most of these stadium sharing situations.
The Dynamo don't share their stadium with TCU. TCU is in Ft. Worth, not Houston.
It's Texas Southern (TSU), not TCU, but they do share the stadium.
Ah, the original poster to whom I replied was mistaken. Thank you for the correction.
Aren't the MLS teams the primary stadium tenants in the majority of the listed stadium sharing cases?
Yes they are the primary tenant in most cases, but not all. Vancouver and Atlanta are/will not be. Most others have restrictions in place regardless if they control revenue or time slots.
Give me a medal! I decided to pay for my for-profit business without bilking taxpayers!
Why don't all teams do this? I'm always confused as to why privately owned teams make taxpayers build their stadiums.
Vancouver is not primary but it's 50/50 with the BC Lions. Soon to be 70/30 for the Caps the way things are going.
Most teams can't afford to built their own stadium. Especially a league like MLS where most teams lose money annually.
The reverse is a team creates jobs, the infrastructure spending creates jobs - and taxpayers like that (even though it's a government handout).
My medal post was about the Orlando team crowing about paying for their stadium themselves.
Similar threads
