It's official: MLS to expand to Seattle

[Luis_Rancagua]

I still think that this is going to be a big mistake. No SSS makes me a little concern. They should have giving the deal to St-Louis. It seems to me that MLS selected Seattle for reason that it is a much bigger tv market than St-louis.

----------------------------------

MLS to expand to Seattle

League's 15th franchise will begin play in '09 season

Posted: Friday September 28, 2007 3:06PM; Updated: Friday September 28, 2007 6:19PM

By Jonah Freedman, SI.com

SAN FRANCISCO (SI.com) -- Major League Soccer has settled on Seattle as its next expansion city, SI.com has learned. According to a league source, the new franchise will begin play for the 2009 season.

An official announcement will be made in the next two weeks, the source said. Seattle is already home to the Sounders of the United Soccer Leagues First Division (one rung below MLS).

According to an earlier report by the HeraldNews of New Jersey's Ives Galarcep, the Sounders ownership group will have a big hand in the new MLS club, and the expansion team will also be called the Sounders.

It wasn't immediately clear if that meant the Seattle Sounders would essentially be promoted to MLS, ending the club's minor-league status.

The bid to lure MLS to the Emerald City has been spearheaded by Sounders managing partner Adrian Hanauer and movie-studio executive Joe Roth. That group's proposal was to bring MLS to Qwest Field, home to the Sounders and the NFL's Seattle Seahawks.

MLS spokesman Dan Courtemanche denied a deal with Hanauer and Roth was imminent, but did say, "Things are moving forward with [the Seattle group], but we've had no finalized agreement. Should they decide to use the Sounders name, uniform and colors, that's a discussion we'd look at."

MLS' goal is to expand to 16 franchises by the 2010 season, and Courtemanche said both expansion cities would be decided before the end of this year. The league currently has 13 teams and announced in July that it would add San Jose, Calif., as its 14th franchise for '08.

Seattle had been at the forefront of as many as eight candidate cities for further expansion. Portland, Ore., was also a consideration for a new club in the Pacific Northwest.

The new Seattle franchise would bring the number of teams in the MLS Western Conference to eight. If the league wants to balance its schedule, it must now add an Eastern Conference team. St. Louis and Philadelphia are said to be the frontrunners.

The current Seattle Sounders will play for their fourth league title on Saturday when they take on the Atlanta Silverbacks in the USL First Division championship.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/soccer/09/28/seattle.mls/index.html?section=si_latest

[DarnCherry]

Whats so great about St. Louis?

[Luis_Rancagua]

quote:Originally posted by Krammerhead

Whats so great about St. Louis?

Krammer, St-Louis had the full backing of City-Hall in order to construct the SSS. In fact, every member of St-Louis' city council voted unanimously in favour of the SSS. Plus, it is a soccer town with a deep rich soccer tradition. Remember that the members of that US 1950 national World Cup team all came from St-Louis. The team that beat England at Belo Horizonte. The only reason why Seattle got the deal is because of the huge tv market that MLS desperately needs. It's all about business revenue.

[DarnCherry]

quote:Originally posted by Luis_Rancagua

Krammer, St-Louis had the full backing of City-Hall in order to construct the SSS. In fact, every member of St-Louis' city council voted unanimously in favour of the SSS. Plus, it is a soccer town with a deep rich soccer tradition. Remember that the members of that US 1950 national team all came from St-Louis. The team that beat England at Belo Horizonte. The only reason why Seattle got the deal is because of the huge tv market that gives MLS. It's all about business revenue.

Just how does 5 of the starting 11 membersof the 1950 US soccer team coming from St. Louis have any bearing on how a professional soccer team in 2009 would do? What does a rich tradition in amateur soccer have to do with anything? What successful professional teams has St.Louis had in the last 40-50 years? Just because every member of the St. Louis city council voted to build a stadium it doesn't mean that a team there would be successful.

If you want to talk professional soccer and support then Seattle has beat St.Louis hands down. The St. Louis Stars of the NASL drew flies, and I don't see any pro-team playing at another level in St. Louis as there have been in Seattle.

But lastly, Seattle has owners ready to go right now. Thats all MLS needed to go to Seattle. There was no deal up for grabs like you seem to suggest by saying the "deal" should have been given to St. Louis.

[DoyleG]

Luis is basing his concerns that Seattle has no SSS. The problem is that Quest was built with brining MLS to Seattle. They really had no alternative after Seattle voters decided not to put more public money into stadium or arena projects.

[VPjr]

Krammerhead, you are right that no concrete link can be drawn between St. Louis' undeniably rich amateur soccer past (and present) and the fate of an MLS team.

However, critics thought Toronto FC would flop too. St. Louis is one of the cities in the US that actually cares about soccer. It actually ranks as a sport that merits attention, and not just among a SMALL, hardcore base. Plus, St. Louis is a fantastic sports town and do a good job of supporting their teams, even though the Blues have not drawn well (likely because they have been horrible for a long time).

With a SSS, I would be willing to wager a few dollars that St. Louis can thrive. It's useless to infer anything between the failure of an NASL team and the potential success of an MLS team. That's a long time ago and we don't know the reasons in the local market for the lack of interest at that time.

What I know is that St. Louis and surrounding area love soccer in a way similar to the way Minnesotans love hockey. If they have a bid worthy of consideration, I'd put a team there for sure as MLS runs up to 20 teams. I am not sure I would choose St. Louis over Philly though, if comparing bids apples to apples.

[Luis_Rancagua]

Guys, let's get real. Qwest is not a soccer stadium. Are you seriously convinced that Sounders will draw more than 30,000 fans in this huge building??? I don't think so. This is one of the reason why the New-England Revolution are moving out of their NFL stadium, and planning to build a 20,000 SSS somewhere in the outskirts of Boston by the year 2010-11.

[Massive Attack]

Krammerhead was absolutely right when he posted this:

But lastly, Seattle has owners ready to go right now. Thats all MLS needed to go to Seattle. There was no deal up for grabs like you seem to suggest by saying the "deal" should have been given to St. Louis.

The bottom line is that the MLS will go wherever the money is, as long as the other factors are half decent (ownership, stadium, tradition, potential support, etc.) If someone in St. Louis steps up to the plate with the franchise fee, then MLS will go there.

[ag futbol]

If there is one thing the NHL has taught me, it's that chasing TV deals is stupid. TV deals come from a successful league, not just putting them in opportune locations.

That being said, Seattle support the sounders reasonably well, so i don't see much of a problem with it.

[DarnCherry]

Vpjr, I'm not saying that St. Louis might not do well. What I was trying to point out is that there is no guarantee they'd do well and certainly no evidence that they'd do better than a proven city like Seattle. Luis is basing all of this St. Louis "greatness" based on what he's read a pro-St.Louis soccer website. Of course they are going to make it sound like they would be the best city for an MLS side.

I also use your Toronto analogy to refute those that say that Seattle will do bad playing in a football stadium. Who cares what has happened in the past? Whats happening right now in Toronto with packed houses and rabid fans has never happened in the past MLS even in cities with their own SSS. For the most part those teams playing out of huge NFL stadiums never had a big soccer following to start off with. Seattle does, I liken it to the Toronto situation.

Luis:

quote:Guys, let's get real. Qwest is not a soccer stadium.

Really luis? I take it then you've never watched a soccer game there. Thats really speaking from ignorance.

quote:Are you seriously convinced that Sounders will draw more than 30,000 fans in this huge building???

Why do they need to draw 30,000 fans a game? Nobody else in the league does?

[ag futbol]

No doubt Quest can be used for Soccer but looking at the capacity it’s less than ideal. MLS started playing in smaller stadiums so they could have more say on how the facilities are operated and come close to packing the places they play.

Even if attendance is 25k a game in Seattle perception of that in a much bigger stadium is terrible. Look at the difference between Edmonton and Toronto with the U-20’s. Same amount of fans, totally different perception of how the event did.

[DarnCherry]

Lets not go comparing how it looked in Edmonton to how it will look in Seattle. It's two different stadiums, and it will be run by two different organizations, and one won't be the crappy CSA. Edmonton looked empty because for most of the games the fans weren't inside the stadium. Sometimes because of the crazy start times and fans couldn;t get into the stadium because they didn't have enough access, some because of doubleheaders. I've been watching USL-1 games in Seattle and crowds of 8,000 look fine on the screen (which is what you guys are really arguing about-the presentation). They are all seated in the same area with the cameras facing the crowd. Looks fine. With 20,000 it will look fine. Not every stadium has to be packed to look fine.

Plus Qwest is a fantastic facility.

[JPB]

Yep, "Qwest is a fantastic facility."

Indeed, that is an understatement.

[Luis_Rancagua]

Latest news. It now appears that this is not deal yet.

---------------------------

MLS hasn't picked Seattle, yet

Puget Sound Business Journal (Seattle) - by Jeff Meisner

Friday, September 28, 2007 - 3:21 PM PDT

Major League Soccer is denying a report on SportsIllustrated.com that Seattle has been granted an expansion franchise for the 2009 season.

"I spoke with (MLS President) Mark Abbott yesterday in Kansas City and asked him if we have a deal in Seattle and he said 'no,'" said league spokesman Dan Courtemanche. "Our goal is to announce the fifteenth and sixteenth teams by the end of 2007 or in the first quarter of 2008."

Abbott confirmed that the league is in continuing discussions with Seattle Sounders Managing Director Adrian Hanauer, who has teamed up with Hollywood movie mogul Joe Roth in an attempt to bring a pro soccer team to the Puget Sound region.

"We're excited about the Seattle market and we've been in discussions with Mr. Hanauer and Mr. Roth, but to say the franchise has been awarded is premature," Courtemanche said.

Hanauer declined to comment on the SportsIllustrated.com report. Roth, founder of Revolution Studios in Santa Monica, Calif., could not be reached for comment.

http://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/stories/2007/09/24/daily39.html

[Richard]

Well, the president of MLS has to stick to the official story. SI.com attributed their tip off to an MLS insider. I suspect SI.com is correct in that Seattle has been selected by MLS and all that remains is to formally ink a deal before it can be officially announced for which the plan is late '07 or early '08 per what the MLS prez said. But we shall see.

[DarnCherry]

According to the Sounders owner when asked about it yesterday he said something to the effect of the announcement is premature but not necessarily incorrect.

[VPjr]

Ives Gallercep has been known to jump the gun a bit on his scoops. He is willing to put his neck out there sometimes and risk being wrong. It's pretty likely he's going to be proven right but, like any league, MLS wants to control this story. Even if they have already approved the deal, they want the announcement to be a big event.

Krammerhead, you make some very good points. I will reserve judgement on what I think of QWest until the team starts to play there. If they can get 20,000 people in that facility regularly, it should be just fine. DCUnited plays in a cavernous place and when it's got 20,000+, it can be a rockin joint so there is no reason to believe a modern stadium like QWest can't be the same.

[Luis_Rancagua]

According to MLS Rumors, they are now confirming that it is indeed a done deal. However, it now appears that the Sounders may not retain the old NASL traditional name after all. I personally feel that they should retain the name Sounders, rather than Seattle FC or Seattle United. We got too many of these names now floating around in the league.

------------------------------

Seattle to MLS in '09 - "done deal".

Multiple sources are reporting this morning that Seattle to MLS for the 2009 season is a done deal which will be announced October 11th. An MLSR source contradicted a published report on a blog that stated the club's name would be the Sounders. This source states that there most likely will be a name the club, contest announced and some of the more "traditional" choices will be more in line with what we've seen in MLS expansions lately.

http://mlsrumors.blogspot.com/2007/09/seattle-to-mls-in-09-done-deal.html

[DarnCherry]

quote:Originally posted by VPjr

Ives Gallercep has been known to jump the gun a bit on his scoops. He is willing to put his neck out there sometimes and risk being wrong. It's pretty likely he's going to be proven right but, like any league, MLS wants to control this story. Even if they have already approved the deal, they want the announcement to be a big event.

Krammerhead, you make some very good points. I will reserve judgement on what I think of QWest until the team starts to play there. If they can get 20,000 people in that facility regularly, it should be just fine. DCUnited plays in a cavernous place and when it's got 20,000+, it can be a rockin joint so there is no reason to believe a modern stadium like QWest can't be the same.

Here's a youtube clip of a the Sounders vs Club America game that drew 10,200 to Qwest. Aside from the pitch not looking hot due to the presence of being able to make out football lines on the pitch, the crowd and atmosphere is not too bad. Add another 5,000-10,000 and it would be that much better: