Calgary NASL

[alberta white]

If you can double up on a venue with a team with similar field requirements (rugby and hockey are common bedfellows in the UK) , then cost can be reduced/shared. They also tend to be community sports, ergo community funding (try to avoid a running track it kills the atmosphere-on no account use a cricket field!)

[jloome]

jloome,

Your numbers and mine match very closely. I'd always calculated the costs for a club to run about $2.5 mil annually. Do you have a background in the field? (most people never calculate things like insurance).

Anyway, like I've said many times, it's all a moot point without a proper venue, and it looks like that's where the deep deep pockets will need to come in.

Nah, media. I've just interviewed a lot of guys and followed football for a long time.

The $2.5M is actually fairly rich compared to what some NASL teams are budgeting, but that's a big part of why they're already in trouble and will stay that way semi-permanently until the owners figure out that soccer is a sport you have to spend at a certain level at in order to be successful.

You simply can't go cheap, it has to at least serve the best that market can support, and most of the second division squads aren't even close. It's also why they're not the cities -- as with Montreal, Portland and Vancouver -- being approached to be in MLS.

Realistically, pro clubs in Europe have operated at every level below the premiership/first league with sub-10,000 crowds for decades. They're not all in horrible debt, although few make much money.

And the only way North American urbanites will buy into a "Division 2" team is if it feels like they're putting as much effort into it as a division 1 team, even if they don't have the budget to actually spend like a division 1 team.

A div. 2 team on $2.5M a year could not only make money (barely) but it could compete for a title in year one, assuming it doesn't fall into the other pitfall of professional soccer in North America, which is having a top-heavy and expensive front office, typically stocked with people who know next to nothing about soccer culture.

[jloome]

IT has to be soccer specific in primary function, or you'll end up with artificial turf, because most of these things require some investment buy-in from government, and government wants year-around use.

That doesn't mean you can't use it for other sports, it just means you have to make sure people know its primary purpose is soccer. Given that every major city in North America has waiting lists for soccer field rentals, it should be doable.

[alberta white]

IT has to be soccer specific in primary function, or you'll end up with artificial turf, because most of these things require some investment buy-in from government, and government wants year-around use.

That doesn't mean you can't use it for other sports, it just means you have to make sure people know its primary purpose is soccer. Given that every major city in North America has waiting lists for soccer field rentals, it should be doable.

Primary Function Soccer agreed. I choose rugby as a seconadry as you can't play it on artificial turf. Also asking around no-one come up with a reason for not installing undersoil heating, any reason?.

If you have a SSC in Edmonton surley it can surve both as home to the Pro team as well as hosting the Alberta Major League Play offs and other EDSA events. In that way you hopefully the ASA on side.

[Cooks]

Does the recent USSF ruling stating that "75% of teams participating in a D2 league need to be from the US" force the CSA to sanction a Canadian league to satisfy the recent expansion interest from Canadian cities for the NASL?

If Edmonton and Montreal are in the league and there are 6 US clubs (Brian Quarstad of Inside Minnesota Soccer says that there are currently 5 - http://www.insidemnsoccer.com/2010/08/11/ussf-d2-update-new-standards-set-for-league-current-and-future-owners/ ) then the expansion plans for Canadian clubs goes right out the window. (The USSF also state that there must be 8 teams in a league for it to be sanctioned).

Ottawa, Hamilton, and Vancouver (rumoured to want a D2 club for development) won't be able to join as there would need to be 15 US clubs in the league. That's not possible anytime soon. Any other Canadian city wanting to join would have to convince several new US cities to follow suit. Yikes!

Does the CSA get off it's a$$ and do something? They were not even at the D2 discussion table.

If Victoria were ready to step up, that would mean a possible 6 clubs (Montreal, Edmonton, Ottawa, Hamilton, Vancouver, Victoria). Would two more be needed to form an 8 club league? (Does the CSA have similar size restrictions?) Montreal is also said to want to keep a team in D2 when they move to MLS. Would this then make the notion attractive to TFC?

Does Calgary have a future role in a posible league? Right owner + right venue = right on.

Stay tuned...

[Macksam]

Stay tuned...

Do you know something we don't?

[Cooks]

Do you know something we don't?

No. Didn't mean to mislead. Was just trying to build up film noire-like suspense.

[paul-collins]

If Edmonton and Montreal are in the league and there are 6 US clubs (Brian Quarstad of Inside Minnesota Soccer says that there are currently 5 - http://www.insidemnsoccer.com/2010/08/11/ussf-d2-update-new-standards-set-for-league-current-and-future-owners/ ) then the expansion plans for Canadian clubs goes right out the window. (The USSF also state that there must be 8 teams in a league for it to be sanctioned).

I think Quarstad is referring to USL specifically rather than USSF D-2 (imagine a combined NASL/USL - that's a total of 9 US teams, 1 PR team and the various Canadian teams). edit: having read the article more closely, I see you're referring to there being 5 teams that pass the financial litmus test, so nevermind...

Does the CSA get off it's a$$ and do something? They were not even at the D2 discussion table.

If Victoria were ready to step up, that would mean a possible 6 clubs (Montreal, Edmonton, Ottawa, Hamilton, Vancouver, Victoria). Would two more be needed to form an 8 club league? (Does the CSA have similar size restrictions?)

CSA regulations on their website state that a league must have 4 teams. (labelled page 20, it's actually the 21st page of the pdf) That said, going back to Quarstad, he states that it's a FIFA requirement to have 8 teams, not a USSF one. I couldn't find the relevant reg in a quick search.

[Cooks]

I guess the question is - would Ottawa and Victoria pass this kind of financial litmus test? (of which I am personally in favour with)

[Blue and White Army]

I really don't understand this 75%-Yank-clubs rule. I appreciate that the USSF is interested in furthering Yank football, but I see Canadian club participation in US leagues (MLS, D2, PDL, etc.) as being mutually beneficial. Why has the USSF turned this into some sort of zero-sum conquest issue?

As for a Canadian D2 league... haven't we been through this debate countless times? Geography is on the side of a joint US-Canada league. If Canada couldn't support a pro-league prior to TFC joining MLS, are we really going to sustain a national D2 league when our top three cities/clubs are in MLS?

[SthMelbRed]

Imposing a cap on the non-USA based clubs in a D2 league would be the height of stupidity. It's basically making the two options to be have a strong league where D2-level USA players can develop and compete against decent opposition, or have no league. If there were enough willing and able US ownership groups, they'd have already come out of the woodwork. As it is, Vancouver, Montreal, and PRI employ a few Americans on top of their domestic players that will be out of jobs if this moronic regulation ever came into force. Allowing any willing ownership groups from Canada to compete in a predominantly US-based D2 league is best for everybody involved because it means more playing jobs for players from Canada and the US.

[Macksam]

I really don't understand this 75%-Yank-clubs rule. I appreciate that the USSF is interested in furthering Yank football, but I see Canadian club participation in US leagues (MLS, D2, PDL, etc.) as being mutually beneficial. Why has the USSF turned this into some sort of zero-sum conquest issue?

As for a Canadian D2 league... haven't we been through this debate countless times? Geography is on the side of a joint US-Canada league. If Canada couldn't support a pro-league prior to TFC joining MLS, are we really going to sustain a national D2 league when our top three cities/clubs are in MLS?

I was under the impression that Vancouver and Montreal would still field u23 sides after they move up to MLS.

[Blue and White Army]

I was under the impression that Vancouver and Montreal would still field u23 sides after they move up to MLS.

There may still be D2 clubs in Vancouver and Montreal, but the biggest draw in both cities will obviolusly be MLS. That would make having a financially-viable national D2 league even more difficult.

[Cheeta]

I really don't understand this 75%-Yank-clubs rule. I appreciate that the USSF is interested in furthering Yank football, but I see Canadian club participation in US leagues (MLS, D2, PDL, etc.) as being mutually beneficial. Why has the USSF turned this into some sort of zero-sum conquest issue?

Been playing with the idea that maybe the USSF has inside information as relates to the potential arrival of an MLS sponsored 2nd division.

No, I'm not suggesting promotion/relegation or any of that. I'm suggesting the big heads over at MLS HQ might be playing with the idea of an MLS Division 2 development league in the very near future. Expanding the brand into markets which would never have much actual chance of getting an MLS side (or be welcomed into MLS for that matter).

MLS & the USSF have a pretty cozy relationship, if it comes down to potentially competing Div 2 leagues I'd bet the USSF would do what they can to stack the cards in favour of an MLS 2nd Division. Good place to start is shutting out the Canadian teams. So if it's unlikely there can be a stable NASL without Canadian franchises the 75% quota could force the better American owners into seeking other alternatives, like MLS 2.

Just speculating.

By the way, the USSF club quota could prove to be a God-send for us. We may actually be closer to reaching the critical mass necessary for a domestic division 2 than appears. And even if we're not if an MLS 2 does come down the pipe and all MLS franchises are required to participate in it we could still be seeing at least 3 more professional clubs (if not more) in Canada.

[Blue and White Army]

^ I think the USSF is grooming MLS2 as well (and I do think that promotion/relegation is in their plans, but only in the long-term).

Given that some MLS clubs are having a difficult time getting soccer-specific stadia (e.g. San Jose Earthquakes moved to Houston primarily because they couldn't get council assistance for a SSS, and DC United still don't have a deal), asking all of the D2 clubs to have SSS is quite the demand. It sounds more like something that MLS would want, and that MLS lobbied USSF to make the SSS requirement.

Odd that top-flight clubs in Europe and South America play in multi-purpose stadia with massive running tracks, but the likes of Austin Aztex are expected to do better. I suppose this would be one way that U.S. soccer could get more respect compared to established international leagues, but it's a big ask of the current (and future) D2 clubs.

[ted]

By the way, the USSF club quota could prove to be a God-send for us. We may actually be closer to reaching the critical mass necessary for a domestic division 2 than appears.

If by "God-send" you mean an act of God like Hurricane Katrina or the Haiti Earthquake I agree.

What exactly do you think, "the critical mass necessary for a domestic division 2 " would be?

[TFCRegina]

If by "God-send" you mean an act of God like Hurricane Katrina or the Haiti Earthquake I agree.

What exactly do you think, "the critical mass necessary for a domestic division 2 " would be?

Actually it could be quite beneficial any way you think about it.

Simple thing about the USSF standards...it's actually not all that big of a threat.

First: NCAA, the primary development tool, alongside PDL does not provide enough development for American players. What this means is that American development is not going to improve, not through these mediums. The US has very little invested into college soccer, so we can foreseeably see the NCAA having much success. PDL has a lot of very amateur soccer as well. There are few good programs (and a lot of the good ones are located in Canada).

Second: Div 2 and Div 3 soccer in the US is a mess. Teams are barely stable and not a lot of development takes place there. Players that are developed tend to end up in Europe rather than MLS. The Div2/Div3 mess from USL/NASL has actually worked to Canada's favour, because with Montreal and Van City moving up, we're getting more teams, even if we're capped at 25%. Not a big deal I say, even with the domestic rules.

Why don't the domestic rules concern me? That's how they've been operating the whole time in USL/NASL. Canadians and Americans count as domestics and yet Vancouver and Montreal still employed large numbers of Canadians to Americans.

Third: Canada has seen strong division three growth and, as evidenced above, this will continue. However, MLSE needs to open the wallet (along with Saputo and Kerfoot) and be willing to pay small to medium transfer fees to pillage the CSL of talent. It's right there and they're improving the development of players as we speak. The US is not implementing anything comparable, and their Div2/Div3 is starting to fail due to heavy infighting. Team insolvency has existed in Canada in the past, but the CSL seems to be getting things right this time.

Point Four: There's still a lot of (young) Canadians being released from European clubs (sometimes Div 1 and Div 2) and these bring experience with them back to Canada and likely can compete. The level of MLS is going to slow in growth over the next five years because the quality of NCAA/PDL isn't enough to supply the needs of the league.

Point Five: Even if MLS clubs develop Academies, their academies will supply their own needs and not Canadian needs. Canadian clubs will have academies with Canadians (primarily anyway), American clubs will have academies with Americans, and these will exclusively provide talent to them.

Point Six: Americans are ultimately going to want to play at home, in their home markets. It doesn't mean that they can't play in Canada, but guys like Gargan and Barrett will likely end up in Philly and Portland, respectively, as much as I like both players.

[Macksam]

Actually it could be quite beneficial any way you think about it.

Simple thing about the USSF standards...it's actually not all that big of a threat.

First: NCAA, the primary development tool, alongside PDL does not provide enough development for American players. What this means is that American development is not going to improve, not through these mediums. The US has very little invested into college soccer, so we can foreseeably see the NCAA having much success. PDL has a lot of very amateur soccer as well. There are few good programs (and a lot of the good ones are located in Canada).

Second: Div 2 and Div 3 soccer in the US is a mess. Teams are barely stable and not a lot of development takes place there. Players that are developed tend to end up in Europe rather than MLS. The Div2/Div3 mess from USL/NASL has actually worked to Canada's favour, because with Montreal and Van City moving up, we're getting more teams, even if we're capped at 25%. Not a big deal I say, even with the domestic rules.

Why don't the domestic rules concern me? That's how they've been operating the whole time in USL/NASL. Canadians and Americans count as domestics and yet Vancouver and Montreal still employed large numbers of Canadians to Americans.

Third: Canada has seen strong division three growth and, as evidenced above, this will continue. However, MLSE needs to open the wallet (along with Saputo and Kerfoot) and be willing to pay small to medium transfer fees to pillage the CSL of talent. It's right there and they're improving the development of players as we speak. The US is not implementing anything comparable, and their Div2/Div3 is starting to fail due to heavy infighting. Team insolvency has existed in Canada in the past, but the CSL seems to be getting things right this time.

Point Four: There's still a lot of (young) Canadians being released from European clubs (sometimes Div 1 and Div 2) and these bring experience with them back to Canada and likely can compete. The level of MLS is going to slow in growth over the next five years because the quality of NCAA/PDL isn't enough to supply the needs of the league.

Point Five: Even if MLS clubs develop Academies, their academies will supply their own needs and not Canadian needs. Canadian clubs will have academies with Canadians (primarily anyway), American clubs will have academies with Americans, and these will exclusively provide talent to them.

Point Six: Americans are ultimately going to want to play at home, in their home markets. It doesn't mean that they can't play in Canada, but guys like Gargan and Barrett will likely end up in Philly and Portland, respectively, as much as I like both players.

To the USA's defense, they are trying to find a better way to develop players as well. Even they see the flaws of the NCAA.

[TFCRegina]

To the USA's defense, they are trying to find a better way to develop players as well. Even they see the flaws of the NCAA.

The best way to do so is pro academies, if you ask me anyway. And they'll come to see that. It's one of many reasons the MLS, especially this year, has ramped that up. But again, our academies will be almost entirely Canadians.

[Macksam]

The best way to do so is pro academies, if you ask me anyway. And they'll come to see that. It's one of many reasons the MLS, especially this year, has ramped that up. But again, our academies will be almost entirely Canadians.

Ofcourse.

[ted]

Actually it could be quite beneficial any way you think about it.

Simple thing about the USSF standards...it's actually not all that big of a threat.

I am confused. I was asking Cheeta about a new national D2 league. I don't really see a problem with the new D2 regulations and I have said elsewhere I assume they are somewhat negotiable to our benefit.

I am questioning the implication that these new rules would be too onerous and would somehow spur the creation of an all-Canadian D2. I think that would be a mistake.

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

I suspect the USSF's main concern at this point is having a single strong division II (i.e. rather than having a two way NASL and USL-D1 split made possible by having both leagues padding out their numbers with weak and undercapitalized franchises including exotic and unlikely locations like Antigua and Barbuda). The standards appear to me to have been drafted to make it very difficult for either the NASL or the USL to put together the numbers needed to be sanctioned without reaching a compromise with the other side.

http://www.uslsoccer.com/home/432974.html

[strobe_z]

It is closing to 2012.How time flies.Look forward the 2012 Olymoic Games.

I'd like to draw to the attention of a moderator that I think this is a spam account... One line, off-topic comments and and link to a retail business are ominous clues...

[StartingEleven]

Non Profit is the way to go for NASL level Clubs. Get the Alberta Minor Soccer Association involved and find a Kerfoot, or a Saputo to handle the rest. Surely with a province as financially stable as Alberta, someone could emerge.

I would stay away from any minor soccer assoc. in Alberta or the ASA for that matter until the ASA and the CSA experience some reform. Association involvement in a pro soccer team in Alberta would be suicide right now unfortunately, but it will change soon I hope.

I love the fact that some of you guys are interested in this and pushing for it here in Calgary, but Pro soccer in Calgary will never be, there just isn't a strong enough fan base here, and the very few that follow football here would never pay to watch semi-pro ball. Thats just the harsh reality of it in Calgary.

[superbrad]

Spurs? Na.

What is Calgary known for throughout north america? The stampede. We even made it on the MASH tv show where Winchester was complaining about his ruined hat "it looks like it was dragged through the Calgary Stampede". People may not know where Calgary is or what the stampede is but they are linked in their minds. So lets use that name recognition. I humbly propose:

Stampede City FC

As to where can we play we could try the Stampede grounds. It seats 12,000 and is already built. Since the horse races left there is only 1 month that it can't be used for (setup, stampede, take down). It is off the downtown core, right on the c-train line. We might have to do artificial turf but the Limonta / GeoSafeplay stuff isn't too bad.

Would be sweet. Thanks for kicking this off Cooks. I stink at art so I will leave the logo to others who have talent in that area. I would recommend a color scheme that is NOT red. Too much of that in Calgary already, hard to differentiate ourselves. Black and Gold?

Stampede in Calgary (or Northlands in Edmonton) should be kept out of anything related to prosport. The stampede 'mafia' is a group of old boys who have proved they are inept at running anything positive other than rodeo. I'd keep any team as far away as possible. In the next 5 years I don't think either Stampede or Northlands will have anything to do with NHL hockey - keep them out of any new sports venture. Their involvement would doom the team to failure in a sport that would begin on the cliffs edge.