MLS announces San Diego as 30th team in 2025 for $500 million
- Thread starter MMC
- Start date
Nice stadium and just slightly above the typical capacity at 35K (most are 25K). But, I recall that there were issues with the stadium during SD St football inaugural games where many fans suffered from heat stroke (and this is in September I believe). Imagine what it would be like in July and August for fans?
Hopefully they have added some extended covers to provide some shade or play at a better time of the day for the fans.
Hopefully they have added some extended covers to provide some shade or play at a better time of the day for the fans.
The city was going through an unusually hot stretch of high 90s temperatures that week when the stadium first opened. The city usually doesn't get above 80 even in the hottest days of the summer. That's a major part of its appeal, the year-round moderate temperatures. They should be fine the way they are.
MMC
Global Moderator
Unfortunately they made the inaugural game an early afternoon start (to get more eyeballs), so people were just baking and they retreated from their seats. Not necessarily a problem just with that stadium. I remember being in the bleachers at Yankee Stadium for a July day game and a woman a few seats over passed out.
Most of the San Diego Wave home games have been 7pm probably to combat any issues with the sun. My friend who works for the Wave also told me this weekend that there would be an MLS announcement forthcoming.
No Fun Shogun
34-38-61-10-13-15
Man, I just don’t get the financials of modern sports if a MLS expansion team is worth $500 million.
MMC
Global Moderator
Not to mention almost all of these clubs do not play in the NFL stadium. A few do like Atlanta and Seattle who both draw 40K plus. NE too, but they draw a lot less. Something in the low 20's in a 70K stadium. Vancouver gets under half of the 50K stadium, though they do curtain off the upper bowl. Carolina also sharing with the NFL Panthers. But, over 20 of the clubs have their own stadium under 30K in capacity which fits their needs. So, that's another cost to consider.
I do wonder if the economics do dictate a valuation of $500 mill for an expansion team. Would mean that the top clubs would be pushing $750 mill or so.
varsaku
Registered User
It has alot to do with growth potential. MLS is still in its infancy when compared to the other big 4 leagues.
PCSPounder
Stadium Groupie
MLS had a 3-division setup for a couple years… then dumped it. Truth is that they have come to realize that MLS fans are very aware of the rest of the world and thus do NOT want to see things the way the North American big 4 are set up, BUT the league compromises to an east-west setup. And I don’t think they’re going to change that because the league knows who the actual audience is, plus there’s a simplicity to this format.
GKJ
Global Moderator
- Feb 27, 2002
- 187,317
- 39,345
Does MLS have to stop? It's not like they're the biggest league in the world where they have to worry about it being watered down, especially with such a large pool of players and accessibility to the sport. They can take the expansion fees as long as the teams and stadium situations are healthy.
PCSPounder
Stadium Groupie
But there is even a point where MLS can over-expand. Doesn’t Chicago Fire want to win another title someday?
It would be interesting to see them buy USL outright and start fielding lower divisions such that expansion COULD always happen and, perhaps, there would be some sort of Byzantine pro/rel structure protecting as many owners as possible while saying it exists. Sort of like Mexico.
Big McLargehuge
Fragile Traveler
GKJ
Global Moderator
- Feb 27, 2002
- 187,317
- 39,345
I'm not saying that winning the championship isn't important, but from a macro sense, for what USA soccer is trying to accomplish...is it? Their focus is just trying to produce the highest level of talent (and entertainment value) they can. So long as enough exists, they want as much as they can handle.
I guess there can be a point where they can overexpand, but as long as the talent level outpaces that, I don't know. The health of the league seems pretty strong, and as a 'minor league' are closing in on the NHL in the sports hierarchy in the US.
KevFu
Registered User
Yeah, it's a lot less about the actual value of the team, but more about the limited supply in a closed league and what MLS could become...
Right now, MLS teams have the same GATE revenue as an NHL team, but about 1/4 or 1/5 the payroll.
Short-term investors in MLS will expect that the media revenue will rise before the payroll does.
Long-term investors in MLS will think of a future in 50 years where MLS is on par with the leagues of Germany, Spain, Italy and France; and their family buying an MLS team now will be George Steinbrenner buying the Yankees for $8.8 million in 1973.
I've said it so much you're all sick of it, but the big mistake MLS made was expanding from 12-16 teams to 30 teams for expansion fees and TV markets like all the other closed North American leagues.
They SHOULD have launched "MLS-2" and sold a lot more teams to THAT, then had YEARS where they "Expanded MLS via promotion." They'd have sold twice as many expansion teams, had epic TV coverage and popularity, and basically had a closed MLS branded league in EVERY market instead of picking half.
varsaku
Registered User
MLS is already among the top soccer leagues in the world when it comes to revenue and attendance despite having no where the level or prestige or history of the other more prominent leagues. With time and gradual growth, it only makes sense that there is significant room for growth.
I highly doubt it stops at 32. MLS is in a sport that expansion will never dilute the talent on the field. All they need to do is loosen the international roster spot limit to mitigate dilution of domestic talent.
They have actually done a much better job of controlling player wages that doomed the NASL. NASL was spending way beyond their revenue to get star players. MLS through its very convoluted rules managed to keep team in check.
KevFu
Registered User
MLS' master plan is tied to the development process for US Soccer.
US sports has no development system. We DISCOVER talent in sports through a non-system: 330 million people, the cream that rises to the top (Youth, HS, College). 30 pro teams don't NEED more than that in other sports.
US Soccer realized that the rest of the world has the academy system, TRAINING kids 12+ and CREATING talent.
So US Soccer started their own men's academy system in 2006. It was a really rocky road at first; but they got the significant buy-in from MLS with one simple thing: MLS teams OWN their academy products and keep the money when they SELL THEM to better leagues.
US Soccer and MLS settled on the short-term role of MLS: CREATE better American players, and EXPORT talent to the rest of the world FIRST.
Results will follow: As we funnel our soccer population base through the academy, ALL the American pro soccer players will just be significantly better going forward, and the teams will get richer and richer selling players to better leagues."
The long-term role/goal is to reach the tipping point: All the money from transfer exports and the quantity of high quality world soccer players who are Americans, mean "If we KEEP all these guys... we could be as good of a league as Germany or Italy!"
How long that will take is anyone's guess.
The upside of MLS expansion is that more MLS teams means more academies developing players. The downside is that more MLS teams means more talent needed to hit that tipping point.
GKJ
Global Moderator
- Feb 27, 2002
- 187,317
- 39,345
PCSPounder
Stadium Groupie
I want to say that half the ‘22 World Cup team came from either FC Dallas or Philadelphia’s academies. It’s really uneven at present. In better news, USL teams made some semi-decent player sales to MLS (who, at first, wouldn’t entertain that idea) and even 1 or two to Europe last year. You don’t even have to be in MLS to get the process right. That may be better news for US Soccer than for MLS.
MLS only announced they would try to become a net seller in the last couple years. So they’re not there yet. They could even be passed up in this aspect in this country. Food for thought, anyway.
KevFu
Registered User
I know Annoying US Soccer Fan has been saying Soccer is exploding and growth is imminent for the last 40+ years, so I get the pessimistic response.
And yes, the final end game is still a long way off... BUT the new system is bearing fruit in ways that were previously unimaginable.
USA was FOURTH in exporting players in 2021, and SEVENTH in transfer fees from league exports. We're alongside Germany and Italy in exports/export dollars.
Getting $100m in transfer fees isn't a big deal on the world scale. But it's how we're doing now vs how we used to do it. We're not loaning our 24-year old best National Team player to Europe so he gets better training. MLS is selling dozens of our prospects to European Clubs for $2-6m each.
In 2018 we set our record for most MLS transfers to Europe with 10. We've broken that three times since, and sold 33 guys in 2022.
Yup. MLS is still a net buying, not a net seller. But they'll get there because they keep breaking records for their export transfers (set a record of 10 in 2018-19, and broken it 3x since... now 33 this year!)
It took a LONG TIME for Pro US Soccer to figure out exactly where they fit into the world structure, and how US Soccer and MLS work together, but they FINALLY figured it out. And once they did, it was going to take years for the new setup to bear fruit.
The 2022 World Cup team and 2019-2022 transfers is the first class of Develop Academy exports. Kids who entered the system at a young-enough age to be developed properly.
You're right that it's really TWO academies who've been dominant: FC Dallas and Philly. But we talk about leagues being "Copy cat" when teams have success. You don't think the rest of MLS is looking at the millions in transfer fees those two have gotten and thought "We should invest in our academies!"
Voight
#winning
They've come a looooong way from Anschutz & Hunt owning half the leagues teams.
Growth potential would have them making good with the Raleigh and Sacramento markets which should've gotten teams, not entering a San Diego where they overlap with the Padres.
PCSPounder
Stadium Groupie
Why do you ignore the Kings and Canes? Or, for that matter, Sacramento Republic and North Carolina FC?
After all, when We The People enact eminent domain over the whole sporting shooting match, it’ll all be pro/rel!
KevFu
Registered User
All three of those markets are soccer hot beds and probably should have had teams a lot earlier.
This is part of the reason I deeply believe that my idea of "Make a second-tier league of 30-40 MLS branded teams, and then expand the top league via promotion; add a third tier and you have MLS teams everywhere!" was the right path.
There's some places that aren't big enough for an MLS team, but are just soccer hotbeds. THOSE are the places where an MLS Academy will help the league and US soccer the most.
Philly and Dallas are doing their best job with their soccer academies; but PHI and DAL are not where our best players have come from, and when you pick the biggest cities for TV markets to put teams in, you're making kids MOVE to expensive areas to attend development academies.
The second-tier markets would be better at developing players simply because THEY HAVE TO BE in order to be successful!
