Minnesota United FC was officially announced as the next MLS expansion franchise yesterday, to start play in 2018 — assuming a plan for a soccer-only stadium is in place by then.
And if not? MLS commissioner Don Garber made sure not to address that yesterday, saying only that “we believe our league is going to be built, and ultimately be more successful, if we can play in stadiums that are our own.” But it’s certainly a possibility that, if a stadium doesn’t happen promptly, the franchise could be held up, a la David Beckham’s Miami morass.
United owner Bill McGuire is still hedging about what he’ll ask for in terms of public subsidies for a stadium, telling Minnesota Public Radio that “we haven’t asked anybody or laid anything out yet and it’s premature to talk about any of that stuff.” Gov. Mark Dayton, for his part, said, “They need to fully realize that it is something they are going to have to pay for out of their own private resources,” but also said he might be willing to help build roads and infrastructure to support a stadium. It certainly smells like a “team pays for construction, state pays for everything else” scenario, which especially if you get into things like tax breaks can start to add up to some real money, but with a formal stadium proposal not expected until July 1, it could be a while yet before we know exactly what he United owners are asking for, and what MLS is willing to do to ensure that they get it.
Maybe they’ve actually learned something from the Viking’s stadium fiasco? At this rate Minneapolis is going to have one of the largest stadia/arena to population ratios out there, with a team dedicated venue for every major sport. How in the hell does anyone see this as sustainable long-term?
And the Twin Cities have been through this before, too: Don’t forget that the Met Center was torn down largely because of arena glut. (And then St. Paul promptly built another new arena for the Wild.)
Wait didn’t MLS do this before in Miami like 2 years ago? Still no Miami team or stadium.
What I don’t get is why they’d pass over Sacramento which seems to have a new stadium in the works, has an existing soccer stadium now, and have a ridiculous amount of support for a D3 soccer side (so much so that it’s rivaling their NorCal neighbors in San Jose). All this to go with two markets that have decent and tepid fan support respectively, and a shaky and non-existent stadium plan respectively.
Why was NYCFC allowed to start playing when they have no stadium deal on the horizon?
Because one does not simply turn down the Sheik’s and Yankees massive amounts of money. That and they’ll get a stadium eventually. With as much money as they have they could lose enough to fund a SSS once the finally get the site they want.
Straight from the horse’s mouth (http://www.twincities.com/sports/ci_27785153/mls-minnesota-expansion-deal-rests-ability-build-stadium)
“We would then, as an ownership group, take a step back and decide whether we wanted to come to Minnesota… We have other options around the country, some of which with very detailed soccer-stadium plans, and we would have to make that decision at that time.”
This is so emblematic of the MLS business model that I can’t even shake my head at it anymore.
“…. that are our own…”
Wait. This must be some deployment of the term “own” with which I am unfamiliar. If you own something, you have to pay to either buy or build it. And if it is property, you need to pay taxes on it.
Is that really what Garber means???
You have to have a product someone gives a shit about before you go the extortion route. These soccer guys have a case of major chutzpah, even by my lofty standards.