I know what you’ve been worried about since it was announced that the St. Louis Rams would be moving back to Los Angeles, and take it from KMOX-AM in St. Louis, you can stop worrying:
No New Stadium Doesn’t Kill St. Louis’ MLS Hopes
I think we can all breathe easier now.
(Joking aside, a soccer-only stadium would be vastly cheaper than a $1 billion NFL stadium, and so wouldn’t require $477 million in public subsidies. And people in St. Louis likely wouldn’t be any more disinterested in MLS than they’ve been in the Rams — sorry, Rams fans, I’m not talking about you, just your neighbors — so this is maybe actually a legitimate news story and not just using the Rams as an excuse to make people read about a soccer franchise that may or may not ever exist? Okay, probably not.)
Or why not just renovate that giant empty dome downtown with minimal cost and (hmpph hmppph) *dragged away*
Garber is already talking to people surely. They will eventually get to 28 teams*** Sacramento is ready to make the jump with the success they have had. They will be team #25. Once an ownership group and stadium plan can be made, St. Louis is ready to go too as team #26. Dropping an MLS team after a major sports franchise left town worked REAL well in Seattle. Just put that wallet back in your pocket before you talk St. Louis.
***this makes the most sense as a stopping point (LOL will they ever stop?) because it creates 2 14-team divisions, HvH intradivision, 1 game interdivision, 40 games total. This is 6 more than what they play now but only 2 more than EPL and one of Jurgen’s complaints is MLS players don’t get as much competition, quality and quantity, as the guys who go to Europe
That sounds like the worst rebound relationship ever, even with the Rams’ ineptitude over the last decade-plus.
St. Louis is actually one of the better soccer cities in the US. When the game was moribund post NASL everywhere else in the US, St. Louis maintained a really strong support of the game. In fact it’s baffling there hasn’t been a team put their yet. Especially as part of Garber’s strategy seems to be to cultivate regional rivalries (even where none exists). But, if the Cubs v. Cards are any barometer, a St. Louis v. Chicago rivalry would be much easier to kick up than Chicago v. Kansas City or Columbus.
So independent of all the Rams’ nonsense, MLS in St. Louis was never a bad idea.
Just the pesky details of ownership group and stadium to be worked out.
Also, for its supposed status as a city where people are fanatical about the game, their pro teams have not been supported commensurate with the hype over the years.
The original Steamers were a fantastic success back in the 80s, but the (original) NASL’s Stars struggled (despite a largely homegrown lineup) and moved to Anaheim. More recent outdoor teams like the PDL’s Lions, D2 AC St. Louis and WPS’ St. Louis Athletica have not resonated with the populace.
The latest USL team drew well last season (though the recent flooding threatens their season now, it seems), so that’s a positive. But you would need someone with a lot more money than that group has and a plan for an actual soccer stadium appropriate for where MLS is going to even be considered. Sacramento is way ahead of everybody, and even San Antonio – not exactly a traditional soccer hotbed as STL is billed – is in a better position.
If they’re going to ever be more than the question, “Hey, why doesn’t MLS have a team in St. Louis?” someone is going to have to step up.
(And, no, it would not be the worst rebound relationship ever.)
Stl does have a strong soccer history, Michael. But one of the reasons behind the AC St. Louis experiment was to prove to Garber and co that MLS could work there.
As you may recall, it really didn’t advance that cause…
The failed St. Louis soccer teams played in failed leagues. NASL, MISL, ect. Or they played way out in Fenton (currently underwater), or across the river in Edwardsville. It’s hard to market a team “major league” when they’re playing in an Illinois horseradish field. (or underwater).
Based on the logic here, because the Pottsville (PA) Maroons were one of the best teams of the NFL in the mid-1920s, the NFL should ask the Raiders to move there today. Tradition!
If you haven’t noticed, there is no “upper limit” on MLS franchises. They will not be limited by geography, size, pool of decent players, or a clean division of conference teams…just make sure you have a check and some free real estate from the city to develop, and you’re in.
St. Louis in not worthy beyond the Cardinals or Blues
Thanks for you input, Shawn. Great spelling.
An MLS team would work well in St. Louis. Of course, it’s still a pipe dream, but I think it would do well there. Despite what you’ve heard, it’s actually a very good sports town. It just doesn’t support the NFL because the NFL doesn’t support the fans there. If you had an active, engaged ownership committed to the region, it would do very well. (Of course, I hope no tax money is spent on the stadium, but I’m not holding my breath on that point.)
Sacramento is the most ready (like last year). They’re practically standing there with shovels ready to break ground on an amazing new stadium. If MLS has any sense at all, they will get Sacramento into the league ASAP. Their most likely entry partner would be San Antonio. Their MLS effort is backed by the Spurs ownership group, who just bought the stadium of the San Antonio Scorpions NASL team. All they really need to do is come up with $50-$80 million to expand the stadium to 18,500 seats. Sacramento looks to be ready no later than 2018. San Antonio closer to 2020.
After that is where things get interesting, particularly for St. Louis. My money would be on NASL’s Indy Eleven to be Team 27, but their stadium push has hit a wall. They do not have enough money to build one and good luck getting those taxpayers to pay for one. St. Louis is an amazing soccer market, but no deep-pocketed investors have yet emerged to take up the cause. We’ll see.
I am 100% certain that so long as somebody waves a $100m check in Don Garber’s face, both Sacramento and St. Louis will get MLS teams eventually.
The Plans for a STL soccer specific stadium, downtown, not in a flood zone, already exist. This could be done for a small fraction of the cost to do the NLF/MLS stadium, and would be a better fan experience to boot. I live 100 miles from STL, but I would buy season tickets if this was the stadium.
http://spacestl.com/an-mls-stadium-as-better-urban-infill-and-the-greatest-sports-street-in-america/
I just moved here from Charleston, and supported the Battery since I was in middle school. I was shocked to find there was not more of a soccer presence here; not even a proper place to go watch a pro team exhibition game. This would definitely fix that.