<b>"Talking Point"</b> is our new feature where we'll take an occasional look at some of the issues affecting MLS and/or the global game today, obviously solving all the problems that arise along the way.
We're going to kick things off with a look at the future development of Major League Soccer.
Is continuing to expand the League the way ahead or should MLS get to 20 teams and then take a step back to re-evaluate some of the clubs already in there?
We share our thoughts and talk to MLS Commissioner Don Garber to get his views on the matter.
[PRBREAK][/PRBREAK]
<center><b>**********</b></center>
Everyone is always talking about expansion when it comes to the future of Major League Soccer.
MLS Commissioner Don Garber has already made it clear that the 20th team in Major League Soccer will be in New York. Whether that team will be the Cosmos, is starting to look less likely all the time, but this has dragged on for so long now that nothing would really surprise me with it any more.
Putting a second team into New York has never struck me as the best move that MLS could make at this moment in time, but with the Red Bulls not even being in New York state, never mind the city itself, I guess you can argue that this will really be the first team in the Big Apple.
Outside of New York, you have cities like Orlando, Atlanta and even Carolina who want to get in on the action.
Orlando City have a new owner in Brazilian Flavio Augusto da Silva. A man with big plans and seemingly deep pockets. A potential $80 million investment is on the table, along with approval for a new 19,000 capacity soccer specific stadium in city's downtown area. If these plans come to fruition, it's hard to say that they don't deserve at least a very strong look at joining MLS despite previous issues in Florida.
There is no timescale as to when NY2 would join the League, and neither is there any timescale as to how long it would then be before any further expansion is considered.
If a team has the facilities and the money to join the party, it would be very hard for the MLS bigwigs to say no or try to hurry proceedings along.
But enough about expansion. What about those teams that simply aren't performing in Major League Soccer as it is? I'm not just talking on the pitch, but off it as well.
How long does MLS give these teams to turn it around? Should they look at relocating existing teams that are simply not meeting expectations, or even a basic minimum standard on regular occasions, before looking at making the League bigger?
The issue of relocating clubs is one that I find very hard to talk about calmly. Full disclosure, I hate franchise football with a passion.
I am an AFC Wimbledon fan, long time Dons Trust member, and thus part owner of the fan owned club. I've seen what franchise football does to a football team, but at the same time, I accept that I am in a different country and different culture now and sporting franchises are basically the norm over here. It still doesn't make it sit any more comfortably for me though but you have to look at this topic with an open mind.
MLS has some wonderful success stories in Los Angeles, Seattle, Salt Lake and DC, whether they be on the pitch or in the stands or both. Portland may not have been doing the business on the field, but they are blowing the rest of MLS away off it, with 35 consecutive sellouts and a passion in the seats unrivalled in the League.
Vancouver are successful and growing, and other sides are doing well in putting together quality footballing sides and building up their fanbase.
But there are concerns. Some clubs can get the fan numbers but can't give them the success that deserves. Others can have moderate successes on the pitch but struggle to build a decent fanbase and keep their fans happy. Then there's Chivas.
In the east, New England have had some success on the pitch, but struggle to draw decent crowds off it at times, have major stadium issues and then there was the whole situation last season with "The Fort".
TFC draw average crowds of 18,155, based on ticket sales. They don't all turn up, but the money has been made. Despite these great numbers, they don't seem to be able to buy a playoff place and their front office revolving door needs to be replaced regularly through overuse.
And what do you do with a problem like Chivas? Officially they averaged 13,056 last season. Not quite sure how from the games I watched, although hosting the Galaxy at least once a season obviously helps them a lot. They can't seem to get it right either on or off the pitch and have long since become the League's joke club (despite Toronto's best efforts to try and take the crown).
So what do you do with Chivas? Well they've gone for the Hispanic rebranding this season. Let's see what they try next year. Become the LA Aztecs? Move to San Diego? Offer a free taco salad with every ticket? (The taco salads at the soon to be renamed Home Depot Center are superb and recommended btw!).
Should Major League Soccer just call it quits with Chivas? Give their owners some money back, thank them for all their efforts and move on to somewhere new. Somewhere that can attract the fans and put a winning product on the pitch.
I would much prefer that option than moving the club lock, stock and barrel to another city, renaming them, but still pretending it's the same club.
So yes, I would rather see clubs kicked out of MLS, or wound up as it were (although the D2 option would be still available), rather than relocated. And yes, I would rather see them put out of their misery than flogging a dead horse and dragging the League down, whilst it grows too big at the same time and adds other new cities into the mix.
But really, you never want to see a club die because they have supporters that do care. There may not be a lot in some cases, but they deserve their club and need rewarded with some turnaround in fortunes.
That's what I would like, but what about the MLS Commissioner Don Garber himself?
When we attended a roundtable with Garber in Vancouver last Friday, we put some of those questions to him and to his credit, he answered them fully and frankly.
Are MLS concerned with the regularly underperforming and undersupported teams? And once the magic number of 20 has been reached, would the League look at relocating existing teams to new markets before looking to expand further or is expansion still going to continue to be the way forward for Major League Soccer?
<i>"You never go into a process like this saying we're going to move that team, we're going to move that team. You guys are living in a market where professional sports leagues have teams that are not doing as well as those that are doing well at the top of the spectrum. That's a part of the character of professional sports in North America.
"Not everybody is going to be selling out every game and not everybody is going to be performing at the highest level.
"Just because they're not performing well, doesn't mean you think about moving them. What you do think about is how do I make them better. So we're putting staff in certain markets to help them with tickets sales and we're trying to work with them on getting more engaged with the community. We're trying to find out if they have the right stadium situations and in some of those cases, put Toronto aside right now, there are things that have to get better.
"Chivas have gone through a major rebranding. One of the owners took interest away from the other owner. They've got a Mexican coach that they've brought in. They've just brought in a bunch of Mexican players for the first time. It's owned by a Mexican club and they haven't had any Mexican players since 2005. There's been quite a lot of Mexican players in Major League Soccer but not on Chivas. That'll change this year.
"So that's a process they're going to go through to hopefully get better.
"New England is looking at potentially developing a downtown stadium. I think if they're able to do that, that'll improve their situation.
"So that's addressing the issue on those teams you'd like to perform better.
"On the expansion front, put Canada aside, as I think we're pretty much effectively expanded up here, in the United States we're still not covering about 35% of the geographic area of the country, so we have an actual television rating missing 50, 60, 70 million people. That's about three European countries.
"We joke around, if you took Europe and all the professional leagues in Europe and you put them in the United States you'd have 135 teams, because just think of the total population there, just in the United States, 330 million people.
"So we're still looking in Florida. We're not south of Washington DC, that's about 75 million people, so when we're airing games nobody south of Virginia is connected to a club. That's a problem for us. We've got figure out how to address that.
"We're still looking in New York. We believe that market of 13 and half million people could support more than one club. We're not anywhere near finalising a deal there but we're still pretty focussed on it. There's still discussions in Atlanta and Minneapolis. Those are two NFL stadiums that are going through renovations or new development process. We've been in discussions with them as to potentially having a MLS team.
"So what we don't know is how it will look like ten years from now. We do know that in the short term we want our 20th team in New York and we want to be somewhere in the Southeast as soon as we can. I don't know when that is though."</i>
There you have it. Straight from the head honcho himself.
Major League Soccer will still look to expand and as it currently stands there will be no relocation of existing teams, no matter how badly they perform year in and year out and how much extra allocation money the League gives them to try and help them out of the rut.
Is that the correct decision? What can be done to help the underperforming and undersupported clubs? And just what will MLS look like ten years from now?
All good talking points indeed.
<p>