MLS Expansion

[iceblizzard69]

http://www.foxsportsworld.com/content/view?contentId=2420610

An announcement on what cities will get MLS teams in 2005 is expected in the next few weeks. One of those teams will be owned by the same person who owns Mexican club Chivas, which pisses me off. Chivas is a xenophobic club (they have a policy of only having Mexican players) and I don't think an owner who owns a racist team should also own a MLS team. However, I doubt MLS will allow the Chivas team in the MLS to be racist. Also, if they decide to discriminate, someone can probably sue and say they don't hire people based on their race. The Chivas team will be in either Los Angeles or Chicago. This could be good because it will make a good rivalry and it will attract a lot of Mexican fans (these two cities have large Mexican populations, although I think LA will get the team because their Mexican population is massive and they will probably attract more fans there). You can argue that they aren't expanding by doing this, but they are going to attract tons of fans in these cities.

As for the other expansion team, it could go to quite a few places. Houston is a contender, the owner of the Houston Texans wants to bring the MLS to Houston and they will play at Reliant Stadium if MLS puts a team in Houston. Seattle also has a stadium (Seahawks Stadium) for the team but they don't have the money to bring a team to Seattle. They need another investor. Rochester has the most successful A-League team in the Rhinos (they get around 10K a game which is great for A-League) and they have the ownership. A stadium is being built but it's small (14-15K I think) and they want to use fieldturf. Also I don't think the stadium will be ready by the start of next season, so while I do think they will eventually have MLS in Rochester, it won't be in 2005.

 

[Dolfan02]

This proposal of Chivas USA is a recipe for disaster. I've heard it discussed endlessly back and forth, but after hearing the pro and cons, it is in my honest opinion that this is all based on presupposed theories and a deceitful agenda by Jorge Vergara, owner of Mexican club Chivas.

That particular article from Foxsportsworld.com which you posted above makes me cringe when I hear such misused speech and thus inaccurate information. Specifically, I'm talking about referring to "Hispanic" as equivalent to Mexican. The Hispanic population is not exclusively comprised of Mexican-descent people although they do comprise of 60% of the Hispanic population in the United States. I, myself, am considered Hispanic. Half my family are from South America and I speak Spanish half the time in my life, especially in this city I live in. Personally, I think the word "Hispanic" is complete absurdity. Anglo-Americans in the past used the word because they couldn't differentiate between a Puerto Rican, Cuban, Mexican, South American, etc because they all speak Spanish. I guess that's another issue but going back to the article, almost all Central and South Americans, and Carribeaners do NOT identify with Mexicans. In fact, most of them do not like Mexicans because they're so much different than the rest of Latin-America. So how is it that MLS thinks Hispanics in U.S. will come out of the woodworks to support a Mexican-influenced team, especially if it's based in Chicago or L.A. where they already have a team? Not to mention, there are millions of Hispanics in United States who are proud of being in America, and root for American clubs and national team, as opposed to the countries of their families' background, and thus all these factors reduce the potential market for Chivas USA. Has the MLS taken this is into consideration in their analysis?

Another arguement is if those Mexican soccer fans based in Chicago and L.A, whom are loyal to Mexican products and the Mexican league and whom currently do NOT support the current MLS team at their city because they're too "American", then just how will they support Chivas USA if it will only allow for only 3 senior internationals (most likely Mexican players)? Let's be honest... yes there is Mexican and Mexican-American soccer fans in the United States who are not attracted to MLS. But the MLS would have to do incredible wonders and various special exceptions, other than stamp a Mexican brand on its team name, in order to maintain any type of loyal extremist Mexican-only soccer fans in the United Staes. It also most be taken into consideration that a large portion of those fans are not Chivas fans, but yet supporters of other Mexican teams. It it quite skeptical whether they will attend Chivas USA games and toss their money to their rival's support.

It's a total twist of the imagination to believe that a large fanbase for this proposed Chivas USA would maintain itself in the long-run.

As for Jorge Vergara, I applaud his ambition and the position he put himself in where he is in no danger of losing any value if the team fails in the long-run, other than the $10 million investment price and annual costs, which is literally loose change to this man's wealth. He has not made a proposal or indication that a soccer-specific stadium will be in his interest for his MLS team. On the contrary, MLS has a plenty more to lose. Most importantly, it will lose its credibility if this team does not fully expand a greater market or if the owner at any point decides to pull the plug on his investment for reasons thereof.

Most disturbingly is the nature of this situation and the direction that MLS has taken. While Mexico can enjoy the fruits of a very successful professional soccer league with their own brand, in their country, and for their people, MLS has decided now to rely on foreign brands rather than develop its own brand to grow our sport with our people... Americans. And when I say Americans, I speak of all Americans, not just targeting one ethnicity. There is no problem with having international players on our teams, as we currently do on all our teams, including many Latin-American and Mexican-descent players. I do cherish and like the idea of having international players on our MLS teams, however, I believe it's wrong to have entire MLS American teams in foreign brands and targeting a specific enthicity.

 

[iceblizzard69]

I don't have a problem with Chivas USA as long as they do the following:

1. Aren't named Chivas USA and instead have a name following the guidelines the other teams follow
2. Follow the same rules that other teams follow in terms of senior internationals
3. Don't discriminate based on race.

Chivas USA will play in Los Angeles due to their HUGE Mexican population. A lot of Mexicans like Chivas, and they will show up to support a club owned by Chivas in the USA. It may not be the same exact club, but the fans of Chivas who live here will support Chivas USA as well.

The MLS needs more fans, and Chivas USA will bring in more fans. There are a lot of soccer fans in the USA who don't like MLS, and the league is trying to get some of those people to gain interest in the league, and this idea is one that will bring in fans. If Chivas USA is in Los Angeles, and I think they will be, they will lead the league in attendance next year.

I'm not crazy about the idea in general due to Chivas' xenophobic policies, but I can understand why the MLS is doing this. I'd personally rather see Club America get a team since they would also bring in fans but they aren't a xenophobic club, but Chivas has more interest in getting a club here.