My Feelings On the League

In Major League Soccer I have my own personal vendetta. I know I have touched on a few in one way or another but I feel like here is a good place to just put everything. This post was originally written in 2014. Hopefully you enjoy my rants right before MLS launched its 2.0 campeign. It is really cool to see how far this league has come (and not come) in just a single year.

There are quite a few frustrations here in this post and I will be talking about a couple teams. What they have, what they don't have, and just something in particular that irritates me about them and if they could just get this one thing wrapped up I would be a very happy man.

New England Revolution

What they have: The Revolution are the 2015 MLS Cup runner ups. Already proving that they are a team with grit, they started off the 2015 season with an 8-0 run, then they proceeded to never win a game again. That is until they could not stop winning and did a cosmic leap to the upper part of the Eastern Table. The Revs proudly have a very star studded line up with a lot of talent such as the likes of: A very expensive Jermaine Jones, Lee Nguyen, Charlie Davies, Bobby Shuttleworth, Diego Fagúndez and Juan Agudelo. The Revolution have the ownership group of the Krafts, one of the wealthiest and most successful sports owners in the world. History in the US is on the Revolution's side, one of the original teams founding the league, the Revs have been around since 1996.

What they don't have: A proper logo. This logo of theirs has also been around since the creation of the club...back in 1996. Do you know what else came out of the 90's, bleached Landon Donovan hair, who thought that was a good idea. The club's current crest us unmarketable, having gaps and a weird edge. If they expect to make money on merchandise here, a new logo is desperately needed. So, how is Foxborough? The league currently operates with an average attendance of 19,150 per game. The Revolution play in Gillette Stadium that has a capacity of 69,000 that plays co-home to the Revs who currently have a 16,000 average game attendance (2014 numbers). It is not the funnest feeling in the world to be alone in the stands at a sporting event.

This is happening at arguably a very exciting time in the game

What irritates me: First of all. How long does it take to change a logo. The Columbus Crew did it at super sonic speed. The announcement came in the summer and the new logo was here in the fall. Not that hard. Location, Location, Location. Portland (pop ~600k) has their own soccer specific stadium in the heart of the city. We can agree that is a successful club, selling 104% of its seats on average over the season. The Revs play in Foxborough, MA (pop 16,865) selling a average of 75% of its downsized 22,000 capacity seating. They should be playing in Boston (pop ~600k) a similar market to Portland. They need a soccer specific stadium in a downtown area. It is not that complicated. If the most exciting thing to happen in your home game is that a man had a horse head....you need help.

New York Red Bulls

What they have: All the money in the world and a very corporate sponsor. They do have one of the nicest stadiums around, and that is nothing to sneeze at.

What they don't have: An organic feel. A MLS cup to show for all that money. They also no longer have Titi or Cahill.

What irritates me: With everyone and their mother clamoring to get their hands on a MLS franchise, why does the league still need to be ruled by a corporation that really doesn't feel like a team, but an advertisement. It is really off-putting cheering for a soft drink. I really like this logo redesign but the only way I could see this come into effect would be a joint ownership group where the Red Bull Corp. are still very much involved, but not the 100% holder. I love this logo by the way, FC Metro. Wonderful name, wonderful. It feels organic with a very tasteful bridge between the NY/NJ Metrostars and the Red Bulls of today (The bull is very reminiscent of the wall street bull) I just love the badge, it looks historic but modern.

New York City FC

What they have: Money, lots and lots of money. This is not longer Yankee money, this is Yankee and Man City money. They have all the star power they need and they landed in New York with a splash.

What they don't have:A stadium. Playing their inaugural season in Yankee Stadium, much to the dislike to both parties. They also have yet to establish an identity aside from Man City for the states.

What irritates me: Somehow the league is allowing them to play in a temporary stadium but David Beckham has to panic to put one in Miami. Ok Don, ok. Also the logo is just another circle in the MLS. For a league that struggles with identity you think they would try harder. Also the corrections above need to happen. It looks cleaner and more unique.

DC United

Maybe something like this

What they have:  One of the most prestigious clubs in MLS history, winning more shiny pieces of metal than a magnet. United is one of those teams that if you are neutral in the situation, you can't help but Vamos United. Things get rowdy in RFK, and I like it. With the Black and Red, it gives United a very clean look.

What they don't have: United doesn't have a soccer specific stadium, or even a stadium that is not falling apart. I love RFK but it is old...like really old. Unlike the other Eastern team playing in a non-soccer specific stadium, they have secured a new location and have plans to build the sexiest looking stadium I have ever seen. Another thing that DCU doesn't have is a decent looking logo, in my opinion.

What irritates me: They are constantly adding more and more white to the kit. The are commonly called Black and Red United. I think a kit that has just solid black with red stripes or a red kit with nothing but black stripes on it. That would look sick and I feel it would really cultivate their image. To recap, the only things that irritate me about DCU is merely cosmetic. They are a solid club that is moving forward. I just can't wait to see the eagle get an upgrade.

Chicago Fire and Colorado Rapids

What they have: Both of these teams have the basics, a soccer specific stadium, lots of talent on the field, decent looking kits and badges (except for the Chicago Fire)

What they don't have:Frankly, a good team. I don't know what it is about these teams, but they do seem exciting and their record proves it. The Chicago Fire lead the leagues in ties in 2014 with 18 to their name and the Colorado Rapids went winless in their last 14 games. The team who lost as much as the Rapids last year were Chivas USA (who no longer exist)

Miami and Atlanta Expansion

What they have: David Beckham. Beaches. Lots of money. Atlanta has a shiny new stadium and a team name they have kept a secret for some reason?

What they don't have: Everything else. No soccer specific stadium, no organic fan base. Nothing. They are stalling Beckham! Also in the Atlanta expansion how were they able to get out of securing a soccer specific stadium like Beckham has to.

What irritates me: I am excited for Atlanta, but I am not too optimistic. I see it being a Montreal situation, "great support at the start, but if they don't keep winning I am not supporting them" fair weather fans. I am also not a fan of the MLS demanding one thing of one club and another thing of another club. I just doesn't sit well. If I was Beckham I would have started a USL PRO team up two months to a year before I had even thought about buying a MLS team. It could have been a bang like Orlando City and not a fizzle like it is now. It has been a year, we are still waiting. (also Inter Miami is a great name!)

Los Angeles Part Two

What they have: A bit of money and the skepticism of every MLS fan in the land. The MLS is no stranger to failure (Miami, Tampa Bay, Chivas USA) but it is a risk to go into a city where it will inevitability have a star studded older brother.

What they don't have:I would argue an organic fan base. I don't see parades in the streets asking for a MLS team like there was in Philadelphia. They would always be the little brother. The LA Galaxy have been around since MLS was founded, in 1996, 21 years of history and marketing ahead of LAFC.

What irritates me: There are a lot of good logos online, LOOK AT ONE, THIS ONE IS BEAUTIFUL! I want this to be their logo and kit, as is! Other things I would love is if this team had to be in the LA area (Galaxy play in Carson), maybe move it to Santa Anna, good location, good city. Not a bad fit, especially if they are still in the "Chivas" mindset of appealing to the Latino market (78% of the population is hispanic/latino). The two team in one city dynamic sound fun on paper and it is really cool in the EPL with Man U and Man City. If you look however at American sports, one team always seems to suffer. LA Lakers and Clippers, NY Jets and Giants. However the times that I would argue it works very well is when the opposite team takes another city's name, for example: Brooklyn Nets and New York Knicks, LA Kings and Anaheim Ducks, LA Dodgers and Angles of Anaheim/LA. Maybe even same it the Football Club of (de) Santa Anna. Another option is San Diego with big money matches versus Club Tijuana of Liga MX. #justsayin

Sacramento Expansion

 

What they have: This is by far the most attractive bid that the MLS has received from an Expansion team. End of story

What they don't have:I honestly couldn't tell you, they seem to have their act together with multiple ownership groups investing in their MLS bid. It is a very attractive offer. Maybe tweak the logo, especially if my favorite LAFC logo comes to be (only one bear please)

What irritates me: If this expansion does go through it all becomes a numbers game. First of all that puts 4 teams in California (pending LAFC) and 7 teams on the West coast. that puts one third of the league on the far west part of the US. Also that creates a league of 22 as of 2017 and I would assume 23 as of 2019 (they normally like doing teams in twos) that leaves only one expansion space open to reach what Commissioner Don Garber called his goal/limit for 2020, that would be 24. I would also like to see Miami come to be, but if things don't pick up soon a more attractive offer may come from exotic Minnesota. All that said FIFA has a 20 team recommendation, well that ship has sailed.