RE: Toronto - imo, no go WAS: [nas] Expansion banter

--- Original Message ---
From: Alex Fowler <fowleral@bc.edu>

>>But give Toronto the advantage of playing most of
>>Canada's best players, to the detriment of MLS?  
Screw
>>that noise.
>>
>>I am all for the development of soccer outside the 
US,
>>as long as it isn't at the detriment of the US
>>development - at least now.  Let's get a bit farther
>>down the road before we go out and bootstrap someone
>>else.
>
>I'm not sure I favor expansion into Canada either, 
but that being said, I'm 
>not so sure that even the full Canadian national team 
would be any better than 
>a mid-table club in MLS.  And a Toronto franchise 
would be playing without 
>some of Canada's best players (Radzinski, DeRosario, 
Onstad, Bent, Hirschfeld; 
>altho Onstad will likely have retired by the time 
there is a Toronto 
>franchise, and DeRosario would probably not be 
protected in an expansion 
>draft).

As things stand now?  Maybe not.  But when does 
DeRosario's contract end?  And do you want to have 
that kind of a double standard?  Which, btw, would be 
detrimental to one of the sides, whichever way it 
goes.  Assume the opposite - that even Canada's best 
(available) isn't good enough to play well in MLS, how 
is that helping their players?  Yet you know (and the 
rules would pretty much force) the team to be mostly 
Canadians....

Again, I think adjusting the rules (and maybe 
expanding them for all of North America.... which 
would bring in more players and allow more 
expansion....?) so that at least Canada's player count 
like US players for ALL teams might be a way to go.

>As far as expansion goes, I'd like to see a 16-20 
>team league, expansion every 3 years:

I think the league is looking at every two years, but 
three is probably better in terms of allowing the new 
teams to get on their feet before another round of 
expansion, and either way, it will be dictated by what 
owners are available...

>2005-Philadelphia, Houston

Biggest non-MLS markets - I know the league wants to 
be there, and I know Houston wants to look at it...

>2008-Seattle, NYC (Cosmos)

Works for me - the Northwest needs a team, either in 
Seattle or Portland.  If the league can get the naming 
rights for the Cosmos straightened out and get a good 
SSS, then wonderful.

>2011-San Diego, St. Louis

St. Louis deserves a team, at least based on their 
soccer history.  They still need a venue and proof 
that they would support a team.

>2014?-Miami, Rochester

I would love to see another team in Florida if done 
right.  That, though, is the key.  Rochester - if they 
can get an owner - is similar to St. Louis - the 
history and fans have earned a chance if the ownership 
and venue are there (which, I believe, they have the 
venue).

>2017?-Minneapolis, Milwaukee, or Toronto (any 2)

Minnesota and Milwaukee are options, but so are 
Carolina, Tennessee, Indiana, the other of the 
Portland or Seattle, Arizona...

Lots of options, if they can get an owner and a SSS 
(or otherwise suitable venue.

But back to the original point - this league must 
remain true to its roots - the development of the US 
player.  Without home-grown talent that the locals 
want to go see and feel a connection to, even the 
deepest pockets won't matter.


---
See all of today's Soccer News Links at:  http://www.sams-army.com/
NAS is hosted by America Kicks (http://www.americakicks.com)
To subscribe or unsubscribe: http://nas.americakicks.com
To post, send an email to nas@americakicks.com