Re: [nas] Resurrecting the Florida debate

It wasn't because of attendance that they got the boot.

Tampa never had a owner (league owned)
And Miami wished they didn't have the one they wanted. (local owner
wanted out after 3 seasons)

Thus when Garber said "2 must go", Tampa and Miami were the one's with
the biggest targets on their heads.

Ethan

On 8/11/06, Jeff Moore <mrmoore01@bluemarble.net> wrote:
>   Perhaps it is Friday and I'm just bored? It is also possible, that since
> I grew up in the bay area, I am biased?
>
>  However, in looking at current MLS attendances and comparing them to
> Miami and Tampa's........I have to say.....WTH is the difference and why
> were these teams in so much "trouble" and current ones are not? Admittedly,
> the Mutiny were better supported than Miami, but why ditch both>?
>
>  This has probably been discussed before in depth. However, my curiosity
> got peaked again on this.
> Explain it as below are the attendances for the Muntiny and Fusion:
>
> Mutiny:
> 1996: 11,679
> 1997: 11,338
> 1998: 10,312
> 1999: 13,106
> 2000: 9,452
> 2001: 14,479
> Fusion:
> 1998: 10,284
> 1999: 8,689
> 2000: 7,460
> 2001: 11,177
>
> ---
> 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
---
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