TCF Bank Stadium may play host to MLS soccer for a season

Donate To GopherHole
dpodoll68 said:
Calling someone a moron when you are debating the meanings of clearly understood words is rich. Whether or not they sold out games before the expansion is immaterial. If I wanted to debate that point, I would've brought it up and used the past tense. Answer the question - how many times did they sell out after the expansion?
Click to expand...

Maybe you shouldn't have included the "if ever" then. You called me a hoofed mammal so I called you a stupid person.
 



Also great job of distracting from the fact of how clearly wrong you were.
 



dpodoll68 said:
If I'm so wrong, answer the question and prove me so. If you're right, it should be easy. Do it.
Click to expand...

They sold out more than half their games last season and set their attendance record, what else do you want to know?

You stated they "rarely (if ever) sell out their stadium".. more than half sound like rarely if ever to you?
 

bottlebass said:
They sold out more than half their games last season and set their attendance record, what else do you want to know?

You stated they "rarely (if ever) sell out their stadium".. more than half sound like rarely if ever to you?
Click to expand...

Right, at the old capacity. What about at the new capacity? Why is it so hard to answer a simple question? It's been made pretty clear "what else want to know".
 

dpodoll68 said:
Right, at the old capacity. What about at the new capacity? Why is it so hard to answer a simple question? It's been made pretty clear "what else want to know".
Click to expand...


Because like I said way earlier, I'm not going to waste time google searching something you should have before you made such an uneducated statement. Look it up yourself, then shake your head at yourself for making such a stupid statement.

Oh and keep ignoring you said "rarely (if ever)".
 

Oh and I know they sold out at least one game later in the season. I was at the sold out NY game.
 




Ugh, another great thread ruined by a pissing match over semantics. Congrats you two.
 

How is it ruined? When has soccer gotten so much attention on GH? The World Cup didn't even get this much discussion.
 

bottlebass said:
Oh and I know they sold out at least one game later in the season. I was at the sold out NY game.
Click to expand...

I was at that game too. The atmosphere was great. The Cosmos game will definitely be one of the games I attend this year. There are a couple other teams I haven't seen yet that I want to before we leave, and hopefully we get a fun mid season friendly again this year.

I'm pretty sure that game was a franchise record in attendance.
 



By the way, the answer is 4 of 11 games sold out after the expansion. 5 of 5 before the expansion, but I don't see how that is relevant to project how they will draw in the MLS.

The United was 2nd in attendance in the NASL in 2015. They would be in dead last in the MLS by a staggering 40% assuming no growth. It's short sighted not to assume they will experience massive growth in 2017 and beyond.

I'll use Orlando City SC as an example again. They averaged 5,000 fans in their last season in the USL and 32,000 in their first season in the MLS. The Montreal Impact's last season in the NASL drew 11,500 per game. In their first season in the MLS they drew 23,000. They still draw around 20,000 3 years later.

It's not a question of whether or not our following will grow dramatically. It's a question of how much. I don't think they'll have any problem filling their proposed 20k stadium, in fact I wouldn't be shocked if it's slightly more when all is said and done. In their first season they're going to sell out a couple games at TCF which will inflate the numbers, so I don't think 30k+ is unrealistic.
 

I'm afraid tickets will be tough to come by at their new stadium. I took part in their survey a couple months ago and it seems like they will have a large percentage of premium seats, which would be fun to sit in every once in a while but feel like they will price me out from a season ticket point. Looked like they were considering some pretty cool options though.
 

bottlebass said:
I'm afraid tickets will be tough to come by at their new stadium. I took part in their survey a couple months ago and it seems like they will have a large percentage of premium seats, which would be fun to sit in every once in a while but feel like they will price me out from a season ticket point. Looked like they were considering some pretty cool options though.
Click to expand...

I would be interested in a partial season ticket package. I have little interest in attending 20+ games, but I would definitely sign up for a quarter to half season package. Seat priority is not a big deal to me as long as I'm in the stadium and don't have an obstructed view. I also have no issue watching on TV and going to games more infrequently. Their NASL broadcasts are pretty good on channel 45. You can tell they are low budget, but they do a decent job and I'm sure it will improve dramatically when they sign a deal with a real sports network. There will be plenty of tickets in 2017, so anyone who wants to see them won't have an issue in their inaugural season.

Have you seen the renderings of Orlando City's standing section? I think that's a great idea and would love if we did that. I also hope we make the stadium expandable, but that might be difficult if we put in a roof over the stands.
 

We will be splitting out season tickets with friends and will most likely only half the season will be ours. I do prefer to have better seats though when i go to games, so it could get interesting. I'm also interested to see what they do for tailgating because that has been fun up in Blaine.

I saw some pictures of Orlando's proposed stadium but haven't taken the time to look too closely. It looked pretty sweet.
 

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Go Gophers!!
 

Leaning toward possibly playing. Not even sure what that means.
 

Spoofin said:
Leaning toward possibly playing. Not even sure what that means.
Click to expand...

Probably means they are looking for the best possible deal between TCF and Target Field.

Or, it could mean they are waiting for the league to chime in on whether they can play on an artificial turf field for a year.

The key to this whole thing is going to be tailgating. It will be interesting to see how accomodating the U will be if they play at TCF.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
Probably means they are looking for the best possible deal between TCF and Target Field.

Or, it could mean they are waiting for the league to chime in on whether they can play on an artificial turf field for a year.

The key to this whole thing is going to be tailgating. It will be interesting to see how accomodating the U will be if they play at TCF.
Click to expand...

I would understand "leaning toward playing" and I would understand "possibly playing", but "leaning toward possibly playing" seems like saying nothing at all.
 

Spoofin said:
I would understand "leaning toward playing" and I would understand "possibly playing", but "leaning toward possibly playing" seems like saying nothing at all.
Click to expand...
Classic modern journalism.
 

I don't really care where we play for a season anymore. My interest in the location has been overridden by my anger at the scummy MLS for making us change our name but letting Atlanta keep theirs.

If we have to change it, please don't ruin it. Just call it Minnesota SC or FC and be done. We shouldn't have to change at all though.
 

mnsportsgeek said:
I don't really care where we play for a season anymore. My interest in the location has been overridden by my anger at the scummy MLS for making us change our name but letting Atlanta keep theirs.

If we have to change it, please don't ruin it. Just call it Minnesota SC or FC and be done. We shouldn't have to change at all though.
Click to expand...

I don't understand this attachment to the "United" moniker. How many teams use this worldwide? It ain't like we are talking about Manchester United or Newcastle United here. We have minimal history and I don't get the fuss people are making about keeping it.

I'm all for keeping the club crest, colors, kit, "Loons" nickname, etc. But United? Tired, overused, bland, uninspiring. Get rid of it.
 

Zeppelin Gopher said:
I don't understand this attachment to the "United" moniker. How many teams use this worldwide? It ain't like we are talking about Manchester United or Newcastle United here. We have minimal history and I don't get the fuss people are making about keeping it.

I'm all for keeping the club crest, colors, kit, "Loons" nickname, etc. But United? Tired, overused, bland, uninspiring. Get rid of it.
Click to expand...

You don't throw away 3 years of branding. If we change our name... Again... It will be our 5th name change in a decade. Soccer all over the world has always had generic, bland team names. It allows the formation of nicknames to come naturally from the fans and not forced like it is in American sports where you have names like Wild.

Where does the line get drawn? We were introduced into the league 3 months before Atlanta introduced their name. Not to mention their name makes no sense at all considering the formation of their club was very much the opposite of uniting.

Fortunately, the Sounders and Timbers were also told to change their name when they entered the league and that didn't end very well for the MLS. This fight is just beginning.
 

Personally, I prefer the American way of giving teams a name instead if something generic. But I don't have any say in it.

Sent from my XT1031 using Tapatalk
 

mnsportsgeek said:
Fortunately, the Sounders and Timbers were also told to change their name when they entered the league and that didn't end very well for the MLS. This fight is just beginning.
Click to expand...

The Sounders and the Timbers are cool, original names that aren't being used anywhere else. If we had something similar already established, I'd agree that we should fight tooth and nail to keep it.
 

Zeppelin Gopher said:
The Sounders and the Timbers are cool, original names that aren't being used anywhere else. If we had something similar already established, I'd agree that we should fight tooth and nail to keep it.
Click to expand...

Keep United in the official team name. As in Minnesota United Football (or Soccer) Club.

The locals will still call them The Loons.
 


http://northernpitch.com/_/minnesota-soccer-news/major-league-facepalm-mnufc-might-have-its-name-forcibly-changed-r679

On March 25, 2015, Commissioner Don Garber and his MLS posse rolled into the Twin Cities to welcome the 23rd franchise to the league. Fans crowded into the Target Field Legends Club to watch hype videos, learn of Dr. Bill McGuire & the ownership team’s plans, and celebrate this milestone in Minnesota sports history. The league put up the MLS Cup on display and had notable figures from league history in attendance. (Of course, as the adage goes, it ain’t an American soccer party unless Landon Donovan shows up.) And, proudly, banners and a backdrop proclaimed: “WELCOME, MINNESOTA UNITED FC.”

On July 7th, three and a half months later, MLS’s other new expansion side in Atlanta announced that they were going to be henceforth dubbed: Atlanta United FC. Enter facepalm, stage right. We have long known that the league was deliberating the idea of having a third United in the league. However, today Sports Illustrated’s Brian Straus updated MLS fans on Minnesota’s plans, writing that “(i)t’s looking increasingly likely that Minnesota United FC will enter MLS in 2017, and it’s looking increasingly likely that it will do so with a new name.” As our own Alex Schieferdeckerwrote in January, “the infinitely more popular English premier league has three "United"s, and English football itself has fourteen.”

The only reason that Minnesota is seen as the “third” United in the league is due to the recent branding of Atlanta’s expansion team. Chosen through a focus group (much in the same way that Betty Crocker names her latest batch of muffins), Atlanta United FC passed through MLS Headquarters and received public support. At the announcement, Garber stated that he was a little “choked up” at the reception to the team’s new monniker. “Sometimes you just have to step back and feel good about the roots we’re planting.”

However, the league’s strong-handed preference for Minnesota to rename their own team uproots established support for the club. DC United’s take for the name is obvious - as a founding member of the league in the nation’s capital, nobody is asking them to drop the name. Meanwhile, Minnesota United was founded after decades of league-shifting and ownership changes, not to mention the uniting of the two Twin Cities. Atlanta’s claim to the term (per Straus)? “The word ‘United’ has long been associated with the beautiful game around the world,” AUFC president Darren Eales said upon the unveiling. “It has particular resonance for Atlanta, as a transport hub in the Southeast, as a multi-cultural, international city and as a club committed to community.”

What’s in a Name

The jury seems unanimous in the court of public opinion that this decision does not make sense. But those with actual power in this situation might say that a name is a name. That’s partially true - the team has been identified as “The Loons” nationally since their 2013 re-brand. However, the MNUFC front office has been charging forward full speed ahead using this name. After years of toiling in obscurity with local papers and sports fans, United is one of the hottest names in Minnesota right now. The team, the City of Saint Paul, and the league alike have put out press statements updating the public on progress that “Minnesota United FC” is making as they work toward joining MLS. After three years of instilling Minnesota United in the American soccer landscape and eleven months post-MLS expansion announcement, the league is continuing to balk at the idea of confirming the team name once and for all.

The two priorities of the league should be: how can we make every individual market a success and then (obviously related) how can we make the league as a whole a success? The Loons right now are selling jerseys that say Minnesota United, they are selling MLS season ticket deposits that say “United,” and every gear spinning and toiling toward making Minnesota’s debut in MLS is branded “United.” Changing now does not indicate a new dawn, it indicates absolute confusion. It is a serious handicap toward success when you have to sell a very confused brand.

The Past and Future

The league may also imagine that a new name would help them indicate that this is a new era of soccer. Though the United era has been remarkably professionalized and successful, it has still been “minor league” (or one can imagine the MLS BOG believing this). But in trying to force a break with the past, the league is making the exact opposite move.

Since 2009, Minnesotans have seen a professional soccer team under four different names (Minnesota Thunder, NSC Minnesota Stars, Minnesota Stars FC, and Minnesota United FC). Our past is one of uncertainty. And this was part of the reason why Minnesota soccer was not taken seriously. You can’t take a team seriously if it changes name every few years.

Changing the name of the club, then, does not break with that tradition. It does not eschew the past. Rather, it inextricably ties you up in the uncertainty, mess, and unprofessionalism of it all. In other words: you’re making yourselves look like just another one of the failed plans for soccer’s success.

You Don’t Know What You’re Doing

If MLS follows through with their plans to enforce a name change, they are committing an unbelievable blunder. It is not the blunder of ignoring the fans; that kind of blunder I expect and I think the league thinks it would recover from. No, this is the blunder of looking like complete amateurs.

There were three months where the league knew Minnesota United FC was entering the league and Atlanta was deliberating a name. This entire mess reveals a league that either has no central leadership (right hand not knowing what the left hand wants to name its team) or, worse, it has a leader who really has no plan. Forget the logic of who deserves the name United. Let’s just talk about the Benny Hill that appears to be the leadership of Major League Soccer. Quit chasing half-naked women around to silly music and come up with a plan.

Co-written by Jeff Rueter and Wes Burdine
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom