City expanding into USA

[Florida Blue]

here is an article from espn

MLS wants English to buy U.S. teams
Associated Press

March 3, 2010
Comment
Email
Print
MANCHESTER, England -- Having failed to convince Barcelona and Real Madrid to invest in Major League Soccer teams or start new franchises, MLS commissioner Don Garber is turning his focus to English Premier League clubs.

Barcelona had been looking to buy partial ownership of a MLS expansion team but negotiations collapsed. However, Garber hasn't given up on forging partnerships that could not only bring in investment but also new methods and links with bigger competitions.

"We think it would be smart for us to have an international team sitting around our board table and helping to influence the way we think and perhaps connect us even more closer with the international community," Garber said in an interview with The Associated Press at SoccerEx.

"We tried with FC Barcelona and Real Madrid, and we will continue to talk to the Spanish clubs while finding some way to see if there is an investment opportunity with any of the English clubs. We are not anywhere close to that on any level yet."

One club that could be persuaded to invest in north America is Manchester City. Garber met Monday with City chief executive Garry Cook, whose club has been transformed by a major injection of money since Abu Dhabi Sheikh Mansour's takeover in September 2008.

"Part of the relaunch of that team is for them to think strategically about their business and where international expansion fits into that, and where the U.S. might fit into that," Garber said. "We've had very preliminary discussions about that. They've got a lot of figuring out to do on their own end in terms of what their international plans are."

Garber argues that MLS teams need greater exposure with soccer outside the U***d States to improve playing standards.

"We could learn a lot about youth development and coaching and the technical side of things," Garber said. "On the technical side, we still need help and I like to think we are not creating an American version of the world game. I would like to think we are part of the world game, and in order to do that we need to have more deep association with the global football community."

A recent trend has been Americans buying English clubs, with Malcolm Glazer at Manchester U***d, George Gillett Jr. and Tom Hicks at Liverpool, Randy Lerner at Aston Villa and Ellis Short at Sunderland. Stan Kroenke has a majority stake in Arsenal, and owns MLS's Colorado Rapids.

"Just like it's good in my view to have American sports team owners in England, it would good for MLS to have an English club investing in our league," Garber said. "I would love to see an opportunity for an equity investment. It would be good for us."

A new MLS team could be bought for about $40 million, Garber says, in the next round of expansion.

Philadelphia is the only new team in 2010, while Portland, Ore., and Vancouver will join the MLS in 2011.

Some English clubs already play in the U.S. in the summer, with Manchester U***d, Manchester City and Tottenham possibly making the trip this July. Garber said helping to grow the sport is the next logical step for interested clubs.

"Whether it's an existing team or an expansion team is irrelevant to me," Garber said. "But I would see over the next number of years us continuing our connection with international football clubs, and having it go beyond representing them in the U***d States for brand development and fan opportunities."

That Real Madrid thing was a joke. They tried to put a team in Miami, set up a website, etc. One problem. THERE IS NO FUCKING PLACE TO PLAY IN MIAMI!!! Details. There is a quaint little stadium in Fort Lauderdale where the NASL team played, but it is not a quality place. The Orange Bowl was bulldozed over a year ago, and Dolphin Stadium (or whatever it is called now - 9 name changes in 10 years) is not considered an option.

My point is, until I see it, I will not believe any of it (and it only takes me an extra hour to fly to Manchester vs. Portland)

[King Kev]

here is an article from espn

MLS wants English to buy U.S. teams
Associated Press

March 3, 2010
Comment
Email
Print
MANCHESTER, England -- Having failed to convince Barcelona and Real Madrid to invest in Major League Soccer teams or start new franchises, MLS commissioner Don Garber is turning his focus to English Premier League clubs.

Barcelona had been looking to buy partial ownership of a MLS expansion team but negotiations collapsed. However, Garber hasn't given up on forging partnerships that could not only bring in investment but also new methods and links with bigger competitions.

"We think it would be smart for us to have an international team sitting around our board table and helping to influence the way we think and perhaps connect us even more closer with the international community," Garber said in an interview with The Associated Press at SoccerEx.

"We tried with FC Barcelona and Real Madrid, and we will continue to talk to the Spanish clubs while finding some way to see if there is an investment opportunity with any of the English clubs. We are not anywhere close to that on any level yet."

One club that could be persuaded to invest in north America is Manchester City. Garber met Monday with City chief executive Garry Cook, whose club has been transformed by a major injection of money since Abu Dhabi Sheikh Mansour's takeover in September 2008.

"Part of the relaunch of that team is for them to think strategically about their business and where international expansion fits into that, and where the U.S. might fit into that," Garber said. "We've had very preliminary discussions about that. They've got a lot of figuring out to do on their own end in terms of what their international plans are."

Garber argues that MLS teams need greater exposure with soccer outside the U***d States to improve playing standards.

"We could learn a lot about youth development and coaching and the technical side of things," Garber said. "On the technical side, we still need help and I like to think we are not creating an American version of the world game. I would like to think we are part of the world game, and in order to do that we need to have more deep association with the global football community."

A recent trend has been Americans buying English clubs, with Malcolm Glazer at Manchester U***d, George Gillett Jr. and Tom Hicks at Liverpool, Randy Lerner at Aston Villa and Ellis Short at Sunderland. Stan Kroenke has a majority stake in Arsenal, and owns MLS's Colorado Rapids.

"Just like it's good in my view to have American sports team owners in England, it would good for MLS to have an English club investing in our league," Garber said. "I would love to see an opportunity for an equity investment. It would be good for us."

A new MLS team could be bought for about $40 million, Garber says, in the next round of expansion.

Philadelphia is the only new team in 2010, while Portland, Ore., and Vancouver will join the MLS in 2011.

Some English clubs already play in the U.S. in the summer, with Manchester U***d, Manchester City and Tottenham possibly making the trip this July. Garber said helping to grow the sport is the next logical step for interested clubs.

"Whether it's an existing team or an expansion team is irrelevant to me," Garber said. "But I would see over the next number of years us continuing our connection with international football clubs, and having it go beyond representing them in the U***d States for brand development and fan opportunities."

That Real Madrid thing was a joke. They tried to put a team in Miami, set up a website, etc. One problem. THERE IS NO FUCKING PLACE TO PLAY IN MIAMI!!! Details. There is a quaint little stadium in Fort Lauderdale where the NASL team played, but it is not a quality place. The Orange Bowl was bulldozed over a year ago, and Dolphin Stadium (or whatever it is called now - 9 name changes in 10 years) is not considered an option.

My point is, until I see it, I will not believe any of it (and it only takes me an extra hour to fly to Manchester vs. Portland)

No problem. Let's buy a franchise in MIami and build an excact replica of Maine Road to play the games in!

[BmoreBlue]

Great news for everybody really but just realised when I saw this on there... There a crystal palace in the US?? http://www.palacebaltimore.com/index.html There bloody everywhere!!!

Friend of mine who went to high school with me was playing for them last i looked - they play at a local university about 10 mins down the street from me

[Beefymcfc]

Perfectr time to boost the MLS and for our marketing in the US. With the World Cup coming up and more and more Americans getting into football rather than the 'Jocks of Football', City could push our brand to a near untapped source.

[JamieMCFC]

I am writing this post from the ceiling of my apartment:

I am a native of Portland, Oregon and have several friends who work for
Nike. The city of Portland (PDX or Stumptown) has been awarded a MLS
Franchise (named the Timbers) that starts playing in the league as of
2011.

http://www.portlandtimbers.com/

The Portland Timbers firm is called the "The Timber's Army"
and is probably the most emotive, rabid group of fans in North America.
They don't call this place, Soccer City, USA, without good reason.

I can't think of another potential US club that would suit Man City
any better than the Timbers.

Read the article again. The talk is launching a new franchise not buying an existing one so that makes Portland a no go. So the Timbers wouldn't suit City in anyway. Garber wants this for when the new round of expansion takes place. By that time Minneapolis could be a viable option. The Vikings (NFL team) will most likely be in L.A. that will leave the Metrodome empty. They could tear it down and put in a SSS. I know that probably won't happen but it is a better chance of City being here than in Portland.

[john68]

Ashton,
What is wrong with calling it soccer? Can't see a problem with the word. It was called soccer in England as long ago as the 1870s.

Pre 1870s...Football was not regulated and teams played by different rules...most using their hands on the ball.
In the 1870s...rules were formulated for the Association game...and soccer was the term used to differentiate it from rugger.
The term soccer was in commom usage in England when I was a kid in the 1950s and I remember it being commonly used in the 1960s too.

It's all just a load of English snobbery to have a dig at the septics.

[Colin the King]

have a dig at the septics.

Ehm.

[razor400]

Ashton,
What is wrong with calling it soccer? Can't see a problem with the word. It was called soccer in England as long ago as the 1870s.

Pre 1870s...Football was not regulated and teams played by different rules...most using their hands on the ball.
In the 1870s...rules were formulated for the Association game...and soccer was the term used to differentiate it from rugger.
The term soccer was in commom usage in England when I was a kid in the 1950s and I remember it being commonly used in the 1960s too.

It's all just a load of English snobbery to have a dig at the septics.

It was derived from 'Asocciation Football' I personnally hate the word, but like John says, it goes to to the formation of the game as we know it and is not an American term.

[King Kev]

It was derived from 'Asocciation Football' I personnally hate the word, but like John says, it goes to to the formation of the game as we know it and is not an American term.

The thing that irks me is that the yanks invented a game that was based on Rugby Football and Association Football and, rather arrogantly, called it 'Football'.

They ignored the fact that there had been other types of football around for a long time before their version came into being, therefore completely denying the roots of their own game.

[razor400]

It was derived from 'Asocciation Football' I personnally hate the word, but like John says, it goes to to the formation of the game as we know it and is not an American term.

The thing that irks me is that the yanks invented a game that was based on Rugby Football and Association Football and, rather arrogantly, called it 'Football'.

They ignored the fact that there had been other types of football around for a long time before their version came into being, therefore completely denying the roots of their own game.

I tend to call it either Yankball or gayball.

[MSG77]

It was derived from 'Asocciation Football' I personnally hate the word, but like John says, it goes to to the formation of the game as we know it and is not an American term.

The thing that irks me is that the yanks invented a game that was based on Rugby Football and Association Football and, rather arrogantly, called it 'Football'.

They ignored the fact that there had been other types of football around for a long time before their version came into being, therefore completely denying the roots of their own game.

I hope this was a joke.

The same way Aussie's called their game "football"?

I'm sure a bunch of schoolboys or mill workers or whatever in the late 1800s had the grandiose worldview to be arrogant enough to intentionally deny the roots of their game (those roots that had been around for less than a generation and weren't even that solidly codified) and try to somehow show their game was "better" or something.

Maybe they didn't have the internet, so didn't realize 150 years later how they'd seem like such pricks.

I'm sure it probably went something like this -

Guy standing around watching - "Hey, what are you guys playing?"

Group of guys playing - "Umm ... football"

How dare they? Those arrogant, selfish pricks! Damn all Americans and Aussies for daring to call a local game football!

[King Kev]

It was derived from 'Asocciation Football' I personnally hate the word, but like John says, it goes to to the formation of the game as we know it and is not an American term.

The thing that irks me is that the yanks invented a game that was based on Rugby Football and Association Football and, rather arrogantly, called it 'Football'.

They ignored the fact that there had been other types of football around for a long time before their version came into being, therefore completely denying the roots of their own game.

I hope this was a joke.

The same way Aussie's called their game "football"?

I'm sure a bunch of schoolboys or mill workers or whatever in the late 1800s had the grandiose worldview to be arrogant enough to intentionally deny the roots of their game (those roots that had been around for less than a generation and weren't even that solidly codified) and try to somehow show their game was "better" or something.

Maybe they didn't have the internet, so didn't realize 150 years later how they'd seem like such pricks.

I'm sure it probably went something like this -

Guy standing around watching - "Hey, what are you guys playing?"

Group of guys playing - "Umm ... football"

How dare they? Those arrogant, selfish pricks! Damn all Americans and Aussies for daring to call a local game football!

Seems a bit harsh to me but you're entitled to your opinion I suppose.

[CitizenYank]

It was derived from 'Asocciation Football' I personnally hate the word, but like John says, it goes to to the formation of the game as we know it and is not an American term.

The thing that irks me is that the yanks invented a game that was based on Rugby Football and Association Football and, rather arrogantly, called it 'Football'.

They ignored the fact that there had been other types of football around for a long time before their version came into being, therefore completely denying the roots of their own game.

I hope this was a joke.

The same way Aussie's called their game "football"?

I'm sure a bunch of schoolboys or mill workers or whatever in the late 1800s had the grandiose worldview to be arrogant enough to intentionally deny the roots of their game (those roots that had been around for less than a generation and weren't even that solidly codified) and try to somehow show their game was "better" or something.

Maybe they didn't have the internet, so didn't realize 150 years later how they'd seem like such pricks.

I'm sure it probably went something like this -

Guy standing around watching - "Hey, what are you guys playing?"

Group of guys playing - "Umm ... football"

How dare they? Those arrogant, selfish pricks! Damn all Americans and Aussies for daring to call a local game football!

I don't want to further your anger, but most Canadians refer to football as soccer (although they put FC on the end of their MLS franchises!) So feel perfectly free to piss off most of the ex-British Empire!!

[Ted Hughes]

It was derived from 'Asocciation Football' I personnally hate the word, but like John says, it goes to to the formation of the game as we know it and is not an American term.

The thing that irks me is that the yanks invented a game that was based on Rugby Football and Association Football and, rather arrogantly, called it 'Football'.

They ignored the fact that there had been other types of football around for a long time before their version came into being, therefore completely denying the roots of their own game.

I hope this was a joke.

The same way Aussie's called their game "football"?

I'm sure a bunch of schoolboys or mill workers or whatever in the late 1800s had the grandiose worldview to be arrogant enough to intentionally deny the roots of their game (those roots that had been around for less than a generation and weren't even that solidly codified) and try to somehow show their game was "better" or something.

Maybe they didn't have the internet, so didn't realize 150 years later how they'd seem like such pricks.

I'm sure it probably went something like this -

Guy standing around watching - "Hey, what are you guys playing?"

Group of guys playing - "Umm ... football"

How dare they? Those arrogant, selfish pricks! Damn all Americans and Aussies for daring to call a local game football!

Or alternatively the yanks decided to call a game where you chuck a ball around almost exclusively with your hands; 'football' because they didn't have enough brain cells to think of anything themselves, as in; " Hey Homer what's that new game you've invented where you throw the ball & the other guy catches it? " " I think I'll call it.........football! "

[DoomMerchant]

Or alternatively the yanks decided to call a game where you chuck a ball around almost exclusively with your hands; 'football' because they didn't have enough brain cells to think of anything themselves, as in; " Hey Homer what's that new game you've invented where you throw the ball & the other guy catches it? " " I think I'll call it.........football! "

yr better than that, but...regardless.

American football obv grew more out of Rugby. You lot had your fracture/splinter of "football" turning into Rugby and erm Soccer (for the sake of uh clarity) earlier than we did, but we had a similar occurrence in the US -- that is forming an association or group to create a standard set of rules around how to play these games that were largely "football." When trying to form a unified league in the US it leaned towards a set of rules that were more rugby-flavored than soccer-flavored, and as a result we kept honing the rules about the game, in isolation from whatever happened on the European continent for the large part, until the game was both well-baked enough it its provincial flavour and seen as a bit of a badge of honour against whatever the former mother land was doing. Early American Football rules had a lot more Rugby flavor in terms of what you could do (e.g. more kicking of the ball, and no forward passing, etc), but those rules changed to make it the game it is today with a forward-passing focus, and less kicking for points outside of field goals, etc. And it's a fantastically fun game to play and watch btw.

Had this game been invented in a more "modern" time i would bet that there would have been an INTL forum and agreement upon rules across many continents, which would have made all of our lives a lot less interesting, don't you think?

I'm glad at least you lot are finally taking ownership of that filthy, grotty word "Soccer." It's despicable.

cheers

[King Kev]

I'm glad at least you lot are finally taking ownership of that filthy, grotty word "Soccer." It's despicable.

For the record, I am NOT taking ownership of this horribe name for the world's best sport. It is football, always was, always will be.

[gillie]

I'm glad at least you lot are finally taking ownership of that filthy, grotty word "Soccer." It's despicable.

For the record, I am NOT taking ownership of this horribe name for the world's best sport. It is football, always was, always will be.

I agree Lee Soccer just sounds yank imo.

[DoomMerchant]

I'm glad at least you lot are finally taking ownership of that filthy, grotty word "Soccer." It's despicable.

For the record, I am NOT taking ownership of this horribe name for the world's best sport. It is football, always was, always will be.

I agree Lee Soccer just sounds yank imo.

hard man. John said when you two were growing up in the 1850s you called it Soccer then. What gives?

cheers

[john68]

As seems to have been proven in this tread....just a bunch of English snobbery.

Before regulation around the 1870s, Football was a mongrel game which had many versions and many different sets of rules in England. It is even possible (though unlikely) that the early games played by our own St Mark's could have allowed the use of hands.
It is important to note that football in any of its forms, particularly the "dribbling game" or "soccer" as it was referred to, was originally not that popular and the rugby version was the main form.

As the dribbling game gained popularity, it was necessary to differentiate which form football was being played. Rugger and soccer were 2 of the terms used.

All versions were defined as FOOTBALL and it has evoled into many seperate games...Rugby, Association Football, American Football, Gaelic Football, Aussie Rules...and probably dozens more versions.
It would be very arrogant to consider that Association Football was the only version that could definitively use the term FOOTBALL as its definition.
The North Americans are only doing what we Eglish have done for years and using Soccer as a means of defining and seperating their version from other games.
Get off yer high horses.

[Ted Hughes]

Or alternatively the yanks decided to call a game where you chuck a ball around almost exclusively with your hands; 'football' because they didn't have enough brain cells to think of anything themselves, as in; " Hey Homer what's that new game you've invented where you throw the ball & the other guy catches it? " " I think I'll call it.........football! "

yr better than that, but...regardless.

American football obv grew more out of Rugby. You lot had your fracture/splinter of "football" turning into Rugby and erm Soccer (for the sake of uh clarity) earlier than we did, but we had a similar occurrence in the US -- that is forming an association or group to create a standard set of rules around how to play these games that were largely "football." When trying to form a unified league in the US it leaned towards a set of rules that were more rugby-flavored than soccer-flavored, and as a result we kept honing the rules about the game, in isolation from whatever happened on the European continent for the large part, until the game was both well-baked enough it its provincial flavour and seen as a bit of a badge of honour against whatever the former mother land was doing. Early American Football rules had a lot more Rugby flavor in terms of what you could do (e.g. more kicking of the ball, and no forward passing, etc), but those rules changed to make it the game it is today with a forward-passing focus, and less kicking for points outside of field goals, etc. And it's a fantastically fun game to play and watch btw.

Had this game been invented in a more "modern" time i would bet that there would have been an INTL forum and agreement upon rules across many continents, which would have made all of our lives a lot less interesting, don't you think?

I'm glad at least you lot are finally taking ownership of that filthy, grotty word "Soccer." It's despicable.

cheers

It was a joke. I don't actually care one way or the other apart from the fact that nerds & prawn sandwich eaters tend to be the people who use the word 'soccer' & 'football ' is a daft name to have called the sport they play in the states, whatever the reason. I can imagine it's good fun to play btw but watching it is an aquired taste. I've tried plenty of times & I mostly end up forgetting it's on.