Montreal and MLS: a perfect marriage, or too much Canadian closeness?

by Steve Davis on Dec 10, 2009 5:58 PM EST Comment 27 comments

Montreal's gorgeous Stade Saputo ... future MLS home?

MLS commissioner Don Garber is in Montreal today to discus expansion into yet another Canadian market. That would make three, along with Toronto and (starting in 2011) Vancouver. Every time I think of this, my first instinct is to invade Canada.

Oh, crap! Wait! That’s Dick Cheney’s first instinct. I sometimes get confused.

Seriously, I sometimes recoil a bit and wonder if MLS is guilty of a league-level wandering eye. The Tiger Woods of professional leagues?

What I mean is this: Is MLS overlooking tempting and worthy markets in its own back yard, the United States, while disproportionately stocking up on Canadian clubs, overly smitten by the evocative ingenue of foreign lands? I mean, St. Louis still looks like a wonderful MLS candidate, if that gung ho ownership group in The Lou can ever satisfy the MLS suits’ requirements of sufficient cash reserves. And other markets look enticing, too.

Then again, Montreal has a lot going. A solid ownership group stands at the ready. (I know that for fans, thinking about ownership groups and cash reserves is a real buzz kill, not nearly as much fun as dissecting stadiums and national maps and such. But when it comes to stability in the big picture, good ownership is like the flour tortilla on a big ol’ burrito: it holds everything together.)

The team in Montreal has been around for 16 years and already averages more than 12,000 fans a game in a second-tier league. The 13,000-seat Saputo Stadium is a little gem.

Last February the Montreal Impact met Mexico’s Santos Laguna of Mexico in a first-leg CONCACAF Champions League quarterfinals. (The Canadians prevailed, 2-0.)

As the brilliant little Stade Saputo (here’s the link, again, in case you were too lazy to go to it last time) was deemed too small and unsuitable for winter weather. (Night time … February … Canada … would you want to be there?) So they moved the match indoors to Olympic Stadium.

There, safely tucked in beneath a blanket of fluffy white snow, a cozy crowd of 55,571 rocked the Quebec night. The match created a real buzz around Canada’s second largest city.

It’s about then that I think, “Montreal? Hmmm. Sounds pretty good.”

What do you think?

0 recs | Comment 27 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

As an American, I’m perfectly fine with three Canadian teams. Why does MLS have to be overtly US-centric? If Montreal is the logical next place to expand, let MLS do it. Plus, I’d expect Canadian expansion to stop at Montreal—the next biggest Canadian metro area is Ottawa, which I can’t see having an MLS team for quite some time.

"My face is my mask."

by Jake Shapiro on Dec 10, 2009 7:48 PM EST reply actions 1 recs

3 of 19 is fine

4 of 24 would be ok as well (though I would hate to be the US city that misses out to Ottawa, Edmonton, or Winnipeg)

Montreal and MLS will be great together.

I am not a Supporter
I am not a Fan
I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart

by Dave Clark on Dec 10, 2009 10:05 PM EST reply actions

Fine with some changes

I think it is fine if MLS can make the following change to their rosters: All players from the US, Canada and Mexico count as North American players and don’t count toward the International player limit. Toronto has been given the opportunity to add more international players to their roster than US teams since their creation, and while they have failed to capitalize on that advantage other teams may not be as impulsive as TFC.

TFC currently has 11 players who would qualify as international players with my changes while Seattle has 7, LA has just 5, even MLS Cup Champions RSL have only 6 that would count. If MLS truly goes back to a 28 man roster, then having 8 players be international and 20 being North American would mean that every team would have to follow the same rules.

Just my opinion

by denz on Dec 10, 2009 10:37 PM EST reply actions 1 recs

There is something about US law

That somehow MLB avoids with their draft (Canadian, US and PR are drafted – rest not) but that MLS is not able to do concerning hiring and the creation of classes of employees based on nationality.

I have thought there may be a legal way around this by granting non-international status to all nations that have certain levels of Free Trade Agreements with the USA and Canada. This would mean that USA, Canada, Mexico, Jordan, Peru, Costa Rica, Chile and Israeli citizens would all be domestics for MLS.

Garber at the Supporter Summit also seemed intrigued by copying the J-League’s extra international slot that can only be used on an AFC player.

I am not a Supporter
I am not a Fan
I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart

by Dave Clark on Dec 11, 2009 1:08 AM EST up reply actions

Title VII or equal protection?

by magistermilitum on Dec 17, 2009 12:51 AM EST up reply actions

Carolina on my mind

No doubt Montreal will be a great expansion city. But when will MLS expand to the southeast? Have the powers that be ever considered North Carolina? ACC country has provided some good MLS talent. Why not give the Carolinas some consideration?

by JohnnyPirate on Dec 11, 2009 12:06 AM EST reply actions

Steve, have you ever done a post (maybe at soccernet) where you talk about possible future expansion locales in the MLS? Like maybe a run down of cities with lower tier teams that have strong support and MLS-ready stadiums that could potentially “become” an MLS team a la Seattle? You mentioned St. Louis in passing above; I would love to see more in-depth discussion about the “tempting and worthy markets” you alluded to. And ownership/financial information is more than welcome; we fans understand how big a part of it that stuff is and are probably more interested in learning about it than you think.

by Frank Reich Revolution on Dec 11, 2009 1:53 AM EST reply actions

Yes and No

I’ve written stories about it before, but it’s been a while. And to your point, it’s probably a good time to post a fresh blog item about it. … Look for it soon, probably next week some time.

by Steve Davis on Dec 11, 2009 10:44 AM EST up reply actions

I'm all for league expansion

as long as it balances out the conferences. After Portland and Vancouver join it’ll be 10 Western and 8 Eastern conf. teams. It may just be the OCD in me, but its just odd.

Also, I hope the expansion helps the league change the format for making the playoffs. But thats a whole other monster…

Expansion is probably the best thing for MLS to breakthrough and gain more national exposure. Lets hope it works.

Columbus til I die, Columbus til I die. I know I am, I swear I am, Columbus til I die!

FKA BLAZER_FAN_199. Now an author for THE Jackets Cannon! March On!

by Andrew Tolliver on Dec 11, 2009 11:05 AM EST reply actions

I too am concerned about the evenness (or lack of)

We could move Dallas or Houston to the East for a season to have 9/9 for a year, and then if Montreal comes in it would be 10/9 on either side, so then move D/H back and put Montreal in the East. Then, bring the 20th team in as an Eastern team (i.e. St. Louis, Charlotte/Carolina, Atlanta).

by chillicothe20 on Dec 11, 2009 3:35 PM EST up reply actions

ESPN wants at least low 20s

Seriously, they want at least in the low 20s to consider a league in a pro sport “national.” It is part of the reason for the lower coverage. Only part, but yes a part.

I am not a Supporter
I am not a Fan
I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart

by Dave Clark on Dec 11, 2009 4:41 PM EST up reply actions

ESPN is evil.

Columbus til I die, Columbus til I die. I know I am, I swear I am, Columbus til I die!

FKA BLAZER_FAN_199. Now an author for THE Jackets Cannon!

by Andrew Tolliver on Dec 11, 2009 4:51 PM EST up reply actions

Also National and on basic cable

I am not a Supporter
I am not a Fan
I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart

by Dave Clark on Dec 11, 2009 5:16 PM EST up reply actions

all for it

I think the biggest thing for MLS is to have on board franchises that have exciting fan experiences, sell out consistently, and don’t have pitches that embarass the league. Weren’t the playoff games in L.A. and Chicago cool to watch this year?

I just hope with Montreal—when MLS, Saputo and the Quebec government are done negotiating the expansion of the stadium—that they take into consideration what’s happened in Toronto and Seattle and go for closer to 30k seats than 20k.

Montreal would also make a really cool road trip. Not only would it be culturally unique amongst MLS locales, it has a rockin’ night life! Keep the players under strict curfew if you want to get points on the road there.

And getting way off topic, but this thought popped into my head the other day. Rather than Beckham get a brand new MLS franchise when that time comes, how about he gets the Revolution from Kraft and fixes that situation?

by PeterJH on Dec 11, 2009 1:22 PM EST reply actions

its probably a pipe dream, but...

… I just get nervous with this talk of an ever-expanding MLS. I would much rather see the emphasis placed on solidifying a real 2nd division (this NASL/USL business is silly) and evolving the game in USA/Canada to a relegation/promotion system. I see no reason why we can’t have two divisions of 16-18 teams each, where you can Earn your way up.

...that's MISTER Keller to you!!!

by malcontentjake on Dec 11, 2009 3:16 PM EST reply actions

Jake,

Why would Joe Roth have just spent 20M$ of his own cash for a second division club?
How ’bout the Hunts who have spent north of 100M$? Kraft? AEG? Etc

I am not a Supporter
I am not a Fan
I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart

by Dave Clark on Dec 11, 2009 3:27 PM EST up reply actions

there is an evolutionary process here...

… and I feel like a part of that process is realizing you have a finite number of top division clubs that can be supported on an economic and talent basis.

I once was a considerable hockey fan, and I watched the NHL cash in on their popularity boom from the late 80’s/early 90’s and expand from 21 teams to 30 over the course of about a decade. This rapid over-expansion hurt the overall quality of the league (IMO) and as the quality of play dropped, so did my interest.

To more specifically answer your question, Joe Roth and company would see a vast untapped market potential in Seattle, and spend the money on the 2nd division Sounders to bring them up to MLS (and might I add, the Sounders would’ve organically won “promotion” from USL a handful of times over the last decade!).

The First Division (MLS) has been established and has become more or less stable, and right now I am pretty concerned with the stability of the 2nd division (USL/NASL fiasco) and I’m just of the belief that a certain emphasis needs to be placed on this problem before we will-nilly add teams at the top.

...that's MISTER Keller to you!!!

by malcontentjake on Dec 12, 2009 3:48 PM EST up reply actions

But Pro/Rel

Would force a team worth tens of millions of dollars right into that disaster that is second tier soccer, where they would not get TV revenue, where they would travel to some pathetic high school football stadiums and in front of 500 fans.

Why would any right thinking CEO of an MLS team desire that for themself? They have already spent the money.

As for the talent level and dilution, while it may be true for other American sports, it can’t happen in MLS unless you can show that MLS teams have fully tapped both the international and domestic markets. Considering that MLS RESERVE talents are starters in Scandanavia that can not be true.

I am not a Supporter
I am not a Fan
I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart

by Dave Clark on Dec 12, 2009 5:17 PM EST up reply actions

except that...

by focusing on building a better 2nd division, you WON’T SEE professional teams playing in pathetic high school stadiums in front of 500 people…

Fox Soccer did broadcast USL matches, and I will re-iterate, a part of the “evolutionary process” is INCREASING the stature of the 2nd division, so it isn’t seen as being sent to Siberia.

Yeah, its true, revenues drop when a team gets dropped, but I don’t see this problem crippling other leagues around the world. As I’ve said before, its a system with a proven, historical, track record of success.

...that's MISTER Keller to you!!!

by malcontentjake on Dec 14, 2009 2:57 PM EST up reply actions

Yeah, it worked great for Leeds

I am not a Supporter
I am not a Fan
I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart

by Dave Clark on Dec 14, 2009 7:21 PM EST up reply actions

not sure what you mean by that...

Leeds were done in by a financial implosion as a direct result of reckless spending. IMO they got what they deserved. I can only hope the same fate awaits ManU, et. al.

...that's MISTER Keller to you!!!

by malcontentjake on Dec 15, 2009 8:21 PM EST up reply actions

Absolutely

Already there are players in the MLS that couldn’t be make water boy in many other leagues. Diluting the available players is going to hurt the quality. Bringing in foreign has-beens isn’t going to solve the problem. If the MLS is serious about becoming a premier league, they have to seriously consider having more than one division. You could probably support about 8 premier teams in US, but many more MLS caliber teams. I see no way around this without accepting that MLS will never be as good as a big name European league.

by Cool Dudes on Dec 12, 2009 1:37 AM EST up reply actions

I have one good market for a MLS team: San Diego.

It is perfect and there is big stadium to play in. Also with Mexico to the south, this is a perfect market for a team. I have been hoping they would bring a team here. I mean stayh in the states at least.

2009 NBA Champions L.A Lakers
2009 NBA Finals MVP Kobe Bryant

by weazel on Dec 12, 2009 1:23 AM EST reply actions 1 recs

I’ve thought a few times that the NASL guys need to jump on San Diego and Phoenix. Good size markets that aren’t being talked about.

Although I’ve also thought that Chivas should just move south to San Diego. Another option I guess.

by danielfarrell on Dec 13, 2009 10:10 AM EST up reply actions

Does Canada have enought Canadian players to support three teams?

by Cool Dudes on Dec 12, 2009 1:38 AM EST reply actions

Montreal=Good, but expansion worries me

I think montreal is a good fit but i worry about this rapid expansion. MLS uses stability as an excuse for treating its players like slaves and being the most socialist league in the world, yet they are wanting to expand like mad men. I say consolidate your gains.

by GeoJock on Dec 12, 2009 12:54 PM EST reply actions

Montreal is perfect addition

This should have been done in the last expansion. 3 teams wouldn’t have been too much, as both of them (Seattle and Montreal) would have been teams with a base already in the USL. Easier transition to top flight. Expand the stadium to 18,500 and get them going!

Chad the Ref

by Chad the Ref on Dec 14, 2009 12:12 PM EST reply actions