Stability

Many of you have already taken a look at the Don Garber interview that threatens the relocation of DC United. There have been similar articles, though not by nearly as credible of sources, about the possible relocation of the Columbus Crew to Las Vegas in the past few weeks.

I view both of these threats as deeply troubling to the league. I believe the Don is likely using the threat as a passive-aggressive tactic to "force" the DC area into finding a viable stadium offer, but the fact that it is DC United just strikes me the wrong way. While I couldn't care less about what they accomplish on the pitch week in and week out there is no doubt that they have brought more to the league than any other franchise since 1996.

The threat is also a bit too "Checkettesque" and like our own stadium battle a year or so ago. While he may think it landed him a stadium, I'd like to think that the stadium would have still come without the 'Real to St. Louis threat'. Another passive-aggressive tactic that upset the core of die-hard fans and fueled the fire behind the soccer haters. It is a threat that still tastes bitter to many that love RSL despite now having our beautiful Rio Tinto. Though if the tactic must be used I believe it is more beneficial coming from Don Garber (who can absorb the hate) than a team owner already struggling for public acceptance.

As for the Columbus move I really wouldn't think much of it if it weren't for the fact that they have what is a historical stadium in the short tenure of Major League Soccer. Each franchise that has a stadium (of the soccer-specific flavor) use longevity as a way to sell the concept to their city. The relocation of a team with a SSS would make getting a stadium a long uphill battle for any other team nationwide looking to take that next step. It would ruin credibility. (Now the debate of why Vegas should have/not have a team is a whole post of its own)

My question to the league is whether or not they should be spending all this time, energy, and resources looking to further expand or if it should be used to fortify up the foundation of existing clubs. There is no doubt that expansion brings a flicker of excitement, look at Seattle, but I feel the league is so eager to keep expanding that it is failing to put effort into strengthening what it already has secured.

Could these expansion franchise fees at least not be partially used to increase promotion in each of the existing cities? In a league that claims to practice sound business policies and prudence it seems as if it is putting that to the wayside in order to grow, but what would really help the league to grow is by improving what exists already. Better publicity, increased salary caps, and better academy systems should be the focus.

With Portland, Vancouver, and Philadelphia already on the way I wish that the league would now focus on building the league rather than expanding it. Don't get me wrong...I am excited about the entrance of Portland and Vancouver and feel they can add to the excitement Seattle brought and hopefully one day add to the foundation of which I preach. But, their success relies largely on the stability of this league and their existing teams, such as DC United and Columbus. With Portland $15 million dollars short for stadium funding and Vancouver still doesn't have a SSS plan in place it will be very important for their proponents not to be able to point their fingers at the league's only near dynasty (DC) and returning champs (CC) as reasons not to invest in their local teams and not to invest in Major League Soccer.