In the last 15 years the Yankees, Jets, and the Madison Square Garden Company, which owns the Knicks and Rangers, have all attempted to build new stadiums in Manhattan.  Each plan was scrapped, with the Yankees and Jets ultimately building new stadiums outside of Manhattan while the Madison Square Garden group opted to renovate the existing building of the same name.  This precedent is only one concern for Major League Soccer – the league must also face the high cost of building in New York City and local competition that will hurt the potential for other revenue streams.  Finally, the league must consider how having a stadium in Manhattan will impact the New York Red Bulls and their growth potential at nearby Red Bull Arena.

The New York Yankees – Late 1990’s

At the height of the New York Yankees turn of the century dynasty, the franchise explored the possibility of building a new stadium in Manhattan.  Historic Yankee Stadium was still a major draw in the late 1990’s, attracting 2.9 million fans during the 1998 season, and exceeding 3 million fans each year after until it closed in 2008.  Yankees owner George Steinbrenner wanted a new stadium for his team, and with the Yankees lease expiring in 2002 the team worked with Mayor Rudy Giuliani to get a new ballpark built in Manhattan over the West Side rail yards.  The plan was met with criticism from local politicians including New York Governor George Pataki.  High attendance numbers in the Bronx suggested that a stadium in Manhattan was unnecessary and the Mass Transit Association owned the proposed location.  Ultimately the proposed inter-borough move for New York’s most popular team was scrapped, with the Yankees remaining in the Bronx.  The team built a new stadium that opened in 2009 at a site across the street from the original.

New York Jets – Early 2000’s

With their 25-year lease at Giants Stadium set to expire in 2009, the New York Jets sought a move across the Hudson River to Manhattan.  The proposed West Side Stadium was the centerpiece of New York City’s bid for the 2012 Summer Olympics and represented an opportunity to dramatically reshape the New York sports landscape.  Long viewed as the little brother NFL franchise in the New York area, the Jets saw the West Side Stadium as their opportunity to step out of the New York Giants shadow and into the limelight.  The $2.2 billion project included $600 million in public funding.  The state of the art building design included a retractable roof and a connection to the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center.  A possible sale of the stadium site, owned by the MTA, resulted in a legal battle between the Jets and Cablevision, owner of Madison Square Garden.  Jim Dolan, CEO of Cablevision, viewed the proposed stadium as a threat to Garden revenue streams.

Despite support from New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg the stadium was rejected.  There were a variety of concerns about the stadium – traffic disruption, competition with Madison Square Garden, the limited number of home games (10 including preseason) for the Jets.  In the end, the biggest issue was the need for $600 million in public funding.  Proponents of the stadium project were unable to convince local politicians that the stadium was a worthwhile investment given New York City’s other needs, including the redevelopment of downtown Manhattan in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks.  The Jets agreed to terms with the Giants and the two franchises built a new stadium together in East Rutherford, New Jersey, site of the old Giants Stadium.

Madison Square Garden – 2008

In 2006 the Madison Square Garden Company was persuaded to consider relocation as part of the Moynihan Station project.  The objective of the project was to reshape midtown Manhattan – Madison Square Garden would be demolished and rebuilt one block west in the James A. Farley Post Office building.  Penn Station, the busiest train station in America, would be refurbished and new office buildings were to be constructed on the site of the old Garden.  Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan first proposed the project over a decade earlier.  The proposed relocation of Madison Square Garden was on the table for about two years, but ultimately MSG pulled out of the project in 2008.  Economic struggles, projected cost overruns and a protracted legal struggle to get the project approved resulted in MSG walking away, opting instead for an extensive renovation of the existing arena.

Additional Obstacles for Major League Soccer

For the sake of argument let’s assume that Major League Soccer is able to find a suitable site for a new stadium in Manhattan – what then?  The biggest issue is going to be cost.  To date the most expensive soccer specific stadium in the league is Red Bull Arena, which opened in 2010 and cost $200 million to build.  The stadium was paid for in full by the team, but the city of Harrison contributed $39 million for the stadium site, and Hudson County chipped in $45 million for a parking garage.  With an overall project cost of about $285 million, the project was still inexpensive by New York area standards.  The Yankees and Mets both opened new stadiums in 2009, with construction costs of $1.5 billion and $900 million respectively.  The Giants and Jets opened MetLife Stadium in 2010 – the 82,000-seat facility came with a $1.6 billion price tag.  The new MLS arena will be considerably smaller than those buildings with a probable capacity the 25-30,000 range.  Pricing estimates haven’t been released to date, but it seems fairly certain that the $200 million cost of Red Bull Arena – built in an old industrial zone in Harrison, NJ – will pale in comparison to the cost of a new building in New York City.  Add in the rumored $100 million expansion fee and acquiring the second New York City MLS franchise will be a very expensive proposition for investors.

Is Major League Soccer Ready for a Huge Investment in New York City?

We’ve already addressed how adding a team in New York City could benefit Major League Soccer – but that was before Garber announced his intention to build in Manhattan.  The ambitious plan suggests MLS is very confident a second New York area team will be successful.  Certainly a Manhattan location would make the stadium extremely convenient for New York area residents.  Madison Square Garden is always near capacity for Rangers and Knicks games in part because the arena is so well located.  Area residents, corporate clients and tourists frequent the building.  If Major League Soccer builds a stadium in Manhattan it will immediately become the most accessible soccer stadium in the league, and would likely rival any other stadium in the world.

Garber has been adamant that Red Bull New York is fully behind the proposed New York City expansion, but market saturation has to be a concern.  The Red Bulls have had the New York area to themselves since the inception of the league and the team is still struggling for attention.  It’s certainly possible that adding another New York franchise would bolster the Red Bulls by association, creating a meaningful local rivalry that captivated fans.  It’s also possible that another franchise in the area will simply cannibalize the existing market share.  The best example is the NHL, which has three teams in the New York City area.  The Rangers, located in Manhattan, are very successful financially while the two teams outside the city – the New Jersey Devils and New York Islanders – both have major financial problems despite greater success in the league over the last 30 years.  Hockey simply isn’t popular enough locally for three professional teams to thrive, and it’s possible (maybe even likely) that soccer isn’t popular enough for two teams to be successful.

Finally, a soccer-specific stadium in Manhattan might struggle to attract other events.  Madison Square Garden has two professional teams playing 41 home games each.  Add in preseason and playoff games, and the arena can count on about 90 games per year from the home teams.  A Major League Soccer team only plays 17 home regular season games, plus preseason, tournament and playoff games that can bump the total over 20.  That leaves roughly 340-45 days a year where the stadium won’t be serving its primary function.  Competition for other events is fierce in the New York area.  A new MLS stadium would have to compete with eight area stadiums for concerts or other events – Madison Square Garden, Barclays Center, Yankee Stadium, Citi Field, MetLife Stadium, Prudential Center, Izod Center and Red Bull Arena.  Furthermore, an open-air stadium would be virtually useless during the winter offseason so they’d have to pack non-soccer events into the spring and summer months while MLS season is in full swing.  The alternative would be adding a retractable roof to the stadium, but that would be costly and the stadium would still have fall/winter competition from nearby arenas.

A New Era for Major League Soccer

Cost, competition, precedent, market saturation – it’s all important to consider.  But if Major League Soccer builds a stadium in Manhattan it will be an incredible step forward.  The league is stable now, it has a healthy foundation and steady growth, but it’s still not quite ready to slug it out with the Big Four.  A Manhattan address would change that overnight.  The expansion franchise playing in that building would become, to many across the country, the league’s signature team right out of the gate.  If it’s the Cosmos, forget it.  You want a back page story for the New York tabloids – how about the most glamourous soccer club in American history reborn on Broadway?  It’s possible.  History shows us that it might be a long shot; the numbers might not add up for MLS, the political battles might prove too frustrating.  At the very least Garber is aiming high, undeterred by the fact that major New York sports organizations have had this same dream snuffed out.

Although it’s been nearly 28 years since they played a game in the North American Soccer League, the New York Cosmos remain the most famous club team in American history.  Their brief flash across the sports landscape in the 1970′s and 80′s introduced America to the game, its glory and decadence.  Now the club is hoping to launch a new era as the 20th MLS franchise.  Is it a good idea?  Is it viable?  Let’s take a look:

—

Why Shouldn’t the League Add the Cosmos?

—

 New York Already has a Major League Soccer Team:

Yes, the New York area already has one high profile MLS team with a brand new stadium and a collection of stars.  Red Bull New York, formerly the Metrostars, have been around since the inception of MLS.  Despite a history marked with disappointment the Red Bulls are among the bigger MLS teams.  Owned by the energy drink company of the same name, the Red Bulls have financial advantages over many of their MLS counterparts, although so far they’ve failed to capture any silverware.

From an outside perspective it’s clear that adding a second team to an existing MLS market would not extremely well received – there are many candidate cities still without one team.  While it’s not the most diplomatic stance, frankly having multiple teams in New York is the norm for American professional sports.  The New York area has two baseball teams, two football teams, two basketball teams and three hockey teams.  We’re used to a little local competition, and a second MLS team would continue that tradition.

A Second Team Would Negatively Impact Red Bull New York:

The potential for a negative impact on RBNY must be one of the primary considerations for MLS as it pursues NYC expansion.  Although the Red Bulls have been around for 17 years, they aren’t very well entrenched locally.  It’s not a situation like the Pacific Northwest, where the Timbers and Sounders have been embraced by their cities.  The Red Bulls are still at the bottom of the sports food chain in New York.  They have to compete with the Mets and Yankees for attention during the summer and rarely get discussed by the local media.  Attendance has improved in the new building, but from personal experience the reported numbers are either inflated or include thousands of no-shows a game.  Regular ticket promotions suggest that the demand is not overwhelming.

Major League Soccer Should Expand to Other Cities:

As mentioned earlier, multiple cities have expressed interest in having an MLS franchise.  St. Louis, Detroit, Minneapolis and Miami have all submitted bids.  While it’s a positive sign for the league that so many cities are interested, MLS needs to galvanize the league with the 20^th franchise.  A twenty-team league with regional anchors in Los Angeles and New York City will have a solid foundation in place for future development.  A wide reaching geographic presence would be fantastic, but a disproportionate emphasis on America’s two biggest markets will pay dividends.  Foreign stars are more likely to come play in America if they can live in NYC or LA, media coverage is easier to come by, and there are enormous numbers of potential fans with disposable income.  Another team in NY might seem redundant, but if MLS wants to continue to make serious headway it makes sense to prime the pump in New York.

—

Bad Arguments for the Cosmos

 — 

Red Bulls are not a “New York” Team:

A common refrain from supporters of the Cosmos is that New York City needs its own team.  While it’s true that RBNY actually play their games in Jersey, it’s really just a footnote.  New York City proper doesn’t have endless tracts of land available for development, it’s difficult to find space for a stadium.  North Jersey is the next best option for “New York” teams.  The Giants and Jets, both New York teams by name, have played their home games in New Jersey for decades and it hasn’t had any impact on attendance or local interest.

 Red Bull Arena is Inconvenient for New York City Residents: 

Basically a follow up to the “Not New York” argument.  Red Bull Arena isn’t as well located as, say, Madison Square Garden, but it’s hardly a hassle.  Public transportation (PATH) is available to take fans to and from the stadium, it’s cheap and it’s only slightly less convenient than the Subway.  Distance isn’t the issue either – despite being in a different state, RBA is only slightly further from Midtown Manhattan than Yankee Stadium or Citi Field (one proposed site for the Cosmos).

 —

Benefits of Bringing the Cosmos to New York

 —

Higher Local Profile for Major League Soccer: 

Given that the idea of a second team in New York isn’t an easy sell for many MLS fans, it’s important to explore how the league would benefit.  As stated, establishing a two team hub in New York would provide a counterweight to Los Angeles’ pair of clubs, giving MLS a major presence in America’s two largest markets.  The circumstances in New York aren’t exactly the same though.  The Galaxy had success prior to the addition of Chivas USA, and with expansion to a second LA team MLS was tapping into the local Mexican-American market in place.  Chivas appeared to have a large number of potential fans, with a cultural link that would divert attention from the established Galaxy.

 New York doesn’t appear to be as fertile on the surface.  Although the Red Bulls have an excellent new stadium and legitimate, if aging, superstars (there weren’t many bigger than Henry over the last decade), the team still isn’t incredibly popular.  Adding another team could improve the situation though.  New Yorkers love their city, and the dynamic between local rivals is an important part of the sports culture.  The Yankees-Mets and Giants-Jets, despite playing in different conferences/leagues, are legitimate rivals.  Although they don’t meet on the field frequently, the battle for local headlines and overall status is constant and engages New York fans differently than other rivalries with teams around the country.  No matter which local team you root for, it’s probable that nearly half the city hates them.  The result is a fantastic, sports based cultural experience that plays out like a sibling rivalry, always present and contentious.  Most importantly it promotes local interest, and by adding the Cosmos MLS would be able to go one step further, having local rivals in the same conference.  The rivalry would be that much better because the Cosmos and Red Bulls would be battling for playoff spots as well as headlines.

An Alternative to Red Bull New York: 

It’s possible that the biggest selling point for the Cosmos will be, simply, that they aren’t the Red Bulls.  While corporate sponsorship is commonplace in American sports, “Red Bull New York” is a bridge too far for many fans.  The modern day standards – stadium naming rights, official league sponsors, logos on the jerseys – might not be ideal, but can be ignored for the most part.  A team named after a product is unappealing  – even among Red Bulls supporters, you can still find fans wearing Metrostars jerseys in protest.  By offering an alternative, particularly a brand (there we go blurring the lines) with historical significance to American soccer, the Cosmos will draw supporters almost by default.  Even now, without any guarantee that the team will ever join MLS, the Cosmos have fans and supporters clubs in the city.

 Looking at the Cosmos as an alternative to RBNY raises the most important point, one that should be of particular interest to MLS: conversion.  Lacking any actual data or evidence beyond firsthand experience, it seems that the biggest problem for the league is that most soccer fans in America are not MLS fans.  Soccer is very popular, MLS much less so.  Rather than focusing on making America a soccer-first nation, which won’t ever happen, MLS should seek to turn existing soccer fans on to the domestic game.  The Cosmos can help facilitate that process.  Would-be Cosmos fans are derided by current MLS fans as hipsters, but that criticism misses the point, which is that there’s a group of fans in New York ready to embrace MLS, they just need a team, and for most the Red Bulls will never be that team.

—

Potential Stumbling Blocks

 —

Don Garber and Major League Soccer have targeted New York City as the home of the league’s 20^th franchise.  The Cosmos brand is available for use, and the ownership group is actively seeking to join MLS.  There are soccer fans in the city ready to embrace New York Cosmos 2.0.  Looking at the big picture, it seems inevitable that the Cosmos will join MLS in the next few years – unfortunately it’s not quite that simple.

The first priority is identifying a suitable owner for a New York franchise.  The league is looking for a group that can pay the sizable expansion fee (rumored to be as high as $100 million), build a stadium and compete financially with big MLS clubs like Red Bulls and LA Galaxy.  Fred Wilpon, owner of the New York Mets, has been linked with the NYC expansion rumors for years.  Garber seems to believe he’d be a suitable owner for the league, and they appear to have a good relationship.  Unfortunately for MLS, Fred Wilpon isn’t exactly Scrooge McDuck.  Without delving into the details, Wilpon lost a great deal of money when Bernie Madoff’s Ponzi scheme collapsed, and is having significant problems with the Mets.  It seems very unlikely he’ll be acquiring a new franchise in the near future.   Garber has suggested that other potential ownership groups exist, but to date nobody has been as prominently linked to the Cosmos as Wilpon.

Once an owner is identified, additional issues will have to be addressed.  Will the franchise owner work out a deal with the Cosmos ownership group?  They should be willing to negotiate, unless the plan is to capitalize on NASL NY Cosmos merchandise indefinitely.  If not, it’s possible that they’ll move forward with a more generic name such as New York FC.

MLS will also want a guarantee a soccer specific will be built by the expansion franchise in short order.  Finding the land and financing for a new stadium in NYC won’t be an easy task.   The rumored Wilpon family ownership included plans for a stadium in Flushing alongside Citi Field.  The most recent comments from Don Garber at the 2012 MLS Draft suggested the league has a more ambitious plan – developing a stadium on the west side of Manhattan, on the Atlantic Yards site once targeted by the Jets.

Afzalul karim Nirvick's flickr

Two weeks ago 26,760 fans filled Red Bull Arena in Harrison, New Jersey for the 16^th MLS All Star Game.  Despite considerable hype, the game was unremarkable, which wasn’t particularly surprising to any seasoned American sports fan.  All Star games, more pageant than athletic contest, are rarely compelling.  The hook for Major League Soccer is that the MLS All Star game is an opportunity to showcase American soccer against the best in the world, while briefly enticing additional eyeballs with a sexy date.  Manchester United accepted the invitation for a second straight year, and forgot their manners again dropping the All Star hosts 4-0.  The score left soccer pundits and fans asking whether or not these exhibitions are good for MLS or the growth of the game domestically.  The answer is “yes” of course (any press is good press), but if the mission of All Star week was to grow the game in America, the main event was only part of the battle.  On Monday night of All Star week, in the same town as the state of the art Red Bull Arena, a celebration of US Soccer history provided an example for the future.

Given the underwhelming track record of US Soccer, the term “Legend” can only be applied in a relative sense.  Brazil has soccer legends.  America has some players who were better than most other American players.  Most great success stories have humble roots though, and players can provide inspiration without possessing genius.  Tony Meola, Tab Ramos and John Harkes are three such figures in the history of American soccer.  All three were raised in Harrison and played central roles on the 1994 US World Cup team.  They were honored by MLS in “The Legends Game”, joining other US National Team alumni in a friendly match against local high school players at the Harrison soccer courts.  The setting was appropriate given the proximity to Red Bull Arena, but the courts and this particular story should serve as an example for the development of the domestic game.

Discussion about the potential of American soccer on the world stage often focuses on empirical evidence.  The United States has an enormous, relatively affluent population, a vibrant sporting culture, incredible youth participation numbers and limitless resources.  Success appears to be inevitable.  It’s difficult to acknowledge that all the support, resources and organization may actually be a significant barrier which the American game, to date, has struggled to overcome.  It’s hard to separate romanticism from fact, but there’s a line of thinking that great soccer comes from poverty and adversity.  Children from poor families in soccer-obsessed countries, lacking the same structure and entertainment options of their American counterparts, play the game more frequently and without the formalities.  The Harrison courts provide evidence that a similar emphasis is necessary here.  In a story about the game from MLS, Meola said, “If you got here, you didn’t want to give up your spot on the court.  You fought and played your hardest to keep your spot. That makes every kick count, it makes it more competitive. You didn’t want to get off the court.” While I doubt this experience is exclusive to the Harrison courts, it’s certainly a unique developmental experience in America.  Most players here start in Rec leagues as kids, those that stick with it play for a local club, then a high school.  Pickup games aren’t commonplace.  Soccer education is handed down by coaches and parents rather than self taught, through consistent informal play, improvisation or peer interaction.

Awareness isn’t the issue – collectively, the US Soccer Federation, MLS, writers and fans understand what the problem is.  The question now is why, and what can be done to correct it?  Some think it’s an American phenomenon; our athletic culture is very organized from a young age.  Games matter, winning matters, coaches are almost always present and as a result valuable experimental time is lost.  Our basketball culture proves otherwise though.  The informal street ball games popular throughout the country exist despite organized youth basketball leagues.

More likely, the answer is twofold:  soccer isn’t popular enough, and there aren’t enough places for kids to just go play.  The popularity issue is real, but long term it isn’t all that troubling.  Significant progress has been made domestically in the last two decades, and it should only continue to improve.  Major League Soccer isn’t overwhelmingly popular, but it’s secure and growing.  The US National Team, Men’s and Women’s, have received incredible exposure over the course of the last two years.  European leagues are as accessible as they’ve ever been for American fans.  The objective now is converting fans, particularly young fans, into players.  The soccer courts in Harrison are an example USA Soccer should embrace and seek to replicate.  Obviously well kept, full size fields are essential for youth leagues – but it’s the time in between games, in between organized events that should be examined.  Go into any city or town in America and you’ll find basketball hoops all over the place.  Parks, gyms, garages, schools – opportunities for kids to play are everywhere.

USA Soccer hasn’t lost site of this, there are initiatives in place to develop new playing spaces.  There are grant programs and opportunities for organizations and municipalities to work with the Soccer Association to develop fields.  Despite good intentions, even this seems overly formal.  The end product is a field turf surface, lights – a place that will probably be built and never open for public use.  It doesn’t have to be so official, frankly the only thing that’s required is properly allocated space.  A small area dedicated to soccer – not league soccer, just a space for kids to play when they want.  A space where they can learn the game on their own terms, where they can be creative, ambitious, even wrong.  If more places like the Harrison courts are created, conversion will happen naturally.

Soccer has made very significant strides in America since World Cup 1994.  MLS is growing, new facilities are being built, major media outlets are dedicating more and more time and resources to coverage.  Our National Team seems to have reached a plateau however, which is an indication that you can only grow so much with a top down approach.  In order for all the exposure to soccer to have the highest impact, the emphasis needs to be on youth development.  Make them fans, then make sure they have a place to play.  Ultimately the full potential of a soccer cathedral like Red Bull Arena will only be realized by developing simple, accessible fields in surrounding areas.  The Harrison courts can act as a blueprint – let’s just hope the most significant game of All Star Week wasn’t overlooked.