MLS announces newest franchise: New York City FC

New York City FC Unveil_Levine_Garber_Soriano

By DAN KARELL

Major League Soccer announced on Tuesday in partnership with Manchester City and the New York Yankees that the 20th team in the league would be New York City FC.

The new team is expected to begin play in 2015.

“We proudly welcome two of the most prestigious professional global sports organizations to Major League Soccer,” MLS commissioner Don Garber said in a statement. “This is a transformational development that will elevate the league to new heights in this country. The New York area is home to more than 19 million people, and we look forward to an intense crosstown rivalry between New York City Football Club and the New York Red Bulls that will captivate this great city.”

For Garber, it’s the successful finish of over three years of negotiations to bring a second team to New York City. For the league, the $100 million it has received in expansion fees can be spread around the league.

Manchester City will be the majority owner in the club, with the Yankees playing an active minority role. Though the team plans to have a permanent home eventually, they will begin MLS play in a temporary venue in 2015.

“We are pleased to be associated with this major move by MLS to increase its presence in the New York market and to enhance the opportunity for New York soccer fans to enjoy high-level play in their own city,” said Hal Steinbrenner, managing general partner of the New York Yankees, in statement release by MLS. ” We look forward to the opportunity to work with Manchester City to create something very special for the soccer fans of New York — and to bringing another terrific team to this city for all sports fans to enjoy.”

What do you make of this news? Did you expect this announcement? Are you excited for the potential of the team and league to continue to grow?

Share your thoughts below.

This entry was posted in Featured, Major League Soccer, MLS- Expansion, MLS- New York City FC, U.S. Soccer. Bookmark the permalink.

322 Responses to MLS announces newest franchise: New York City FC

  1. steve says:

    fantastic news. two great ownership groups in new york city area. the question is where will nycfc play their games?

    • USsoccer100 says:

      I love Man City, I hate the Yankees. Not sure I could support anything with Yankee ties. I bet there are Man Utd fans that feel the same way.

      • Noel says:

        This is exactly how I feel. The Yankees and Arsenal have a strategic alliance-type thing on YES, so I’m just gonna pretend like Sheikh Mansour is the only owner and the Steinbrenners are his errand boys. In my head that makes sense.

      • Josh says:

        I loved Man City before they became a Yankees style organization and just paid for a competitive team.

        • PD says:

          Yes but what was their trophy case like? I hate it too, but you can either love time table teams for their heart and smarts or you can love top table teams because they can afford the players that win championships. It’s ironic that the unrestricted egalitarianism of the free market is more freely expressed in European football models that don’t have salary apps and have promotion and relegation and yet American society seems to not like this model for it’s sports, even though we supposedly are the cradle of this dial in every other aspect of society from education to immigration to white collar crime…

          • PD says:

            Mid, not time
            caps, not apps
            Ideal, not dial

            Stupid auto text…

            • USsoccer100 says:

              I have always thought Conservatives will one day turn to soccer in droves for the very reasons you list. I can’t imagine a more socialist setup than rewarding the failed teams with the best player through the draft.

              • Rabbit says:

                Yes yes, have thought about this often as well. It’s a much more free market capitalist model in European soccer.

      • Sparta Riverside says:

        Think I just became a Red Bulls fan. Can’t stand the Yankees and the Steinbrenners.

        • TomG says:

          Anti-Yankees sentiments are ridiculous and have nothing to do with the topic. Who cares whether your favorite baseball team gets bludgeoned by the Yankees every year? The point is that they are one of the wealthiest and best run organizations in professional sports. Having them involved in MLS can only be a great thing.

          • USsoccer100 says:

            Ridiculous over-emotionalism in the realm of sports? Why I never heard of such a thing!

          • Sparta Riverside says:

            The Yankees may be run well and may be well funded ( the first point is debatable), but that doesn’t mean that they are likeable. Actually I think the league needs some more bad guys (galaxy aren’t enough) so this may be a good move overall, but I am going to root against them every game.

            By the way my team beat the Yankees in the playoffs.

            • Riggity says:

              Sparta, what Riverside are you referring to? Are you a cadet??

              • Sparta Riverside says:

                Live in Riverside, CA, but grew up in Michigan. Sparta is a reference to Sparta Prague.

              • Riggity says:

                Familiar with both, went to a private military academy named Riverside thought there might be a tiny chance you were an alum…I’d much rather be from Riverside California lol

            • slowleftarm says:

              The first point is debateble? Are you serious? From a business perspective, they’re a gold mine and on the field they win every year. Yeah I know sometimes they lose in the playoffs but baseball playoffs are exceedingly random. 17 trips to the playoffs in 18 years is pretty damn impressive.

              • Sparta Riverside says:

                Do you think the Yankees spend thier money as efficiently as other teams? Not saying they don’t make money, but it is debatable if they are always smart with their cash.

              • Sparta Riverside says:

                When you spend as much as they do, you should make the playoffs that much.

          • Increase says:

            Everyone loves it when the underdog wins. When you spend like the Yankees…. that makes everyone underdogs.

            Schadenfreude is fun!

      • fischy says:

        Naah — I hate both Man City and the Yankees. So, this is delicious.

        • Kingly Alexander says:

          It’s ok though because however much level of corporate whoring and dehumanization this will bring to soccer, the Red Bull franchise is and will forever look more disgusting and epitomize all filth.

          Viva Los Cosmos!

    • Michael says:

      I hope they have to share a pitch with RBNY. Or the Giants. There are plenty of other MLS teams that are waiting for a soccer-specific stadium and NYCFC can get in line.

      • USsoccer100 says:

        Uhm… not many other MLS teams don’t have a SSS. The Revs, DC United is the only major tenant in the dump that is RFK (but clearly need a new stadium), is there anyone else left since San Jose is building one soon?

        • Mike in Missouri says:

          Seattle. But other than the turf, that’s fine for them

          • Michael says:

            Exactly. So why go through all the trouble of getting a new stadium when they can use a perfectly functioning one like MetLife? Or Yankees stadium (like the Colts and Orioles once shared a field).

            • USsoccer100 says:

              I saw a Wizards game when they were in the little baseball park there… makes for weird seating arrangements.

              • Hogatroge says:

                @ Kyle Williams

                I don’t disagree… I’m merely pointing out to @Michael that no other nearby stadia in NYC are acceptable for long-term use by an MLS team.

            • Hogatroge says:

              Non-soccer stadiums offer a less than ideal experience.

              1. The field size (including space outside the lines) can be limiting since the ideal soccer pitch is considerably larger than an NFL field (even though you can still fit a smaller, technically legal pitch in most NFL stadia).

              2. For baseball stadia, the stands are arranged completely wrong

              3. Other pro sports arenas in the US are sadly too large to fill even close to capacity for soccer on a regular basis.

              4. Artificial surfaces are non-ideal for soccer.

              5. Baseball fields have dirt patches… also not desirable for soccer.

              • Kyle Williams says:

                This is:
                A- a negotiating ploy to buy time to get the “right” deal.

                B- a marketing tactic to they could still maximize exposure of MCFC’s presence in the states ( and Yankee stadium specifically) in the face of not having a stadium dal to also announce. (See A above)

                C- Smart ( See A and B above)

              • Increase says:

                Those dirt patches are practice for CONCAF cricket ground games.

                Also, The Meadowland lands might even be worse. I have never been there but Jerry World needs a lot of extra stands to fit a soccer field properly.

                Besides getting Yankees fan’s to go watch soccer is a brilliant way to get instant fans.

            • Tom says:

              The Giants and the Yankees shared Yankees stadium for many years as well as the Mets and Jets sharing Shea.

              BTW the Cosmos all were a tenant at Yankee stadium.

              You don’t have to go out of town find an example of ground sharing.

              • bottlcaps says:

                The economics of a franchise having it’s own stadium are slanted towards who owns the stadium. With the stadium come revenue streams from not only ticket sales, but parking and concessions. I do not think that Man City the major partner will want an inferior deal on Stadium rental from their minority partner.

                The Galaxy and AEG did no favors for Chivas in sharing the home depot. The Galaxy get a lions share of concessions, plus a portion of even the ticket sales. Parking is streams to CSUDH, as part of the agreement AEG hasa to lease the property from the University

            • Kyle Williams says:

              Ummm… Money and control of the venue as far as experience, surface, and revenues (read health of the franchise/league).

              Also: if I remember the colts don’t play in Baltimore anymore, the nfl team in St.Louis is not called the Cardinals, and to make this even more circular – the Browns are in their second incarnation and the Ravens were once the Browns. Sharing a stadium in perpetuity was the issue at the heart of most if not all of these….

      • Drew says:

        Errrrr. So you think teams build their stadiums based on some sort of allocation system??? How does NYCFC effect the Revs from building a stadium?

        • Michael says:

          No, but support from the league doesn’t hurt. Garber will definitely be pushing for a new stadium for NYCFC while other teams (like the Revs or DCU) have to sort it out on their own. With the wealth and power behind NYCFC, a soccer-specific stadium of their own is a sure thing.

          So no, the issue isn’t that other teams are waiting (except DCU, who have been waiting for a decade). The issue is how the league takes care of it’s teams.

          • Jp says:

            I am going to have to disagree with you on this one. The league does plenty to support teams that want to build stadiums. DC united isn’t playing in RFK because the league has forgotten about them. They are playing in RFK because there are very few tracks of land in and around Washington DC where DCU could afford to build a SSS. As for the Revs, I’m pretty sure Robert Kraft would rather stick people in Gillet Stadium another 20 nights a year than she’ll out $100 million dollars of his own money to build a second stadium.

            • Hogatroge says:

              There have been intermittent reports that the Krafts are looking for locations for an SSS (as well as numerous areas around Boston who want it in their neighborhood).

              However, it remains to be seen how much weight this carries. They’ve been talking about it for a long time, and nothing’s happened.

              Within a decade, though, it will be a league requirement (with an exception for Seattle) to have an SSS… especially for expansion teams.

        • Kyle Williams says:

          +1

      • Kyle Williams says:

        This “line” you speak of-help me understand it.
        Last time I checked it wasn’t necessary for greater Boston to get it’s house in order before NYC can build a stadium. The people paying for an NYC stadium likely have nothing to do with an NE stadium. Unless-and this is the ONLY potential caveat I see-you are assuming the league resources involved with securing stadium financing cannot handle two negotiations at once, I find difficulty with your premise (other than you simply you are a revs fan who is tired of waiting). Graber is a big boy and pretty sure he/staff can do both at once.
        Why do I get sense you are an RBNY sympathizer who is fearing an NYCFC will accel where the Austrians have proved more cosmos-esque (read unsuccessful in both incarnations )?
        NYCFC is great for the league.

    • Mike in Missouri says:

      Well, since the Yankees are part owners….

      (I’m kidding)

      • Eurosnob says:

        Did anyone tell Yankees and ManCity that MLS has salary cap? :-)

        • Jp says:

          You clearly haven’t been around MLS very long if you think there is a salary cap for teams in NY or LA. Salary Caps rules are only there for poor teams.

          • Edwin in LA says:

            Another conspiracy theorist who cries foul over NYRB and the Galaxy having teams who have spent good money on the team…

        • Hogatroge says:

          NYCFC will be able to spend all the $ it wants on 3 (or 4, once the league changes the rules for them) players.

          • Edwin in LA says:

            Wow still obsessed that the league caters to teams that in your opinion it prefers huh?

            I know you are a Dynamo fan and I wonder if you felt this way before the 2011 final when Houston had won 2 MLS Cups and no team with a DP had won an MLS Cup… Get over it already… or ask AEG and Oscar+Brener to spend more if you’re not happy…

            • Hogatroge says:

              Wow… only joking a bit. You’re maybe harboring a little resentment for me calling you our for something sometime in the past? IIRC you’re pretty prone to hyperbolic comments.

              Personally, I’m pretty satisfied with my Dynamo team (despite their bad losses lately).

              On the other hand, I’m all for teams signing DPs, and even pro adding a 4th DP slot if that were envisioned as helping the league.

              Lighten up a bit… though maybe I should reconsider using sarcasm on these boards since there are plenty of people here who make serious comments like this all the time.

              That said, Ives himself said he expects NYCFC to debut with 3 DPs. Not that bold an assumption.

          • Left wing says:

            3 DPs funded from petrol and Yankee viewers.. Damn I wonder who those 3 will be..?

    • Josh D says:

      Hate City. Hate the Yankees. Love that these big money, big brand, big ambition teams are investing in MLS.

      City will bring the money. Yankees will bring the know-how and prestige.

      Perfect. And classy name.

      • joe says:

        why are they called a “football club”? most of the english speaking, including those in america, world calls the sport “soccer”

        • Jacknut says:

          Because when you say “FC” every sports fan in America understands that you are talking soccer, not American football.

          • Carl says:

            You are definitely correct. You instantly strike a conversation. When it’s mention like that.

        • Edwin in LA says:

          The close to 50 million in England and the ones in Scotland and Ireland who do speak English also don’t call it soccer at all…The people in the Caribbean who speak English also call it Football so I don’t know what you’re referring to…maybe in Australia?

      • matt says:

        +1
        As a Rays, Liverpool fan (and sounders bandwagoner, love the support) I appreciate that the league is trying to expand, especially in place with extensive soccer history. I will probably dislike the team though, especially if they go the man city, yankee’s route. Hopefully they will start off and emulate the galaxy’s youth system, supplementing their foreign stars with homegrown youth who may become stars they will desire.

        Also, the league needs to get a team in the south, whether it be in Atlanta, Orlando, STL, or Miami. though I would caution that Miami is probably feeling rather vulnerable after the marlins disaster so an sss is probably out of the question.

        • Edwin in LA says:

          Without an SSS it will not happen…. Orlando was the closest thing to it happening in Florida and I think it was the House of Rep at the State level where the Proposal died to allow MLS teams to enjoy the same financial help that MLB, NBA, NHL & NFL teams can get from state and local governments

          Those cities need to get a team in NASL or USL if they don’t have one already….and make THAT team sustainable and with a big enough Fan Base that IF they made the jump to MLS not only could they build a bigger much nicer stadium up to MLS standards but compete with MLS teams in terms of attendance, talent and other vital areas..

          The South simply isn’t there at all in the sport. Atlanta is a HORRIBLE idea…the Hawks even tho they been a playoff team coudn’t get more fans that say FC Dallas last year. NCAA and NFL Football rules in the South is that simple. I would LOVE to see a team in St Louis…but that my friend if anything is Midwest not South…at all I think lol

          • matt says:

            Orlando already has an NASL Team, Orlando City, and the mayor of Orlando is going to keep on trying with the MLS to get a stadium built.

            Also, growing up in north central florida, soccer is a huge thing with the youth soccer generation growing up. High school teams are very competitive, my school had to cut 20 kids who all wanted to play even if it was for JV. Soccer is pretty big, Though it is mostly among the immigrant kids from Europe, South and Central America, and Africa. But still there is a hole to be filled.

    • AzTeXan says:

      Two great ownership groups? Not likely. It’s only a matter of time before the Red Bulls become the Mets/Jets of the two teams. Still working on what Red Bulls stands for though.

      Me
      Entire
      Teams
      Stinks.

      Just
      End
      The
      Season.

      R
      E
      D

      Bulls
      Ultimately
      Lose
      Like
      Suckers

  2. T-lover says:

    Portland Timbers and Sounders may have huge fan bases, but still the national TV ratings are low. Why?because they are still small markets; for MLS to grow you need teams in big markets.

    • RK says:

      All ratings are low.

      • T-lover says:

        Ratings are low, because MLS didn’t have a team directly in the heart of NY, now that has change. Also people who are comparing it to Chivas are idiots, because Chivas USA only appeals to Chivas fans.

        • USsoccer100 says:

          Okay, I’ll bite my tongue when New York “super MLS fans” say they can’t be bothered by a few train rides out to Jersey for a Red Bulls game in the nicest stadium in the country, but now they can’t even watch the RB games on TV because they’re not in the city?

          I call shananigans.

          • T-lover says:

            NYRB have the highest regional TV ratings in the league. Try driving in traffic to NYRB arena, or going on a NY train, then tell me you could do it every NYRB home game. Only non New Yorkers say the stupid comments.

            • Noel says:

              Amen. It’s not exactly an easy ride, either taking the LIRR to NJ Transit to the Path or the Path straight there. It’s a pain in the ass.

            • drew11 says:

              You must have been one of those fans who disguised themselves as an empty seat last weekend when Donovan, Keane and Henry were playing.

              If NYCers are too delicate to get out to see a great lineup like that they won’t be heavily supporting a new team.

              Still, great news for the league.

              • Edwin in LA says:

                The game was sold out drew11…and it looked pretty close to full on the actual fans being there…and yes getting to RBA is a pain in the ass if you live in NY CITY…..if you live in Queens or the Bronx..it is quite a trek…

            • Matt says:

              Taking the Path train to NYRB games could not be easier. As someone who has lived in Brooklyn his whole life trust me, transportation isn’t why the Red Bulls have low attendance, its because they’re a big advertisement for something that has nothing to do with New York.

              • der says:

                Oh its the advertising in the name that prevents you from going to games. I guess Philly fans shouldn’t go to games because the team is sponsored by a Mexican bread company, and DC fans should go home because VW is based in Germany.

                Seems like NYCers always have an excuse for not going to games that other fans somehow manage to overcome.

              • T-lover says:

                I live in queens and the traffic is horrible, you have no fucking clue what you are talking about. Taking a train is easier borough to borough, however it is not to RB arena.

              • USsoccer100 says:

                Clearly the lack of a shirt sponsor is why the Rapids lead the league in attendance at 105,001 fans per game. Imagine how that would drop if Chipoltle was splashed across their chest, we’d lose all the Moes, Qdoba, and Hacienda fans.

            • Shane says:

              This is still likely going to involve a train ride because the talk has always been that the team will be in Queens. I’ve not heard anything about this being in the heart of NYC. Will the NYCFC fans be bothered to take the train to RB Arena for this great rivalry that Garber talks about?

            • USsoccer100 says:

              Considering that I drive 8 hours to Kansas City, 6 hours to Chicago, and 6 hours to Columbus to watch the Rapids three times a year, yeah, I can say that I wish I had to switch from subway to Path train or whatever to see my team.

              • T-lover says:

                The difference is the traffic, so comparing any city to NY doesn’t work, its a different animal.

              • Hogatroge says:

                +1

              • Hogatroge says:

                The +1 is for Shane…

                @ T-lover

                That’s a pretty arrogant comment, and I’ll bet you really have no frame of reference. You’re forgetting NY is open to people from all over the world, and most of us have been there to experience the city firsthand.

                The fact is, if you make it a priority to go to a game, or 3, or all of them (weekday games can be an exception), you’ll find a way to get there, whether it’s a 30 minute or 3 hour commute.

                Stop making excuses, because really, the majority of fans outside NY are not sympathetic.

              • USsoccer100 says:

                I’m sure fans in Denver or Dallas wish there were trainlines running to their stadium. yeah, I get that they don’t have the traffic New York has, but then again they don’t have the population to draw fans from either. Perhaps if New York fans had better supported their club in the Meadowlands they would have felt more comfortable spending all that cash to move into New York instead of the cheaper jersey option.

            • USsoccer100 says:

              Hey t-lover, where are you getting your New York regional TV ratings from? The few sources I find never mention New York while Seattle, Portland, Montreal, and Philly are all talked about as regional TV Successes.

              • T-lover says:

                Grant Wahl said it last year when LA Galaxy signed their TV deal, the biggest in MLS, that the NYRB have the highest TV ratings in the league.

        • Eurosnob says:

          Ratings are low because MLS is putting out substandard product.

          • krolpolski says:

            Exactly, and adding another team (and don’t forget David Beckham will be able to get one, too), will only dilute the talent pool.

            It’s not like in the old days when you couldn’t watch European football. We now know what good football looks like.

            I may be a Fire fan from Day One, but I know I would rather watch Manchester United on any given day.

            • Hogatroge says:

              Are you kidding? Man U played some of the most boring football imaginable this season, while plodding their way to an admittedly impressive series of mostly 1-0 wins.

              While I won’t argue that the level of play is higher in Europe, I strongly disagree with your negative attitude and question your MLS fandom. A blind person could see the strides MLS has made in the last decade of its existence. Maybe this all stems from the fact that the Fire aren’t doing so well this year.

              Regardless, if you’re going to point at a team that’s fun to watch, at least show that you know what you’re talking about.

              • Jimmy B says:

                That and Man City and the Yankees are pumping $100 mln into the league. That money, in all likelihood, will more than offset any dilution of talent. In addition, you have to believe that this ownership group will at least match the Galaxy and NYRB in terms of spending. In addition, the Man City owners already have a global network of scouts, relationships with agents, and the name and track record to attract players. I’d be shocked if they don’t immediately splash some cash and bring in three of the biggest name DPs we’ve seen in league history.

                I’d also note that adding another big spending team to MLS is going to put further pressure on the rest of the league to open up their wallets if they want to compete. I really see very few scenarios in which adding this ownership group and team to the league does not improve the overall quality of the league over the next 5 years.

              • Eurosnob says:

                Hogatroge, you are a bit hard on krolpolski. ManUtd had a total of four 1-0 wins in the EPL this season and led the league in scoring by a wide margin. ManUtd might not be creme de la creme in Europe or the most exciting team to watch, but they are more watchable than any MLS team. In fact, they sell out NFL-size standiums in the US for meaningless preseason friendlies while most MLS teams fail to average 20K fans at in-season games.

              • Hogatroge says:

                @Eurosnob

                I’m not dumping on Man U… just saying they’re hardly the poster child for making the argument that MLS is not fun to watch by comparison.

            • The Imperative Voice says:

              Really? I could have that attitude before my city had a MLS team — which took a decade — but since then the pecking order is US/international, Dynamo, and only then random foreign tube soccer.

              If you want soccer of that quality here, you have to support it here. Otherwise you will only get it on their terms.

              I mean, how can people support teams whose ground they’ve never been to? Or because they have some players who might transiently be there, eg, Fulhamericans (hear that one anymore) who pulled for the team when EJ and Dempsey were there, who’ve now disappeared; the “loyal” Stoke fans who will flee if Pulis’ successor starts undoing the US signings.

          • Scott e Dio93 says:

            Thank you, someone with common sense and realistic viewpoint.

        • TomG says:

          Queens is not the heart of NY, Manhattan is.

          • Hogatroge says:

            But Queens is a part of NYC, so splitting hairs is a waste of time.

            The NY Giants couldn’t afford real estate in Manhattan to support a stadium.

            And face it… MSG isn’t big enough.

          • redbird says:

            No but it is the most ethnically diverse area in the world. If you’ve ever been to Flushing Meadows park on a Sunday there are about 50 rec league futbol games being played at once. Queens is the best possible place to put a team. That stadium will be packed and rocking, mark my words.

      • Drew says:

        Not when you have 6 DPs playing in NJ/NY

        • Josh says:

          They’ve had 3 in NY/NJ for years and still can’t get anybody to watch RBNY. (anybody being used liberally obviously)

          • Drew says:

            Business plan is add big markets and allow the talent to bring in the fans/tv deals. Chivas is the elephant in the room still. Redbulls will still get their NJ/PA/NY fans , but putting a team on the other side of Manhattan opens up LI and direct city connection.

            The league has done well so far with the red bulls, imagine what will happen when they bring in 3 dps with Yankee/Man City money.

            • USsoccer100 says:

              Look, there’s only so many high quality DP players out there that would want to come to MLS. The three that wind up in NYC will likely be three that would have gone to play somewhere else anyway unless you get a Henry situation where they’ve always dreamed of living in New York.

              • Drew says:

                I disagree, I think there are a lot of people who see MLS as a good move, but only want to live in big markets, and not Colorado or Ohio.

                League has a long way to go, but NYCFC will increase the talent and salary cap in the league

              • T-lover says:

                What? Chinese club, Guangzhou Evergrande, the PSG of Asia, are buting talent from all over, why? because money talks. So you will always have high quality players wanting to play in MLS, if MLS is willing to pay.

              • Josh says:

                As for China, it’s the same type of system MLS has had for the last couple years. Getting people at the end of their careers like Drogba. His point is there still MLS still isn’t the same prestige as playing in the top Euro leagues.

              • Iggy says:

                There are enough out there to find 3 instead of 6. What it may hurt is less flashy destinations (i.e. CBUS) signing big Euro DPs.

              • kevdflb says:

                I think you underestimate the lure that NY has in the minds of many, many people around the world. Including top soccer players.
                Where was is Pep living?
                New York.
                Not to play, not to coach, but just because he wants to live in New York. No other American city comes close.
                Okay, maybe LA and Hollywood comes close.

              • Scott says:

                No. DP’s don’t want just any city. NY, like LA is a draw. Money, plus location, beats money any day. Big European talent doesn’t want to live in Columbus. TH always wanted to live in NY. That mad the Red Bulls more attractive. Don’t be naive, location is always important.

            • T-lover says:

              Guangzhou Evergrande has brought talented players that are 23 years old, look at their roster. Like I said money talks.

              • Hogatroge says:

                All the big name stars that Chinese teams have brought in have walked.

                Why? Because their system isn’t sustainable like that of MLS, and the league doesn’t allow bankrupt teams to spend exorbitantly, like all Euro leagues except Germany.

                It’s pretty ridiculous to say that MLS won’t attract talent. There are plenty of high quality South & Central Americans willing to make the jump to MLS for the right DP price, and we’ve started to see that as of this year.

                Valeria, Valencia, Rafael in DC (despite his underwhelming-ness), etc.

    • Charles says:

      Classifying Seattle as small is a little rediculous. Smaller than NY, yes. Small, no.

    • Josh D says:

      TV ratings are low because coverage still needs to improve, the commentary is terrible, and the product on the field, while improving, still isn’t up to par with other soccer played around the world. Most people don’t have the luxury of watching soccer all day, so given a choice between a PL game and MLS, most choose PL. It’s the sad truth.

      • drew11 says:

        Seattle & Portland look like BL games on TV. Great crowds. Stop being such a crybaby and support your own league.

        • kevdflb says:

          If by BL you mean Premier league, then no – they definitely do not.
          I’m not criticizing them, but no they do not.
          If BL means “belgian league” then I guess you are about right.

          • Alexandria says:

            Umm Dont Stoke City, and Norwich and freaking Aston Villa play in the premier league? I.m willing to bet Seattle wipes the floor with all three teams. This idea that because MLS isnt top 4 quality so it cant be premiership is stupid. Tge premier league is 20 teams not 4 and the ones in the middle are fair game.

        • Josh D says:

          A crybaby? I’m tell my mommy…

          I support MLS and watch a few games every week. I’m not a typical soccer fan, though. I’m generalizing.

          Sure, Seattle and Portland are great teams. Much like Stoke and Villa aren’t the be-all-end-all of the PL, neither is Seattle and Portland a true taste of MLS. So what’s your point? There are exciting rivalry games in all leagues – look at Celtic and Rangers. Doesn’t represent the league.

      • Felix says:

        MLS is better than most leagues around the world, there are probably only 10 to 15 that are better. The accessibility is good as well.
        Most soccer fans who refuse to watch MLS still bring up lame excuses from 15 years ago.
        The fact of the matter is that MLS is still seen by more tradition football fans as some upstart gimmicky league, and refuse to overlook their first impressions. Most of those fans are lost now, Its the non-soccer and young fans that MLS has to continue to attract (which it is doing) and through time it will become a strong, competitive league that can easily become one of the top 5 to 10 in the world.

        • David JS says:

          +100000 thank you! Kids that graduate high school this year (and every year afterwards) will know MLS as part of the US pro sports scene. It’s popularity will rise naturally. Casual fans are easier to gain when they don’t remember a world without MLS or a world where MLS was a joke compared to other American pro sports. Time will prove the success of MLS but it can’t be sped up even if we want it to be.

          • Kyle Williams says:

            Yes and a big shout out to EA sports for the FIFA video game brand. Everyone plays this game and though they might like playing with Barca it’s still good for the league and teaches the sport-although that’s a matter of degree.

    • Danielofthedale says:

      Ratings are low because most MLS fans are really just fans of their MLS home team. If a majority of people that watch their local team would tune in for National TV games ratings would be much higher.

      • USsoccer100 says:

        Yes, and that was true of the NFL before Big Gambling and later Fantasty Football became key partners in growing interest in out of market teams.

      • tim says:

        I agree with both posts here, I didn’t pay much attention to other MS teams until I started doing the MLS fantasy league, now I take in 3-6 games each week.

        As far as TV ratings, MLS would be well served to do better at getting the games on TV. FCD has time warner which doesn’t even offer 100% coverage in the Dallas metro area. I live 30 minutes from the stadium yet cannot watch a game on tv… I attend all home games (missed 12 in past 5 years, including CCL and USOC).

        We get an ESPN2 game and NBCS game, a few random games via Spanish channels. MLS TV coverage is fail. They need to get more open with their deal and not juss chase the cash.

  3. RPH says:

    Awesome.

  4. RK says:

    No surprise….except that they’ve gone ahead without a stadium. South ignored.

    • USsoccer100 says:

      I thought St Louis was getting in the mix. So why’s Kroenke building a 20,000 seat SSS? Moving the Rapids or buying and moving Chivas?

    • BK says:

      A 2nd MLS team in NYC has been Garber’s wet dream since day one. I’m not surprised. Unless it is Florida for the THIRD time, I don’t think the South will get a team until MLS merges with NASL an dpromotion and relegation is implemented.

    • Skippy says:

      People in the southeast just need to hang in there. Next year, they’ll announce Orlando and Miami (Beckham and Dolphins) as #21 and #22.

  5. baropbop says:

    This is amazing. Can’t wait to see who they sign. The ante just got upped.

    • Danielofthedale says:

      How did the ante get up? Sure Man City and the Yankees love to throw their cash around, but with the very small MLS salary cap neither one can do that. They will look at the same type of players the rest of the league does.

      • Gnarls says:

        There’s no cap on DP spending. Who’s to say Wayne Rooney wouldn’t play in NY for 350k/week?

      • Jimmy B says:

        I think you’re also ignoring the fact that MLS’ CBA expires in just over 2 years, so the current cap isn’t locked in forever. In addition, since the last agreement was negotiated MLS has added several formidable ownership groups (and all the buy in money associated with those new teams), a number of SSS’s, and they’ll be negotiating another new national TV contract around that times. The traditional more conservative ownership groups like the Hunts and Kraft are going to have less and less say over the cap. I don’t expect spending to explode, but I do expect that the cap will go up and the CBA will be amended to allow the larger teams in the league to spend more.

      • Kyle Williams says:

        Wrong

  6. WiscFan says:

    Glad they didn’t drag this worst-kept-secret any longer. As always happy to see further growth of MLS. RedBulls better hurry and win something before 2015.

    • Tony in Quakeland says:

      Worst keep secret? I didn’t hear a peep about the Yankees

      • Yogi says:

        Agreed. Yankees tidbit was a well kept secret.

        • drew11 says:

          Yankees are probably just for the logo. Sort of Cosmos lite. I doubt the Yankees will be active participants in the club and they see MLS as a long term growth investment.

      • WiscFan says:

        Yeah, wish I could edit, that did catch me by surprise as well. And the fact the announcement didn’t come with an outline for a stadium.

  7. Paul H says:

    I’m really curious to see what the temporary venue will be. Flushing Meadows seems to be on track to being built, so why not just wait until you have all the pieces in place? Or do a long stint on the road like SKC did?

    • RB says:

      Yankees site says the club is “committed to seeking a new permanent stadium in New York. Until that time, the new team is arranging to play in an interim home beginning in its inaugural MLS season in 2015.” They do mention the Flushing Meadows site but nothing concrete (heh, heh); no mention of any such road stint maneuver…

    • beto says:

      yankee stadium? haha i hope not (baseball diamonds are not good soccer fields) but i could think of worse.. maybe the new Giant Stadium..

      I don’t think they would have made this announcement if they didn’t have the Flushing Meadows Stadium deal 99% done.. better get building soon!

  8. Dean Stell says:

    Great news. This is an ownership group that will push the envelope and won’t be happy running out a team of 27 year old, ex-college players who all making $75K/year.

  9. Matthew says:

    So is that the end of the Cosmos’ bid? I would assume so.

    • Yogi says:

      Did the Cosmos ACTUALLY make a push or is it just fan sentiment?

    • Josh D says:

      Cosmos are already in a league. They’ll bid their time. Who knows, one day we may see three NY teams in first division US soccer. At least there is opportunity for friendlies between the three and a chance to meet in the Open Cup.

      • Kyle Williams says:

        C’mon the cosmos will be out of money-and this US community out of its misery with this stupid discussion-within 3 years.

        • slowleftarm says:

          Cosmos are a marketing gimmick. No one cares. They’re a nice historical footnote.

  10. Waterlewd says:

    Any thoughts on the temporary venue? Could they play at Yankees Stadium perhaps…

    • malkin says:

      Certainly seems like a real possibility…especially considering there are two games (Man City/Chelsea and Spain/Ireland) coming up in the Bronx over the next couple weeks.

    • David M says:

      On infield dirt? Brings back bad memories of NASL.

      • kevdflb says:

        No soccer is played in Yankee stadium on Infield dirt.
        Watch Chelsea Man C. next week. (good timing, NY Yankees & Man C FC, BTW)
        But scheduling at Yankee stadium would be tough, I’d have to guess.

  11. Andrew Hauptman OUT! says:

    so when/where does Chivas USA get moved?

    • Josh says:

      Orlando City, my guess at the end of this or next season if they continue to…well, be Chivas USA

      • USsoccer100 says:

        St Louis. Kroenke is building a 20,000 seat stadium, owns the Rams already. I guess he could move the Rapids (NFL is making him sell the Nuggets and Avalanche by 2014)

        • Josh says:

          As an SKC fan, that would be great. I just can’t imagine STL getting in over Orlando considering what the push for Orlando over the last couple years.

        • bbstl says:

          Is he building a stadium in St. Louis? If so, please tell me that it is going to be in the city and not going to be way out in Jesusland (Chesterfield / St. Charles County).

          • USsoccer100 says:

            Smack dab downtown, at the old Union Station. A short walk from all other sporting stadiums and the hotels.

            • bbstl says:

              WOW!! That would be amazing….and 10 minutes from my house.

              • USsoccer100 says:

                Kroenke’s company “Lodging Hospitality Managment” bought the site for $20 Million. Unless he’s using the possibility of putting a soccer stadium there as leverage to get some other potential developer to jump on buying it from him for some other purpose. But honestly, that isn’t Kroenke’s MO. He usually buys things to develop himself, not resale.

  12. Dinho says:

    What does this do to the Cosmos?

    And, City as the majority owner? I now have a new most hated team. sweet.

    • The Imperative Voice says:

      Who cares? It was once a marquee name but for a failed league, and I’m sure the rights holders either wanted cash for the name or the inside track on franchise ownership.

    • RB says:

      Yeah sure seems to kill this kind of fantasy mojo the Cosmos had been living on!

    • Josh D says:

      Nothing. Cosmos are already playing in the lower leagues starting in a few months. The glitz and glam team that reintroduced the Cosmos sold them and the new owners are starting small.

      • The Imperative Voice says:

        I think that was a holding pattern for something like this, which didn’t happen for them, and with two teams ahead of it in NYC, the plane will start running out of fuel. Who’s going to watch a 3rd NY team besides family and friends?

  13. Jon says:

    Red Bulls need to find every Mets/Man United fan in NY that has been indifferent to MLS up to now…

    • joel says:

      awesome

    • Steevens says:

      Agreed. RBNY should start the marketing campaign now. Could RBNY now consider some partnership with the Mets and/or Man U? I doubt it, but it sure would be interesting.

  14. RPH says:

    This could be cool. Some day I would hope to see New York City supporting three MLS teams, with the Cosmos becoming the 3rd, like a London of the United States. No doubt this also gives more options to potential DPs that will only want to sign with a team in LA (not you, Chivas) or a team in New York City.

    • USsoccer100 says:

      Then I will hope for a league that actually tries to get to the rest of the country instead.

    • The Imperative Voice says:

      With a temporary home and NY’s history of MLS support, we’ll be lucky to have two solid teams, much less 3.

      And the aside on Chivas undermines the neighboring argument that just putting the team in the city suffices, to the contrary, poor and/or discriminatory management may chase people out of even LA.

  15. JMon12 says:

    Orlando City is still pushing for a 2015 MLS date with alternate funding for a stadium being worked on now. I think NY2 will be good for the league and it was smart to involve the Yankees. I am really interested to see what happens to Chivas USA and also what Becks intends to do in regards to ownership.

    • Josh D says:

      I’d think Beckham gets Chivas, works with Orlando to build a stadium? I can’t see him building one in LA out of respect, and the other glam cities have been taken. Miami would be flashier than Orlando, but if all Beckham wants is a business card with “Owner” on it and doesn’t want to deal with the every day life of a proper owner, Orlando is safer. He can toss money into it like a hobby and let others manage the club.

      • beto says:

        i imagine that becks wants to be involved in the football side of the business too; doesn’t seem to be a half-harted dollar sign type.. Miami or Orlando both have their pluses…

        • USsoccer100 says:

          Uhm, if Becks gets a discounted 2007 era price for a new team ($30 million), it would be a major discount to go the expansion route rather than buy Chivas who I would imagine has to go for around the $100 Million current expansion fee.

          Becks could easily live in Miami and have his golden helicopter fly him to work everyday in Orlando, if he feels the need to show up for work everyday.

      • Kyle Williams says:

        I really like this idea of Beckham getting Chivas and rebranding it in his image. Orlando city launches at same time and Beckham pays his pre-negotiated fee with the price Orlando city pays going in large part to the Chivas USA owners. Chivas USA obviously won’t accept beckham’s like 75 cents franchise fee.

  16. Michael F SBI Mafia Original says:

    great for the league. Exciting for the fans whether you’re going to root for or against them. Bummed to hear they will play in a temporary venue. Isn’t two years enough to get the stadium done?

    • USsoccer100 says:

      Not in New York, I’d bet it takes four or five years to negotiate the paperwork and union issues and all that, not to mention closing roads to do the construction.

  17. Tom says:

    What does this mean for the Cosmos???

    • Josh says:

      Nobody cares. Cosmos are a defunct team in a lower league. All NY support will be for this incredibly rich conglomerate. Until a relegation system tries to exist, there’s no foreseeable future for the Cosmos in MLS

  18. Jacknut says:

    I was hoping they would name the team Interboro FC.

    Any old school fans remember the Steinbrenners kicking the tires on buying the late Mutiny (RIP)?

  19. Reboot says:

    Great.

    Now will MLS PLEASE get rid of Eastern and Western conference, and have 38 games, everyone plays everyone twice? And that can decide the MLS cup like it should??

    Okay, thanks.

    • Reboot says:

      Otherwise, who moves out West?

      Houston or SKC? Please let it be Houston…

      • T-lover says:

        Conferences will always be used, and needs to continue, because of the size of the country.

        • Yogi says:

          It works in England…Because England is small. I agree…US is too damn big.

          • The Imperative Voice says:

            Plus, even England subdivides the country in sub-League (“Conference”) play. As does Germany and Spain in their minors.

            That being said, I could see a 38 game balanced schedule with conferences. In which case the only real value of regionality would be seen at the reserves and for a few playoff rounds. Conference play only saves money if the schedule unbalances.

    • Charles says:

      And when they go passed 20 teams ?…and they will.

      Plan ahead dude.

    • CubesCompanion says:

      Not gonna happen. If anything more teams means more regionalization. No choice with the teams spread so far apart.

  20. Reid says:

    This should be fun, always looking for a bad guy to hate on, it doesn’t come more evil empire then Man City and NY Yankees

  21. Matt says:

    NYCFC? OMG WTF?

  22. Gilby says:

    Would love to see Chivas moved to Orlando and Becks set up shop in Miami. That would give MLS a much better TV footprint and better base in the South East. Houston, Chicago and KC move to the western conference and everyone is happy.

    • wyofan says:

      Agreed. Orlando and Miami would make a nice regional rivalry. Who would be team 22?
      St.Louis? But they need a strong ownership group.

  23. Scott e Dio93 says:

    $100million? How much of it going to improve this pathetic salary cap?

    • Josh says:

      That depends on Dom. The salary cap isn’t that pathetic, it’s what keeps the league mostly competitive. If you’d rather have the baseball/worldwide soccer system of NY and LA paying for the best championship every year, MLS isn’t the place to do that (mostly). The current system gives smaller clubs a chance at competing while still allowing the larger clubs to pay for the best teams. Once this $100 million changes the system, the league competitiveness will go down the drain.

      • USsoccer100 says:

        That $100 Million will be spent on league administration before the season is over. I doubt the cap will go up half a million per team.

        The real scary thought is that the league has survived off expansion fees and now there shouldn’t be anymore of those until we just admit we’re going to get to the 24 or 30 teams in the next decade. SUM is making good money off the Mexican National Team and the Euro club tours but expansion money is the lifeline of the league.

      • Scott e Dio93 says:

        It’s pathetic. Salary cap what’s keeps MLS become a bigger player in TV market, and keeping out MLS winning something important. The current system isn’t helping MLS international image, I do agree MLS needs a type salary cap, this one is way too low and not helping MLS win, like DP needs to part of salary? Why maxium is so low? Why DP is someone earning above $400k? Not making MLS competitive in : the TV market, CONCACAF, selling merchandise, or creating fans.

        • USsoccer100 says:

          How about changing the salary cap to a salary cap based on the players on the field. This way a team could have more higher payed players but only play a certain value at any given time in league play, but then roll out whoever they want for US Open Cup or Concacaf CL?

          • Scott e Dio93 says:

            Give bonuses without causing problems in salary cap? Goal of the Week = extra 2k, Player of the Month = extra 10k, Team’s MVP = extra 100k, MLS’ MVP and Golden Boot = extra 200k.

            MLS needs DPs but not players already playing MLS type DPs. Focus more : try to complete with mexico and Brazil bring DPs from South America already name in national team or with European experience. If MLS could bring players from Europe without over paying the Asian leagues, then it’s good if they have positive stats in that season. And just increase DP to 4 without being part of salary cap, and MLS teams had major transfer (over $2miilion) could use it for extra DP.
            My solution without causing salary cap drama.

          • Scott e Dio93 says:

            For CONCACAF : Players and coach get an extra 20% base on performance in Champions League.

        • Northzax says:

          Couple questions: are you a season ticket holder to your local club? Have you bought the 2013 jersey yet? MlsLive? No? Then where do you expect all ths money to come from?

          I am a dcu sth. I pay roughly 35 a game. Several times a year, I go visit family and catch a Reading match in England. Similar seats (good ones, to be fair) 70 pounds. That’s three times the price. For a Stoke or Wigan. 90 for the man cities of the world. And that’s for a team that just got relegated. The season sold out before the first match. So get used to spending a lot more money.

          • Scott e Dio93 says:

            In South Florida, there’s no MLS team, hell, people don’t even know the Fusion. So I can’t go to MLS games. Me and father use go Galaxy games, my father sold Galaxy ticket from his store, now my father is back Uruguay (because state of California tax crap small businesses), that was my life back in L.A.

    • Tony in Quakeland says:

      The impatience of some people kills me. What do you think the odds were on getting the Yankees involved in MLS 20 years ago? Or a huge club like Man City? For those of us who remember the landscape pre-MLS, what the league has done is astounding nad deserves credit. And clearly, bringing in deep pocket owners liket these and strategic increasing the footprint are all about expending payrolls and the talent pool.

      • Charles says:

        Amen Tony

        • USsoccer100 says:

          Agreed… but I’d go further and give most of the credit to Garber, the guys before he took over couldn’t even dream of this kind of stuff.

      • drew11 says:

        Exactly. There was NOTHING. Soccer desert. The first SSS was a big deal. Now these hipsters turn up their noses at a palace like RBA and tell us how other people should spend their money..

        • Charles says:

          There was something, I went to a Seattle FC game with ex-Sounders playing.
          Me and 100 of my closest friends watched………….OK maybe I used paid attendance…plus 25….ok plus 50.

      • Scott e Dio93 says:

        Actually, MLS done proper changes much quicker, then MLS owners wouldn’t lost so much money. Like people hated Shootout and backwards clock, that right there killed fan-base big time for MLS, reason some markets failed, and it took over 5 years to change that.

      • Jimmy B says:

        +1

    • The Imperative Voice says:

      That is the perfect NASL scenario, we wring massive franchise fees out of new entrants, which saddles them with debt, then we soak the rest of the league with increased roster costs by upping the cap and promoting salary competition, on the theory they can pay with it with one-time franchise fees that are by definition not regular income, and which only encourages further risky expansion.

      • Scott e Dio93 says:

        MLS lost over $100million in court, not on players.

        Players are best marketing for the MLS, not annoying commercials. Also, use sponsorship to pay some DPs and give bonuses. Like Herbalife sponsorship money paying for Keane’s salary.

  24. Kmac014 says:

    Awesome news! Excited for this rivalry and always hated the Yankees but appreciate what they are trying to do. Go red bulls!

  25. Evan says:

    I feel bad for Orlando but I hope they get #21 (or Chivas). Anyone know the chances this stadium at Flushing Meadows being completed? Since they’re NY City FC, they can’t play in Harrison at the beginning, can they?

  26. Mysterious J says:

    By 2019 we will have TWO half empty soccer specific stadiums in the greater New York area.

    • Josh says:

      Call me crazy, but is it possible they go down to one when even less people care about RBNY? I could see them go the way of Chivas as the second best team and the city giving up

    • Dramadan86 says:

      NY will not support MLS. Midwest will! So, logically, get NY to collect DP’s like lint in your pocket and champions will come from the West and Midwest. NY blows.

  27. Charles says:

    MLS will blow through 20 teams very quickly. Beckham rumors out there, along with serious rumors of a handful of cities.
    My wish is for MLS to stay where it is for salary cap ( with scheduled raises) And keep expanding where profitable.

    I think that helps the national TV contract, spreads soccer where we need it ( nationwide ) and keeps only the real soccer fans (anyone that ever said the quality isn’t good enough for them can watch Man U win again next year). A stronger national team will come from a league with 30 teams than it will from a league of 20, imho.

    • Mike in Missouri says:

      I think at this point, MLS needs to either do a Baseball with separate leagues, in essence, 2 first divisions, or they need to get USSF to help them partner more with the lower divisions and strengthen them.

  28. A.S. says:

    Wonder where the temporary stadium will be. Giants Stadium? (ha ha)

    (I assume it will be some college football stadium, like a Hofstra or Columbia)

    • AcidBurn says:

      Maybe NYCFC can strike a deal with the Cosmos to play in the new Cosmos stadium, you know that 25K seat palace built in LI for a second division team?

      Sorry, just spit my coffee out laughing.

  29. Travis says:

    Lol there wont be a rivalry with NYRB. What few fans actually make their way to NYRB will now just go to this club, wouldn’t be surprised at all in a few years if the stands at RBA look like HDC during a Chivas game. Disappointed that MLS was so intent on forcing this club, interesting to see what Cosmos do now though since they clearly won’t be becoming an MLS team.

    • NaranjaFanatic says:

      Or maybe the new club will be a flameout like TFC. I wouldn’t just assume they are going to be successful. Red Bulls have made progress recently. What would be interesting is if Cosmos joined up with Red Bull and changed their brand to Cosmos.

      • seaoctopus says:

        How strong is the Red Bull company’s commitment to the team? I could see this scenario play out…

        • The Imperative Voice says:

          I’ve watched Red Bull plow endless money into F1 via Red Bull Racing and Toro Rosso. They see this as advertising costs. That end of the equation will only stop when Red Bull decides to dial back marketing, and I don’t see that tomorrow.

          I think the issue is that the cap/roster rules make it harder to just buy titles, you have to actually construct a roster wisely. LA has been either bad or great at it, and thus has two titles. NY has been good but not great so they’ve bought recurring playoff appearances. Are they ready to quit? It’s not Chivas, they are a consistent competitor, but the offseason makeover means some degree of frustration set in….and though people are focusing on turmoil and Impending Redbull Eclipse they might check the standings for a reminder how it’s actually played out so far…..not bad….

          I also think people are being naive that they will wrong more effort out of Cosmos’ group than a spendy drink maker. The reality on this is that this is not the NASL where you can buy your way up, some skill at teambuilding in the soccer context is requisite.

    • Reid says:

      I’m really looking forward to not hearing the complaining from new Yorkers that the travel time is 1 1/2hrs to a red bull game anymore.
      The next step is to put grass in Seattle so we won’t have to keep hearing that turf is just as good.

      • AcidBurn says:

        That whining will be replaced with the whining that the 7 train ride is too long and the stadium is too far away from the subway station.

        There will always be something to whine about!

  30. Josh says:

    Call me pessimistic, but I see this as the beginning of the end for a lot of the smaller clubs being competitive in the league. It started with the DP system allowing the most money to win, and I can’t see how the NYCFC team will be happy having to stay under the cap. With this money and power, there’s no way they don’t have Dom in their pocket to influence him into some changes. Man City/Yankee owners only know how to do it one way, and that’s pay all of this money to win. Not buy building a sustainable program from the ground up, but by buying the most championships money can buy. It’s fine for them, but as a small-market fan, I’m expecting the worst.
    I don’t see any way this doesn’t turn into every other soccer league with two or three teams competing for the title and a bunch of others irrelevant year after year based on money.

    • USsoccer100 says:

      What? I couldn’t hear you as I was busy putting on my Colorado Rapids MLS Cup 2010 Championship T-shirt.

      • RPH says:

        Or my 2009 RSL Championship tee shirt.

        • Josh says:

          The tournament system will still have outliers (ie. Wigan), but doesn’t change the overall point I was trying to make. The DP system started in 2010 and Galaxy have won two of the three years since.

          Not to mention, I didn’t say it’s currently happening right now did I?

          • Travis says:

            The DP system started well before 2010, not sure exact year like 2006 maybe. There have been changes to it but the original system has been around for a while

            • Josh says:

              Yes, in 2007, but outside of the incoming Beckham, they grandfathered the other affected players in until they changed it in 2010

    • Charles says:

      It is my worry too. I hope the guys that responded to you are correct. Montreal and Portland seem to be doing just fine this year. ( is Montreal small ? )

    • JCC says:

      I don’t think it will turn into a two or three team league, but I do think this will be bad news for developing local talent. We’ll probably start seeing a larger influx of foreign players into the league as I can’t see MCFC or the Yankees being okay with just a few DPs, so I think the salary cap will most certainly go up as they won’t be playing until 2015 so there must be something in the works along these lines.

      This will of course force the hand of other teams to bring in more experienced players from abroad, (not necessarily DPs) instead of taking risks on unknown and untested American players. In other words, say good-bye to the Justin Brauns and Juan Agudelos of the league.

  31. the unmistakeable Ronaldinho says:

    thank God they picked a decent, simple name.

    New York Statue of Liberty Sporting Club seems more MLS

    • USsoccer100 says:

      I was hoping they would just go with City.

      But how about a logo with New York City with the New York in white and City in light blue?

    • The Imperative Voice says:

      You mean New York Met Life Statute of Liberty Sporting Club. And then we can name the stadium MetLife Stadium for rights but then they expire and it has no name and fans are stuck because there never was a non-corporate identifier beneath it…..Pizza Hut, etc.

    • Charles says:

      The name stinks, no doubt. Maybe they can have fans vote on it, like they did in Seattle.

      • The Imperative Voice says:

        Golden Rule all over again like Red Bull, he who ponys up the pot of gold for the team picks the name. City’s owners may have wanted a NY soccer team but at least some of the concept is an extension of branding a la Chivas or Red Bull.

        The stumbling block on that being that our roster/cap rules are such that one cannot simply send over a management team with bags of cash and buy the league. Even LA had a learning curve before using the DP rules to seize a dynasty of recent sorts.

  32. sjm003 says:

    Fantastic news! Can’t wait to visit the new stadium!

  33. Mike in Missouri says:

    I would have killed for it to be named “Gotham City FC”

  34. Yogi says:

    New York City FC is what it is. Let’s talk kits. I heard it will be a blend of both Man City and the Yankees. I’m thinking Man City blue with black pin stripes and then black kits with blue pin stripes.

    • beto says:

      classy. im ready for some more innovative MLS kits..

      • USsoccer100 says:

        Light Blue is already in the league in Sporting (and hopefully again in Colorado one day), but the pinstripes like Columbus used to have would be cool

    • Adam M. says:

      Man City blue pin stripes on a white shirt for home, and Yankee road greys with Man City blue numbers and letters.

  35. Matt says:

    Love the news very interesting to see where they build the stadium. Find it funny that a few years ago George Steinbrenner had a deal (of some kind don’t remember exactly, even though it was nothing like this) with Manchester United. Guess this means we will be having a lot for games/friendlies in Yankee Stadium.

    Think this helps move an EPL game/Community Shield (like the NFL in Wembly) something like that to the US if there is a SSS owned by City here?

  36. A.S. says:

    Oh and let me add my pet peeve: I absolutely HATE using “FC”. Sorry, but in this country, the sport is soccer, not “football”.

    • Yogi says:

      And why do we call American football..Football? Not mocking…But that is my peeve

      • A.S. says:

        If you could arrange a swap between the sports, I’d be all for it. (Football trades the name of its sport in American English plus a third round draft pick to soccer in exchange for the name of soccer’s sport, a DP slot and allocation money.)

        Until that time, it annoys me to see US soccer teams (by the way, they are not clubs here either) use the acronym for the wrong sport.

        • Shane says:

          yes, they should have had to name it New York City Soccer Franchise then everyone would see how stupidly boring names like Manchester City FC are.

      • The Imperative Voice says:

        Because in its infancy football was more like rugby, where kicking is more integral. NFL has just progressively tweaked the rules further and further in the direction of “throw-ball” because that makes it a more exciting and less grisly televisual spectacle.

      • PD says:

        Agreed. Don’t get me started on stupid arbitrary sports terms, soccer/football doesn’t not have market cornered on that.

        And just like the rest of the word uses the metric system, the rest of the world calls this sport FOOTBALL.. So maybe we’re the one with the “problem”…

        • Steevens says:

          Soccer is a term that originated in the same place as the sport itself. The UK! The term derives from Association as in the FA. In the early years of the sport football/soccer and rugby were kind of all one thing. Then when the FA defined rigid rules for a sport, teams/leagues following the asSOCiations rules played SOCcer.

        • Jerrod says:

          I just think it’s so weird that people care so much about what it’s called. I know a lot of it is based on the inferiority complex some people feel towards European football, but damn. Just enjoy the sport, who cares what it’s called?

    • 407 says:

      The club and supporters of Orlando City SC get it.

  37. Brain Guy says:

    Until they get a stadium approved and built, this is going to be very much a work in progress. I don’t think the Yankees are going to want to see their beautiful grass mucked up by soccer cleats for the entire season.

    While I continue to think that this is not welcome news for RBNY fans, the fact that the Yankees are behind the new team is a great reason for all of my fellow Met fans (as well as all Man U fans) to support RBNY. And if any ownership group could look more giant and unfriendly than Red Bull, it’s the combination of the Yankees and Man City’s ownership.

  38. Andy in Atlanta says:

    I am frankly disgusted…. so many very solid soccer towns that are being left in the dark… MLS should have encouraged ownership groups to seek out cities that already have a fan base to build from the already prevalent smaller clubs… St Louis, Milwaukee, Minneapolis, Orlando, Phoenix, Baltimore…

    Instead they went with a second team in a city that does not fully support its first namesake…

    • drew11 says:

      All in good time. No need to whine about good news.

      • Josh says:

        To play devil’s advocate here, there really isn’t any time left for this. Soccer leagues don’t really have more than 20 teams anywhere else (All I can think of is English Championship). What’s going to come in good time?

        • bbstl says:

          I tend to agree with you. I think that eventually (probably way, way, way down the line) an MLS 1 and MLS 2.

          • USsoccer100 says:

            I think we will be at 24 teams before the end of this decade (announced at least). The only major hurdle now is that teams cost 100 Million as opposed to 10 million as they did ten years ago.

            Orlando or Miami
            St. Louis (Rapids moved there by Kroenke)
            Atlanta
            San Diego (Chivas)
            Sacramento (about to lose their NBA franchise)
            Some other Canadian city (Ottawa, is that a place?)
            And the 24th team to whoever builds a small dome first, Las Vegas or Phoenix.

            then we start the second round of retraction…

        • Scott says:

          You are talking about leagues in countries the size of our states. Look at it another way, London has something like 50 teams with several in the BPL.

    • Shane says:

      Agree with the sentiment Andy, but I doubt there was any way MLS could convince Sheikh Monsour and the Yankees to locate the team anywhere else. At least MLS got $100 million out of them. And the rest of us can just hate them.

    • fischy says:

      –Instead they went with a second team in a city that does not fully support its first namesake…–

      Instead, they went with the first team to play in the country’s first city, and with a fan-base that will be second to none.

      Fixed it for you.

  39. bryan says:

    this should be a great team for MLS. MLS needed a 2nd NY team. i still hope Orlando gets a team because they deserve it. and if MLS can get someone to buy Chivas USA, re brand it, and move it within LA, that would be amazing. a 2nd team in LA makes sense…so long as the business plan actually makes sense.

  40. Chesterton Chris says:

    This ownership group is going to push MLS to a whole new level. They will want a higher salary cap to bring in better players. It will be fun to watch this play out. And to those who are complaining…BPL wouldn’t be what it is without the big clubs. MLS isn’t getting stronger with St. Louis and Milwaukee….two NY teams and two strong teams in LA plus the other teams will make for a stronger league. I think this is great.

    • Josh says:

      Why do teams in big cities suddenly make it stronger? Teams like Manchester(s) thrive because they are small industrial towns that grew into successful franchises over a century. Placing teams in big cities doesn’t guarantee a “stronger” league. I would argue a stronger league is teams like Seattle and Portland filling 40k seats per game enjoying a rivalry, not RBNY and Chivas playing to stadiums that are half to two-thirds empty.

      • Chesterton Chris says:

        Manchester is the third largest urban area in UK. You need big metro areas to have strong teams because that’s where the money is. One may not like it but that’s how it works. What MLS needs to increase salary cap is revenue increasing brought on by TV contracts which are driven by big markets. Milwaukee, St. Louis, Seattle, Portland….they don’t drive ratings. NY/LA/Chicago/Philadelphia drive ratings.

  41. AcidBurn says:

    Cohiba Don has his feet up and is puffing on a huge cigar. He gets $$$$$$$$$$ from City and the brand cache from the Yankees.

    Now get the Don Garber SoccerPlex built and his legacy is complete.

  42. Christian says:

    Great news for MLS! Now lift the salary cap and let the boys spend some money to help attract younger talent to either come over to MLS from abroad or to help entice American players to stay in the country and play!

    • Yevgeniy says:

      Lift the salary cap? Great idea! I would venture to say that it is more likely that EPL introduces salary cap than MLS lifts it.

      • Christian says:

        I definitely agree! I think the EPL should introduce some kind of salary cap and I would like to see MLS either lift the salary cap completely or at least raise it or add a couple more DP spots per team

      • fischy says:

        Yes, but $100 million from the new owners will provide room to significantly RAISE the cap….which is probably what the poster meant when he wrote “lift the cap.”

  43. louis z says:

    I thought Red Bulls have problems filling up their stadium, it doesn’t sound like a good business model. I’m sure there is other cities that would benefit more with a new franchise.

    • Ben says:

      One problem is that the Red Bulls have been putrid for so many years, with leadership or organization. The location of the stadium is terrible, but it isn’t great either. Finally, and I don’t know how this compares to other MLS teams, but RB tickets aren’t exactly cheap.

      • Yevgeniy says:

        They are absolutely cheap by New York standards. The best seats are $60-70 and for $20 you still get an excellent view. How is this not cheap?!?!?!?!?

  44. PSU says:

    Icahn Stadium??? It would certainly be on the small side, but I think it could be a great location for games. Maybe not as their main stadium, but it might be the perfect site for a US Open Cup game. If they could get temporary stands on the other side of the field, it might be a viable option for their home for a year. Just a thought. Never actually been in the stadium, so there may be problems I’m not aware of. Would be the closest thing to actually having game in Manhattan.

    • TomG says:

      Unless you live on the Upper East, it’s still tough to get to, though. No subway. 75% of Manhattan residents don’t own cars.

  45. Ben says:

    I’m a NYRB fan, but I consider switching if they can do the things necessary to put a coherent product on the field.

    • ed - houston says:

      There will plenty of NYRB Benedict Arnold’s pretty soon. I would prob do the same thing if i lived in Queens, Brooklyn, or Long Island. If i lived in the Bronx, Manhattan or Jersey i would prob stick with the Bulls.

  46. Adam says:

    I think that new york doesnt need another team. Look at all sports in north america:Football, soccer, hockey, basketball and baseball. There is one thing in common, all have two new york teams. My question is why does new york need two teams in every sport? Look at all of the other teams you don’t see them with two teams. I recomend that they only have one team like every other city. Do they need two teams to double there chances or do all of their teams bomb it every season every year that they need to have somkething else to cheer for.

    • kevdflb says:

      the simple and very easy to understand answer to why NY has multiple teams in multiple pro sports?

      population.

  47. AC says:

    As long as a support structure is set up better than Red Bull New York, where the ownership is actually involved. Luckily, I can see that happening with the Yankees involved and a big financial backing from Manchester City.

  48. Zack says:

    … and the league office never spoke of the western conference … ever, again.

  49. Roberto says:

    I really think this move will also invigorate the Red Bulls fan base, sort of like how many NYers reupped their commitment to the Knicks once the Nets moved to Brooklyn. Not that the Knicks ever had real problems with attendance, but the point is that moving the Nets actually benefitted both franchises to a certain extent, and in only one year, that rivalry took on real meaning to the fans in a way it hadn’t in years. I think the same dynamics might appear in this situation.

  50. beto says:

    and it happened..

    the first MLS expansion that is…
    not a “promotion” to an existing club since 2007 RSL and Chivas.
    a partnership with an MLB team
    a partnership with a EPL club
    centrally planned my the league itself..

    i am usually not a fan these kind of things but I am optimistic about what this much money can create!

  51. bryan says:

    between this and xbox one announcement, it’s a great day!

  52. bryan says:

    and now a live Q&A!!!!

  53. McQ says:

    All this playing in MetLife chatter is silly. There was a reason the RedBulls moved out. The central idea of this team was to have a team actually play in New York City. The league has been working on the stadium for more than a year – longer than getting the ownership group in place. They will have a soccer specific stadium in Flushing Meadows Park near the US Tennis Center and City Field.

    They just catapulted to the top of the “Best Name in MLS” list – NEW YORK CITY – say no more!

  54. Cairo says:

    As a West Coaster, I am already predisposed to hating the NYC teams. Add the Yankees to the mix and its a done deal. Now all they have to do is bring one of the semipro college football teams from the SEC in as a partner and I’ll be there throwing epithets at the team bus. Good for MLS, though–strong dislike is still passion, and the league is sometimes short on that…

  55. ed - houston says:

    I don’t know what to say now that its happened. No more teams!! Perhaps

  56. Travis in Miami says:

    Lame…they don’t even have a log yet? Or a stadium? I feel for Orlando FC…

  57. seaoctopus says:

    So when will the Columbus death watch begin? Or the move for DC to Baltimore?

    Pressure is on

  58. pete says:

    Now if we can get John Henry to buy the Revs this will get really fun. Or maybe the Glazers could pick up DC United.

  59. Sean says:

    As long as the Yankees influence doesn’t badly affect any game day atmosphere with video gimmicks and artificial hype, I support this ownership. This ownership structure will reduce the unease at Middle Eastern absentee ownership by inserting an American staple in sports. And, maybe the Yankees involvement will mean the stadium deal gets fast tracked.

    • The Imperative Voice says:

      They must have some idea what the stadium plan is if the deal got approved, at least as far as Stage 1 if not the Next Stages.

      So does this mean City starts in Yankee Stadium? If so, geez, what will ticket prices be? [This has been my recurring concern about MLS in NYC proper is hooooo boy what will ticket prices be to recoup that address?] And then will the permanent destination be in the Bronx because of the Yanks link-up or Flushing or one of the other rumors?

  60. JL says:

    As a New Yorker in the Bronx, Red Bull supporter. I like what’s happening.

    I always wished that some ultra rich dude would buy the Metrostars and give it a fancy name such as New York City FC. But alas, Red Bull Energy Drink decided to plaster their brand everywhere.

    It’s just tacky even if they have a really fancy stadium.

    I just really hope NYCFC come up with a really nice crest and kit.

  61. Eric says:

    Can we start calling them the New Jersey Red Bulls? That’s how you could really kickstart the rivalry with the new NYCFC. Hasn’t MLS figured out the reason no one goes to see a club in New Jersey called the New York Red Bulls is that it’s an insult? Or just move the Red Bulls to Detroit. And what’s with dissing the Cosmos?

    • slowleftarm says:

      Cosmos are a cheesy marketing gimmick and if there’s anyone not going to RBNY because they aren’t called New Jersey, they’re in a pretty tiny group.

  62. DCUnitedWillRiseAgain says:

    Hate City. Hate the Yankees. The only thing I can’t decide is who I will root for when they play the Pink Cows. I’ll bet the Pink Cows move to Orlando in 2 years.

    • slowleftarm says:

      Shouldn’t you be worrying about whether your team will ever win another game?

  63. Excellency says:

    I wonder why there is not a “London FC”.

  64. Scott says:

    Because they have more than one team and the original teams associated more with neighborhoods/community than city.

  65. Joseph D'Hippolito says:

    If somebody already answered this, I apologize, but I would like to know what the Yankees and Manchester City get out of this? More income? The Yankees don’t exactly need to spread their “brand” around the world, let alone in NYC. Does Man. City plan to use the team as a kind of reserve club, like Guadalajara is trying to do with Chivas USA? I can see how Man. City would want to extend its reach into North America.

    • bryan says:

      they get money. a chance to build another global brand. they buy the team for $100M, spend $350M on the stadium and hope that in 10-20 years, the team alone is worth $350M.

  66. ThaDeuce says:

    Sooooo.

    What do the Cosmos think of all this?

    Awkward…