UrbanOhio.com

General Discussions => Sports Talk => Topic started by: ryanlammi on August 06, 2015, 11:19:31 AM

Title: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on August 06, 2015, 11:19:31 AM
We have one professional soccer team in Cincinnati: The Cincinnati Saints (http://www.cincinnatisaints.com/). They are in the National Premier Soccer League (NPSL) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Premier_Soccer_League) and also play indoor soccer in the winter. They have a women's team as well. They play at Stargel Stadium in the West End (just outside of Downtown/OTR) next to Taft High School.

New reports (http://www.wcpo.com/news/insider/cincinnati-bengals-exec-jeff-berding-trying-to-bring-a-new-pro-soccer-franchise-to-town) indicate Cincinnati will be getting a 3rd tier team in the United Soccer League (USL) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Soccer_League). Not a lot is known of the team, except they will probably play at Nippert until they build a dedicated facility (or find another location). Jeff Berding, of the Bengals, is apparently leaving his post to run this. They will start in 2016. Rumor has it John Harkes (http://scratchingthepitch.com/2015/07/30/harkes-may-head-fc-cincinnati/) may lead the team as head coach.

More info surely to come soon.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: OCtoCincy on August 06, 2015, 01:31:59 PM
The Saints play at Withrow HS now.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: ryanlammi on August 06, 2015, 02:21:28 PM
^That was only for the 2015 season as CPS was redoing the field. Their permanent home as of now is Stargel
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: thomasbw on August 06, 2015, 08:24:48 PM
^That was only for the 2015 season as CPS was redoing the field. Their permanent home as of now is Stargel

I went to 4 Saints games at Stargel and 0 at Withrow
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: bendixondavis on August 07, 2015, 12:36:26 AM
I don't know the numbers, but it seemed less people came to withrow this yr vs stargel last yr, even though they did better this yr.
I have always been a huge fan of soccer, very exciting that within a couple of yrs of each other we might have 2 pro soccer teams.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: ryanlammi on August 11, 2015, 08:56:19 AM
Fox19 said via Twitter the new team will be owned by the Lindners and play at UC. No article to accompany the tweet.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: ryanlammi on August 11, 2015, 09:20:34 AM
Here's a youtube video they created.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KR88W__JMto
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: ryanlammi on August 11, 2015, 11:54:16 AM
Hopefully FC Cincinnati gets a new logo before they actually start. I think their current logo looks rushed. Also, is it supposed to be an acorn? Why?

(http://mediad.publicbroadcasting.net/p/wvxu/files/styles/x_large/public/201508/fcCincinnati_Logo.png)
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: KyleCincy on August 11, 2015, 12:22:06 PM
Well they are going to have one heck of a facility to play in. I should try to get over to UC for a few baseball and now maybe soccer games.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: thomasbw on August 11, 2015, 12:25:11 PM
Well they are going to have one heck of a facility to play in. I should try to get over to UC for a few baseball and now maybe soccer games.

UC has a great baseball facility there. The only thing I don't like about it is I can't get over the ping of the metal bats, just feels wrong.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: moonloop on August 11, 2015, 12:36:32 PM
This is what it could look like...   As a very casual soccer fan, an interesting development

(http://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/49ae0b647d30acfe4824bf2c2bcb9e79aa684e89/c=46-0-719-506&r=x404&c=534x401/local/-/media/2015/08/11/Cincinnati/Cincinnati/635748899856678192-soccer.JPG)
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: KyleCincy on August 11, 2015, 12:37:06 PM
Well they are going to have one heck of a facility to play in. I should try to get over to UC for a few baseball and now maybe soccer games.

UC has a great baseball facility there. The only thing I don't like about it is I can't get over the ping of the metal bats, just feels wrong.

Yep, lol, metal bats don't sound right.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: Cygnus on August 11, 2015, 12:59:40 PM
Per Carl Lindner III bringing new pro soccer team to Cincy (http://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/2015/08/11/source-cincy--getting--new-pro-soccer-team/31456919/):

Quote
The team will take the field in spring 2016.

An official announcement is scheduled for Wednesday, after which tickets will go on sale. They will range from $50 for students up to $595 for club seats.

These have to be season ticket prices...
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: Cygnus on August 11, 2015, 01:23:05 PM
The Cincy Saints are now the Cincinnati Saints and released their new logo today

(http://mediad.publicbroadcasting.net/p/wvxu/files/styles/small/public/201508/new_saints_logo.jpg)
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: KyleCincy on August 11, 2015, 01:56:57 PM
This is what it could look like...   As a very casual soccer fan, an interesting development

(http://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/49ae0b647d30acfe4824bf2c2bcb9e79aa684e89/c=46-0-719-506&r=x404&c=534x401/local/-/media/2015/08/11/Cincinnati/Cincinnati/635748899856678192-soccer.JPG)

Yeah same here. Wonder if they decide not to build a stadium and stay there long term?
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: cincySAL on August 11, 2015, 03:29:53 PM
I thought there was a mandate that USL had to have a soccer specific stadium by 2020? I don't see how they get Nippert to be wide enough, nor do I understand why they chose Nippert. That picture looks cool, unfortunately there will only be 1,000 people in the seats (hopefully they get that many) and there will be painted lines across the field every 10 yards. Why not Gettler?
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: OCtoCincy on August 11, 2015, 03:48:13 PM
They imply in the article I read that they will spend the next year or so figuring out the plans for a permanent home. 

Any ideas on where a permanent soccer specific stadium could be for this team that has seating for around 5,000?
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: ryanlammi on August 11, 2015, 03:56:31 PM
2020 still gives the team 4 years to build a soccer specific stadium. This is likely a temporary home.

Also, the league will only overlap with UC Football for a month at the most, so it shouldn't be too big of a deal as a temporary home (2 years or so I bet). I'm sure FC Cincinnati is paying for the field conversion. I don't know about the width of Nippert. Are the lowest level seats retractable for other sports?

I think it would be cool if they built a soccer stadium in Newport at the Licking River where that stalled development is. You could put the stands on the south side so it faces the Cincinnati skyline.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: Ram23 on August 11, 2015, 04:06:47 PM
This is what it could look like...   As a very casual soccer fan, an interesting development

(http://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/49ae0b647d30acfe4824bf2c2bcb9e79aa684e89/c=46-0-719-506&r=x404&c=534x401/local/-/media/2015/08/11/Cincinnati/Cincinnati/635748899856678192-soccer.JPG)

If you look closely at the rendering, they show the first several rows of seats removed, particularly in the student section. Currently, the wall is very low and the aisles open up onto the field. In the rendering, the wall rises up at the south end. I'm not sure if the designer was using some artistic license, or if they really think UC is going to renovate the stadium again in order to accommodate a larger field. I think that would be awful, the fact that the front rows at Nippert are directly at field level is one of the coolest things about it (even if the seats are often empty because fans can't see over the heads of people on the sidelines).
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: ryanlammi on August 11, 2015, 04:12:54 PM
Alternatively, if there is enough space, perhaps the Bengals could give up their practice field but retain certain rights to use it during preseason and full use after the USL season ends each year. Here's a map of two locations worth considering.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: Rabbit Hash on August 11, 2015, 04:37:13 PM
No way the Bengals do that given Mike Brown's history.  In Newport the new KY9 will be routed in a way that precludes this even if Ovation never happens.

At least that's my take.

How about we seize on this to bring some life to lower Queensgate.  Fifth and Freeman OR Linn and Ges.. Turn those brownfield into green!
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: KyleCincy on August 11, 2015, 04:39:35 PM
I am OK with the first few rows of Nippert coming out. UC has a tough time selling those seats.
Linder will probably make a nice donation to UC also.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: ryanlammi on August 11, 2015, 04:45:55 PM
^^Consider that Jeff Berding is GM/President of the organization. He left his post after about 20 years with the Bengals. I think Mike Brown could be convinced. Perhaps they've already reached an agreement. Also, if they provide significant improvements and then give the Bengals free use of the space around games and some practices while covering maintenance of the site, I think it would work well for both teams.

I'm skeptical of going into Queensgate. Part of the benefit of the two sites I mentioned is that parking would either be unnecessary or be lower because of the public infrastructure already in place.

And that lower end of Queensgate is a mess of railroads, polluted land (expensive to convert), and industrial companies that likely aren't willing to pack up and leave.

I hope they stay in the basin after they leave Nippert.

USL averaged 3114/game in 2014. Gettler only holds 1,400. I agree that Nippert is a little big, but Gettler is pretty small. And their activities would likely interfere more with UC sports if they were at Gettler with Track & Field, Lacrosse, and Soccer.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: OCtoCincy on August 11, 2015, 04:55:02 PM
It would be very foolish of Newport to allow a stadium to be built on the ovation grounds.  Financially that would make no sense for them.  Ovation is unlikely to ever get built, but that land could become a 2000 resident dense townhouse style development at a minimum, or something in the middle like a continuation of The Banks with 2 or so mid size office buildings and 3-4 6 story apartment buildings.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: jwulsin on August 11, 2015, 05:03:46 PM
Alternatively, if there is enough space, perhaps the Bengals could give up their practice field but retain certain rights to use it during preseason and full use after the USL season ends each year. Here's a map of two locations worth considering.

Both of those locations ought to be used for something *much* higher density than a soccer field. (I say that as a huge soccer fan). With close proximity to downtown, the river, and the highways, it's always bugged me how the Bengals' practice field is such an under-utilized piece of land. (Same goes for the Newport property).
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: thebillshark on August 11, 2015, 05:05:50 PM
Might be a savvy move for the Browns be involved with this. Companies in other industries have R&D departments developing the next big thing and this is analogous. The NFL is peaking right now in popularity and who knows how sustainable that is given both in-sport issues like concussions and external factors.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: ryanlammi on August 11, 2015, 05:24:08 PM
Chances are it will be built out in Mason by the Lindner's tennis facilities and we'll all forget about it in a couple years.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: OCtoCincy on August 11, 2015, 05:27:05 PM
Louisville City FC got $580K from Louisville government to renovate locker room. Article implies they will ask for public funds for soccer stadium.  Also implies 2020 is deadline for Cincinnati FC to get their own stadium. I don't see how they stay in the urban core.

http://www.courier-journal.com/story/sports/soccer/louisville-city-fc/2015/05/14/usl-wants-teams-including-louisville-city-fc-in-soccer-stadiums-by-2020/27302237/
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: Cygnus on August 11, 2015, 07:01:33 PM
I could see Mike Brown working with Carl Lindner to upgrade the Bengals practice facility as @ryanlammi mentioned. Call it United Dairy Farmers (UDF) Stadium and add the ability to inflate a bubble for Bengals practices.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: diaspora on August 11, 2015, 11:01:58 PM
I went to most Saints games last year, and 1 this year. I got to know the Crusaders supports group and I think the news today is a bummer.

This just feels to me like Walmart trying to push the local store out of business.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: Jimmy_James on August 11, 2015, 11:26:20 PM
Might be a savvy move for the Browns be involved with this. Companies in other industries have R&D departments developing the next big thing and this is analogous. The NFL is peaking right now in popularity and who knows how sustainable that is given both in-sport issues like concussions and external factors.

Totally agree with this. Also, with the success of the Seahawks/Sounders model (2 teams sharing 1 stadium, promotions, marketing, even color scheme) it's crazy for an NFL team to allow a stadium to just sit unused in the off season. Especially given the uncertainty that lies ahead regarding head injuries and whatnot.  There's no reason that Paul Brown Stadium couldn't pull double duty for something like this.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: ryanlammi on August 12, 2015, 08:22:50 AM
^Except that USL won't allow it. And PBS would look absolutely empty with even 6,000 people in it (average attendance in USL is north of 3,000 and some pull close to 5000 average). Even if they close off the upper sections and have one of the best attendances in the country, they aren't going to come close to filling PBS.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: Jimmy_James on August 12, 2015, 09:13:11 AM
^I guess I'm factoring in that the USL is a third tier soccer league in the United States.  Meaning that even MLS isn't that popular within its own country, and is regarded as a lesser league worldwide, so how likely is it that A) USL will exist long enough to be worth building a stadium of any size, and B) if push comes to shove they wouldn't cave in and allow the use of an NFL quality stadium for one of their teams?

Crowd size is definitely a concern, yes.  If it's truly that low, then PBS wouldn't be a good fit.  But I still think it's crazy to consider building anything for a team/league that may or may not be around in a few years.  I do like the renderings of Nippert, and that seems like a great option for the time being.  If they do make the jump to MLS, then other options would need to be considered, but they haven't even played a match yet, so this is all a bit premature.

Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: ryanlammi on August 12, 2015, 09:59:59 AM
I agree. I think they should be permitted to play in an existing facility. Unfortunately that isn't the reality of the league. I would be more supportive of building a soccer specific stadium if there was promotion/relegation in US Soccer.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: Jimmy_James on August 12, 2015, 10:08:02 AM
^That's the key to soccer differentiating itself from the other major sports and gaining popularity in the US.  I'm surprised that it hasn't been implemented already, but maybe you need several stable tiers of leagues before something like that can function properly.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: ryanlammi on August 12, 2015, 10:23:41 AM
The biggest issue with relegation is that investors are putting serious money into MLS teams and those investors aren't willing to spend that money on a team who could be relegated to a lower league for one bad season. After that attendance could drop considerably and they could be out a lot of money. Current teams would never support it. I do hope it happens though. I think promotion/relegation would hugely increase fan engagement in soccer.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: Jimmy_James on August 12, 2015, 10:55:43 AM
^They just need to work out some sort of profit sharing agreement that makes relegation less scary financially.  If the prize is growing the fan base in every mid-size city in the US by adding teams that have a slim chance of playing their way up to MLS, that could translate into more money than any one team could ever generate on its own.  For instance, the NFL's ticket sales are dwarfed by the money made from TV contracts, which I'm sure is increasingly true for the other major sports as well.  It may not be doable in the short term, but it's something that MLS should be strongly considering in the long term.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: cincySAL on August 12, 2015, 10:59:14 AM
Relegation is definitely needed but I have to imagine it will be very difficult to get MLS owners to agree to it. Why would they agree to something that would hurt their revenue if they happened to be relegated.

edit: sorry, didn't see Ryan's post which basically said the same thing.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: Jimmy_James on August 12, 2015, 11:11:04 AM
^Because you can make more money by growing your sport to the #2 or #3 most popular nationwide than you can by staying #5, even if you do have good ticket sales within your own market.  It can be done.  Whether it will be done is another matter.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: ryanlammi on August 12, 2015, 11:22:11 AM
The live press announcement is online right now (started at 11).

First thing I heard was Cranley thanking Jeff Berding and Bob Bedinghaus for leading the way with the stadiums. Then Jeff Berding saying how great of a job Cranley is doing as mayor. This is definitely giving me a negative impression. I don't really like the people involved.

You can watch it live here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=080JREKSGJ4&feature=youtu.be
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: KyleCincy on August 12, 2015, 12:44:41 PM
The live press announcement is online right now (started at 11).

First thing I heard was Cranley thanking Jeff Berding and Bob Bedinghaus for leading the way with the stadiums. Then Jeff Berding saying how great of a job Cranley is doing as mayor. This is definitely giving me a negative impression. I don't really like the people involved.

You can watch it live here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=080JREKSGJ4&feature=youtu.be

If it is a decent product, cost is reasonable, .....venue is top shelf, I will probably go to some games. Especially in the spring coming out of
winter it is good to get outside. Local business people are certainly behind making this work.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: Flyboy41 on August 12, 2015, 12:45:14 PM
Even though I don't live in Cincinnati anymore, I'm so excited for this team. We have RSL and a USL team here in SLC and now I can see FC Cincinnati in person when they visit for USL games and the US Open Cup.

Relegation won't work here, and frankly I think it's a stupid idea. American fans have a pretty distinct idea of what major/minor leagues are. Can you imagine the drop off in overall attendance and revenue if the Reds got relegated to AAA? Also, TV networks are not going to pay money for a team that can get bumped out of the major league.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: cincySAL on August 12, 2015, 12:56:15 PM
^Because you can make more money by growing your sport to the #2 or #3 most popular nationwide than you can by staying #5, even if you do have good ticket sales within your own market.  It can be done.  Whether it will be done is another matter.

That's a big assumption and a tough sell. I'm not sure how profitable MLS teams currently are but if they make good money they likely won't wan to risk it for an unknown.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: cincySAL on August 12, 2015, 12:59:42 PM
Even though I don't live in Cincinnati anymore, I'm so excited for this team. We have RSL and a USL team here in SLC and now I can see FC Cincinnati in person when they visit for USL games and the US Open Cup.

Relegation won't work here, and frankly I think it's a stupid idea. American fans have a pretty distinct idea of what major/minor leagues are. Can you imagine the drop off in overall attendance and revenue if the Reds got relegated to AAA? Also, TV networks are not going to pay money for a team that can get bumped out of the major league.

You are comparing it to the Reds in a sport where they have incredibly distinct leagues. Obviously if they went to relegation it wouldn't be so distinct. Not only that, it incentivizes teams to spend money to better their team unlike the crappy Reds and Bengals here who do very little. You also create an exiting atmosphere when teams are competing for promotion. Imagine the fan support for a second tier team when they are close to getting promoted.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: ryanlammi on August 12, 2015, 01:04:51 PM
Perhaps US Soccer should introduce a promotion/relegation system for all non MLS teams. If that builds enough support, MLS could slowly be leaked into the promotion/relegation schedule.

Perhaps if an MLS team folds, the winner of the top minor league team gets automatically promoted. Or if a team fails to meet certain metrics (attendance, revenue, record, etc) they are relegated to the top minor league team and the winner of the top minor league is promoted to MLS. That way it isn't guaranteed that a team will be promoted/relegated within MLS, but if a team consistently performs poorly they are punished.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: KyleCincy on August 12, 2015, 01:05:03 PM
What is the process or procedure to go from a minor league to MLS?
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: ryanlammi on August 12, 2015, 01:06:54 PM
^There currently is no process. MLS basically would need to invite a minor league team at their discretion (like they did with Orlando City SC who won two years in USL and had a committed fan base). But other teams just appear out of thin air (NYCFC, the new Miami team, etc).
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: diaspora on August 12, 2015, 01:31:19 PM
Relegation is the best idea in sports, but it is impossible to do. It only works in England because that's the way it has always been, and the real money wasn't in EPL until very recently.

Imagine the difficulties for a county or city that financed a stadium for a team that was then relegated.

Speaking of which, hopefully this City is smart enough to stay the hell away from another stadium deal, but if Cranley, Berding and Bedinghaus are named, who knows. Got any more hospitals to sell?
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: jmecklenborg on August 12, 2015, 01:49:03 PM
The difference between this and the many earlier minor league soccer teams is that the old money is behind it and they've assembled their team of stooges to run the thing.  They also got a much better venue.  I think Nippert will make a great venue for soccer, much better than Paul Brown.  I think a few of the previous minor league teams were playing at high school stadiums. 

But for years national commentators have been complaining that soccer fails to cross over in the United States in part because of the "euro" branding.  And here again we see some attempt to allude to European team names.  Give American teams American names and American team colors and there would be greater acceptance.     
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: diaspora on August 12, 2015, 01:52:32 PM
^big problem is that USL requires soccer specific stadiums by the end of the decade, so FCC isn't going to be at Nippert for long.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: jmecklenborg on August 12, 2015, 01:56:46 PM
^big problem is that USL requires soccer specific stadiums by the end of the decade, so FCC isn't going to be at Nippert for long.

Well maybe this is all a back-door strategy for The Bengals to get the public to pay for upgrades to PBS.  In 2020 that stadium will be 20 years old.  If the upgrades are for "soccer", then it's an easier sell to the public. 
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: surfohio on August 12, 2015, 01:57:36 PM
But for years national commentators have been complaining that soccer fails to cross over in the United States in part because of the "euro" branding.  And here again we see some attempt to allude to European team names.  Give American teams American names and American team colors and there would be greater acceptance.     
There are some really good heritage names in U.S. soccer, like NY Cosmos, Ft. Lauderdale Strikers, Seattle Sounders, Tampa Bay Rowdies etc.

The problem with finding new American team names is all the good ones have been taken. That's how you end up with awful names like the "Dallas Burn" and the "Kansas City Wiz"

I think "Sporting Kansas City" and "FC Dallas" are drastic improvements.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: diaspora on August 12, 2015, 02:03:50 PM
^big problem is that USL requires soccer specific stadiums by the end of the decade, so FCC isn't going to be at Nippert for long.

Well maybe this is all a back-door strategy for The Bengals to get the public to pay for upgrades to PBS.  In 2020 that stadium will be 20 years old.  If the upgrades are for "soccer", then it's an easier sell to the public.

The way the USL has it, they have to be the owners or primary tenants of a stadium, so PBS wouldn't work.

The MLS has allowed it with Seattle, but the Sounders and Seahawks have the same owner in Paul Allen.

I also don't think that FCC is going to be moving up in a couple years.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: Flyboy41 on August 12, 2015, 02:13:37 PM
Many MLS clubs have USL affiliates. You'll probably see a minor/major league system with soccer like they have with MLB and NHL in a few years.

The good news is that if FC Cincy wants to move to MLS, they have an ownership group with the money to do so. Wrong Side of the Pond just tweeted today that Berhding (sp?) basically said they have MLS ambitions. FC Cincinnati is affiliated with Kings and Hammer FC so they already have an academy system in the works.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: cincySAL on August 12, 2015, 02:21:59 PM
But for years national commentators have been complaining that soccer fails to cross over in the United States in part because of the "euro" branding.  And here again we see some attempt to allude to European team names.  Give American teams American names and American team colors and there would be greater acceptance.     
There are some really good heritage names in U.S. soccer, like NY Cosmos, Ft. Lauderdale Strikers, Seattle Sounders, Tampa Bay Rowdies etc.

The problem with finding new American team names is all the good ones have been taken. That's how you end up with awful names like the "Dallas Burn" and the "Kansas City Wiz"

I think "Sporting Kansas City" and "FC Dallas" are drastic improvements.

I love how non-American teams don't have to use all the cheesy names that American sports do. FC, or SC, is simple. Generally I'd prefer SC over FC over here since they it's called soccer, but it's simple it's the soccer club for that city. For the new team I'd prefer Cincinnati SC but it's still better than FC Cincinnati Blue Whales or whatever cheesy names that american teams have.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: diaspora on August 12, 2015, 02:32:38 PM
As much as I hate them, I think the Oakland Athletics have the best name in US sports.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: ryanlammi on August 12, 2015, 02:45:10 PM
The Kansas City Royals have a great name, too. The origin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Royal) is really good.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: diaspora on August 12, 2015, 02:56:38 PM
The royals can burn in hell.

Sincerely,
An angry Tigers fan
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: jmecklenborg on August 12, 2015, 03:03:06 PM
The most preposterous current pro team is the Buffalo Bills.  The most preposterous defunct team is the Brooklyn Bridegrooms. 

A local team name that hasn't been used yet would be the Cincinnati Cicadas.  Great logo, they make a ridiculous sound, and they pop when you throw them at a brick wall. 

Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: ryanlammi on August 12, 2015, 03:04:52 PM
Ha, I'm a Tigers fan too. But I still respect their team name. Though I am a Reds fan first, so most of the Tigers rivalries aren't as bad to me as Reds rivalries.

Getting back to promotion and relegation, does anyone think that the lower tiers shouldn't use the system? I think it would at least bring more passion to those teams even if it doesn't lead to MLS joining in.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: diaspora on August 12, 2015, 03:39:31 PM
Promotion might work, but the leagues would have to be operating on the same set of rules. NPSL is extremely limited due to salary cap issues and a heavy reliance on college (amateur) players. If USL/PDL etc could agree on everything, it would make some sense.

Still, it isn't something that American sports fans are used to.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: cincySAL on August 12, 2015, 03:39:33 PM
Ha, I'm a Tigers fan too. But I still respect their team name. Though I am a Reds fan first, so most of the Tigers rivalries aren't as bad to me as Reds rivalries.

Getting back to promotion and relegation, does anyone think that the lower tiers shouldn't use the system? I think it would at least bring more passion to those teams even if it doesn't lead to MLS joining in.

Some of it also depends on the disparity in quality. If the top league teams were head and shoulders above the lower leagues than it wouldn't be good. A team would get relegated and then crush all the bottom teams. I would hope there isn't that much of a talent disparity between the different leagues.

Though I highly doubt it would ever happen having a relegation system would be great. You also have to keep in mind that the major, big money teams would likely never get relegated just as you don't see a Man U or Chelsea ever getting relegated. It'd only be the smaller market teams and then they would likely (hopefully) go from losing many games to winning many games.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: OCtoCincy on August 12, 2015, 03:42:24 PM
^big problem is that USL requires soccer specific stadiums by the end of the decade, so FCC isn't going to be at Nippert for long.

Well maybe this is all a back-door strategy for The Bengals to get the public to pay for upgrades to PBS.  In 2020 that stadium will be 20 years old.  If the upgrades are for "soccer", then it's an easier sell to the public. 

The lease agreement has the taxpayers paying all upgrades until 2030. They aren't worried about upgrades being funded.  Once half the teams have something, the taxpayers of HC must pay for it for the bengals.  The lease even says taxpayers would have to install a "hologram graphic system" if half the teams end up with one.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: Jimmy_James on August 12, 2015, 04:25:19 PM
A local team name that hasn't been used yet would be the Cincinnati Cicadas.

I like that name.  Also, I've always thought it would be cool if the Brown family owned an MLS team and called it the Cincinnati Siberians.  In a similar vein as the Sounders and Seahawks sharing color schemes, they could use the same logos, fonts, etc. as the Bengals, swapping orange and black for white and black.

Imagine the difficulties for a county or city that financed a stadium for a team that was then relegated.

This will become less problematic over time, as fans of most sports are increasingly choosing to watch on HDTV in the comfortable of their living rooms instead of paying exorbitant ticket and concession prices.  Also, it's extremely unlikely that any team would be displaced for longer than a single season at a stretch, as they should be better than most of the teams in the league below them.  The trick is to have two or three teams moving up or down every year, and to have each tier being only marginally better than the tier below (as cincySAL stated) so that a single relegated team doesn't just dominate in the lower league.  This also puts a stop to nonsense like teams losing on purpose to get a better spot in the draft.  And, it keeps the fans interested even when their team is terrible, so attendance may actually increase for teams in danger of relegation.

Imagine the spike in popularity that would happen if a city like Toledo or Dayton got promoted to MLS for even one season.  There's nothing like it in American sports.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: ryanlammi on August 12, 2015, 05:04:50 PM
Maybe even using the average performance over 3 years or so could provide some comfort to the teams currently in the top. Promote/relegate every three years and you could find the teams that truly don't deserve to be in the top tier and the teams who truly deserve to be promoted. That way one bad season where your star goalkeeper suffers a huge injury can't relegate you to the lower level.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: jdm00 on August 12, 2015, 05:30:21 PM
Relegation is the best idea in sports, but it is impossible to do. It only works in England because that's the way it has always been, and the real money wasn't in EPL until very recently.

Imagine the difficulties for a county or city that financed a stadium for a team that was then relegated.

Speaking of which, hopefully this City is smart enough to stay the hell away from another stadium deal, but if Cranley, Berding and Bedinghaus are named, who knows. Got any more hospitals to sell?

Relegation isn't limited to England.  It's used pretty much everywhere in soccer outside of the US.  And in addition to providing performance incentives, it's a very effective way to penalize clubs for wrongdoing (like the relegation of Rangers in Scotland, or when Juventus was related in Italy a few years ago). 
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: KyleCincy on August 12, 2015, 05:55:22 PM
Berding said goal is MLS, mentioned Orlando. Lucky to secure renovated Nippert to get started.  He said being on a large university campus, where younger people are driving American soccer, is a big deal.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: thebillshark on August 12, 2015, 07:29:44 PM
Relegation sounds like fun, but if it's not feasible for some reason, is there any way MLS can just be twice the size of a typical North American sports league? It seems there shouldn't be so many vested interests standing in the way of that for such a young league.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: diaspora on August 12, 2015, 09:06:56 PM
Relegation is the best idea in sports, but it is impossible to do. It only works in England because that's the way it has always been, and the real money wasn't in EPL until very recently.

Imagine the difficulties for a county or city that financed a stadium for a team that was then relegated.

Speaking of which, hopefully this City is smart enough to stay the hell away from another stadium deal, but if Cranley, Berding and Bedinghaus are named, who knows. Got any more hospitals to sell?

Relegation isn't limited to England.  It's used pretty much everywhere in soccer outside of the US.  And in addition to providing performance incentives, it's a very effective way to penalize clubs for wrongdoing (like the relegation of Rangers in Scotland, or when Juventus was related in Italy a few years ago). 
Yeah, I know, but no matter where it is, it has always been part of the game. You couldn't introduce relegation to England (or Scotland, or Spain) now if it had never been in place before.

Large teams would never accept a system where they can be penalized. The owners run the leagues, not the other way around.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: bendixondavis on August 12, 2015, 09:15:40 PM
Interesting point from news courier article today. It implied that the dayton dutch lions which used to be in the usl and dropped out got bought by lindner, bringing us this new team. The saints had a preseason game against the dayton dutch team this year and crushed them if i remember right. I wonder if this could lead to a great rivalry between both teams if they ever are in the same league like the rivalry with manchester united and manchester city,  or real madrid and madrid atletico.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: taestell on August 12, 2015, 11:16:05 PM
The most preposterous current pro team is the Buffalo Bills.  The most preposterous defunct team is the Brooklyn Bridegrooms. 

A local team name that hasn't been used yet would be the Cincinnati Cicadas.  Great logo, they make a ridiculous sound, and they pop when you throw them at a brick wall. 



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpXN8BvGp_o
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: jmecklenborg on August 13, 2015, 08:47:53 AM
^A girl who works at NYPD Pizza has a big cicada tattooed on her left calf.  I'm a bit surprised that our little hissing friends haven't become more of a campy local logo. 
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: ryanlammi on November 23, 2015, 02:15:36 PM
A few updates:

Cincinnati Saints have officially moved to Dayton and will be rebranded (looked like they are keeping the blue and white color scheme, but nothing concrete beyond that).

Most recent estimates are that FCC has about 4,000 season tickets sold. That's pretty good in my opinion for a team that hasn't played a game yet and won't until March. Also, I expect holiday sales to be strong (if they are good at marketing the team). Those promotions should be all over starting just after Thanksgiving if they know what's good for them. Louisville average 6,500 guests/game. FCC should beat this at this rate. Sacramento averages something like 11,000/game. That seems to be FCC's goal is to compete in attendance with Sacramento. We'll see if they can do it.

They just hosted tryouts this past Saturday. All things from blogs of people who know things seemed to be fairly impressed with the level of players trying out. I'm no expert at all, so I will leave this up to people who know things.

Overall their branding seems a little weak. Hopefully that can be updated before the season or revamped in a year or two.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: OllyTransit on November 23, 2015, 06:27:05 PM
A few updates:

Cincinnati Saints have officially moved to Dayton and will be rebranded (looked like they are keeping the blue and white color scheme, but nothing concrete beyond that).

Most recent estimates are that FCC has about 4,000 season tickets sold. That's pretty good in my opinion for a team that hasn't played a game yet and won't until March. Also, I expect holiday sales to be strong (if they are good at marketing the team). Those promotions should be all over starting just after Thanksgiving if they know what's good for them. Louisville average 6,500 guests/game. FCC should beat this at this rate. Sacramento averages something like 11,000/game. That seems to be FCC's goal is to compete in attendance with Sacramento. We'll see if they can do it.

They just hosted tryouts this past Saturday. All things from blogs of people who know things seemed to be fairly impressed with the level of players trying out. I'm no expert at all, so I will leave this up to people who know things.

Overall their branding seems a little weak. Hopefully that can be updated before the season or revamped in a year or two.

Hope they have plans to hand the reigns of the primary fan sections over to the public too. IMO the best soccer clubs allow ticket holders / official fan groups to be drive the process of fan chants, traditions, etc.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: ryanlammi on November 24, 2015, 08:52:19 AM
I believe that is the plan. There is a fairly active subreddit at r/fccincinnati that has been in talks of chants and things. Hopefully the supporters group(s) work early to prepare. It's really on them.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Soccer
Post by: OllyTransit on November 24, 2015, 10:49:56 AM
I believe that is the plan. There is a fairly active subreddit at r/fccincinnati that has been in talks of chants and things. Hopefully the supporters group(s) work early to prepare. It's really on them.

Thanks for mentioning that. Subbed!

Found a great article posted on there that I thought I'd share. Very insightful read: http://www.sixthdaysoccer.com/does-fc-cincy-understand-cincinnati-its-soccer-fans/
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on December 03, 2015, 09:57:43 AM
For anyone interested, I am hosting a meeting at Rhinegeist tonight for an "Urban Basin" supporters group (basically downtown, OTR, Pendleton, West End, Queensgate, and part of Mt. Auburn). If you're interested in joining, feel free. It'll be an open discussion where we go through logistics, future plans, name ideas, etc. You don't have to live in the urban basin to participate, but all events will take place there and designs will reflect that focus. This is meant to be a more focused group than the other supporters groups and create a more personal experience where you can meet other soccer/FCC fans.

7:30 tonight at Rhinegeist.

If you are interested, but can't make it to the meeting send me a PM with your email and I'll be sure to add you to future conversations. Also, check out the subreddit for general updates on things. r/fccincinnati
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on January 18, 2016, 10:47:41 AM
With some help from some friends we created a new supporters group for FC Cincinnati called Die Innenstadt.

"Die Innenstadt" translates literally from German to mean "The Inner City". The core neighborhoods included in this is Downtown, Pendletown, West End, Queensgate, Lower Price Hill, and Over-the-Rhine with parts of Fairview, Clifton Heights, and Mt. Auburn. This group is meant to build on the energy and history of the inner city neighborhoods to boost the city and the club. There's no requirement to live within these geographic boundaries, but that is where all events and meetings will take place.

We have our first meeting this Friday at 6pm at Rhinegeist (https://www.facebook.com/events/887980377988103/). It will be an open meeting where you can ask questions, socialize, and provide feedback. You can also become a member of Die Innenstadt for $20 which will include a unique scarf each year as well as other benefits. Anyone can attend match day activities whether you are a member or not.

If you have any questions now, you can ask me here and I'd be happy to answer them.

You can find us on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/DieInnenstadt/), Instagram (http://www.instagram.com/dieinnenstadt), and Twitter (http://www.twitter.com/dieinnenstadt).

Cheers!
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: PAlexander on January 18, 2016, 11:46:29 AM
I don't know why these guys chose those colors, or what the lion/griffon has to do with anything.  While they don't look bad, I think they should have gone with a red & white scheme.  Classic Cincinnati colors.  Or if they wanted to get away from that, they could have done a socceresque modification of Cincinnati colors, such as claret (instead of red) and white.  One thing I do respect about Pittsburgh sports is that all their sports teams wear the city's colors (which originate in the Pitt family arms: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earl_of_Chatham).

If these guys are looking for a soccer specific stadium, they should try to do something at the old Spinney Field site.  If there was a way to co-ordinate redeveloped housing in the LPH area, it could be a really cool project.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on January 18, 2016, 11:58:22 AM
^Yeah. They partly chose those colors because their ultimate goal is to join MLS, and that color scheme doesn't exist yet in MLS. I think red white and blue would have worked, though. They should have used the exact colors in the Cincinnati flag.

I agree that LPH would be a good location. It would have to be coordinated with other developments, though. It would be close to downtown, have views of the skyline, and provide additional development opportunities for LPH. A stadium couldn't go to the suburbs or it wouldn't draw IMO.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: PAlexander on January 18, 2016, 12:38:33 PM
Well, those colors are still lame.  I also hate how U.S. teams are using FC, as if we call it football and not soccer.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on January 18, 2016, 01:00:24 PM
Well, those colors are still lame.  I also hate how U.S. teams are using FC, as if we call it football and not soccer.

Exactly.  We don't expect U.S. hockey teams to use Canadian lingo, spellings, etc.  It's a ridiculous, clumsy stab at "authenticity" with the U.S. soccer stuff that turns tons of people off.  When I played soccer as a kid it was a "field".  Then suddenly it became a "pitch".  WTF is that?  The same thing dogs cycling.  Americans don't like using French and English terms for things (it's a pack, not a "peloton"...they're saddle bags, not "panniers"...a bike has gars and a shifter, not a "deraillur").  Maybe some of the popularity of mountain biking in the U.S. versus road biking is that we invited the bikes and the sport, and so we use our terminology and wear clothes with colors and of a character that is normal here.  Road biking clothes look absolutely ridiculous in the United States, and then they make it even worse when people insist on calling cycling clothes "kit". 


Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: surfohio on January 18, 2016, 01:15:51 PM
Well, those colors are still lame.  I also hate how U.S. teams are using FC, as if we call it football and not soccer.

It's lamer that the Bengals copied the Browns. And Pittsburgh is the only city that uses the same color scheme for all sports.

These colors look great imho. Let this franchise build its own identity.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: PAlexander on January 18, 2016, 02:03:23 PM
I think it's kind of cool that the Bengals copied the Browns given the situation around Paul Brown at the time.  Imho, between the name, the lion/griffon and the colors, this franchise is pretty generic.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on January 18, 2016, 02:34:41 PM
The Bengals did not copy The Browns.  The orange is not the same shade of orange and there is no brown in The Bengals' color scheme.  Besides, The Bengals were named for an old Cincinnati team called The Bengals, who in turn named themselves after the zoo's tiger from Bangladesh.   
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on January 18, 2016, 02:47:03 PM
Well, those colors are still lame.  I also hate how U.S. teams are using FC, as if we call it football and not soccer.

It's lamer that the Bengals copied the Browns. And Pittsburgh is the only city that uses the same color scheme for all sports.

These colors look great imho. Let this franchise build its own identity.

I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with the colors. I think they look fine. But I would appreciate something that had ties to the city itself (hence my suggestion of using the city's flag as the color scheme).

We are too far out to actually coordinate all of our sports teams IMO. Also, can you imagine if The Crew used scarlet and gray as their color scheme? No one would have bought Crew gear and everyone would be wearing OSU gear. It would be a little embarrassing. They might have thought the same thing about using red and white to coordinate with the Reds or black and orange to coordinate with the Bengals.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: gaslight on January 18, 2016, 02:59:51 PM
The Bengals did not copy The Browns.  The orange is not the same shade of orange and there is no brown in The Bengals' color scheme.  Besides, The Bengals were named for an old Cincinnati team called The Bengals, who in turn named themselves after the zoo's tiger from Bangladesh.   

umm, the Bengals did copy the Browns. When  Paul Brown got fired He owned the Equipment, so when he created the Bengals it was the same uniforms and helmets, but he added the word Bengals on the helmets.   

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cincinnati_Bengals
From Wiki

When the team debuted in 1968, the Bengals' uniforms were modeled after the Cleveland Browns. When Paul Brown was fired by Art Modell, Brown still owned the equipment used by Cleveland. So after the firing, Paul Brown packed up all his equipment, which he then used for his new team in Cincinnati. The Cleveland Browns' team colors were brown, orange, and white, then they changed to white, black, and orange, and their helmets were solid orange with a white dorsal stripe over the crest.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Ram23 on January 18, 2016, 03:33:12 PM
A team called the "Bengals" after the tiger that shares the same name has every logical reason to use orange, though. It's not so much a copy as it is something that made perfect sense. What's weird is that a team called the "Browns" uses the color orange as their primary color, instead of brown.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: PAlexander on January 18, 2016, 04:21:41 PM
I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with the colors. I think they look fine. But I would appreciate something that had ties to the city itself (hence my suggestion of using the city's flag as the color scheme).

We are too far out to actually coordinate all of our sports teams IMO. Also, can you imagine if The Crew used scarlet and gray as their color scheme? No one would have bought Crew gear and everyone would be wearing OSU gear. It would be a little embarrassing. They might have thought the same thing about using red and white to coordinate with the Reds or black and orange to coordinate with the Bengals.

I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with the colors either.  We are saying the same thing, that we would have preferred that the new team used something that had ties to the city itself, which is why I suggested red and white, or, to change it a bit, claret and white.  It's not a weird desire to have a team that builds its brand on the name "Cincinnati" should have some brand similarity, right?  That's why I brought up the colors; maybe a crown instead of a lion/griffon?

Columbus' city colors are red and yellow (as far as I can tell from their flag.  They have some sky blue as well on their city crest).  The Columbus Crew aren't putting OSU as part of their branding, whereas they do use the name of the City of Columbus.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thebillshark on January 18, 2016, 04:26:43 PM
I think that "Die Innenstadt" logo you guys designed looks awesome and should be the logo of the entire club. Maybe even the name of it too!
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: bendixondavis on January 18, 2016, 10:09:46 PM
Yea i like that logo, makes me think of the old patches on fighter pilot jackets.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on January 19, 2016, 08:07:29 AM
Thanks! Ronny Salerno of Queen City Discovery (http://queencitydisco.com/) designed the logo.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Rabbit Hash on January 19, 2016, 12:30:41 PM
Awesome work!
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on January 19, 2016, 05:15:58 PM
First home FCC match is Saturday, April 9th at 7pm.

Second home match is Saturday, April 16th.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thomasbw on January 20, 2016, 02:16:22 PM
I had some time to kill so I did a logo too (just a rough mock up, there are lots of little things to fix)-

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/GAAWZlRWRPYQ4QatkU_iBMjxUMXWUmn4uj08HptaONmQ5wiONi683aZs6eSE7xHmskIgRrUKyq2a0gxS6CaZsDkRvHWk14PyVIa4BhSopRcv5GJzt1KiYH5rhIWxDanaqTSxmehycs4oM-j5EFv0ROxC7Q13TaMyS1oemT1ZS_c2zYhlHZV5xW11nBccokzqNDFjyy4iJrxBJIfg6H6Gc4k876oMRXiz9-HEIxYqe2CJtIxFkmNwy5r4WOwH6h3K4tXg7yLx3xBp6QVk2fpwgBAnS_duAx3zn8iV6Pa2AXeV_2yS7zeynhWtTcHw5T98wJc16uJwOgScbfGHb3tnq2Q6UeuqnIOjeQsjrFazpLm6noTiDhsF0UC3vpSrI97ly9D14W4oj1WgA3HxxQFdvkWub0YhIrwFkPHxdrnOEs2yb9vsaSkxpn_xvcmWyLIxzgUzDvFXojnji0aSpjh1uPaUN5mTQ6iCFObXdWSeR-749N0NzZg_qUFymDpDuZ6IfiYeu8ch_x-UFPDpA6WhhSEBV9Hoeo5I0-6Y4qUpm9nnwp4tqz5gtXML5d7f7E3wWT70=w765-h735-no)

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on January 20, 2016, 02:39:17 PM
The fountain lady is either walking like an Egyptian or about to do the limbo. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on January 21, 2016, 12:33:02 AM
More like a drunk woman stumbling out of Neon's.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on January 21, 2016, 11:11:43 AM
More like a drunk woman stumbling out of Neon's.

Yeah, reaching for a parking meter to catch her balance. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on January 28, 2016, 09:30:37 AM
A lot has happened for the Supporter's Group I started as well as for the club itself. Among those things: membership for Die Innenstadt can now be accepted online and the full FCC Schedule has been released!

You can check out the latest here (http://www.dieinnenstadt.com/news/2016/1/28/online-memberships-and-fcc-schedule)!
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on February 05, 2016, 01:53:06 PM
We just unveiled the scarf design for Die Innenstadt (http://www.dieinnenstadt.com)! The only way to get it is by becoming a member ($20).

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CadU5JNW8AAz6bH.jpg:large)

You can read about it here: http://www.dieinnenstadt.com/news/2016/2/5/the-inaugural-season-scarf

You can purchase a membership online here: https://squareup.com/store/die-innenstadt

You can also follow us on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/dieinnenstadt), Twitter (http://www.twitter.com/dieinnenstadt), and Instagram (http://www.instagram.com/dieinnenstadt).

The FC Cincinnati subreddit is here: www.reddit.com/r/fccincinnati
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on February 05, 2016, 02:44:53 PM
They should call the team the Cincinnati Lammis.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on February 05, 2016, 02:51:33 PM
They should call the team the Cincinnati Lammis.

The Cincilammis?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on February 07, 2016, 11:57:01 PM
Heh.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on February 12, 2016, 11:26:41 AM
If anyone is considering becoming a member of Die Innenstadt, now is the time!

We are going to give out a pair of tickets to two randomly selected members at 5pm today and Monday. We need to place our scarf order by early next week to get them in in time, so this is a little incentive to do it now, rather than wait so we have a better idea of how many people are going to be members and so we don't under order our scarves and have to buy more.

Memberships are $20 and come with the scarf above!

www.squareup.com/store/die-innenstadt
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on March 31, 2016, 02:58:12 PM
Been a while since any update was provided on this. The first match resulted in a 1-0 loss in the 94th minute in Charleston, SC.

For a recap on the day, check out this blog post here (http://www.dieinnenstadt.com/news/2016/3/28/and-so-the-season-starts). For a match recap by the club, check out this post on the FCC site (http://www.fccincinnati.com/fc-cincinnati-falls-1-0-on-late-goal/).

Die Innenstadt is hosting a watch party for every away match at rhinehaus. Come on out for the next match on Sunday, April 3 at 3pm for the next game against Bethlehem Steel. Check out the Facebook event here (https://www.facebook.com/events/1584060951913191/).
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on April 11, 2016, 03:43:13 PM
FC Cincinnati draws huge crowd for home opener

(http://media.bizj.us/view/img/9229322/697c1395*750xx2000-1125-0-104.jpg)

Note: Page three of the slideshow shows a certain moderator


FC Cincinnati’s first-ever home game probably couldn’t have gone much better if it was written as a movie script.

Cincinnati’s new professional soccer team drew a United Soccer League season-high 14,658 fans to Nippert Stadium on the University of Cincinnati campus, the team won its home opener 2-1 and Sean Okoli’s first-ever FC Cincinnati goal in a home game ended up on ESPN’s SportsCenter as one of the top 10 plays of the day.

More below:
http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2016/04/11/can-fc-cincinnati-repeat-its-league-leading-crowd.html
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on April 18, 2016, 08:32:52 AM
FC Cincinnati set the USL season record attendance for their first home match of the year, then shattered it this past weekend. They had 14,658 against Charlotte, then set the USL's regular season attendance record with 20,497. The Previous record high was 20,231 set by Sacramento in 2014 and then tied again that year (sell out crowds).

You can read a recap of the game here (http://www.fccincinnati.com/fcc-sets-usl-record-edged-by-loucity/), in which FC Cincinnati lost 3-2 to Louisville City.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on April 18, 2016, 10:53:30 AM
Traffic was absolutely ridiculous before and after this game.  The crowd was half the size of a typical UC football game, but I didn't see any police directing traffic anywhere and there were no bans on street parking on McMillan, Calhoun, or elsewhere.  They usually set all of the lights on McMillan green from UC over to the I-71 north ramp in Walnut Hills but I got stuck in it with all lanes jammed as far as the eye could see. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: bendixondavis on April 18, 2016, 11:35:51 AM
There were cops controlling a lot of the lights after the game on Sat.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on April 18, 2016, 11:42:29 AM
There were cops on Jefferson letting us cross before and after the game, but traffic was pretty much at a standstill after, so we could have crossed the street anyway.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on April 18, 2016, 11:48:51 AM
I wonder if traffic is worse than after football game because college football games last so long that many people leave before the end of the game, which allows traffic to be spread out a bit more. Because soccer games are pretty much guaranteed to finish in 2 hours, a higher percentage will stay until the end.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on April 18, 2016, 11:53:28 AM
^That's possible. Also, despite the larger attendance at UC games, almost all of the students walk to campus or live on campus, so they aren't taking cars. Not a lot of students have been going to the FCC matches despite the $5 entry.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on April 18, 2016, 12:33:15 PM
There were absolutely zero police directing traffic on Clifton Ave. or McMillan/Calhoun or from what I could see at Vine & McMillan.  Also there were no streets blocked off -- for example, during UC football games, they block off Scioto, Market, and W. Clifton between Calhoun and McMillan.  I think Ohio stays open but I can't remember for sure. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Cygnus on April 18, 2016, 12:50:59 PM
The past two weeks there was a Deputy Sheriff controlling the light at McMillan & Vine. However he was obstructing pedestrian traffic...
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: roman totale XVII on April 18, 2016, 03:20:44 PM
Traffic woes aside, those are a couple of very good attendances. Long may it continue.  Compares very well to Columbus Crew and MLS as a whole.
I wish Cleveland had a team at that level...
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on April 26, 2016, 12:20:51 PM
http://www.fccincinnati.com/nippert-stadium-parking-update/

Quote
In the two home matches that FC Cincinnati has hosted so far, a combined 35,000 turned out to cheer on the Orange & Blue for the first. Obviously, the club is delighted with not only the size of the crowd, but also the way the city has embraced the team. But the size of those crowds definitely exposed some areas that needed additional focus to ensure the thousands of fans that show up to cheer on FCC have a great match day experience.

One of those areas that required further attention: parking.

We’ve heard from fans over the phone, on social media and in the streets that they experienced long lines getting into the garages on campus. In particular, the garages to the South of Nippert Stadium seemed to be where queues formed the fastest.

And with University of Cincinnati commencement taking place at Fifth Third Arena prior to Saturday’s kickoff against Wilmington, there could be even more traffic to deal with.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on April 26, 2016, 12:32:55 PM
Well we're deep into page 4 of this discussion topic and we have yet to see a player or coach's name mentioned.  That's in line with all of the other online folderol I've been seeing -- a 100% obsession with getting a MLS team.  Seem like people are way more into having cake than eating it. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on April 26, 2016, 01:04:10 PM
^Going to the games has been so much fun so far, that frankly I'd be totally fine staying in the USL forever if we could maintain ~20k average attendance. That's a huge IF (which probably isn't true, because I think you're right that lots of the excitement is around the potential for moving up)... but I care much less about the league than the actual fan experience.

I would like to see US Soccer adopt the promotion/relegation system (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promotion_and_relegation) that most other countries use, where teams have the possibility of moving up/down a league, depending on their performance. That makes every game count and you avoid the situation you see in much of American sports where mediocre teams decide to "not contend", accepting an abysmal record with no ramifications (other than declining attendance). Or worse, in leagues like the NBA and NFL where the worst teams get REWARDED with draft picks. That system encourages mediocre teams to compete for last place. In a promotion/relegation system, those teams would move down a league.

The quality of play in the USL is definitely not on par with more competitive leagues, but just like college basketball can be more fun to watch than the NBA, it's not all about the absolute talent of the players. Creating a fan experience that fills a stadium is much more important to me.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on April 26, 2016, 01:05:02 PM
There's plenty of discussion going on about players, I'm just not personally posting much of anything here. It's not my primary source of communication. Yes, there are people who are more interested in getting to MLS than actually watching this team play, but there's also plenty of discussion about the actual team on the reddit and at games. Just check out any blog www.cincinnatisoccertalk.com www.sixthdaysoccer.com www.scratchingthepitch.com etc. and you will find actual discussion of players. Your friends on Facebook who just found out about the team are going through the steps of becoming more knowledgeable. The first step is realizing where we are in the soccer pyramid (3rd tier) and how that differs from MLS. Then the natural question is could we become an MLS team.

After the two record breaking crowds, that was an obvious jump for a lot of people, but if you look at the week since, the most recent reddit post about MLS is the 18th most recent post. People aren't lingering on it and they are actually talking about the team.

I respect what Columbo does for the Blue Jackets and Crew discussions with his recaps (and I read them) but I just am not going to be doing that for FC Cincinnati.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: moonloop on April 27, 2016, 09:55:00 PM
I'll admit I more interested in how FC Cincy expands. I'm not jumping on the bandwagon just yet. Seems they want Nippert to be their home long term. MLS doesn't require grass fields? I thought there's been some concern re: health issues with turf that has uses rubber beads.

FC Cincy's deal with UC: More Nippert changes

"...upcoming renovation calls for expanding the field to 115 yards long and 75 yards wide.

...plans to permanently remove a "minimum number of rows and lower level seats"

...club's contract calls for it to pay UC $5,000 per game and an additional $20,000 for the season to use the stadium, locker room, weight room and other athletic facilities for practices and game preparation.

...previously, there had been buzz about the possibility of FC Cincinnati paying for a new scoreboard and sound system ...not part of the contract."

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2016/04/27/fc-cincys-deal-uc-more-nippert-changes/83597078/
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on April 27, 2016, 10:09:25 PM
^ New England, Seattle, Vancouver, Orlando (temporary), and Portland all have turf fields.

Though in perfect world all MLS teams play on grass in a soccer specific stadium, exceptions have and will be made.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on April 27, 2016, 10:10:44 PM
Generally, I think the MLS prefers grass... but a few MLS teams play on turf fields, including Vancouver, Seattle and soon Atlanta (all of these cities use large stadiums that are also used for football).
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on April 27, 2016, 10:53:20 PM
Nippert is so much nicer than almost any of the MLS stadiums in terms of stadium design, amenities, and location. I understand why the MLS has their policy of wanting dedicated stadiums (empty stadiums feel underwhelming, owners/cities have less skin if they don't have to build a facility), but if FC Cincinnati can keep Nippert as full as it has been (filling lower level with overflow onto upper level as needed), then the MLS would be insane to force them to build some less nice stadium in some worse location. The owners could use that saved money to invest more in better players and better marketing, which would do more to benefit the league as a whole than another stadium.

If you look at the "purpose built" stadiums for the MLS (Denver, Columbus, Kansas City, Chicago, etc), many of them feel like they were built cheaply because they were! It would be far better for the MLS to push more investment in improving the rosters and marketing of the league.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: surfohio on April 28, 2016, 08:11:58 AM
^Going to the games has been so much fun so far, that frankly I'd be totally fine staying in the USL forever if we could maintain ~20k average attendance. That's a huge IF (which probably isn't true, because I think you're right that lots of the excitement is around the potential for moving up)... but I care much less about the league than the actual fan experience.

Seeing the upper tier teams play the lower tier teams is one of the coolest aspects of pro soccer. I love seeing teams like Ft. Lauderdale Strikers, Charleston Battey and the Rochester Rhinos hold their own against MLS in the Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup.

http://www.ussoccer.com/stories/2016/02/05/15/43/160205-usoc-2016-competition-format-and-schedule-revealed

Also, one interesting aspect of lower division soccer is that the NASL has no salary cap. So there is a chance that a team like the New York Cosmos could theoretically become a ridiculous group of all stars surpassing the MLS teams in talent. Could you imagine if some billionaire owner tried the same thing in pro football or basketball? Very interesting to consider. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jdm00 on April 28, 2016, 09:51:19 AM
Nippert is so much nicer than almost any of the MLS stadiums in terms of stadium design, amenities, and location. I understand why the MLS has their policy of wanting dedicated stadiums (empty stadiums feel underwhelming, owners/cities have less skin if they don't have to build a facility), but if FC Cincinnati can keep Nippert as full as it has been (filling lower level with overflow onto upper level as needed), then the MLS would be insane to force them to build some less nice stadium in some worse location. The owners could use that saved money to invest more in better players and better marketing, which would do more to benefit the league as a whole than another stadium.

If you look at the "purpose built" stadiums for the MLS (Denver, Columbus, Kansas City, Chicago, etc), many of them feel like they were built cheaply because they were! It would be far better for the MLS to push more investment in improving the rosters and marketing of the league.

Nippert is a great place to see a game and has the location advantages of being in the middle of town, but I still think some other amenities (bathrooms, concessions) are not quite where you would want them in an ideal setting.  Not a knock on Nippert--they have added a significant amount as a result of the renovation, but without really blowing out some of the buildings immediately around, it's always going to face some limitations in that regard, just because it wasn't built with that in mind.  The tradeoffs of having a cool old venue with great sight lines are that you can't squeeze in the same number of concessions or bathrooms per capita that you see at a stadium like GABP. 

Also, I am not a huge fan of bleacher-style seats, but I think that they are working okay so far. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on April 28, 2016, 01:05:59 PM
With the latest proposed changes to Nippert which will extend the field and "center" it more, it seems like it might shift the field further to the south, away from The Bailey. That seems like it might allow for the stands in The Bailey to be extended (moving down and closer to the field). Anybody know if that'd be feasible? Might not be worth it just to gain a few more rows, but I think it's really important for The Bailey to be as close as possible to field.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on April 28, 2016, 01:10:49 PM
The Bailey could stand to be a few feet further away from the end line, because from certain parts of The Bailey you can't see the corners. It's not a big deal, but it would be nice to be able to see the entire field from every spot in that section. So moving the field slightly south without touching The Bailey would be good.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on April 28, 2016, 01:36:23 PM
@ryanlammi - good point.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: moonloop on May 01, 2016, 10:20:32 PM
This is why I asked about turf fields. 11,000 Sat., thanks to the cold and rain.

(http://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/81425f017cd606f99fd21d3f80cb1ee3c6030adf/c=34-0-2213-1638&r=x693&c=920x690/local/-/media/2016/04/30/Cincinnati/Cincinnati/635976491741591098-043016FCCincy-08.jpg)

Artificial turf and cancer: ESPN digs into crumb rubber risks

...following in the footsteps of an NBC News investigation last year, “The Turf War” explores the anecdotal evidence that soccer players – especially young ones – are at risk due to the toxic cocktail of chemicals found in crumb rubber, the tiny bits of recycled auto tires used as infill in most modern turf surfaces..."

http://www.soccerwire.com/news/clubs/youth-boys/artificial-turf-and-cancer-espn-digs-into-crumb-rubber-risks-with-troubling-e60-report-by-julie-foudy/ (http://www.soccerwire.com/news/clubs/youth-boys/artificial-turf-and-cancer-espn-digs-into-crumb-rubber-risks-with-troubling-e60-report-by-julie-foudy/)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on May 02, 2016, 12:02:00 AM
Well we're deep into page 4 of this discussion topic and we have yet to see a player or coach's name mentioned.  That's in line with all of the other online folderol I've been seeing -- a 100% obsession with getting a MLS team.  Seem like people are way more into having cake than eating it. 

The MLS talk really picked up after the first two home games. I think at first it was largely ignored, because what new team wouldn't say things like "we want to be the best." However, the attendance really got people thinking about the idea and to be fair - FCC's attendance so far is incredible for the USL. Even with 11,000 or so in the rain, they were still at the top of the league.

I'll admit, I'm very intrigued by the idea of an MLS team in Cincinnati. It makes for a good story. NHL and NBA aren't coming, but MLS could. Should it? Will they let it? There's tons of angles and it'll be interesting to follow as it develops. Having said that, I loved what was happening in Louisville in 2015/how fans connect with soccer teams in general. I'll support this club whether it makes the MLS jump or stays in the USL. Also, every time I've been to a bar to watch an away game or attend any Die Innenstadt events, MLS discussion rarely comes up. It's always about the team, how they're developing, the players, coach Harkes, Etc. 

In short: there's an allure of MLS, but that's not the only thing getting people excited. It's just what the media bites at.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on May 12, 2016, 11:09:28 AM
It's interesting to watch the FC Cincinnati brand evolve so quickly. I wasn't thrilled with the look/brand initially, but I'm liking the direction they are headed. Already, in their merchandise (online store (https://www.fccincinnati.com/shop-online/)), you can see how the crest is being diminished and the Lion is taking on more importance. The crest is the main shortcoming of their look because it makes "FC" too big, "Cincinnati" isn't legible, and the Lion is invisible. And when the crest appears on a blue background, the whole thing fades away because there isn't enough contrast.

If you just look at how the hat evolved from the first version (crest on blue (https://www.fccincinnati.com/shop-online/#!/FCC-Blue-Adjustable-Hat/p/65679621/category=16709076)) to the new version (Lion on white (https://www.fccincinnati.com/shop-online/#!/Nike-White-FCC-Hat/p/60272337/category=16709076)), you can see how much better things are looking already. Part of that is just that the quality of production has improved (compare the embroidery on the two hats), but their design/marketing team seems to recognize how to improve the look of the team.

Very excited for this Saturday's game against Pittsburgh. Hope we can hit the 25k goal!
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on May 16, 2016, 03:05:45 PM
"FC Cincinnati home average attendance is a tremendous accomplishment and speaks to absolute lack of anything else fun to do in Cincinnati."

https://twitter.com/zipsix/status/732278808510922752
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thomasbw on May 16, 2016, 04:30:28 PM
On Saturday @fccincinnati drew more spectators than five USL teams drew in their entire 2015 season
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on May 19, 2016, 11:52:02 AM
FCC had over 23k in attendance for the match against Pittsburgh on Saturday.

On Wednesday, they picked up their first US Open Cup win - against the NPSL side of Indy Eleven.

On June 1 we play the Tampa Bay Roudies, an NASL team (second division) with some huge stars on the team.

If we win on June 1, we play against the Columbus Crew on June 15! It's unlcear if it's in Columbus or in Cincinnati. But either way, I imagine a sell out crowd if we advance. This is one of the most exciting matchups announced in the US Open Cup.

Also, it was announced today that FC Cincinnati will play Crystal Palace at Nippert Stadium on July 16 for a friendly!
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Hootenany on May 19, 2016, 01:17:49 PM
^FC Cincinnati is coming out of the gate strong with these attendance numbers and some great matchups.  I'm thinking it's high time for Cleveland or Akron to make a push for a USL team.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on May 26, 2016, 10:31:57 AM
PG Sittenfeld's latest podcast episode hosted Jeff Berding and Austin Berry. Interesting discussion, including some thoughts from Berding about why FC Cincinnati has seen so much support. One of the points he makes is that Nippert Stadium, both as a facility and in terms of its location, has contributed significantly to what makes it such a fun atmosphere before, during, and after the games. Also interesting to hear Berding compare the Bengals stadium experience (everything in stadium is "scripted") to the soccer community, where the fans resist anything that feels "corporate" or from the management. 

https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/keepin-it-pg/id1111790895
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: gaslight on May 26, 2016, 12:38:58 PM
PG Sittenfeld's latest podcast episode hosted Jeff Berding and Austin Berry. Interesting discussion, including some thoughts from Berding about why FC Cincinnati has seen so much support. One of the points he makes is that Nippert Stadium, both as a facility and in terms of its location, has contributed significantly to what makes it such a fun atmosphere before, during, and after the games. Also interesting to hear Berding compare the Bengals stadium experience (everything in stadium is "scripted") to the soccer community, where the fans resist anything that feels "corporate" or from the management. 

https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/keepin-it-pg/id1111790895

I would hope mls would let fc Cincinnati stay at Nippert and not force them to build a soccer only stadium. Nippert is such a great venue.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on May 26, 2016, 12:47:17 PM
If you watched the USMNT friendly last night against Ecuador, they played in Frisco, TX in Toyota Stadium (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Stadium_(Texas)) (home of Dallas FC) which is a "purpose built" stadium... and it's just sad how bad that stadium is in comparison to Nippert. It's in the middle of nowhere. That's part of the downside to the MLS insisting on new, dedicated stadiums: they end up on cheap land with cheap construction.

They only had 9,000 fans show up to that game, which is pitiful for our national team and I blame - in significant part - the location of the stadium.

In the podcast with PG, Berding talked about how he expects to "sell out Nippert" for the Crystal Palace friendly this summer. He didn't clarify if he meant the upper decks or just the lower level, but either way, it shows how Berding recognizes Nippert can be a premiere soccer venue.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Jimmy_James on May 26, 2016, 04:18:52 PM
^Maybe FC Cincinnati can get a variance, if it comes to that, but that's a long way off.  The Sounders, one of the most popular MLS teams, share a stadium with the Seahawks so there is precedent.  Yes, the Sounders and the Seahawks share an owner, but something could be worked out.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: moonloop on May 27, 2016, 12:46:40 PM
WCPO has a nice story (behind paywall) about the attention FC Cincy has gotten including international news sites. Found these bits interesting:

"...And while plans for an academy system are on the horizon and a 15-year lease at Nippert Stadium might cast doubts on short-term MLS viability, no one can rain on FC Cincinnati’s parade.

http://www.mlssoccer.com/post/2016/05/13/another-orlando-inside-charts-exciting-rise-fc-cincinnati


"...Bjorn, Chip and 150 others are marching just under a mile from Mecklenburg Gardens, a quaint corner bar, toward Nippert Stadium — the home to what’s quickly becoming America’s most fascinating new club."

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/may/16/fc-cincinnati-usl-record-attendances-soccer


"...We also have a give-back programme, in which we give back some of the money we get from local clubs as a charitable donation. When parents buy tickets online they can indicate which club they're from and at the end of the season we will tally it up and give some money back.

"While the $100 million-plus expansion fee will not be a problem for the FC Cincinnati ownership group"

"Some of the new stadiums that are being built are in the 25,000-seat range. But we can draw possibly 35,000 at Nippert, right in the heart of a college campus. We've designed the stadium as a soccer pitch, there are no football lines. We have locker rooms fully decked out for soccer. We have sufficient control over the schedule."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2016/04/19/fc-cincinnati-show-strength-in-numbers-for-mls-push/
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Krugkiw on May 30, 2016, 10:53:21 PM
Given the discussion around the need for a soccer-specific stadium to join MLS, I thought I might take a page out of thebillshark's "Cincinnati Ideas" playbook and propose the IRS building site in Covington as the Cincinnati FC stadium site:
(http://i.imgur.com/woTHWzT.png)

This stadium site is about the same size as Portland's Providence Park, which holds about 21,000 and is also bounded by a street grid. While this proposed stadium fits comfortably on the Covington site (bounded by 4th Street, Johnson St, and Rivercenter Blvd), a smaller stadiumfootprint would be doable. San Jose's new Avaya Stadium (capacity ~18,000) is a smaller site, and could also be a good fit.

Benefits:

Potential drawbacks:

It does seem like the soccer-specific stadiums in the MLS are usually located on cheap land away from the urban core, probably due to paltry box office revenues and a lack of multiple revenue-generating uses. While Berding's comments in the podcast do make me a little more optimistic, the fact that the Lindners own the team means that a Dallas FC-style stadium in Mason is probably a likely scenario:
(http://i.imgur.com/nCr2tle.png)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: TroyEros on May 31, 2016, 12:51:27 AM
I could honestly see a Stadium being built in Mason or West Chester...and what's sad is that I think the attendace will soar even more so.

 You have SOOOO many youth soccer leagues, and obssessed soccer suburban parents in that area. Build it close enough to these neighborhoods, and I think you will see incredibly well off attendace.

 That's why, I think even as good as the attendance is currently, you still have hoards of people who won't want to trek downtown because of how "scary" it is.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on May 31, 2016, 08:43:23 AM
I think MLS is wary of suburban soccer stadiums. Chicago and DC have suburban stadiums currently, and their attendance is pitiful. I don't know if I would call Mapfre Stadium "suburban" but the immediate surroundings are and attendance has been pretty lackluster this year to say the least.

MLS doesn't want a suburban Miami field, and Sacramento's new stadium is going to be just outside of downtown. I think MLS wants urban parks. I also don't think attendance would soar with a stadium in Mason. No one from Kentucky, Indiana, downtown, or Clermont County are driving to Mason for a game.

People blow the "downtown is scary I won't go there even for a sporting event" demographic way out of proportion. There may be thousands of them in the metro, but it isn't a significant number that should influence the team to move up to the northern suburbs. I doubt the Reds would draw better in the suburbs, and I don't think FCC would either. The Bengals might just because there are only 8 home games [that matter].

Also, you can't build a team entirely on youth attendance. It just doesn't work. A lot of people I go to games with would stop buying season tickets if they moved to the suburbs. They also need the beer $ and families with kids notoriously don't buy much beer. Youth attendance is important for long term success, and they definitely fuel merchandise sales, but they can't support a team.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Hootenany on May 31, 2016, 09:02:24 AM
If the MLS did expand to Cincinnati I think it would be a major mistake to move the team from Nippert if it can be helped.  It's a historic, intimate stadium in a great location and it's the perfect size.  Nippert has huge potential for soccer use in my opinion and I would hate to see Cincinnati FC move to a stale suburban park.  I don't think the MLS will come to Cincinnati anytime soon, but if they do they would be smart to make another exception to the soccer specific stadium rule.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on June 10, 2016, 11:46:25 AM
If anyone is thinking of going to the game in Louisville, Rhinehaus and Die Innenstadt have a bus that will take you there 3 hours before the game and bring you home that night! Check out the details at the event link below

https://www.eventbrite.com/e/fc-cincinnati-louisville-city-fc-rhinehaus-bus-trip-tickets-25842145553
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on June 10, 2016, 11:55:15 AM
Very cool! Will drinking on the buses be allowed?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on June 10, 2016, 11:56:53 AM
^We're not going to ask  :wink:
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on June 10, 2016, 12:15:46 PM
^Thumbs up!
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on July 14, 2016, 02:05:05 PM
FC Cincinnati hits attendance milestone for Crystal Palace match

(http://www.visiteffinghamil.com/sites/default/files/attractions/ryans.jpg) + (http://www.phoodie.info/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/flat550x550075f.jpg) + E

FC Cincinnati has cracked the 30,000 tickets sold barrier for Saturday’s international friendly soccer match versus English Premier League club Crystal Palace.

FC Cincinnati announced Thursday morning it broke the 30,000 mark. That puts it close to the sellout that FC Cincinnati has been targeting for the past month. Nippert Stadium on the University of Cincinnati campus has a capacity of 35,000 for soccer.

More below:
http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2016/07/14/fc-cincinnati-hits-attendance-milestone-for.html
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: JYP on July 14, 2016, 02:18:53 PM
^ I see what you did there.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on July 14, 2016, 02:50:31 PM
If anyone is interested in hanging out, we're putting on a pretty good party. It's both our pregame spot and the official Crystal Palace fanzone! There will be raffles, a buffet, good beer, and a bunch more.

https://www.facebook.com/events/896307743830033/
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on July 14, 2016, 03:42:25 PM
...will it be a Ryan's Buffet?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on July 14, 2016, 04:13:51 PM
One could only hope.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: moonloop on July 15, 2016, 01:35:32 PM
Crystal Palace is using the Bengals' practice fields. It must pain Mike Brown not to charge them a user fee.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CnaYR6GWIAE2S_8.jpg)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on July 15, 2016, 01:49:23 PM
Sports bras? 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: savadams13 on July 15, 2016, 02:32:57 PM
Mike doesn't give anything away for free. I bet he will be using Crystal Palace fields and facilities for the Bengals when they play in London this fall...
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thomasbw on July 15, 2016, 02:41:17 PM
Berding used to work for the Bengals
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on July 15, 2016, 03:29:00 PM
The players were all wearing Go Pro cameras that record 360 degrees from their chest. The USL just released a video of Ugo (Sean Okoli) juggling while wearing one. You can grab the image and look where you want. https://www.facebook.com/USLSoccer/videos/1090406401041859/
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on July 16, 2016, 03:39:42 AM
With the bigger crowd, will police block off streets and on-street parking on Saturday?  If not, traffic is going be gridlocked for at least an hour before and after the game.  The stuff they do for Bearcats games might seem obnoxious until you experience what happens when they don't do it. 

On Calhoun they typically block off the three connections between Calhoun and McMillan between W. Clifton and Vine and prohibit any on-street parking on McMillan all the way to I-71.  They also direct traffic near Hughes, on MLK, on Jefferson, on McMillan at Auburn, etc. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on July 26, 2016, 12:44:20 PM
Maybe when FC Cincinnati moves to the suburbs, the next time it plays Chrystal Palace it will be called Loveland Castle. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on July 29, 2016, 03:53:18 PM
Some interesting commentary, coming out of the trip to San Jose: http://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/soccer/fc-cincinnati/2016/07/29/buckle-up-fc-cincinnati-fans/87737924/

In regards to the "ideal" stadium size:
Quote
The standard for most MLS teams upon entrance to the league (with a couple notable exceptions in Seattle and the Bronx in New York City) and is to have a soccer-specific stadium. Through implementing this standard, MLS has transformed itself from a league that played in cavernous, mostly empty NFL and college football stadiums to a league that packs fans into smaller, more intimate venues that feature European soccer-stadium aesthetics. You can't argue with the success of that initiative. San Jose's Avaya Stadium is a great case study in this - an 18,000 seat stadium with a Euro-esque canopy. It's beautiful and the smaller capacity creates scarcity for tickets in the marketplace.

I love the atmosphere at Nippert, so I hope they never leave. If it really is necessary to reduce seats (I don't think that argument makes sense) perhaps they could replace some of the bleachers with actual seats. That would make it more comfortable and make it easier to fill the stadium.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Ram23 on July 29, 2016, 04:32:36 PM
^If UC gets an invite to the Big 12 later this year, which is seeming increasingly likely, they will likely add even more capacity to Nippert in the next decade. Right now it works for FC Cincinnati because even with the top stands closed off, it still has an intimate feel. I'm not sure UC will be able to pull off the same intimate feel if they add another 10,000 seats or so - since up is really the only way they have to go to get in more seats.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Clevelander17 on July 29, 2016, 04:44:50 PM
A lot of my old college buddies from SWO are posting about FC Cincinnati on social media these days. Looks like they're having a blast going to games. Wish Cleveland had something like for soccer, not sure what venue would work though.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on July 29, 2016, 05:15:15 PM
^If UC gets an invite to the Big 12 later this year, which is seeming increasingly likely, they will likely add even more capacity to Nippert in the next decade. Right now it works for FC Cincinnati because even with the top stands closed off, it still has an intimate feel. I'm not sure UC will be able to pull off the same intimate feel if they add another 10,000 seats or so - since up is really the only way they have to go to get in more seats.

I think the two obvious expansion strategies for the stadium would be to extend the existing upper deck around the south curve and then to rebuild and double-deck the stands in the north end zone.  The stadium's bowl was not completed in the late 80's expansion because the power plant was still north of the north end zone.  When the new power plant was built, there was obviously an opportunity to complete the bowl.  Instead they built the CRC right up against the stadium when plenty of unused land existed north of the site.  So if they really want to add some seats to the stadium, they're stuck having to demo part of the 10 year-old CRC. 

An unrelated issue enabled by a major expansion is that by eliminating the first row of seats in the bowl, the field can be raised a few feet and the field size expanded for soccer. 

Also, don't discount the boon that area restaurants and bars are enjoying from these games in what is otherwise a dead time of year.  They're going to get used to it really quick and lobby to have the team remain at Nippert.  What's cool about the schedule is that it overlaps one month into the UC academic schedule, so incoming students will be introduced to the team right away.  It won't be some myth that shows up at the end of their freshman year. 



Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Rabbit Hash on July 31, 2016, 08:01:26 AM
I think any expansion will put a big premium on suites. Because of that, I think it's more likely you would see a demo of the Hershede-Schank Pavilion on the  east and an expansion similar to what was done in the last couple years. Seems like this would likely reduce capacity or not increase it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on July 31, 2016, 07:49:39 PM
I think any expansion will put a big premium on suites. Because of that, I think it's more likely you would see a demo of the Hershede-Schank Pavilion on the  east and an expansion similar to what was done in the last couple years. Seems like this would likely reduce capacity or not increase it.

I like that idea... and that does make sense. It would allow for more premium seating while making it easier to fill the lower bowls.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on September 07, 2016, 12:24:43 PM
Cool video from FIFATV about FC Cincinnati, including some nice footage of the city and Nippert:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VE7MwiAzJJM
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on September 21, 2016, 11:43:22 AM
FC Cincinnati just posted a timelapse video showing how the turf at Nippert gets re-painted to switch from football to soccer lines. My understanding is that the paint is soluble paint that can be washed off using a special machine and dissolving solution. I'm curious how much that whole process costs. But the fact that they can do this so easily/quickly illustrates how it makes sense to share facilities. Especially since the USL schedule wraps up in early September. If the MLS allows FC Cincinnati to remain at Nippert, then there would be overlap since the MLS season goes until December. But whatever the costs are to re-paint the turf, I'm sure it's still a LOT cheaper than acquiring new land (almost certainly in an inferior location), building a new (inferior) stadium, and maintaining a separate facility. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urfasJoFths
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Jimmy_James on September 28, 2016, 11:53:51 PM
I'm surprised no one has posted about the MLS Commissioner's upcoming visit to Cincinnati.  There are a lot of articles out there, but here's one:

http://www.foxsports.com/soccer/story/could-fc-cincinnati-be-next-for-mls-expansion-with-commissioner-don-garber-set-to-visit-092616 (http://www.foxsports.com/soccer/story/could-fc-cincinnati-be-next-for-mls-expansion-with-commissioner-don-garber-set-to-visit-092616)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Caseyc on September 29, 2016, 09:32:09 AM
Is anyone else petrified by the prospect that Cranley is going to take the MLS Commish on a "driving tour" of Cincinnati?
Let's find that guy's twitter feed and start making suggestions when the date draws closer.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on September 29, 2016, 09:41:50 AM
Is anyone else petrified by the prospect that Cranley is going to take the MLS Commish on a "driving tour" of Cincinnati?
Let's find that guy's twitter feed and start making suggestions when the date draws closer.

@TheSoccerDon aka Don Garber. Cranely's taking him on a "driving tour." Having talked with several FCC supporters, I hope Cranely understands that any applause he encounters along the way is for Don Garber/MLS and not for him.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: moonloop on November 25, 2016, 11:08:01 AM
The Nipper redesign is a go. Soon after Bearcats (god awful) season is over.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Ram23 on November 25, 2016, 01:04:38 PM
Those south end zone corners are going to look downright horrible.  What's shown in the rendering would have been okay - though a big downgrade from how Nippert looks today - but that plan seems to be more of a final image than the rendering, which is depressing.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on November 28, 2016, 09:28:05 AM
@moonloop - do you have higher resolution versions of those?

In the rendering, on the north side, it looks (though I'm not 100% sure) like they added some rows *below* the existing seating.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on November 28, 2016, 12:21:08 PM
The team from England seemed to do just fine on this field.  Can't wait to hear the soccer studs socsplain why wide fields are #absolutelyessentialtomymillenniallife.   
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: moonloop on November 28, 2016, 12:24:17 PM
^^Those are the only pics I could find. There does seem to be an option for premium field-level seating.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Ram23 on November 28, 2016, 12:56:49 PM
Saw this posted elsewhere - this is going to look so dumb.

By the looks of it, they aren't adding any more rows at the bottom (they probably can't do that as the first row is already at field level)  - they are removing the first few rows of bleachers.

(http://i.imgur.com/j2BHvDi.jpg7)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on November 28, 2016, 01:01:15 PM
I wonder if they are going to be able to move seats back for football games and pull them in for soccer games.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on November 30, 2016, 11:18:47 AM
Details from Garber's visit: http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2016/11/29/cincinnati-deserves-an-mls-team-mls-commissioner.html

Overall, seems like it was a very positive visit, and Garber certainly didn't do/say anything to tamp down expectations about Cincinnati being on the shortlist for expansion. I'm glad to hear that it seems like playing at Nippert is at least an option on the table (i.e. it doesn't preclude Cincinnati from joining the MLS).

Quote
“Nippert Stadium has really done well for you, and I think for now it’s a great solution,” Garber said.

But MLS likes to see downtown stadiums with real grass fields that are built for soccer, he said. It also prefers stadiums that team owners control, which maximizes revenue opportunities. Nippert has none of those things.

Garber didn’t rule out FC Cincinnati because of Nippert, but he said the club’s leaders will have to decide if that’s the best stadium situation over the long run.

“You’ve got lots of time to figure out if that’s the best long-term solution,” he said. “I don’t know that I would say it’s make or break. This is a process and this is the first step. It’s only year one.”
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: gaslight on November 30, 2016, 11:26:37 AM
On one hand he says FCC needs it's own soccer specific stadium. Then he goes to say that what the MLS has learned is that soccer stadiums in the City's core help attendance, and points to Portland.  So again why cant they just stay at Nippert?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on November 30, 2016, 11:39:43 AM
On one hand he says FCC needs it's own soccer specific stadium. Then he goes to say that what the MLS has learned is that soccer stadiums in the City's core help attendance, and points to Portland.  So again why cant they just stay at Nippert?
Where did Garber say that FCC *needs* its own stadium? He said that was what was preferred, but acknowledged the benefits of using Nippert and said it wasn't a make or break part of the decision.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: oudd on November 30, 2016, 11:55:09 AM
As excited as I am for FCC to join MLS, I'd almost rather they stay in the USL if that means they remain at Nippert. I've been to MLS matches in Philadelphia and Chicago, and both those "soccer-specific stadiums" were pretty ugly and far, far away from the city.

It's good that MLS seems to now acknowledge that it's better for stadiums to be in urban areas, but do we really want another gigantic sports venue that gets used less than half the year taking up valuable real estate? PBS especially seems so silly given the taxpayer cost and the fact that it gets used, what, like 12 times a year?

Seems like MLS is pushing the stadium thing because it improves their revenue stream, and the other reasons (team pride, grass, etc) are mostly cover.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thomasbw on November 30, 2016, 11:58:10 AM
Not that it will ever happen, but Bengal's practice fields would work for a soccer specific site.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: gaslight on November 30, 2016, 12:00:27 PM
On one hand he says FCC needs it's own soccer specific stadium. Then he goes to say that what the MLS has learned is that soccer stadiums in the City's core help attendance, and points to Portland.  So again why cant they just stay at Nippert?
Where did Garber say that FCC *needs* its own stadium? He said that was what was preferred, but acknowledged the benefits of using Nippert and said it wasn't a make or break part of the decision.

Garber confirmed what many had long ago accepted – that FC Cincinnati’s deal to play home matches at the University of Cincinnati’s Nippert Stadium likely wasn’t a long term, MLS-level stadium solution.

"I think what they've been able to do (at Nippert) is spectacular, but we do believe that our clubs will be more successful in soccer stadiums," Garber said.


http://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/soccer/fc-cincinnati/2016/11/29/garber-fc-cincinnati-they-have-done-lot-things-really-well/94635734/
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Jimmy_James on November 30, 2016, 02:43:24 PM
They just need to have him attend a match at Nippert to see what the atmosphere is like.  It's one thing to walk around an impressive but empty stadium, and another to be there when the fans are going crazy.  Also, the traffic/parking situation around UC on gameday isn't helping things.  I'm not sure if there's a fix for that or not, though.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on November 30, 2016, 02:52:32 PM
These games are not really that festive because it's mostly middle class people.  All of the first-year FC fanboys would stop showing up if the equivalent of Steelers fans started patronizing the place. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thebillshark on November 30, 2016, 03:07:55 PM
Wouldn't a Mt Auburn Tunnel bringing the streetcar to UC and Nippert Stadium be a much better investment for the city while effectively putting the stadium downtown (mere minutes from Fountain Square?)

Doesn't this stadium talk when there are so many other better, more competitive investments to make seem like Groundhog Day over and over again? Are our corporate leaders going to drag us down the rabbit hole?

Won't a stadium sit empty most of the time, which means if it's downtown it could kill off the pedestrian street life it's seeking to locate near?


Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on November 30, 2016, 03:51:47 PM
I was thinking about where a good spot for a stadium and I keep coming back to the public school stadium they have behind district 1. The land is there and additional could be acquired quickly. The city or school board owns the land for the stadium which would make it easy to construct. They should be for this idea because there could be a provision to allow the local HS to continue using that new facility rent free on Friday's and many Saturdays in the fall (which wont conflict with soccer games) and gives the stadium additional use.

IT would be a great location for the team because it would connect it to OTR and help develop other areas of the West End easily. you would have the parking garage and some infrastructure from Music Hall nearby. Washington Park is a 3 minute walk from there, and for the most part, there is already good highway access. It would make it easy to go to the OTR bars and reatrauants after the games too and provide a nice addition to the urban fabric.

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on November 30, 2016, 04:29:43 PM
Not that it will ever happen, but Bengal's practice fields would work for a soccer specific site.

Spinney Field?

I was thinking about where a good spot for a stadium and I keep coming back to the public school stadium they have behind district 1. The land is there and additional could be acquired quickly. The city or school board owns the land for the stadium which would make it easy to construct. They should be for this idea because there could be a provision to allow the local HS to continue using that new facility rent free on Friday's and many Saturdays in the fall (which wont conflict with soccer games) and gives the stadium additional use.

I like the idea but there might not be enough room. 

This whole situation is ridiculous.  Building a new stadium for this team (private or public) is a complete waste and everyone knows it.  Many college football teams play in bizarre old stadiums with bleacher seats and grad student offices or even dorms under the grandstands, but Nippert Stadium is a better stadium than most.  Look at the dozen or so college football stadiums that hold close to or over 100,000 people -- they're all less than ideal, but the huge crowds keep coming, generation after generation. 

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: moonloop on November 30, 2016, 07:33:22 PM
^The practice fields next to the stadium. I know some think those fields are an incredible waste, but I can't picture office or residential there. Interesting if a soccer stadium could fit. What about further west in Queensgate. A lot of land has been cleared over the years.

Keep in mind, if UC ever gets an invite(seems far fetch now) to a big 5 conf. they would be obligated to expand Nippert. More suites plus 10K seats increase. Texas isn't going to play UC in a 40K stadium. Hell, I think some high schools in Texas seat more than Nippert. Would FCC still seem like a good fit at Nippert.

I'll project even further. The Bengals sent a letter to Hamilton County a year or two ago wanting to discussed improvements to PBS. I haven't heard an update since but don't be surprise if there's a request for 100m or two for "improvements".

I think their lease expires in 2026 and as we all know is consider one of the worst stadium deals ever. Negotiations would start well before then, if FCC could hang in for 6-8 years there may be an opening.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on November 30, 2016, 09:13:13 PM
Not that it will ever happen, but Bengal's practice fields would work for a soccer specific site.

Spinney Field?

I was thinking about where a good spot for a stadium and I keep coming back to the public school stadium they have behind district 1. The land is there and additional could be acquired quickly. The city or school board owns the land for the stadium which would make it easy to construct. They should be for this idea because there could be a provision to allow the local HS to continue using that new facility rent free on Friday's and many Saturdays in the fall (which wont conflict with soccer games) and gives the stadium additional use.

I like the idea but there might not be enough room. 

This whole situation is ridiculous.  Building a new stadium for this team (private or public) is a complete waste and everyone knows it.  Many college football teams play in bizarre old stadiums with bleacher seats and grad student offices or even dorms under the grandstands, but Nippert Stadium is a better stadium than most.  Look at the dozen or so college football stadiums that hold close to or over 100,000 people -- they're all less than ideal, but the huge crowds keep coming, generation after generation. 



Jake - It would be a waste if it is only used 10-12 times a year like PBS. I don't think people find GABP a waste. So how do you justify the cost of a 200 million stadium that seats about 25-30k ? That is why this site would work well. You have a state of the art soccer facility, but you can also add 10-12 weeks of HS FB for the city schools there. A 20-30k Stadium is much better to use than PBS for these events. On top of that, you can have playoff games there too. It would also have a few outdoor concerts a year and you can maybe come up with other events that would nto be appropriate for PBS because of the size and costs. Now you have a venue in use for 60-70 dates a year and it is a bit more justifiable.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on November 30, 2016, 09:54:41 PM
The fact is that there is an upside for UC and the uptown businesses for the 17+ home games that an MLS team would play at Nippert each season.  It's a cool thing for UC to promote to prospective students.  The stadium needs virtually zero modification whereas an all-new stadium would surely cost at least $50 million. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on November 30, 2016, 10:03:22 PM
^ I agree that Nippert would be the preferable venue because infrastructure is already in place and it is a good historic venue that serves the needs well without a huge capital outlay. That being said, if we need to get a new venue to earn an MLS team, then so be it, and If that is the case, there is really no better area in the city than behind district 1. Heck the police presence would already be there to help game day traffic
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: bendixondavis on November 30, 2016, 11:33:26 PM
They just need to have him attend a match at Nippert to see what the atmosphere is like.  It's one thing to walk around an impressive but empty stadium, and another to be there when the fans are going crazy.  Also, the traffic/parking situation around UC on gameday isn't helping things.  I'm not sure if there's a fix for that or not, though.

Actually the traffic situation is very good. Went to mapfre for the USA Mexico game last month and there it is horrible. My friend said it's usually bad there but this was extra bad, took 1hr 15min just to get out of the parking lot. I can usually get out of an FCC game and home in 30-40 min tops.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: bendixondavis on November 30, 2016, 11:36:02 PM
I was thinking about where a good spot for a stadium and I keep coming back to the public school stadium they have behind district 1. The land is there and additional could be acquired quickly. The city or school board owns the land for the stadium which would make it easy to construct. They should be for this idea because there could be a provision to allow the local HS to continue using that new facility rent free on Friday's and many Saturdays in the fall (which wont conflict with soccer games) and gives the stadium additional use.

IT would be a great location for the team because it would connect it to OTR and help develop other areas of the West End easily. you would have the parking garage and some infrastructure from Music Hall nearby. Washington Park is a 3 minute walk from there, and for the most part, there is already good highway access. It would make it easy to go to the OTR bars and reatrauants after the games too and provide a nice addition to the urban fabric.

This is where the Cincinnati Saints played 2 years ago. The view of downtown from there is great and you can regularly smell the brewing at Sam Adams.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on November 30, 2016, 11:48:36 PM
They just need to have him attend a match at Nippert to see what the atmosphere is like.  It's one thing to walk around an impressive but empty stadium, and another to be there when the fans are going crazy.  Also, the traffic/parking situation around UC on gameday isn't helping things.  I'm not sure if there's a fix for that or not, though.

Oh, there's a fix - what you do is park over near Mecklenburg Gardens where parking is ample especially if you arrive early... say around 2-3 pm for a 7 pm match. Good food, great beer, plenty of awesome people. Then you march to the stadium, take in the game with 17,000 friends, and walk back hungover and exhausted and hey, right back at your car with easy access and no traffic!
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on December 01, 2016, 01:25:33 PM
I don't think the traffic situation is actually that bad, but in any case the traffic flow around UC will be much improved in the coming months once the two MLK projects (Hopple exchange at 75, and the new exchange at 71) are completed, making it faster to access both 75 and 71 from the north side of campus.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on December 01, 2016, 02:39:43 PM
If Nippert proves not to be a viable option for the long term in order to get an MLS team, where should a new stadium go?

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: TroyEros on December 01, 2016, 03:28:13 PM
If Nippert proves not to be a viable option for the long term in order to get an MLS team, where should a new stadium go?

As mentioned about, where the old Cincinnati Saints soccer used to play in the West End. Obviously that old stadium would be demolished and the land would be cleared for a MLS specific stadium.

It's a no brainer imo due to the proximity of it being literally a few minutes from OTR.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: joshknut on December 01, 2016, 03:31:34 PM
if it moved to that location, maybe the old Metropolitan Theater could get new life as a theater again.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Ram23 on December 01, 2016, 03:48:21 PM
I think the distance between Central and John Streets isn't big enough to accommodate a stadium. It is about 400 feet - for comparison sake, Columbus Crew's stadium is about 500 feet wide. You could close Central Avenue and John Street, but then the stadium would be butting up against the theater and Laurel Homes in a pretty odd way. I think it's more likely the theater would have to come down, Central Avenue would be chopped off, and the playing field would shift to the east of its current position.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on December 01, 2016, 03:52:33 PM
^While the location looks good, I agree that the dimensions are not adequate for a full MLS stadium. The sidelines offer the best sightlines and the most raw number of seats, so it's likely impractical to build a stadium that only has seats on one sideline. Either buildings would need to come down, or it can't be built there.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Ram23 on December 01, 2016, 04:18:28 PM
Here's a quick and dirty copy paste of Crew's stadium laid overtop the location - the theater and adjacent buildings would have to go, you might be able to squeeze it in without removing the buildings on Wade but they would likely have to come down as well:

(http://i.imgur.com/GMOd7gX.jpg)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on December 01, 2016, 04:25:26 PM
The one issue I have with copy and pasting another stadium onto that site is that you may be able to work creatively with the site to compact the width of the stadium. Mapfre is built on an open site with almost no restrictions, so it might be more sprawling than FCC could come up with. Perhaps decking the second level over the first level instead of behind it (kind of like Wrigley Stadium) could confine it to that site, but I don't know.

That being said, I still think it's too narrow to accomplish without significant demolition.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Jimmy_James on December 01, 2016, 04:30:36 PM
^^So technically it's big enough, but where's the parking for 30,000 people?  Yeah, I know it's walking distance to tons of housing in OTR and the West End, but the MLS isn't going to see it that way.  They're going to want garages or a sea of parking lots for people driving in from Mason and West Chester.  And they'll want them right next door if they're building a new stadium, not a few blocks away.  That just makes me too nervous about the fate of the surrounding area.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on December 01, 2016, 05:48:39 PM
Thee is the music hall garages in place already.

You could build  new garage or so across the street, plus there looks like there are fields for parking there.

You could extend the streetcar or build light rail to help wth the crowd. Parking should not be a major concern.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on December 01, 2016, 05:52:01 PM
I think sites that no one mentions but are possible are:

1) the old Kahn's facility on Spring Grove in Camp Washington. It's big enough, isn't desireable for housing or commercial use. It's been advertised for industrial, but nothing has happened yet.

2) The old Hudepohl and jail site. It's big enough, some cheap land could be purchased for parking, is technically walking distance to downtown (shuttles would help), and they could re-purpose the Hudepohl smokestack for the stadium.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Jimmy_James on December 01, 2016, 11:52:05 PM
Thee is the music hall garages in place already.

You could build  new garage or so across the street, plus there looks like there are fields for parking there.

You could extend the streetcar or build light rail to help wth the crowd. Parking should not be a major concern.

I hope you're right, but I don't think MLS is going to share our love of transit and historic preservation.  Look at Mapfre in Columbus on google earth.  The amount of parking surrounding that is ridiculous.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on December 02, 2016, 12:22:51 AM
None of the sites is big enough to fit a stadium and enough parking, so let's quit talking about it.  Even if a new soccer stadium were built entirely with private dollars, it's still a waste, since a perfectly good stadium already exists. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: TroyEros on December 02, 2016, 03:05:17 AM
None of the sites is big enough to fit a stadium and enough parking, so let's quit talking about it.  Even if a new soccer stadium were built entirely with private dollars, it's still a waste, since a perfectly good stadium already exists.

Regardless, MLS will want a Soccer specific stadium for any chances of FCC to jump to the MLS.

 I'm fully in favor of keeping nippert as FCC main venue, but there are indications from Don Garber that this will only be a short term solution rather than a solidified long term plan.

There is also talks about the IRS site in Covington as a potential area of interest. I wouldn't be totally against a MLS stadium in Northern KY with Cincinnati as the backdrop.

Cincinnati NEEDS MLS. The length of the season is the longest in any pro sports. There season starts from early March till Mid December. With 34 weeks of games, and 5 rounds of playoff matches, and an All Star game that cities host in the Middle of the summer. To have these people come to our urban core and come to these games (especially when the bengals/reds aren't at home) and in turn ride the street car to go to bars or restaurants after the games will be a boon to our cities vibrancy and economy.

 I would love for Clifton and the UC area to experience this boon, but alot of signs are pointing that this simply won't be the case. If building a stadium means more vistors coming to cincinnati and exploring downtown (on days when they would have probably stayed at home or done something else in there suburb community) then so be it.

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: OHSnap on December 02, 2016, 08:42:29 AM
I'm down with the Stargel Stadium site.  There doesn't appear to be much going on between Central Ave. and Central Parkway right there, so if you had to bend Central Ave around a new stadium you could.  The Music Hall garage means you could get away with a smaller dedicated garage.  Good highway access via Liberty or Ezzard Charles, too (and even the Western Hills Viaduct or 50/Freeman for westsiders). 

And if the team got big enough, I could also see constructing a "game day loop" for the streetcar that uses 14th, Central Ave, and Wade.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Ram23 on December 02, 2016, 08:47:44 AM
None of the sites is big enough to fit a stadium and enough parking, so let's quit talking about it.  Even if a new soccer stadium were built entirely with private dollars, it's still a waste, since a perfectly good stadium already exists. 

I agree it would be a waste, but I think it's what MLS is going to push for. If it becomes inevitable and people push for tax dollars, I think we should figure out a way to trick Butler County or someone else into paying for it. "Voice of America Stadium" has a nice ring to it.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on December 02, 2016, 11:05:23 AM
What people aren't considering is that a purpose-built stadium won't be perfect, just like how Nippert and Paul Brown aren't perfect.  The tennis stadium in Mason isn't perfect.  Great American isn't perfect.  Shoemaker Center 5/3 Arena isn't perfect.  People are envisioning perfection in their mind and that won't happen, and even if it did, it wouldn't be that great.       

In the unlikely event that The Bengals leave Cincinnati after expiration of their lease in 2026, then this team (assuming it happens) could have Paul Brown to itself.  As has been stated here and ignored, PBS was built with corner cut-outs of the sort that have just been built in Nippert.  As a renegotiation of the 2026 lease, The Bengals could probably leverage sharing PBS with a soccer team to their advantage, although they've already gotten pretty much there is to take in the 1996 lease!
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on December 02, 2016, 11:19:51 AM
No stadium will be perfect, but there are a lot of problems with PBS that would make me hesitant to accept a deal to move the team there.

That stadium is way too big for an MLS team in Cincinnati. It has a capacity of 65,535. The highest attendance in 2016 regular season was 60,147, followed by 53,302. The highest mean attendance was 42,636, followed by 31,324. I understand that you can tarp off the top sections, but it would be really demoralizing to have 20-25,000 people in such a large stadium. The atmosphere of soccer games helps drive attendance, and going into a stadium like PBS is a nonstarter for a good atmosphere. I know you'll say "who cares?", but it matters. Skepticism of this fact doesn't make it any less true.

Nippert is small enough where a crowd of 17,000+ looks pretty good with the top section tarped off, but allows for a crowd of 35,000 if demand is great for a particular game. They have to either stay at Nippert or build a new stadium somewhere. The club doesn't want to move home games to the suburbs and has stated this multiple times. They don't think they will be successful in Mason, and won't take the risk.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on December 02, 2016, 11:23:07 AM
Thee is the music hall garages in place already.

You could build  new garage or so across the street, plus there looks like there are fields for parking there.

You could extend the streetcar or build light rail to help wth the crowd. Parking should not be a major concern.

I hope you're right, but I don't think MLS is going to share our love of transit and historic preservation.  Look at Mapfre in Columbus on google earth.  The amount of parking surrounding that is ridiculous.

Mapre was built in the late 90s on fairgrounds parking and part of the fair complex. it was essentially wasted space in Columbus and not too far from where they were playing already. Interstate access was probably a concern for them but parking was an afterthought because they had all this unused land sitting there waiting for development. Mapre came at the right time for that. Not many cities have such large swaths of surface parking available though. ALso, when Mapre was built, It was a different era and league then. Mapre reminds me of Dolphins stadium in Miami. It is in a field with nothing nearby to walk too. The league has said it sees the benefit integrating itself with the city. So I think the league would care about those issues now.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on December 02, 2016, 11:32:58 AM
What people aren't considering is that a purpose-built stadium won't be perfect, just like how Nippert and Paul Brown aren't perfect.  The tennis stadium in Mason isn't perfect.  Great American isn't perfect.  Shoemaker Center 5/3 Arena isn't perfect.  People are envisioning perfection in their mind and that won't happen, and even if it did, it wouldn't be that great.       

In the unlikely event that The Bengals leave Cincinnati after expiration of their lease in 2026, then this team (assuming it happens) could have Paul Brown to itself.  As has been stated here and ignored, PBS was built with corner cut-outs of the sort that have just been built in Nippert.  As a renegotiation of the 2026 lease, The Bengals could probably leverage sharing PBS with a soccer team to their advantage, although they've already gotten pretty much there is to take in the 1996 lease!

Jake, Nippert is the ideal location for Cincinnati, but not for MLS standards. SO something has to live.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: GCrites80s on December 02, 2016, 11:45:59 AM
A LOT of people want the new Crew stadium Downtown or close to it once the lease with the state fairgrounds is up. That way fans can hang out in bars before and after games, engage in soccer hooliganism etc. instead of being out in auto dependency next to a Lowe's and some '50s restaurant.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on December 02, 2016, 11:55:30 AM
A LOT of people want the new Crew stadium Downtown or close to it once the lease with the state fairgrounds is up. That way fans can hang out in bars before and after games, engage in soccer hooliganism etc. instead of being out in auto dependency next to a Lowe's and some '50s restaurant.
I'm sure fans *want* a downtown staidum... but is there any actual chance they're going to build another, new, dedicated stadium for the Crew?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: GCrites80s on December 02, 2016, 12:04:48 PM
Yes. This is Columbus. We have the space with our gigantic Downtown full of surface lots and tumbleweed filled razed train station sites.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on December 02, 2016, 12:51:24 PM


Jake, Nippert is the ideal location for Cincinnati, but not for MLS standards. SO something has to live.

Raise the field level and take out 3 rows of seats.  Problem solved. 


Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: gaslight on December 02, 2016, 12:55:21 PM


Jake, Nippert is the ideal location for Cincinnati, but not for MLS standards. SO something has to live.

Raise the field level and take out 3 rows of seats.  Problem solved. 



Jake,
MLS says no sharing of the Stadium. So they can't stay at Nippert unless an exception is made, and as of right now they are not making the exception. If we have to find a site, what about something around the new MLK exit?

I would love to stay at Nippert.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on December 02, 2016, 12:56:14 PM
A LOT of people want the new Crew stadium Downtown or close to it once the lease with the state fairgrounds is up. That way fans can hang out in bars before and after games, engage in soccer hooliganism etc. instead of being out in auto dependency next to a Lowe's and some '50s restaurant.

But that stuff isn't really that great.  There is actually a culture of tailgating for college and NFL games that goes back generations whereas the push for neighborhood bars by major league baseball was a foil to convince the public that they should unload tax money to publicly finance stadiums.  There is a lot more stuff around Wrigley and Fenway now than there was back in the 90s.  I remember there being absolutely nothing around old Yankee Stadium and precisely one bar across the street from Tiger Stadium. 

Stadiums just plain do not motivate nightlife and hotel construction on their own.  They are a part of the formula, but many people opt to stay at cheaper hotels far from stadiums anyway. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Columbo on December 02, 2016, 12:59:23 PM
A LOT of people want the new Crew stadium Downtown or close to it once the lease with the state fairgrounds is up. That way fans can hang out in bars before and after games, engage in soccer hooliganism etc. instead of being out in auto dependency next to a Lowe's and some '50s restaurant.
I'm sure fans *want* a downtown staidum... but is there any actual chance they're going to build another, new, dedicated stadium for the Crew?

Yes. This is Columbus. We have the space with our gigantic Downtown full of surface lots and tumbleweed filled razed train station sites.

Stop f**kin with the Cincy folk, GCrites.  We've already discussed that a new Crew stadium is not only possible, but also probable just west of the Arena District in this post:

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,7699.msg824545.html#msg824545
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on December 02, 2016, 01:01:20 PM

Quote
Jake,
MLS says no sharing of the Stadium. So they can't stay at Nippert unless an exception is made, and as of right now they are not making the exception. If we have to find a site, what about something around the new MLK exit?

I would love to stay at Nippert.


New York FC is playing at Yankee Stadium.  So add Great American to the list of potential sites.

http://www.nycfc.com/tickets/pricing/

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on December 02, 2016, 01:14:26 PM
^No offense, but I don't think you know anything about the stadium situations in MLS.

Or you're just trying to get a rise out of people (probably more likely).
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: gaslight on December 02, 2016, 01:15:18 PM

Quote
Jake,
MLS says no sharing of the Stadium. So they can't stay at Nippert unless an exception is made, and as of right now they are not making the exception. If we have to find a site, what about something around the new MLK exit?

I would love to stay at Nippert.


New York FC is playing at Yankee Stadium.  So add Great American to the list of potential sites.

http://www.nycfc.com/tickets/pricing/



and it's temporary.

The New York City FC Stadium is a proposed soccer-specific stadium to be built in New York City for the expansion franchise New York City FC of Major League Soccer. The team currently plays their home games at Yankee Stadium.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City_FC_Stadium
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: GCrites80s on December 02, 2016, 01:19:01 PM
A LOT of people want the new Crew stadium Downtown or close to it once the lease with the state fairgrounds is up. That way fans can hang out in bars before and after games, engage in soccer hooliganism etc. instead of being out in auto dependency next to a Lowe's and some '50s restaurant.
I'm sure fans *want* a downtown staidum... but is there any actual chance they're going to build another, new, dedicated stadium for the Crew?

Yes. This is Columbus. We have the space with our gigantic Downtown full of surface lots and tumbleweed filled razed train station sites.

Stop f**kin with the Cincy folk, GCrites.  We've already discussed that a new Crew stadium is not only possible, but also probable just west of the Arena District in this post:

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,7699.msg824545.html#msg824545

Oh, I thought the Jager site was the site of the former West Downtown train station, which is actually just NE of the Jager site. There were actually 3 Downtown train stations at one time, plus ones at Franklinton and one near Leonard Ave.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on December 02, 2016, 01:37:31 PM

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City_FC_Stadium

Looks like they're either moving to the suburbs or sharing a stadium with a college if they want into Manhattan.  Hmm.


 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on December 02, 2016, 01:40:11 PM
Jake - Raising the field and designing it to soccer specifics does not fix the issue. the issue for MLS is being able to tap into the stadium revenue that ownership or control of the facility provides. Also being the primary tenant too. At Nippert, FC Cincy will never be the primary tenant. That is the concern for MLS
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on December 02, 2016, 02:18:06 PM
Jake - Raising the field and designing it to soccer specifics does not fix the issue. the issue for MLS is being able to tap into the stadium revenue that ownership or control of the facility provides. Also being the primary tenant too. At Nippert, FC Cincy will never be the primary tenant. That is the concern for MLS

New domed stadium (replacement for the Georgia Dome) will be shared by the Falcons and their MLS team:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_Stadium
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on December 02, 2016, 02:47:54 PM
^The Falcons and Atlanta United have the same owner...
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on December 02, 2016, 02:52:02 PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlanta_United_FC

Looks like the owner of the Falcons is also the owner of the new MLS franchise.  So it's no coincidence that Jeff Berding has been leading FC Cininnati -- it's pretty obvious that the Lindners and the Browns are going to want own a Cincinnati MLS franchise and might use dual ownership to force Hamilton County to build yet another stadium or we'd risk losing two teams. 

But in a much-better scenario, The Bengals will sign a lease extension in Paul Brown Stadium and have the other team they own also enjoy ridiculous benefits at the teat of taxpayers. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on December 02, 2016, 03:41:38 PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlanta_United_FC

Looks like the owner of the Falcons is also the owner of the new MLS franchise.  So it's no coincidence that Jeff Berding has been leading FC Cininnati -- it's pretty obvious that the Lindners and the Browns are going to want own a Cincinnati MLS franchise and might use dual ownership to force Hamilton County to build yet another stadium or we'd risk losing two teams. 

But in a much-better scenario, The Bengals will sign a lease extension in Paul Brown Stadium and have the other team they own also enjoy ridiculous benefits at the teat of taxpayers. 


ATL isn't the only MLS team backed by an NFL owner, Seattle and New England are similar. However, I wouldn't use those examples to characterize or assume Mike Brown is going to somehow be involved. I doubt the Bengals have little, if any interest, in pursuing an MLS team. Lindner and his group can stand on their own ownership wise.

The Bengals also had the chance to pursue an MLS franchise and PBS was built with soccer in mind. However, aside from a brief mention in the press in the early 2000's, the Bengals never did pursue MLS.

Given the cold reaction to US Bank Arena even seeking some sort of public funding when they released "renovation plans," I sincerely doubt that FCC is going to ask Hamilton County for $.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Jimmy_James on December 02, 2016, 04:35:55 PM
^Agreed.  People are still p***ed off about the Paul Brown Stadium deal.  I don't see any appetite to publicly finance another stadium, especially when PBS was built with Soccer in mind.  As Jake mentioned, the Atlanta teams are sharing a stadium, as are the Seattle teams, and possibly others (I don't know the details of all teams in both leagues).  Yes, those teams share ownership.  I wonder if a swap could be worked out where the Lindners end up owning something small percentage (say 5%) of the Bengals, and the Browns end up owning a larger percentage (say 20%) of FC Cincinnati.  This would make sharing the stadium possible, give the Lindners a small piece of the very successful NFL, and diversify the Browns interests in the event that the NFL fades in popularity in the coming decades for some reason (concussions, increased competition, or something else).  It would also provide a new revenue stream for the Browns from having more events at the stadium and drastically increase the odds of FCC reaching MLS since getting a stand alone stadium is no small feat.  Finally, it would leave both families firmly in the majority shareholder position with their traditional franchise, so neither would have to worry about ceding control to an outside entity.  The contract could even be conditional on FCC reaching MLS, so that if it doesn't happen, the Brown family reverts to sole ownership of the Bengals.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on December 02, 2016, 04:44:44 PM
^The problem is though, Paul Brown is likely not an option. Major League Soccer has made it known that they prefer MLS teams to control their stadiums and revenue. I don't see them being very open to a deal between FCC and The Bengals. PBS is also cavernous. Century Link Field (Seattle) and MB Stadium (Atlanta) were designed with MLS in mind (more so Atlanta than Seattle). At Paul Brown it's an afterthought and the extra locker rooms for soccer have been renovated into other things. Could FCC use it? I'm sure they could, but it's probably not in their long term interest do so.

Overall, I wouldn't worry about public financing. If anyone's aware of that political climate, it's Jeff Berding. Not to mention, MLS stadia are generally way less in cost than the $1B behemoths the NFL is building. I would place good money on the theory that if MLS said "look, get yourself a soccer specific stadium that meets our requirements and you're in," Lindner and Co. would do it. If any public exchange is involved, I could see it being the county saying "we'll sell you this land for $1, you pay for the stadium," etc.

This article from CST today kind of backs that up, if a stadium is needed... FCC is willing to work it out: http://cincinnatisoccertalk.com

Also, an employee of the club recently reached out on Reddit and said a suburban stadium is a no go.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on December 02, 2016, 04:47:37 PM
Berding wouldn't be working for FC Cincinnati if the Browns didn't have an interest in using MLS soccer their advantage.  These people are smart and patient.  The Browns are pocketing well in excess of $10 million from every Bengals season -- remember that back in 2011 they bought out their last minority shareholder with *cash* for something like $160 million, and almost all of that was retained earnings from 2000 onwards (when PBS opened). 

The worst-case scenario is that Lindnders/Browns leverage construction of a new publicly financed NFL/soccer stadium, but the MLS team is only signed to a 5 or 10 year lease.  Then they come back to the city or county wanting subsidies for a new MLS only stadium.  That way they get to control the western half of The Banks plus some other part of town. 

The need for vast parking lots has been used to the advantage of many team owners around the country.  As we're seeing all over the country, new stadiums are being built right next to existing, perfectly-good stadiums.  The new stadiums are always excuses to renegotiate the lease of a publicly-financed facility. 

 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ucgrady on December 02, 2016, 05:00:53 PM
So far I like two ideas a lot:
1- "The old Hudepohl and jail site. It's big enough, some cheap land could be purchased for parking, is technically walking distance to downtown (shuttles would help), and they could re-purpose the Hudepohl smokestack for the stadium." Re-purposing the smoke stack in a brick and anodized black metal stadium with a real industrial look would be the coolest looking stadium ever, and would have great visibility and access to I-75 as well.

2- IRS site in Covington, tons of room, access to downtown arena district of the banks via short bridge walk (similar to the Tenesee titans stadium across the cumberland river from downtown) and would really help Covington's downtown.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on December 02, 2016, 07:12:59 PM
Wouldn't it be ironic if a new soccer stadium ended up being built on the former Cincinnati Gardens site?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: bendixondavis on December 03, 2016, 01:01:00 AM
Lol I was thinking the same thing when reading that interview with Berding where he was vague saying it could "somewhere in the city".
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on December 03, 2016, 04:01:59 AM
Wouldn't it be ironic if a new soccer stadium ended up being built on the former Cincinnati Gardens site?

Not enough room without tearing down nearby buildings and/or shifting the path of Seymour Ave. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on December 03, 2016, 12:21:03 PM
Berding wouldn't be working for FC Cincinnati if the Browns didn't have an interest in using MLS soccer their advantage.  These people are smart and patient.  The Browns are pocketing well in excess of $10 million from every Bengals season -- remember that back in 2011 they bought out their last minority shareholder with *cash* for something like $160 million, and almost all of that was retained earnings from 2000 onwards (when PBS opened). 

While I don't disagree that the Browns are patient and strategic businesspeople, I think they would be involved from the get go rather than behind closed doors.

Quote
The worst-case scenario is that Lindnders/Browns leverage construction of a new publicly financed NFL/soccer stadium,

I definitely get where you're coming from and as Paul Brown approaches being 20 years old, I could see FCC/The Bengals coming together for a renovation of Paul Brown Stadium that makes both NFL and MLS a priority. However, Paul Brown has never and is not currently an option being pursued by FCC. Nor would it be for MLS, even with a renovation. At the town hall this past Tuesday, Garber made it quite clear that if a facility happens outside of Nippert, it needs to be controlled by the time. I think they're going to make a strong case for Nippert and if that doesn't work out, I really don't see the Bengals being involved or FC Cincinnati making a push for public dollars. They're aware of their popularity, but also aware of the political climate locally (and nationally) surrounding public stadium funding.

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on December 03, 2016, 03:06:13 PM
Obviously the biggest unknown in the FC stadium saga is if The Bengals stay or go in the late 2020s. Right now it's fairly safe to say that The Bengals aren't going to move.  LA now has one team, might get a second, and The Raiders are likely moving to Las Vegas.  The most likely city to get an NFL team that doesn't have one is probably Toronto.  Other than there or London (which is a big what-if) there is no metro 2X as big as Cincinnati that wants football but doesn't have it.  So it would generally be a lateral (get it!) move...The Bengals already have the best lease and will get a similar renewal, so TV revenue would be the motivation for a move, since it would raise the value of the team if Brown's daughter wants to sell. 

Whatever these guys say publicly now can't be trusted.  They are real estate guys, just like Trump, and they're never going to reveal what their long game is. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Chas Wiederhold on December 14, 2016, 11:20:40 AM
Anyone care to speculate where they could see FC Cincinnati building its practice facilities?

Columbus Crew's facilities are about 10 miles south of MAPFRE Stadium. My guess is that FCC would want to find something closer to Nippert and in a more entertaining area with a bit more ceremony. I could be wrong... just my hunch.

In this age of Public/Private partnership could a questionably ethical deal be struck to place practice facilities in Burnet Woods? Perhaps there isn't a flat enough spot. Could something be accomplished along the river near Lunken Airport or Lower Price Hill?

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/soccer/fc-cincinnati/2016/12/13/fc-cincy-has-goals-question-how-many-do/95393868/

FC Cincy has goals. Question is, how many will do it?

Most moves made by Futbol Club Cincinnati are done with Major League Soccer in mind. The big-picture goal always remains in sight.

For now, though, the club is still in the United Soccer League and therefore is knee-deep in prep work for the 2017 season. That means focusing on filling out the club's roster, improving its infrastructure and bracing for a possible shakeup in U.S. soccer's lower leagues.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on December 14, 2016, 11:37:44 AM
^Training facilities can be anywhere, really.

I would put my money on Mason. The Lindners already own a bunch of land up there where the tennis tournament is. I would bet that's where they are looking. Another possibility would be building a facility in Northern Kentucky. This could help engage people who aren't already following the team. Regardless of where it ends up, they are going to want a lot of room to expand. I don't see them building it anywhere close to Nippert. A vast majority of their activities are likely to be closed to the public anyway, so I don't anticipate them looking too closely at engaging people in this new facility except for open practice sessions, preseason scrimmages, etc.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on December 14, 2016, 11:48:21 AM
Burnet Woods is not a good option (as you said, due to topography).

Does the Crew have a full-size, indoor training facility? Or is it just an outdoor field?

Perhaps along Mill Creek there's some flat, vacant land... though the Mill Creek valley you'd have to compete for industrial/manufacturing uses.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Chas Wiederhold on December 14, 2016, 01:03:31 PM
It looks like the Crew just has two fields and a fieldhouse. Do they have more facilities elsewhere that you know of, Ryan?

https://www.google.com/maps/place/4175+Alum+Creek+Dr,+Obetz,+OH+43207/@39.8838278,-82.9368057,817m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x8838870ed47c692b:0x5f68d083aa669cbb!8m2!3d39.8838237!4d-82.9346117

In the case that FCC doesn't care to be close to Nippert and that they would want growing room, it really becomes a race to the cheapest and vastest land. Recreationally, I would still like to see them in the Little Miami floodplain around Lunken (floods, I suppose, aren't ideal for training). This is where they would be launching their academy? I feel like the northern suburbs are already well served by select soccer teams and FCC's youth program might decimate those programs.

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: GCrites80s on December 14, 2016, 01:11:02 PM
The City of Obetz just bought the speedway just west of there and tore it down to replace it with a lacrosse and rugby stadium. I don't know if it makes much difference for what the Crew is doing though. The speedway may not have been all that cheap but I bet the rest of the land was 15 or so years ago when the facility was initially built.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on December 14, 2016, 01:34:05 PM
^^I don't know a lot about the Crew's development program, but I believe their only facility is the one out in Obetz that you mentioned. I think they partner with a lot of outside organizations and use fields they don't own for development/youth teams, but I believe the main team practices in Obetz and sometimes at Mapfre Stadium.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: GCrites80s on December 14, 2016, 01:40:00 PM
More fields are a part of speedway property project.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Cygnus on January 04, 2017, 10:03:32 AM
Is it FC Cincy vs. 'silent assassins' for MLS? (http://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/soccer/fc-cincinnati/2017/01/04/fc-cincy-vs-silent-assassins-mls/96125434/)

There's a reason some industry insiders refer to the Tampa Bay Rowdies as the "silent assassins" of the race for Major League Soccer expansion.

The Rowdies are a relative newcomer to the mainstream MLS expansion conversation after formally announcing their intent in December, but don't misinterpret that for a hurried and premature MLS pitch.

The Rowdies' announcement came after years of behind-the-scenes work and investment from the team and Rowdies Chairman and CEO Bill Edwards, who has his club knocking on the door of MLS.

By the way, he doesn't care if you hear the Rowdies knocking or not.

Cont (http://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/soccer/fc-cincinnati/2017/01/04/fc-cincy-vs-silent-assassins-mls/96125434/)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on January 04, 2017, 11:19:34 AM
Their stadium plan is interesting: http://www.rowdiessoccer.com/stadiumplan

The seating has two huge gaps in it, one facing the water and one facing the city, with the stands on opposing corners. It'd make for nice views, but the stadium environment will feel too "open". By comparison, I love the sense of enclosure at Nippert, which is created by the height of the surrounding buildings and the sunken field.

I'm glad to see that the Rowdies are leaving the NASL for the USL next season. I really hope the NASL simply folds and those teams get absorbed by the USL and/or MLS. The NASL is too small to be a successful league on its own:
http://www.espnfc.com/united-states/story/3013624/us-soccer-delays-decision-on-reclassifying-divisions-of-nasl-and-usl

The "Tampa Bay" Rowdies name is a bit confusing, since they're located in downtown St. Petersburg. That being said, their location for the stadium is pretty neat, right on the water and right next to downtown St Pete.

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on January 04, 2017, 11:38:20 AM
The "Tampa Bay" Rowdies name is a bit confusing, since they're located in downtown St. Petersburg. That being said, their location for the stadium is pretty neat, right on the water and right next to downtown St Pete.

Technically, it's the region/body of water that is called "Tampa Bay". The principal city is "Tampa". So St. Pete is still in Tampa Bay. It would be similar to a team in Oakland being called the San Francisco Bay Rowdies. Maybe a little weird, but not wrong.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ucgrady on January 04, 2017, 12:18:52 PM
So if FC Cincinnati moves to Covington or Newport can we call them FC Ohio River?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: GCrites80s on January 04, 2017, 01:07:57 PM
FC Simon Kenton
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on January 04, 2017, 02:26:20 PM
FC Greater Cincinnati and Northern Kentucky
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: JYP on January 04, 2017, 07:57:30 PM
FCVG
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: GCrites80s on January 04, 2017, 08:30:28 PM
FC Cin-Day-NKY-Hamilton-Middletown Unified Metropolis
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on January 25, 2017, 11:17:07 AM
The Enquirer lays out a few options for new stadium sites, listing some pros and cons of each site. Based on this shortlist, it's so clear that none of the sites would improve on Nippert. I really hope UC, FC Cincinnati, and the MLS can strike a deal that benefits all parties while avoiding the unnecessary expense of building a new inferior stadium at a worse location.

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/soccer/fc-cincinnati/2017/01/24/where-could-fc-cincinnati-build-new-stadium/96947728/
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on January 25, 2017, 12:48:39 PM
Is there space to build a soccer specific facility at UC? This could be used by both an MLS team and UC. Question would be over ownership, but if Nippert is not an option, the next best option would be to take the soccer field and try and expand that into a 25k seat stadium on campus. (if even possible)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on January 25, 2017, 12:55:01 PM
^Definitely not possible. Way too small of a site, would still be owned by UC, etc. There's no room on campus unless you use Nippert itself.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: gaslight on January 25, 2017, 01:00:06 PM
What about Burnet woods, Is that to small? The corner up by MLK and Clifton.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: brian korte on January 25, 2017, 01:23:58 PM
Is there space to build a soccer specific facility at UC? This could be used by both an MLS team and UC. Question would be over ownership, but if Nippert is not an option, the next best option would be to take the soccer field and try and expand that into a 25k seat stadium on campus. (if even possible)

There already is a soccer specific site at UC. Gettler Stadium. Capacity 1,400.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: brian korte on January 25, 2017, 01:24:29 PM
What about Burnet woods, Is that to small? The corner up by MLK and Clifton.

Much too small if they need 20 acres. They'd have to tear down a whole lot of mature trees.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on January 25, 2017, 01:32:21 PM
I really hope UC, FC Cincinnati, and the MLS can strike a deal that benefits all parties while avoiding the unnecessary expense of building a new inferior stadium at a worse location.

Center of Cincinnati is the best of those locations.  The location is in the heart of soccer's yuppie fanbase and proximity to I-71 is advertisement for the team.  Unfortunately, that entire development has done nothing but poach from surrounding neighborhoods, and stealing the soccer team will just be one more thing taken at the expense of the rest. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Cygnus on January 25, 2017, 01:40:17 PM
Another con to the Oakley location, Saturday matches are generally at 7PM with a few at 4PM and Crossroads services are at 4:30 & 6:15pm. Traffic in that area is already bad at these times...
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on January 25, 2017, 02:30:37 PM
Another con to the Oakley location, Saturday matches are generally at 7PM with a few at 4PM and Crossroads services are at 4:30 & 6:15pm. Traffic in that area is already bad at these times...

Well hopefully by then the great fraud that is Crossroads will be exposed and it will be out of business.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on January 25, 2017, 02:55:34 PM
Is there space to build a soccer specific facility at UC? This could be used by both an MLS team and UC. Question would be over ownership, but if Nippert is not an option, the next best option would be to take the soccer field and try and expand that into a 25k seat stadium on campus. (if even possible)

There already is a soccer specific site at UC. Gettler Stadium. Capacity 1,400.

Gettler is not "soccer specific" since it is also used for track and field, and as result the bleachers have to be set back from the soccer field. It's acceptable for college soccer, but not exactly the ideal fan experience.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on January 25, 2017, 03:25:29 PM
I really hope UC, FC Cincinnati, and the MLS can strike a deal that benefits all parties while avoiding the unnecessary expense of building a new inferior stadium at a worse location.

Center of Cincinnati is the best of those locations.  The location is in the heart of soccer's yuppie fanbase and proximity to I-71 is advertisement for the team.  Unfortunately, that entire development has done nothing but poach from surrounding neighborhoods, and stealing the soccer team will just be one more thing taken at the expense of the rest. 


If only we could redevelop Center of Cincinnati and transform it into a new urbanist neighborhood centered around the new stadium, flowing seamlessly into the surrounding historic neighborhood.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: joshknut on January 25, 2017, 03:48:20 PM
I would prefer for the stadium to be somewhere in the urban basin if it cannot be Nippert. We need to have streetcar/light rail access and the closest thing to this happening would be Nippert. Next would be a line going out to Queensgate/West End which can also connect to Amtrak. I think a suburban-style big box area (as in Oakley) would be a mistake. Oakley had their chance to make this an urban neighborhood and it's a sea of parking.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on January 25, 2017, 03:57:20 PM
Is there space to build a soccer specific facility at UC? This could be used by both an MLS team and UC. Question would be over ownership, but if Nippert is not an option, the next best option would be to take the soccer field and try and expand that into a 25k seat stadium on campus. (if even possible)

There already is a soccer specific site at UC. Gettler Stadium. Capacity 1,400.

Could you take that site and possibly expand to say 25k? It would be tight, but the rest of the infasturcture is already there.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on January 25, 2017, 03:57:37 PM
I would prefer for the stadium to be somewhere in the urban basin if it cannot be Nippert. We need to have streetcar/light rail access and the closest thing to this happening would be Nippert. Next would be a line going out to Queensgate/West End which can also connect to Amtrak. I think a suburban-style big box area (as in Oakley) would be a mistake. Oakley had their chance to make this an urban neighborhood and it's a sea of parking.

Live in Oakley currently and it's amazing how much of a transition it is when you walk under the railroad bridge. I can walk out of my complex and go left into Oakley Square which is great or right under the railroad and into a sea of parking lots, potholes, and the usual underwhelming Kroger store. There's also the traffic inducing mega church.

Madtree's a plus though.

As much as I'd love to be within walking distance to the stadium, I think Oakley is a poor choice.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thebillshark on January 25, 2017, 04:03:49 PM
Is there space to build a soccer specific facility at UC? This could be used by both an MLS team and UC. Question would be over ownership, but if Nippert is not an option, the next best option would be to take the soccer field and try and expand that into a 25k seat stadium on campus. (if even possible)

There already is a soccer specific site at UC. Gettler Stadium. Capacity 1,400.

Could you take that site and possibly expand to say 25k? It would be tight, but the rest of the infasturcture is already there.

What would be the point of building another stadium right next to Nippert to perform a function that Nippert is already doing? Except to expose the dedicated stadium requirement as ridiculous.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thomasbw on January 25, 2017, 04:32:32 PM
Move the Bengals practice fields to one of those sites and put the MLS Stadium on the practice fields. If anyone can convince the Browns to do it, its the Lindners.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: joshknut on January 25, 2017, 05:26:53 PM
Move the Bengals practice fields to one of those sites and put the MLS Stadium on the practice fields. If anyone can convince the Browns to do it, its the Lindners.

I think this would be a great idea. Is there enough space there? The bengals do not need their practice field there. It can be in the suburbs
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on January 25, 2017, 05:34:11 PM
Move the Bengals practice fields to one of those sites and put the MLS Stadium on the practice fields. If anyone can convince the Browns to do it, its the Lindners.

To paraphrase @thebillshark: "What would be the point of building another stadium right next to Paul Brown to perform a function that Paul Brown could also perform? Except to expose the dedicated stadium requirement as ridiculous."
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thomasbw on January 25, 2017, 06:14:36 PM
Move the Bengals practice fields to one of those sites and put the MLS Stadium on the practice fields. If anyone can convince the Browns to do it, its the Lindners.

To paraphrase @thebillshark: "What would be the point of building another stadium right next to Paul Brown to perform a function that Paul Brown could also perform? Except to expose the dedicated stadium requirement as ridiculous."

In fairness, the FC Cincinnati Stadium would be about one third the size of PBS and could be used for concerts (I saw Guns and Roses at Crew Stadium), high school tournaments, etc

Not that I'm disagreeing but by that logic we should go back to shared stadium concept of Riverfront.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on January 27, 2017, 06:42:23 PM
FC Cincinnati has now announced their first home game, first road game, and full preseason schedule

Preseason:

Sunday, February 19 @ 4pm vs. Chicago Fire [USL] (in Florida)
Wednesday, February 22 @ 4pm vs. Chicago Fire [MLS] (in Florida)
Saturday, February 25 @ 4pm vs. Ottawa Fury [USL] (in Florida)
Saturday, March 4 @ 830pm Eastern at Sacramento Republic FC [USL]
Saturday, March 11 @ 7pm against UC Men's Soccer at Gettler Stadium on campus
Friday, March 17 @ 7pm against Xavier Men's Soccer at Xavier Soccer Complex on campus

Regular season:

First game is at Charlotte Battery on Saturday 3/25
First home game is against Saint Louis FC on Saturday 4/15

There will be more games between those two, but the full schedule hasn't been released yet.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: subocincy on January 28, 2017, 06:22:00 AM
With his usual flair for words, "Doc" (aka, Paul Daugherty) drops the hammer on aspirations for a new soccer stadium:

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/columnists/paul-daugherty/2017/01/27/doc-real-cost-fc-cincinnati-stadium/97160688/
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on January 30, 2017, 09:24:24 AM
I was thinking and this is an outside the box idea, but why not build a retractable roof or dome stadium for soccer. It would be a lot cheaper than doing something like that for football because it will only seat about 30,000, but it would have a lot of benefits.
1) We need a new arena because we lose out on conventions and other trade shows because of the size and dated arena. This will help alleviate that problem because it can provide an indoor event center with the seating people are looking for.
2) It could be used for many more events year round besides soccer. We could now compete for NCAA basketball and even Final 4 (with about 35-40k seats). We could compete for DNC/GNC conventions and some of the largest meeting space.
3) It could be used for High school football playoffs without any conflict from the Bengals
4) It could be used by city High School football teams.
5) It would be novel in the MLS world and one of the more distinct stadiums in the league.
6) It could integrate with the city much better as the opportunity to have such convention and exposition space would be best if it were in the downtown corridor.

I know it will not happen, but if you are going to build a stadium for soccer, an indoor arena would have benefits.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Jimmy_James on February 02, 2017, 01:00:03 AM
Not that I'm disagreeing but by that logic we should go back to shared stadium concept of Riverfront.

That's not a perfect comparison though, because the baseball infield is problematic for football, and football players destroy the outfield in a way that baseball players never do.  The astroturf that allowed for both sports to coexist in Riverfront Stadium was horrendous.  Soccer doesn't have those problems.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmblec2 on February 02, 2017, 09:34:50 AM
Heard a rumor from a friend that FC Cincinnati is looking at a parcel “next to the Casino” for the stadium. Take it with a grain of salt, however he did know the Cincinnati was getting a pro team probably 3 or 4 months before it was announced. My only guess would be the surface lots/small buildings next to the casino. Is there enough room for a stadium there? Would the city consider eliminating a street to create  a larger parcel? It would be a good spot if it was possible.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on February 02, 2017, 10:25:55 AM
^ That would be a great location if they can do it. Heck the Casino could help fund it and you know they would get programming to fill it on non soccer dates.

Still say we need a retractable roof or something on it. I really want a Final 4 to come to Cincy.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thebillshark on February 02, 2017, 11:14:36 AM
Heard a rumor from a friend that FC Cincinnati is looking at a parcel “next to the Casino” for the stadium. Take it with a grain of salt, however he did know the Cincinnati was getting a pro team probably 3 or 4 months before it was announced. My only guess would be the surface lots/small buildings next to the casino. Is there enough room for a stadium there? Would the city consider eliminating a street to create  a larger parcel? It would be a good spot if it was possible.

Are you thinking take out Reedy street between Court and Eggeleston? You'd lose 2 buildings then- though they're pretty non discript and disconnected from the Urban fabric already. As long as the triangle building on the corner remains, I could live with that.

Pluses include dramatic view of Times Star building and P&G Towers. Easy access from Main Street OTR and Pendleton bars.

Perhaps the Lindners should call up Dan Gilbert and have him invest in the team and become part owner so they could work on parking/events together with the casino.

If a Mt Adams air gondola touched down somewhere in the area it would really be a tourist destination.

Would really be bizarre to have the jail right across the street from such a large entertainment complex.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: IAGuy39 on February 02, 2017, 11:43:54 AM
^I agree on retractable roof, but I doubt we could get a final 4 because those get like 70k fans like Indianapolis Lucas Oil.

Cincinnati really dropped the ball on that, I know the stadium deal was horrible with Brown, but they really should have spent the extra $100 million or whatever in the clause to make it a retractable roof or dome type structure like Lucas Oil.  I assume Brown didn't want to share and would want the profits, and did all the decision making on all of it, but that was another horrible mistake by the crafters of the football stadium deal

*Edit: Did the math, and maybe it wouldn't have been possible because the difference between Open Air of Paul Brown (broke ground in 1998 at a cost of $455 million = $545 million in 2005 dollars) vs. Retractable Roof Lucas Oil (broke ground in 2005 at cost of $720 million) is a difference of $175 million 2005 dollars or $146 million in 1998 dollars.

You could argue it may have been worth that cost, though.  On the other hand, Indy went all in with the mecca of sports in the MidWest and they have a lot better infrastructure downtown with hotels it seems than Cincy does, so Cincy probably would have had to do a ton more work too.  Also, Indy gets things like the B1G 10 Championship Game (sometimes it is a Super Bowl light), the Super Bowl, Final 4, and other NCAA Tourney games.

You could argue that if FC Cincy built a retractable roof, they could compete up to Regional (16 & 8) games for Men and up to Final Four for women, and maybe some smaller venue concerts (between US Bank and the Reds?), but I don't know what else you could do with a size of 25k or 30k

Heck, even Omaha and Des Moines are getting in on the action of First 2 rounds of NCAA Tourney and Memphis and Kansas City, St. Louis, etc. are getting Regional finals.  Indianapolis has two(!) Final Fours in 7 year span! (2015 and 2021)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmblec2 on February 02, 2017, 11:52:04 AM
Yes I would assume you would have to remove that street as it cuts right through the main width of the parcel. A great idea for Danny to get involved but he is already part owner the MLS team in Detroit they are trying to start. Maybe somehow the casino could provide some funding for the stadium and then they could hold events there.

Another potential site could be the lots next to P&G where New Street is. But less likely because P&G would have to replace their daycare. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on February 02, 2017, 11:57:20 AM
I don't see how you could fit a stadium in next to the Casino, unless you are remove the garage and the greyhound station. Even then, it'd be extremely tight and the topography would be challenging.

I tried to squeeze the smallest MLS stadium (San Jose with 18,000 seat capacity) next to the casino, and here's what you get:

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/MJ0sd_WpWqadAc8Udkn8VwXUB6of9CSaYsHk-5SBhAcOXxND9rpzXHE0F4F5Hk1H3Xw5iy2aTuNS_JPCGciiA0qDkSh_Fd4w2xtpB3d2jHDvJWm1RIury_8Ie1ZMSd6lR3ts-8k=w947-h772-no)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on February 02, 2017, 12:12:52 PM
^I agree on retractable roof, but I doubt we could get a final 4 because those get like 70k fans like Indianapolis Lucas Oil.

Cincinnati really dropped the ball on that, I know the stadium deal was horrible with Brown, but they really should have spent the extra $100 million or whatever in the clause to make it a retractable roof or dome type structure like Lucas Oil.  I assume Brown didn't want to share and would want the profits, and did all the decision making on all of it, but that was another horrible mistake by the crafters of the football stadium deal

*Edit: Did the math, and maybe it wouldn't have been possible because the difference between Open Air of Paul Brown (broke ground in 1998 at a cost of $455 million = $545 million in 2005 dollars) vs. Retractable Roof Lucas Oil (broke ground in 2005 at cost of $720 million) is a difference of $175 million 2005 dollars or $146 million in 1998 dollars.

You could argue it may have been worth that cost, though.  On the other hand, Indy went all in with the mecca of sports in the MidWest and they have a lot better infrastructure downtown with hotels it seems than Cincy does, so Cincy probably would have had to do a ton more work too.  Also, Indy gets things like the B1G 10 Championship Game (sometimes it is a Super Bowl light), the Super Bowl, Final 4, and other NCAA Tourney games.

You could argue that if FC Cincy built a retractable roof, they could compete up to Regional (16 & 8) games for Men and up to Final Four for women, and maybe some smaller venue concerts (between US Bank and the Reds?), but I don't know what else you could do with a size of 25k or 30k

Heck, even Omaha and Des Moines are getting in on the action of First 2 rounds of NCAA Tourney and Memphis and Kansas City, St. Louis, etc. are getting Regional finals.  Indianapolis has two(!) Final Fours in 7 year span! (2015 and 2021)

You are probably right, however, we could have a fighting chance. Maybe they could get 50k in for basketball or something. That could work. but more importantly, it provides additional programming options that US Bank Arena is not suitable for. We could now compete for huge national or international conventions which precludes us now.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on February 02, 2017, 12:26:33 PM
This article says the MLS application identifies two potential sites in the urban core: http://www.si.com/planet-futbol/mls-expansion-prospective-cities-bids-28-teams?sdf#planet-futbol/2017/02/01/cincinnati-mls-expansion-city-usl-lindner-harkes-berry

Quote
Stadium Plan

The University of Cincinnati’s venerable Nippert Stadium does the job for now. But MLS requires a stadium designed with soccer in mind, so it isn't a permanent solution. Berding said FCC has zeroed in on two potential stadium sites, both of which are in the city’s urban core that stretches connects the river, downtown, Over-the-Rhine and UC.

He wouldn’t provide details regarding the financing but said MEIS architects and principal Tim Lambert have been working on the stadium design. Lambert was involved in designing Red Bull Arena, StubHub Center, Toyota Park and Rio Tinto Stadium in MLS. He’s also working on AS Roma’s new arena.

“We’re going to submit a plan that meets [MLS] requirements. Our application is going to show a soccer-specific stadium that work on two different sites in our urban core with a funding model where the numbers add up,” Berding said. “We’re going to continue to fine-tune the funding model, and that’s going to be a bit of ongoing work. But at the end of the day, we have a plan that can get it done.”
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: joshknut on February 02, 2017, 01:08:20 PM
What is their definition of the urban core?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on February 02, 2017, 01:18:41 PM
What is their definition of the urban core?

Berding seems to define it as: "city’s urban core that stretches connects the river, downtown, Over-the-Rhine and UC"
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thebillshark on February 02, 2017, 02:01:46 PM
I don't see how you could fit a stadium in next to the Casino, unless you are remove the garage and the greyhound station. Even then, it'd be extremely tight and the topography would be challenging.

I tried to squeeze the smallest MLS stadium (San Jose with 18,000 seat capacity) next to the casino, and here's what you get:

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/MJ0sd_WpWqadAc8Udkn8VwXUB6of9CSaYsHk-5SBhAcOXxND9rpzXHE0F4F5Hk1H3Xw5iy2aTuNS_JPCGciiA0qDkSh_Fd4w2xtpB3d2jHDvJWm1RIury_8Ie1ZMSd6lR3ts-8k=w947-h772-no)

Too bad... it seems like they could have fit this in quite easily, if they had thought about it just a few years ago when they designed the casino and garage, and if they were able to move Greyhound down to the RTC.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on February 02, 2017, 02:08:07 PM
In 2014, UrbanCincy suggested (http://www.urbancincy.com/2014/07/editorial-its-time-for-cincinnati-to-build-a-new-first-class-arena/) building a new arena next to the casino. We were very quickly contacted by some people in the know asking, basically, "how did you find out?" So it's clearly something they've though about before. I'm not exactly sure how it would fit on the site, but if you look at the casino parking garage, they have made some interesting design choices that make it pretty clear they have taken future expansion into consideration.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on February 02, 2017, 02:36:19 PM
Putting an arena on the casino site makes a LOT more sense to me than a soccer stadium. The casino garage has a footprint of ~320'x550' which would be enough to fit an arena, but not enough to fit a soccer stadium.  So, if the garage was engineered to support additional load, then that'd be an option for a new arena.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on February 02, 2017, 02:47:55 PM
^Throw the arena there and then build an MLS stadium where US Bank Arena is currently.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on February 02, 2017, 03:18:57 PM
I apologize for the crude photoshopping, but here's my proposal for where a new arena could go next to the casino. I'm not sure if you could fit a soccer stadium in that space.

(http://s.mlkshk-cdn.com/r/1AZMG)

The red area would be easily doable because I don't think there would be much of an objection to removing those parts of Court or Reedy streets or the few remaining buildings on Reedy that are long disconnected from the urban fabric. You may not even need the Greyhound space but it would be a good location for a box office and other back office functions.

The blue area could be added to the site if the Casino agrees to give up the space where Margaritaville is located now.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on February 02, 2017, 03:21:17 PM
Having the arena next to a casino is also a pretty good idea for traffic flow. If people don't want to get caught in traffic they can either arrive early or stay late and just hang out in the casino. Of course, since it's also within walking distance of OTR and Pendleton, those would be big pre and post game destinations as well.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on February 02, 2017, 04:21:09 PM
If they did that, I think they would have to build a hotel there too.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on February 02, 2017, 04:27:04 PM
^I love that idea @taestell, I wonder if they could work the existing flat iron type building into a potential stadium. Location would be excellent with nice views and just a block or so from the streetcar.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thebillshark on February 02, 2017, 04:33:17 PM
I think you could still do a soccer stadium if you removed that part of Court St. too. The "short" side of the stadium would be along Eggleston and the "long" side would be along Gilbert. It may be possible due to how the corner of the garage is cut away on the south side there. The garage may still cut into one of the corners of the stadium, but could be designed around.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on February 02, 2017, 04:38:24 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/hDzxaUh.jpg)

To Echo @taestell, "pardon the crude photoshop," but this is Crew Stadium overplayed on that aforementioned casino site. It's too tight to fit Mapfre Stadium's even grandstands on both sides, but if you got creative you could make it happen.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on February 02, 2017, 04:48:38 PM
^Plus, they could put Grand Victoria Casino billboards on it. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thebillshark on February 02, 2017, 04:50:56 PM
^^@Gordon Bombay flip it 90 degrees and you got it. You could even maintain the circle drive on the south side the for the casino for access purposes and connect it directly to Court, Court Street would become a cul de sac with the entrance off Eggleston.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Cygnus on February 02, 2017, 06:34:37 PM
Eggleston is heavily traveled at rush hour and during sporting/special events on the riverfront. A connection with Gilbert would be critical with this design. I'd also like to see Broadway made two-way...
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ucgrady on February 02, 2017, 07:21:36 PM
First the prisoners get free concerts from 'the Shoe' now they could watch FC games too!?

If you kept parts of the field open without a grandstand, similar to the new proposed Tampa Bay stadium previously discussed, you could definitely fit a stadium on that site (and it would have nice views of downtown). The problem is it would probably require completely removing that section of East Court and Reedy. If that was done Gilbert overpass should get demo'd and Gilbert should be connected to Eggleston. I have proposed getting rid of that Gilbert overpass anyway to make more developable land on that surface lot ridden section of downtown, so this would all be great if it happened but it feels like too many moving parts...
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thebillshark on February 02, 2017, 08:49:00 PM
Wow, this is the first time I've noticed how useless those Gilbert Ave overpasses are.  Not really geographically necessary, just saving cars 20 seconds entering and exiting downtown. They should be removed to encourage development and to simplify the street grid in that area making it easier for walkers and bikers.  If Gilbert connected with Eggleston, I see no problem with removing that section of Court Street either. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: atlas on February 02, 2017, 10:44:03 PM
It would be nice to see it incorporated into the site where the casino garage is now. I hate the thought of losing more public land and losing connectivity. We need more connectivity, not less. Particularly since such a monolithic venture has the potential to kill the possibility of this area ever becoming a more vibrant urban environment we all want.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on February 02, 2017, 10:54:40 PM
Another possibility is just north of P&G, between Sixth St. and KZF Design.  The P&G daycare could be rebuilt into the stadium bleachers. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thebillshark on February 03, 2017, 12:35:16 AM
It would be nice to see it incorporated into the site where the casino garage is now. I hate the thought of losing more public land and losing connectivity. We need more connectivity, not less. Particularly since such a monolithic venture has the potential to kill the possibility of this area ever becoming a more vibrant urban environment we all want.

To this I would say, choose your battles. The casino already forms a huge monolithic site wedged in between neighborhoods that is backed up against a highway that is itself backed up against the hillside of Mt Adams. By adding to this monilithic site, you're not really affecting much, and maybe you are preventing a monolith from taking over elsewhere.

Plus if you reconnected Gilbert to Eggleston by tearing down the overpasses as mentioned above you're adding important connectivity where it counts, to the eastern edge of downtown, and freeing up land for development. You would also be saving the city maintaince costs of the overpass.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on February 03, 2017, 11:02:36 AM
@jmecklenborg how awesome would it be if it was built butting up to the casino like that, but Belterra bought the stadium naming rights?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on February 03, 2017, 11:03:58 AM
^ I don't see why everyone seems to hate the casino? I named my son after the casino.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: joshknut on February 03, 2017, 11:18:27 AM
You named your son Horseshoe?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on February 03, 2017, 11:19:57 AM
@jmecklenborg how awesome would it be if it was built butting up to the casino like that, but Belterra bought the stadium naming rights?

Remember that Grand Vic had that billboard for years until it mysteriously disappeared when the Horseshoe broke ground. 

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: joshknut on February 03, 2017, 11:46:43 AM
This was in the River City News:

It just so happens that Berding's old boss, Bill Butler, and Corporex own the Ovation site in Newport, which is a large swath of riverfront land long awaiting a development. Additionally, Covington was rocked by the announced departure of its IRS center, which could also open up development on another large piece of near-riverfront property. "Are we aware of those sites? Yes we are," Berding said, when asked by The River City News at Thursday's event. He declined to get into specifics of the site evaluation process but said sites are explored in the team's application to MLS.

"Our commitment, because soccer is urban, we have said we were going to build a stadium in the urban core and last I checked, this side of the river has an urban core," Berding said. "So, whether it's Clifton or maybe a little bit north of Clifton and it comes down to what I would call the riverfront, Northern Kentucky, absolutely.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on February 03, 2017, 11:52:02 AM
^ I don't see why everyone seems to hate the casino? I named my son after the casino.

I wouldn't say that I hate it, but it's been a bit underwhelming for me. I voted for the measure that created it (and the one before that failed and would've brought a casino to Wilmington (was that it?) mainly on the grounds that I don't care if people are opposed to gambling on moral/religious principles - it's legal in other nearby states, why not keep some revenue here when people will do it anyways? I was also excited at the time to have Broadway Commons developed from just as massive parking lot into something useful (there were also no franchises who could put a new arena there and no hope for an MLS side at the time who could use the site). However, then it debuted. The building is ugly, whatever, but the sign is gaudy and awful. Then, as it turns out, the casino was incredibly underwhelming. I haven't been in since it originally switched to the Jack brand. Not really my thing I guess.

Don't hate it, not opposed to it being there, but if we could spruce up the site with say an MLS stadium and fill in around it with more interesting development - let's do it. Having it right there next to OTR and downtown would make it one of the best stadiums in MLS.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: IAGuy39 on February 03, 2017, 12:15:34 PM
Yeah, putting the MLS stadium there I think would be a big win win, and could help drive development possibly even faster around that side of Pendelton.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on February 03, 2017, 12:53:17 PM
Covington would make sense too but the thought of putting it in KY didn't cross my mind until @joshknut mentioned it.

For the people who were around during the 1996 stadium deal, was there a real possibility of losing either the Reds or Bengals to KY? Like, were Newport or Covington ready to step up and finance a new stadium if Hamilton County wouldn't?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on February 03, 2017, 01:09:33 PM
I wouldn't mind if FCC set up shop at the IRS site. It would be a perfect spot for a venue like this and it would have killer views of Cincinnati. Not sure what happens to that land when the feds have finally cleared out.

I think it would suck if the Reds left the city, but the Bengals can do whatever they want for all I care. I'd prefer they stay in the market, but I'm not concerned where they actually play. Whether that's on the river, in Kentucky, or in Clermont County. Makes no difference to me.

FCC is young enough where a move to NKY wouldn't bother me and it's still Cincinnati even if it isn't "Cincinnati".
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on February 03, 2017, 01:37:05 PM
Covington would make sense too but the thought of putting it in KY didn't cross my mind until @joshknut mentioned it.

For the people who were around during the 1996 stadium deal, was there a real possibility of losing either the Reds or Bengals to KY? Like, were Newport or Covington ready to step up and finance a new stadium if Hamilton County wouldn't?

No.  Those cities couldn't have possibly tax themselves enough to have afforded one, let alone both stadiums.  It would have required, at minimum, a tax shared between the three NKY counties.  Almost impossible to pull off, esp if all three counties had votes.   
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Jimmy_James on February 03, 2017, 01:55:19 PM
This was in the River City News:

It just so happens that Berding's old boss, Bill Butler, and Corporex own the Ovation site in Newport, which is a large swath of riverfront land long awaiting a development. Additionally, Covington was rocked by the announced departure of its IRS center, which could also open up development on another large piece of near-riverfront property. "Are we aware of those sites? Yes we are," Berding said, when asked by The River City News at Thursday's event. He declined to get into specifics of the site evaluation process but said sites are explored in the team's application to MLS.

"Our commitment, because soccer is urban, we have said we were going to build a stadium in the urban core and last I checked, this side of the river has an urban core," Berding said. "So, whether it's Clifton or maybe a little bit north of Clifton and it comes down to what I would call the riverfront, Northern Kentucky, absolutely.


At least post their link.  :angel:

http://www.rcnky.com/articles/2017/02/03/covington-newport-mix-fc-cincinnati-explores-options-stadium (http://www.rcnky.com/articles/2017/02/03/covington-newport-mix-fc-cincinnati-explores-options-stadium)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ucgrady on February 03, 2017, 02:21:22 PM
FC Greater Cincinnati. FC GC for short. Northern Kentucky; it's what makes Cincinnati, Greater.

But seriously I would say Nippert is still first in my mind, Casino site second, Newport third. I would prefer the IRS site be broken up and have the street grid reconnected than more mega-sized developments. Between the Banks and Ovation site we already have plenty of that available, IRS should be broken to smaller lots and sold to smaller private developers, please don't give it Corporex.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on February 06, 2017, 05:07:46 PM
FC Cincinnati pins down two stadium sites, hires architect, report says

FC Cincinnati has focused its stadium search on two sites and has started working with an architect, according to a published report.

The year-old professional soccer franchise is targeting two stadium locations between the University of Cincinnati and the Ohio River, according to an in-depth Sports Illustrated analysis of Cincinnati published last week as part of a batch of analyses on each of the 12 markets competing for four Major League Soccer expansion franchises.

The SI.com report didn't go into specifics about any sites, but it said FC Cincinnati president and general manager Jeff Berding said the team has MEIS architects working on a new stadium design. MEIS, with offices in New York and Los Angeles, designed MLS facility StubHub Center in Los Angeles as well as other MLS stadiums. The firm also did design work for renovations at Paul Brown Stadium, home of the Cincinnati Bengals, where Berding worked for 20 years before launching FC Cincinnati a year and a half ago.

“Berding said FCC has zeroed in on two potential stadium sites, both of which are in the city’s urban core that stretches (between) the river, downtown, Over-the-Rhine and UC,” Brian Straus, who covers soccer, wrote on SI.com.

More below:
http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/02/06/fc-cincinnati-pins-down-two-stadium-sites-hires.html
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: gaslight on February 06, 2017, 05:22:46 PM
Anyone think the city would sell part of inwood park to FC Cincinnati to build a stadium there? If that happens wonder if the streetcar extension could have a stop at that site.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on February 06, 2017, 05:56:00 PM
I don't think that would ever happen. Neighborhoods would completely oppose it.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on February 06, 2017, 06:28:38 PM
Inwood would not be a good location for a stadium. It's would be a traffic nightmare because those streets around there are not built for huge influxes of traffic. There is no existing parking infrastructure and there is no adjacent commercial district.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thebillshark on February 06, 2017, 07:57:22 PM
The weird way that it's worded, "between UC and the river," almost makes you  think they are thinking about the Glencoe Hole or something.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: SleepyLeroy on February 06, 2017, 08:49:24 PM
Im making my out of left field mixed metaphor guess before someone else does. Im betting it will be located at the site of the former Hudepohl brewery. The port authority owns the property for redevelopment, the business nextdoor just moved to the Pleasent Rigde/Oakley Kmart site and the museum offices may return home once the renovation of the terminal is done. Near the highway, close to town plenty of room to park and grow. It is solated from the core by I-75 and near the relocated mens shelter but it is between UC and the river at least and having the big old smokestack integrated into the design would give it some history. After looking at the map though with the bend in the river anywhere from straight east of Nippert to south west of it  can fit into that description of 'between UC and the river'.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on February 06, 2017, 09:32:23 PM
Everything north of UC and south of the river is "between" if you circle the globe.  Soccer is the world sport so that would make sense. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on February 07, 2017, 04:50:45 PM
Architect hints at FC Cincinnati stadium design

The architect who is working on new stadium designs for professional soccer team FC Cincinnati has worked on several other Major League Soccer facilities and looked at the other expansion candidates, but he chose the local club.

“I wouldn’t want to be on another team,” Dan Meis, founder of MEIS, a sports and entertainment architectural firm with offices in New York and Los Angeles, told me on Monday.

MEIS said FC Cincinnati brought his firm on board about a month and a half ago to work on developing designs and site studies for a potential new stadium. FC Cincinnati might need to build a new stadium to win an MLS expansion franchise.

FC Cincinnati president and general manager Jeff Berding and majority owner Carl Lindner III, co-CEO of American Financial Group Inc., are bidding on the expansion franchise. MLS has said it’ll award two expansion franchises by year-end to begin play in 2020 and two additional expansion teams at some point down the road.

More below:
http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/02/07/architect-hints-at-fc-cincinnati-stadium-design.html
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thebillshark on February 11, 2017, 09:11:08 AM
Hey all, I dropped the Columbus Crew stadium into a few sites around town we've mentioned here for a possible FC Cincinnati stadium using screenshots from Microsoft Maps for Widows 10. I tried to keep the scale as close as possible by confirming dimensions using the distance measure tool in Google maps.

First is the casino.  Would require removal of Court St. and some design around the parking garage but overall feasible.  Close to OTR for the fan clubs. The big footprint wouldn't harm the urban fabric too much further, due to it being at the edge of the neighborhood, but would be extremely close to everything. Could be part of a larger overall effort to transform eastern downtown.

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2715/32021832723_49a075a8cf_h.jpg)

Second (I think I was the only one suggesting this) is the Glencoe Hole. Walkable from Uptown (with an uphill pilgrimmage march possible form OTR.)  There would be some serious terrain challenges with this site.  Perhaps the stadium could be built atop its own parking garage, to keep it closer to elevation of Auburn Ave.  Though a long shot, it's interesting that this site would be accessible by a light rail stop if John Schneider's Mt Auburn Tunnel comes to fruition. ( https://cincinnatiideas.com/uptown-light-rail/ )

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/535/32455646560_c7ec8b08f0_h.jpg)

Third is IRS site in Covington.  This site is simply huge.  It is incredible what a waste of urban space this IRS facility is plopped down right in the middle of the beautiful walkable historic neighborhoods of Covington.   The stadium fits easily here, even with a convention center expansion. Even with both, it looks like the site could get split up with some cross streets and mixed use development added.

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/677/31993547004_8d19427589_h.jpg)


I looked at the Hudepohl site and the Bengals practice field, but the Crew stadium didn't fit in easily with the street grid.



Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Flyboy41 on February 11, 2017, 01:56:25 PM
All of those look great! One caveat, though. Mapfre (Crew) Stadium probably isn't a good analogue. It's probably too big and a new stadium would be more modern. I'd use Houston, Kansas City or San Jose's stadiums as a template. If you want bigger, Orlando's new stadium seats 30,000 with a safe-standing section.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on February 13, 2017, 07:24:30 PM
FCC has spent most of their off-season improving the front half of the team.

Our two most recent signings have been Victor Mansaray from Seattle Sounders and Djiby Fall (pronounced Jee-Bee). Fall has played all over Europe and was most recently in the Kazakhstan Premier League and has had two appearances for the Senegal National Team. He's 31, so definitely a veteran player and will be the primary striker for the team.

http://www.fccincinnati.com/news_article/show/757172?referrer_id=2577005
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on February 14, 2017, 06:22:31 PM
Why an FC Cincinnati MLS expansion franchise would be welcomed by Columbus Crew

(https://media.bizj.us/view/img/10274721/pic-fccincinnatifans4*750xx1800-1014-0-82.jpg)

FC Cincinnati’s bid to become one of the next Major League Soccer expansion franchises looks strong in most categories.

But questions have come up from time to time about whether Cincinnati’s close proximity to Columbus – it’s about 100 miles away and already has the Columbus Crew SC in MLS – could hurt FC Cincinnati’s chances.

Let’s put those to rest now. MLS commissioner Don Garber and FC Cincinnati president and general manager Jeff Berding have said it’s not a problem. I contacted the Crew just to make sure they won’t fight FC Cincinnati’s bid. No worries there.

“It is exciting to see several markets close to Columbus in the applicant pool, including Cincinnati, Detroit, Indianapolis and St. Louis,” Columbus Crew SC investor-operator and chairman Anthony Precourt told me in an emailed statement. “Our Crew SC supporters have a chance to see some healthy new regional rivalries develop within MLS in the coming years.”

More below:
http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/02/14/why-an-fc-cincinnati-mls-expansion-franchise-would.html
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on February 14, 2017, 06:26:29 PM
The Bengals and Colts are only 100 miles apart. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on February 15, 2017, 12:10:38 AM
I like the Casino site the best just for its proximity to OTR and continued development there. It would make it such a powerhouse of the neighborhood. Although having the jail right there detracts a bit from the spot. However, this spot would not lead to a sea of surface parking and many of the existing lots could be used. Also, it could be the most financially feasible option as I am sure the Casino would look to partner on the financing of it because it could use the stadium for concerts or other casino events in the area and it may allow them to develop a hotel there too.

Glencoe is an interesting option. It could really help develop Mt. Auburn so long as it does not lead to a sea of surface parking, and does offer a close walk to UC. It would not lead to as many concerts and such as the casino site would and the roads in the area would have to be expanded to better handle gameday traffic. I think traffic on Auburn is a nightmare most of the day anyway and I would hate to go there on game day. At least Nippert has more options and better traffic patterns to get there.

The IRS site is a good option too. Like the casino, it is good developable land and would be a coup to Covington. It offers great views and walkable to main Strauss which would be good. The infrastructure and traffic patterns are already in place there, and there is already ample parking. Personally I like the Casino the best, but this appears to be a decent option. It could also be incorporated with the Convention Center (heck maybe they build a retractable roof to get larger events and connect it to the convention center.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thomasbw on February 15, 2017, 11:36:13 AM
I like the Casino site the best just for its proximity to OTR and continued development there. It would make it such a powerhouse of the neighborhood. Although having the jail right there detracts a bit from the spot. However, this spot would not lead to a sea of surface parking and many of the existing lots could be used. Also, it could be the most financially feasible option as I am sure the Casino would look to partner on the financing of it because it could use the stadium for concerts or other casino events in the area and it may allow them to develop a hotel there too.

Glencoe is an interesting option. It could really help develop Mt. Auburn so long as it does not lead to a sea of surface parking, and does offer a close walk to UC. It would not lead to as many concerts and such as the casino site would and the roads in the area would have to be expanded to better handle gameday traffic. I think traffic on Auburn is a nightmare most of the day anyway and I would hate to go there on game day. At least Nippert has more options and better traffic patterns to get there.

The IRS site is a good option too. Like the casino, it is good developable land and would be a coup to Covington. It offers great views and walkable to main Strauss which would be good. The infrastructure and traffic patterns are already in place there, and there is already ample parking. Personally I like the Casino the best, but this appears to be a decent option. It could also be incorporated with the Convention Center (heck maybe they build a retractable roof to get larger events and connect it to the convention center.

Glencoe would be a disaster.

One benefit of the IRS site is that the Commonwealth of Kentucky might contribute some funding to land their first professional team
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on February 15, 2017, 11:39:35 AM
I doubt Bevin would support that. Or most of the legislature.

From a traffic, engineering, and accessibility standpoint, I agree Glencoe would be terrible.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmblec2 on February 15, 2017, 11:41:52 AM
I just don't see them putting it in Covington, it would be a good spot though. But the team is called "Cincinnati FC" and but the team won't even be in Cincinnati? The optics from outside the area will be issue. IMO
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on February 15, 2017, 11:53:51 AM
New York Red Bulls play in Harrison, New Jersey
Chicago Fire plays in Bridgeview, Illinois
Philadelphia Union plays in Chester, Pennsylvania
FC Dallas plays in Frisco, Texas
LA Galaxy plays in Carson, California
Real Salt Lake plays in Sandy, Utah
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on February 15, 2017, 12:31:39 PM
And when visitors fly into Cincinnati's airport, they won't even have to leave the state to see the game! ;)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on February 15, 2017, 01:32:34 PM
I just don't see them putting it in Covington, it would be a good spot though. But the team is called "Cincinnati FC" and but the team won't even be in Cincinnati? The optics from outside the area will be issue. IMO

I think people would get over that rather quickly if it meant a world class venue and solidified the team's MLS goals. Might even help bolster the perception that despite different states and names, all these areas are "Cincinnati" in a sense. I lived in NKY for 5 years and still identified as a Cincinnatian. Now living in the city proper, I still spend time (and money) in NKY, mostly Covington. I tend to see Newport and Covington as just another neighborhood with their own unique features. It's literally much quicker to reach those places via transit, car, or bike than any of the outer suburbs like West Chester and Mason.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmblec2 on February 15, 2017, 02:17:15 PM
All good points, but I still don't think it will happened especially not at the IRS site. The federal government owns the land, and it will take them years to decide what to do with the land, then once they decide that it will take years to actually go through the process to excess the property. Also, How can FC Cincinnati have identified the IRS as one of the two potential sites if it isn't even available and won't be for some time. They can't just call up the IRS and ask if they can have the land when they leave. Its has to go through a long process before the land could even be made available.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on February 15, 2017, 02:25:04 PM
^ even so, MLS will allow them to play in Nippert for a couple years as long as the other stadium issues (financing and location) are already in place
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: IAGuy39 on February 15, 2017, 02:40:04 PM
I think by far Casino site would be best with using structured parking to not create surface lots.  Casino could invest some into it for shared used of concerts as mentioned, etc.  Retractable roof could get NCAA tourney games / boxing / NCAA Wrestling Tournament *I wish*.  They should propose a retractable roof, at least then maybe it could get US Bank owners of their sorry a**es).  Possibly city funding only from TIF District there or bonds against TIF district?  Then I agree, would really help redevelop more of Pendleton.

I'm not worried about the jail.  In the next 10 years hopefully those huge surface lots close by get developed and it makes it the jail less noticeable, people won't even care.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ucgrady on February 15, 2017, 03:33:55 PM
Hey all, I dropped the Columbus Crew stadium into a few sites around town we've mentioned here for a possible FC Cincinnati stadium using screenshots from Microsoft Maps for Widows 10. I tried to keep the scale as close as possible by confirming dimensions using the distance measure tool in Google maps.

The only other sites that I've heard mentioned is the Ovation site in Newport and the milacron site in Oakley. Because of the Corporex connections Berding has, that one seems like a legit contender, though it gets more complicated with the new traffic circle and new Route 9 layout. Of the options discussed here the casino location is definitely still the best.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmblec2 on February 15, 2017, 04:50:17 PM
^ even so, MLS will allow them to play in Nippert for a couple years as long as the other stadium issues (financing and location) are already in place

I don't see the IRS site being available for 8 to 10 years.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thomasbw on February 15, 2017, 05:58:28 PM
Hey all, I dropped the Columbus Crew stadium into a few sites around town we've mentioned here for a possible FC Cincinnati stadium using screenshots from Microsoft Maps for Widows 10. I tried to keep the scale as close as possible by confirming dimensions using the distance measure tool in Google maps.

The only other sites that I've heard mentioned is the Ovation site in Newport and the milacron site in Oakley. Because of the Corporex connections Berding has, that one seems like a legit contender, though it gets more complicated with the new traffic circle and new Route 9 layout. Of the options discussed here the casino location is definitely still the best.

What if the Linders gave the Browns an equity position in FC Cincinnati in exchange for the practice fields? Its kind of a win for everyone. The Browns diversify into the fastest growing pro sport (especially important if CTE and other health risks threaten the long term viability of football by discouraging youth participation and drying up the talent pool at the college and pro levels) and they turn an asset that produces essentially no revenue into one that does. If you need a practice field literally next door to the Bengals stadium, you would probably have access to the FC Stadium (FC's last home game is Sept 16; Bengals first home game was Sept 11). Then you buy a new practice field in Queensgate.


(edit: turns out the practice fields are owned by the county, so essentially you would have the Browns assign their lease of them to FC)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thebillshark on February 15, 2017, 06:46:41 PM
Hey all, I dropped the Columbus Crew stadium into a few sites around town we've mentioned here for a possible FC Cincinnati stadium using screenshots from Microsoft Maps for Widows 10. I tried to keep the scale as close as possible by confirming dimensions using the distance measure tool in Google maps.

The only other sites that I've heard mentioned is the Ovation site in Newport and the milacron site in Oakley. Because of the Corporex connections Berding has, that one seems like a legit contender, though it gets more complicated with the new traffic circle and new Route 9 layout. Of the options discussed here the casino location is definitely still the best.

What if the Linders gave the Browns an equity position in FC Cincinnati in exchange for the practice fields? Its kind of a win for everyone. The Browns diversify into the fastest growing pro sport (especially important if CTE and other health risks threaten the long term viability of football by discouraging youth participation and drying up the talent pool at the college and pro levels) and they turn an asset that produces essentially no revenue into one that does. If you need a practice field literally next door to the Bengals stadium, you would probably have access to the FC Stadium (FC's last home game is Sept 16; Bengals first home game was Sept 11). Then you buy a new practice field in Queensgate.


(edit: turns out the practice fields are owned by the county, so essentially you would have the Browns assign their lease of them to FC)

At least to fit the dimensions of the Crew stadium (500x600 ft.,) you would need to reconfigure Mehring Way which passes under the Clay Wade Bailey bridge in that area. Maybe not impossible but might take some doing.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on February 15, 2017, 06:53:47 PM
^ Personally I like the Casino site better. It integrates better with downtown and is more walkable. PBS acts as a boundary to downtown and would not encourage as much other development on that location.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on February 16, 2017, 10:31:25 AM
Hey all, I dropped the Columbus Crew stadium into a few sites around town we've mentioned here for a possible FC Cincinnati stadium using screenshots from Microsoft Maps for Widows 10. I tried to keep the scale as close as possible by confirming dimensions using the distance measure tool in Google maps.

The only other sites that I've heard mentioned is the Ovation site in Newport and the milacron site in Oakley. Because of the Corporex connections Berding has, that one seems like a legit contender, though it gets more complicated with the new traffic circle and new Route 9 layout. Of the options discussed here the casino location is definitely still the best.

What if the Linders gave the Browns an equity position in FC Cincinnati in exchange for the practice fields? Its kind of a win for everyone. The Browns diversify into the fastest growing pro sport (especially important if CTE and other health risks threaten the long term viability of football by discouraging youth participation and drying up the talent pool at the college and pro levels) and they turn an asset that produces essentially no revenue into one that does. If you need a practice field literally next door to the Bengals stadium, you would probably have access to the FC Stadium (FC's last home game is Sept 16; Bengals first home game was Sept 11). Then you buy a new practice field in Queensgate.


(edit: turns out the practice fields are owned by the county, so essentially you would have the Browns assign their lease of them to FC)

If they want to partner with the Bengals ownership group, why not follow the lead of Atlanta and simply use Paul Brown Stadium?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on February 16, 2017, 10:58:40 AM

What if the Linders gave the Browns an equity position in FC Cincinnati in exchange for the practice fields? 

I've been thinking about this as well. Interestingly enough, the Bengals had attempted to purchase an MLS franchise to play at PBS in the early 00's. I never heard the details of what went down and why it didn't happen, but they've at least shown interest in the past. I also think the practice filed site would be nice as it places all stadiums on the riverfront and could allow the western side of downtown to attract more bars/development. Not terribly far from the streetcar either AND if NKY make their streetcar a reality - boom!

Then you buy a new practice field in Queensgate.

The Bengals could always look into returning to old Spinney Field, their former practice site near Queensgate. I also wonder if a deal could be worked out where FCC helps fund a new Bengals/UC football indoor training facility in exchange for the current practice field land. As it stands now, the Bengals and UC both utilize the "bubble" at UC from time to time.

If they want to partner with the Bengals ownership group, why not follow the lead of Atlanta and simply use Paul Brown Stadium?

I don't think that's a realistic possibility. Speaking as an MLS observer: The league has really tried to get away from playing in shared football stadiums. It wants stadiums that look good on television, where teams have a firm say in dates and collecting revenue. Atlanta is a little bit different in that their new stadium has soccer considered from the ground up. The sightlines in Atlanta work, the pitch will receive the same priority as the NFL team, and the upper bowl can be completely hidden to create an intimate environment while still utilizing suites. In Seattle, they get away with using a football stadium simply due to attendance demands. That team averages far more than most (~44,000, sometimes more for playoffs) and they entered the league in a time when MLS needed strong markets and didn't exactly have everyone beating down the door to get in. New England and DC also play in football stadiums, but are actively looking to leave.

PBS doesn't really offer the advantages of Atlanta which make a shared stadium beneficial.

Speaking as a fan: playing in cavernous, bland Paul Brown would be terrible. While a 17,000 average for USL is impressive, it would look horrible on television in a 60,000 seat stadium.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on February 16, 2017, 11:07:52 AM
^ It is also important to note who was working for the Bengals in the early 2000s when the soccer discussion began. It is probably not a coincidence that Jeff Berding was playing a prominent role with the Bengals at that time.

As for the practice field. Part of the benefit of having the practice field where it is, is that it saves on infrastructure. You only need one locker room, you only need one weight room, one player parking lot. It is very efficient having the practice fields where they are.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on February 16, 2017, 12:35:43 PM
The Browns still had minority shareholders until 2011.  Screwing around with soccer would have slowed down their long game, which was to buy out the last minority shareholder and therefore command complete control of the team, which is very rare in the NFL.  A few majority shareholders have fallen victim to plots hatched by their minority shareholders, the best-known being Art Modell.  Mike Brown shrewdly negotiated lease terms in 1996 that made the team very profitable and allowed them to pile up cash until they wrote a $150~ million check in 2011. 





Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: OHSnap on February 16, 2017, 01:50:40 PM
Did we already rule out the Stargel Stadium site?  The area bounded by John St., Wade, Providence, and Taft HS has a similar footprint to MAPFRE.  Nothing immediately east along Central Pkwy is very high-value, so you could even have a "front lawn" facing the parkway.

Central Ave. could be curved east around the site a la the way Mehring curves around the Reds and Bengals stadiums.  You'd have highway access via Ezzard Charles and Liberty, and a short gameday loop of the streetcar could be built to connect to the core.  Some parking already exists at the Music Hall garage, lowering the amount that would need to be built.

If Stargel is still used for high school games, I can't see why it couldn't still on FC off-days - they're clearly used to sharing.  And the sale of the site could be seen as a nice boost for CPS.

I can imagine the fan groups congregating at Taft's and Taste of Belgium or wherever, marching around/through Washington Park, and then over to the stadium.

To me, it just fits.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on February 16, 2017, 02:32:36 PM
Stargell is my favorite location for all the reasons you cite however, I don't think it is really going to be given serious consideration by the people in charge
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on February 16, 2017, 02:37:55 PM
CPS wouldn't even agree to sell beer at Saints games in Stargel. I would be shocked if they sell the land to FCC, even if they get perpetual rights to utilize the facility around FCC's schedule.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on February 16, 2017, 02:38:07 PM
^Why don't you think it'll be given any serious consideration.

Also, @billshark - you've written a bit about reconnecting the West End to downtown/OTR. Do you think an FCC stadium at Stargell would help with that effort or hurt it?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on February 16, 2017, 02:43:14 PM
^ Because I think it would have come out via leak at this point. People would rather throw around Spinney or IRS site, and there has been rather mellow reception to the idea from this board as a whole.

Personally, I think it is the best location for everything you mention, plus traffic wise, it provides easy access to the highway and ample parking in the area too without a sea of surface lots.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: moonloop on February 16, 2017, 03:08:59 PM
I can't imagine Spinney Field being consider. It literally stinks, like all the time, thanks to MSD. Bengals player routinely complained about the air quality.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on February 16, 2017, 04:53:41 PM
I'm going by memory but I believe that one dude + a church owns the small collection of buildings (including the old theater) on the east side of Central Ave. opposite the high school stadium.  The police District 1 parking lot is owned by the city and the large grassy lot on the east of Central south of Wade is owned by the company that owns the large building north of Wade (between Central and Central).  The south side of Wade St. between John and Central is owned primarily by the Jehova's Witnesses (they own the church + the 120x120 empty lot at the SW corner of Wade & Central) and then some random dude from New Jersey owns one mid-block lot.  An REIT owns the 1-2 midblock row buildings as well as most of the north side of Wade between John and Central.   

Yeah, having Central Ave. bow eastward toward Central Parkway could work.  I went by that high school stadium on a Friday night maybe 3 years ago and it was sad to see how poorly attended the football game was.  CPS built a nice facility and nobody cares. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Cygnus on February 16, 2017, 05:07:22 PM
The Enquirer's been lurking...

FC Cincinnati: No point in responding to stadium rumors, speculation (http://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/soccer/fc-cincinnati/2017/02/16/fc-cincinnati-no-point-responding-stadium-rumors-speculation/97892584/)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thebillshark on February 16, 2017, 07:58:56 PM
^Why don't you think it'll be given any serious consideration.

Also, @billshark - you've written a bit about reconnecting the West End to downtown/OTR. Do you think an FCC stadium at Stargell would help with that effort or hurt it?

 The current stadium is only about 400 ft wide, to expand it to 500 ft would require disrupting the street grid to the east. I think it would hurt it and here's why.

First, Central Ave is long & straight and does a good job connecting the West End from top to bottom on into downtown.

Second, it would require demolition of some high quality historic buildings that could easily fit back into the neighborhood by filling in missing teeth.

Third, it would truncate 15th street as an east-west connection.

Fourth, the way you connect the neighborhoods is to add people along the border IMO. My vision is to add larger apartment blocks in the area west of Central Parkway to add raw numbers to our population. They could  be like the construction taking place Uptown (aka nothing fancy architecturally) order to provide affordable market rate  places for young people and service workers to live. These folks will then build a customer base for everyday neighborhood type businesses and the streetcar.  Please check out https://cincinnatiideas.com/ballet-flats/

Edit: here's the original post @Gordon Bombay was referring to: https://cincinnatiideas.com/2016/08/15/reconnecting-the-west-end/

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Cygnus on February 17, 2017, 10:45:25 PM
FC Cincy: John Harkes out as head coach (http://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/soccer/fc-cincinnati/2017/02/17/report-john-harkes-out-fc-cincy-head-coach/98071460/)

FC Cincinnati President and General Manager Jeff Berding confirmed to The Enquirer Friday night that Harkes is no longer with the club.

Assistant FC Cincinnati coach and director of scouting and analytics Alan Koch will act as the club's head coach, Berding said, and won't be placed under an interim title.

Additional details weren't immediately provided.

Cont (http://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/soccer/fc-cincinnati/2017/02/17/report-john-harkes-out-fc-cincy-head-coach/98071460/)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: subocincy on February 18, 2017, 10:07:02 AM
Considering John Harkes' praiseworthy achievements as FC's first-year head coach, this comes as a shocking decision by team management.  Exactly why was this questionable decision really made?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on February 18, 2017, 10:30:45 AM
According to this report: http://www.goal.com/en-us/news/66/united-states/2017/02/17/32800472/sources-john-harkes-out-as-fc-cincinnati-coach?ICID=HP_BN_1

Quote
Sources say that a power struggle between Harkes and FC Cincinnati president and general manager Jeff Berding led to the abrupt coaching change, which caught players and staff by surprise, especially since Harkes was coaching the team as recently as Thursday.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Jimmy_James on February 18, 2017, 11:13:41 AM
...Speaking as an MLS observer: The league has really tried to get away from playing in shared football stadiums. It wants stadiums that look good on television, where teams have a firm say in dates and collecting revenue. Atlanta is a little bit different in that their new stadium has soccer considered from the ground up. The sightlines in Atlanta work, the pitch will receive the same priority as the NFL team, and the upper bowl can be completely hidden to create an intimate environment while still utilizing suites. In Seattle, they get away with using a football stadium simply due to attendance demands. That team averages far more than most (~44,000, sometimes more for playoffs) and they entered the league in a time when MLS needed strong markets and didn't exactly have everyone beating down the door to get in. New England and DC also play in football stadiums, but are actively looking to leave.

PBS doesn't really offer the advantages of Atlanta which make a shared stadium beneficial.

Speaking as a fan: playing in cavernous, bland Paul Brown would be terrible. While a 17,000 average for USL is impressive, it would look horrible on television in a 60,000 seat stadium.

I'm pretty sure PBS had soccer considered from the start as well. Yes, the seating capacity is challenging, but given how expensive and otherwise useless a third pro stadium would be (and how badly Hamilton county got burned on stadiums last time around), I think using PBS is the best option if MLS would allow it and if they ruled out Nippert.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on February 18, 2017, 03:42:03 PM
^PBS has corner cutouts for soccer.  They were somewhat controversial at the time because they added $500k-$1 million to the expense of the stadium. 

I'm surprised but you can actually see the cutouts on Google Earth:
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on February 21, 2017, 04:56:27 PM
According to Berding, the decision to replace Harkes was all about winning... so it's clear that Berding had lost confidence in Harkes's ability as a coach:
http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/02/21/fc-cincinnati-s-berding-explains-coaching-change.html

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Ram23 on February 21, 2017, 05:04:46 PM
^PBS has corner cutouts for soccer.  They were somewhat controversial at the time because they added $500k-$1 million to the expense of the stadium. 

I'm surprised but you can actually see the cutouts on Google Earth:

I remember that being a story. I forgot that the reason for it was not a potential soccer team - it was so that Cincinnati could pursue the Olympics:

http://enquirer.com/editions/2000/03/01/loc_710_000_stadium.html

How many soccer games have ever been played in PBS?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Cygnus on March 01, 2017, 01:28:32 PM
The FC Cincinnati Team Shop located in the 1st floor of their offices at 14 E 4th will be moving to a larger space across the street at 43 E 4th (formerly home to Bolero which moved to 417 Vine).
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on March 28, 2017, 04:57:29 PM
FC Cincinnati targets another attendance record

(https://media.bizj.us/view/img/10274721/pic-fccincinnatifans4*480xx1800-1014-0-82.jpg)

FC Cincinnati’s ticket sales keep soaring in its second season of existence, with season ticket sales topping 11,000. And the home opener is still two and a half weeks away.

FC Cincinnati has 11,500 season tickets in its sights, president and general manager Jeff Berding said. But his real goal is to break the United Soccer League single-game attendance record that the team set last year with 24,376 fans when it played Orlando City B Sept. 17.

More below:
http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/03/28/fc-cincinnati-targets-another-attendance-record.html
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on March 28, 2017, 05:34:26 PM
With the Port Authority's proposal to demolish the old Hudepohl Brewery, I'm starting to think that will be the site proposed for the new stadium.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: SleepyLeroy on March 28, 2017, 06:42:42 PM
With the Port Authority's proposal to demolish the old Hudepohl Brewery, I'm starting to think that will be the site proposed for the new stadium.

If it does can I toot my horn a few times for guessing this back on 2/6? I really don't think it is the best spot 'urban wise' but with some integrated history from the Brewery&trains it could lead to a whole new & interesting developable area for new related businesses to spring up without cannibalizing existing entertainment districts or encroaching on residential areas. They recently started clearing out the huge piles of iron ballast that was across from the coal company along Mehring Way so maybe something is in the works there too. I think demolishing the brewery w/o a plan in place is a mistake since things like the barrel vault tunnels and the Eastern Facade where the big letters were would make a cool retrofit into a unique stadium. Even if it isnt the stadium site, it seems rash to tear it down now with the current budget problems.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Ram23 on March 28, 2017, 11:10:47 PM
The only hope for the smokestack is a cool million from the wealthy owners of the soccer team. If the Hudepohl site is where they build their stadium, it'd be a travesty if they don't save it.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thebillshark on March 28, 2017, 11:34:52 PM
The only hope for the smokestack is a cool million from the wealthy owners of the soccer team. If the Hudepohl site is where they build their stadium, it'd be a travesty if they don't save it.

I think the million dollars was to move it somewhere. If they leave it in place, I think it's considerably cheaper than that.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on March 29, 2017, 01:54:53 AM
I think using PBS is the best option if MLS would allow it and if they ruled out Nippert.

As has been pointed out here before though, MLS isn't going to allow it.

Seattle has the attendance and was admitted at a different time, New England is looking to move out of their American football stadium, Atlanta's stadium had soccer considered from the ground up and has several modifications made to keep soccer a priority, D.C. Just broke ground on a new venue.

While I agree that PBS makes practical sense, MLS has a long list of suitors lined up who can and will provide soccer specific stadiums. If FCC truly wants in, they're going to need their own facility other than Nippert or PBS.

Here's a mockup I made of PBS with it's soccer cut outs in place. From an article I did in 2012 about whether or not Cincy could support MLS: http://queencitydiscovery.blogspot.com/2012/04/major-league-soccer-in-cincinnati.html
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-t_G2h_2fH5U/T5oOJesEpXI/AAAAAAAAAEw/6kyCo_-q3GQ/s640/PBSsoccerfield.jpg)

I remember that being a story. I forgot that the reason for it was not a potential soccer team - it was so that Cincinnati could pursue the Olympics:

http://enquirer.com/editions/2000/03/01/loc_710_000_stadium.html

How many soccer games have ever been played in PBS?

The Bengals organization also hinted at potentially purchasing an MLS team circa 2002 for the 2004 expansion and saw the soccer modifications as a chance to make PBS a venue in a potential US hosted World Cup: http://enquirer.com/editions/2002/06/20/loc_soccer_fans_new_goal.html

Not sure on exactly how many matches it has hosted, but it did host the US Women's National Team at least once. It's out of contention for hosting the men's team now though as the surface is now field turf rather than it's original grass.

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: cincydave8 on March 29, 2017, 08:29:46 AM
The FCC stadium will either be at the Hudepohl site (hopefully with the smokestack) or in Oakley next to the movie theater.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on April 05, 2017, 02:18:42 PM
Photo of Nippert with the new "cut outs" allowing for wider field:
https://twitter.com/fccincinnati/status/849663873447849986

Looks like some of the bleachers on the upper deck were replaced (appears that the bottom ~6 rows of bleachers are new and have backs).
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on April 05, 2017, 02:23:42 PM
^I saw it this past weekend.  Looks really cheap, like a brick wall entrance to a new subdivision.  If they re-used the original brick, it doesn't look like it at all. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on April 05, 2017, 02:46:49 PM
I suspect those walls will be covered with banners/ads during game days. But yeah, the masonry looks cheap. The expansion joints are big part of what gives it a "suburban" look.

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/soccer/fc-cincinnati/2017/04/04/fc-cincinnati-christens-newly-renovated-nippert-stadium-field/100029556/
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on April 05, 2017, 04:25:12 PM
I think it looks fine along with the other walls from 1996.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on April 17, 2017, 02:04:42 PM
Nice photos of Nippert from the home opener:
https://twitter.com/USL/status/853661809383022593
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: bendixondavis on April 18, 2017, 09:16:37 AM
Saw an article about updates from the games of the last week. Thought it was awesome that they said we didn't only break a home opener attendance record, it was the second highest attendance of any soccer game in North America this last week. Pretty sweet.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on April 18, 2017, 10:36:54 AM
Second largest in the US/Canada. Mexico had several with higher attendance, but usually we compare attendance with Canada/US as they share leagues.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Cincy513 on April 18, 2017, 11:06:06 AM
The FCC stadium will either be at the Hudepohl site (hopefully with the smokestack) or in Oakley next to the movie theater.
Berding has said they're down to two sites between UC and the river so that would rule Oakley out. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: unusualfire on April 23, 2017, 01:56:43 AM
Can MLS and basketball share the same arena if it's designed well? Maybe they can come up with something to get the US Bank arena financed to host MLS, the final four or more.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on April 23, 2017, 12:06:21 PM
Can MLS and basketball share the same arena if it's designed well? Maybe they can come up with something to get the US Bank arena financed to host MLS, the final four or more.

The NCAA schedules the Final Four in indoor football stadiums... but that is the only time that basketball "works" in the football/soccer sized facility. No NBA (or college basketball) team would ever want to play a full season in football sized stadium. The seats end up being too far away from the court, and you'd barely fill 1/4 of the seats for a typical game.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on April 23, 2017, 03:39:07 PM
Second largest in the US/Canada.

Yet nobody knows any of the players' names, just like a Cyclones game.  If this team isn't accepted to MLS, look for attendance to drift downward. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on April 23, 2017, 06:07:56 PM
Second largest in the US/Canada.

Yet nobody knows any of the players' names, just like a Cyclones game. 

Actually plenty of people are well aware of who the players are and their names. Several banners, songs, and chants about many of them. Not to mention the regular mainstream sports coverage as well as an entire podcast produced by others that discusses the team in depth. What FCC has going is quite a bit different than the Cyclones, come check it out sometime.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on April 23, 2017, 10:09:01 PM
Can MLS and basketball share the same arena if it's designed well? Maybe they can come up with something to get the US Bank arena financed to host MLS, the final four or more.

The NCAA schedules the Final Four in indoor football stadiums... but that is the only time that basketball "works" in the football/soccer sized facility. No NBA (or college basketball) team would ever want to play a full season in football sized stadium. The seats end up being too far away from the court, and you'd barely fill 1/4 of the seats for a typical game.


Don't tell that to Syracuse. I think they like their dome.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: TroyEros on April 23, 2017, 11:25:45 PM
Yeah, no. It honestly sounds like your not much of a fan honestly, which is fine.

 If you ever go to the games you'll realize how knowledgeable FCC fans are. You really should come to the games sometimes if you haven't already. It's faaaaaar from the cyclones. Their is a growing passion and interest for soccer. Hockey is just really irrelevant in general of a sport if your not from the northern states/east coast.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on April 24, 2017, 10:07:11 AM
Second largest in the US/Canada.

Yet nobody knows any of the players' names, just like a Cyclones game.  If this team isn't accepted to MLS, look for attendance to drift downward.

I don't disagree that attendance would drift downward if MLS was completely off the table. But that's not what's bringing everyone to the games. And I guarantee I can name more FC Cincinnati players than Reds players or Bengals players.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Cygnus on April 26, 2017, 01:39:57 PM
FC Cincinnati's Djiby Fall suspended for 'major game misconduct' (http://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/soccer/fc-cincinnati/2017/04/26/djiby-suspended-major-game-misconduct/100928026/)

In the wake of a biting accusation stemming from Saturday's Futbol Club Cincinnati-Louisville City FC match, a United Soccer League disciplinary panel handed down Wednesday two fines and a combined six-game suspension for FC Cincinnati striker Djiby Fall.

Djiby, who was accused post-match by Louisville City head coach James O'Connor of biting Louisville midfielder Niall McCabe (http://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/soccer/fc-cincinnati/2017/04/23/louisville-city-fc-coach-djiby-bit-our-player/100811436/), was assessed a five-game suspension and fine for what the USL Disciplinary Panel termed in its weekly discipline report as "major game misconduct."

Cont (http://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/soccer/fc-cincinnati/2017/04/26/djiby-suspended-major-game-misconduct/100928026/)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Cygnus on May 01, 2017, 08:02:57 PM
FC Cincinnati moves up the charts in MLS expansion race (http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/05/01/fc-cincinnati-moves-up-the-charts-in-mls-expansion.html)

It’s been three months since FC Cincinnati submitted its application for an expansion team in Major League Soccer. Competition is fierce. It was one of a dozen cities to turn in a bid.

Since then, some cities’ bids have run into trouble. That bodes well for FC Cincinnati, which continues on its strong path to expansion. It’s time to revisit where FC Cincinnati stacks up in the high-stakes battle for one of four expansion bids MLS will award starting this year.

First, some quick background:

FC Cincinnati started out as one of the clear frontrunners in the high-stakes battle. Most observers had FC Cincinnati at least in the top four. That’s based largely on the overwhelming attendance success the club enjoyed in its inaugural season last year.

Cont (http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/05/01/fc-cincinnati-moves-up-the-charts-in-mls-expansion.html)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Rabbit Hash on May 02, 2017, 06:45:25 AM
That seemed to cast our chances in a very positive light. Stadium plan being the last legitimate concern (market size being the only other slight concern.)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on May 02, 2017, 09:34:37 AM
That seemed to cast our chances in a very positive light. Stadium plan being the last legitimate concern (market size being the only other slight concern.)

I'd love to be a fly on the wall in some MLS meetings about expansions. Granted, I'm inherinently bias towards Cincinnati, but while our media market size may not move the needle much for television ratings, the support here is unbelievable. Confirm that MLS is a certainty and I think that support will stay just as strong if not go up even more.

At the same time though, I can see the value in adding a market like San Diego or Tampa. Those areas move the needle and I don't think Tampa's middle of the road attendance is a good indicator. If the squad goes to the top level and has a modern stadium, I think people will show up.

That being said, I think Tampa's stadium plan is both unrealistic and a poor design, even if it looks nice visually. Their owner is also kind of an asshole with some questionable business dealings.

Interestingly enough, the author of the above article failed to mention Detroit and Indianapolis. Indy's run into some trouble with their bid, but Detroit still has life left in it.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on May 17, 2017, 04:24:09 PM
http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/05/17/here-s-where-fc-cincinnati-s-attendance-would-rank.html?ana=twt

Average attendance of 19,534/game puts FC Cincinnati at the top of the USL attendance charts (more than double all teams except Sacramento which averages ~11k/game). Compared to MLS teams, we would be 11 out of 22. Columbus Crew has the lowest attendance in the MLS, averaging 13,090/game.

http://soccerstadiumdigest.com/2017-mls-attendance/

One other interesting tidbit: average ticket price at FC Cincinnati games is $18 while MLS average is $27.

I'm actually surprised the price gap isn't larger. I suspect it's because FC Cincinnati is able to sell suites at Nippert at a pretty high price. That allows them to offset the cheaper tickets sold elsewhere in Nippert. You can buy $10 general admission tickets, which makes it almost as cheap as going to a movie.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on May 17, 2017, 04:29:32 PM
^ I wonder if FC Cincinnati hurts Columbus attendance at all?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on May 17, 2017, 04:37:23 PM
I seriously doubt it has had a large negative impact. Maybe there are some people who used to drive to Columbus and now stay in Cincinnati, but I suspect at most that's a few hundred. If you were a hardcore Crew fan, then you probably still make the drive.

And on the other hand, simply having more people excited about soccer in Cincinnati should be a *good* thing for attendance in Columbus. Long term, I think Columbus attendance would be boosted if/when FC Cincinnati joins the MLS.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on May 18, 2017, 12:41:25 PM
FCC defeated AFC Cleveland in the US Open Cup, advancing to the third round. We host Louisville City FC at Nippert Stadium on Wednesday, May 31. Season ticket holders get first access to their seats. At 9am on next Tuesday, any seats held by season ticket holders who don't purchase for this game will be released to the general public. Tickets are not included for this match.

The winner of the FCC/LCFC match goes on to play the Columbus Crew on June 13 or 14. A coin flip around 12:30 today will determine who plays at home for that game.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Cygnus on May 18, 2017, 01:40:50 PM
The Crew lost the coin toss and will play in either Cincinnati or Louisville.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on May 18, 2017, 03:15:35 PM
Oh man... that would be awesome. Talk about motivation to win on May 31st against Louisville.

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on May 23, 2017, 05:04:58 PM
http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/05/23/exclusive-fc-cincinnati-owners-bringing-in-new.html?ana=twt

Lindner is quoted as saying that the new (un-named) investor "will help with the private part of a public-private partnership to build a new stadium.”

That's the first anybody has mentioned the idea of having public involvement in building a new stadium. A lot of people (myself included) will not be thrilled by the idea of any public funds going towards a new stadium, since Nippert has already proven to be a great venue.

This is a pipe dream, but I'd love to see the University of Cincinnati brought on as a part owner of FC Cincinnati. It would make sense and ensure that they remain a good partner as long as FC Cincinnati stays at Nippert. It would be similar to how Atlanta United's ownership group overlaps with the Atlanta Falcons, and together they manage the facility. I'm not sure that there is any precedent for this in the US/MLS... but in Mexico, a few of the top teams are affiliated with large, public universities. I have no idea if there are legal reasons that either UC or the MLS wouldn't allow this... so, as I said, it's a pipe dream and I haven't seen any indication that the owners are creative enough to make it to happen. But I think it would be the best way to ensure long term success: great facility, great location, no need to build new stadium, ability to capture parking revenue, shared maintenance expenses, constant inflow of students as new fans.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on May 23, 2017, 05:12:31 PM
I love that idea, but I am very certain that they will build a new stadium if brought into MLS.

I am curious how much public involvement they will be asking for. They know that a stadium tax will never pass voters. But they also know they can get money out of the county and/or city. I have no idea where the breaking point is, or where that money comes from. I seem to remember someone saying there was still money in the old stadium deal to put towards this, but I'm not sure that's legal or true.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on May 23, 2017, 05:27:11 PM
I can't find the ballot language from 1996, but my understanding is that the Reds/Bengals stadium tax doesn't ever expire or have a cap on how much money it can raise. So theoretically Hamilton County could keep the tax going longer in order to raise money for additional renovations to the stadiums, a renovation of US Bank Arena, or an FC Cincinnati stadium without the citizens ever having to go back to the polls. But if that actually happened, I predict that the newly formed COAST spinoff group No More Stadium Taxes would sue them to try and stop it.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on May 23, 2017, 05:31:41 PM
^Yeah, I don't recall who I was talking to, but someone said something along those lines. And yeah, I'm sure a lawsuit would be brought on if that were the case. Not sure if it's true that the money could be transferred or used for a third/fourth stadium. I just want to know what they're doing so we can stop speculating about possibilities, and evaluate the option(s) they select.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on May 23, 2017, 05:58:42 PM
http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/05/23/exclusive-fc-cincinnati-owners-bringing-in-new.html?ana=twt

Lindner is quoted as saying that the new (un-named) investor "will help with the private part of a public-private partnership to build a new stadium.”

That's the first anybody has mentioned the idea of having public involvement in building a new stadium. A lot of people (myself included) will not be thrilled by the idea of any public funds going towards a new stadium, since Nippert has already proven to be a great venue.

This is a pipe dream, but I'd love to see the University of Cincinnati brought on as a part owner of FC Cincinnati. It would make sense and ensure that they remain a good partner as long as FC Cincinnati stays at Nippert. It would be similar to how Atlanta United's ownership group overlaps with the Atlanta Falcons, and together they manage the facility. I'm not sure that there is any precedent for this in the US/MLS... but in Mexico, a few of the top teams are affiliated with large, public universities. I have no idea if there are legal reasons that either UC or the MLS wouldn't allow this... so, as I said, it's a pipe dream and I haven't seen any indication that the owners are creative enough to make it to happen. But I think it would be the best way to ensure long term success: great facility, great location, no need to build new stadium, ability to capture parking revenue, shared maintenance expenses, constant inflow of students as new fans.


In that theory, what about if the Bengals were brought on as partners and then they could use PBS, which is already soccer ready.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on May 23, 2017, 06:02:24 PM
The worst of both worlds. A sterile environment and terrible owners.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on May 23, 2017, 06:54:30 PM
^Yeah, I don't recall who I was talking to, but someone said something along those lines. And yeah, I'm sure a lawsuit would be brought on if that were the case. Not sure if it's true that the money could be transferred or used for a third/fourth stadium. I just want to know what they're doing so we can stop speculating about possibilities, and evaluate the option(s) they select.

Regardless of whether the existing tax could be used to build additional stadiums, I do predict that before the current bonds are fully paid off, the Bengals and Reds will claim that their stadiums are getting old by league standards and they need more money for renovations. So the tax might be carried on for an additional couple of years just to add whatever features the Bengals and Reds ask for.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on May 23, 2017, 10:54:52 PM
The tax does not automatically sunset .  The bonds for the two stadiums were sold between 1998 and 2003 so the first ones will be paid off in 2028. 

The reason the stadium fund ran into trouble was because PBS went over by about $50 million but more importantly the county tax receipts stopped growing at 3%, after having grown at that rate for several decades.  It briefly flat lined around 2001 and has been growing since at about 2%.   The fact that the flat line happened so early in the repayment period instead of 10 years in had a profound effect on the county's situation.  It really isn't anyone's fault, it's just reality.

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thebillshark on May 24, 2017, 12:35:19 AM
Wetterich on the type of public support that may be palatable: https://twitter.com/chriscincibiz/status/867102580345896961
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on May 24, 2017, 12:39:10 AM
Port Authority involvement and tax abatement is almost a no-brainer. Hotel tax would be a harder sell.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: old edale on May 24, 2017, 02:38:59 AM
A renovated or new arena would have much better ROI than a new soccer stadium. Honestly, I get that FC Cincinnati games are fun, and Nippert is a great atmosphere, but it's a little strange how enthusiastic the city is about a minor league team. I get that there are ambitions to get to the MLS, but what if that doesn't happen? Think the level of support will remain as high as it is? Large numbers of fans don't travel to support minor league soccer teams at road games, so they wouldn't be contributing too much to the stadium tax that they'd be benefitting from. The f**king Forbes 500 List Lindners certainly don't NEED any public assistance- they could build 3 stadiums with their own money and still be billionaires.

If I'm the city I say to the FCC a) privately fund a stadium and hope to get to the MLS or b) continue playing at Nippert and live with keeping the team minor league.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on May 24, 2017, 08:05:16 AM
The stadium won't happen if they don't get into MLS. They aren't going to build a stadium in hopes of getting into MLS. The stadium will be contingent on it, and they may continue playing a Nippert for 1 or 2 years as they build a stadium (what Orlando, Atlanta, and Minnesota have done).
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: cincydave8 on May 24, 2017, 08:26:11 AM
Port Authority involvement and tax abatement is almost a no-brainer. Hotel tax would be a harder sell.

Yup, I think you're going to see the first 2 things. I think they'll also look for help in removing streets/structures depending on which site they choose. I still can't imagine they'll ask for a tax increase, that would make no sense. Public tax increases for stadiums is toxic here and nationally for that matter. Plus, I'm a Bailey season ticket holder and I would vote against any tax for FCC.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Rabbit Hash on May 24, 2017, 06:49:13 PM
News breaking that theee sites are under consideration:

Taft HS Football Stadium in OTR
Milacron Site in Oakley
Ovation in Newport

Thoughts?
OTR...fingers crossed.

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on May 24, 2017, 07:02:31 PM
Oakley is my least preferred site. Not near anything, terrible traffic, etc.

West End is my top choice. Newport would be pretty good, too, but not as good as West End.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on May 24, 2017, 07:55:10 PM
Here's a quick and dirty copy paste of Crew's stadium laid overtop the location - the theater and adjacent buildings would have to go, you might be able to squeeze it in without removing the buildings on Wade but they would likely have to come down as well:

(http://i.imgur.com/GMOd7gX.jpg)

Could the stadium be built into City West instead?  What sort of land restriction binds those crappy 15 year-old City West houses?  I know it was all former public housing, but who actually owns the land under those homes now? 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thebillshark on May 24, 2017, 09:04:00 PM
Here's a quick and dirty copy paste of Crew's stadium laid overtop the location - the theater and adjacent buildings would have to go, you might be able to squeeze it in without removing the buildings on Wade but they would likely have to come down as well:

(http://i.imgur.com/GMOd7gX.jpg)

Could the stadium be built into City West instead?  What sort of land restriction binds those crappy 15 year-old City West houses?  I know it was all former public housing, but who actually owns the land under those homes now?

Totally disagree Jake. I don't think those houses are crappy and I think they are still performing their function as affordable housing quite well.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thebillshark on May 24, 2017, 09:14:17 PM
Here's a quick and dirty copy paste of Crew's stadium laid overtop the location - the theater and adjacent buildings would have to go, you might be able to squeeze it in without removing the buildings on Wade but they would likely have to come down as well:

(http://i.imgur.com/GMOd7gX.jpg)

I have huge problems with this. It breaks up the street grid further in an area that used to have a way more intact street grid. It wrecks down 3 historic buildings that are quite nice. Also hate to bring up parking but I think the garages in the area should be geared towards businesses and residents as opposed to a huge game day type structure.

I think at a minimum this design would have to be really creative incorporating those historic buildings into the stadium for me to even consider liking it.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Cygnus on May 24, 2017, 09:17:02 PM
Didn't know this was a thing: FCC 2 NKY (https://www.facebook.com/FCC2NKY/)

Although by NKY they mean Covington:
Quote
FCC is missing a big opportunity at the soon to be shuttered IRS facility in Covington. Imagine walking from the pubs at Mainstrasse to the stadium. It could be the most authenic place for soccer to be played. It would feel like Europe.

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: joshknut on May 24, 2017, 10:17:39 PM
Who has their email addresses? If it's in Oakley I will also cancel my subscription. Newport there may be a 50% chance I keep it. This needs to be in the Cincinnati urban core. This should not cater to the suburbs. Placing it in Oakley would be to make people driving in from West Chester feel safe with a suburban style set up. This would be best used to help the West End
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: moonloop on May 24, 2017, 11:25:19 PM
I'd like to see the West End too.


The Enquirer quotes Berding, "...Our prospective stadium finance plan is being developed," Berding said. "Our effort to land an MLS franchise for Cincinnati starts with $250 million in private investment and would not include a new tax increase as speculated today at the Hamilton County commission meeting."
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on May 25, 2017, 12:01:11 AM
Totally disagree Jake. I don't think those houses are crappy and I think they are still performing their function as affordable housing quite well.

I looked it up and everything in the 500 block of David, Derrick Turnbow, Betton, etc., is owned by CMHA and dates to 2005.  There is still a ton of land in that area that has not been developed since the original public housing was torn down.  If anyone has the pull to get CMHA to do a land swap and get their housing rebuilt on that extra land or nearby, it's the Lindners.  There very well might be a 50-year federal contract backing that affordable housing

The way I look at it is if the stadium is built with Central Ave. as its eastern boundary, then everything between Central and Central becomes very valuable.  That includes the big lot owned by Cincinnati Police District 1, the Cincinnati Ballet, the big vacant lot owned by Tri-State Wholesaling just south of their warehouse.  If the stadium overlaps Central Ave. and makes Providence its eastern boundary, it reduces the amount of land that it helps improve.

Also, it's noteworthy to mention that a West End stadium would be very accessible to I-75 from Ezzard Charles and the Winchell ramps.   Also, keeping Central Ave. intact does help vehicular access since it does continue south into Downtown and has access to the 8th St. Viaduct and other highway ramps. 
 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thebillshark on May 25, 2017, 02:10:26 AM
^ I think in that scenario people would be outraged that the only way to get new affordable housing built is in a one for one swap because the richest man in town wanted to build a stadium. And they would be right. That's a functioning neighborhood that doesn't need to be disrupted, and given the history of Kenyon Barr I think it's appropriate to be skeptical of big sweeping plans. Until we know more details it's all hypothetical anyway, especially the scenario you describe which is probably not what they're thinking anyway. 

But in general, I'm not convinced a major league stadium in that location would be automatically good for the neighborhood- it's a cliche, but the devil would be in the details for this one (which we haven't seen yet.)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on May 25, 2017, 07:08:49 AM
Well, with American sized stadiums, you have to make a trade off. I think most of the people on this forum would agree that superblocks aren't great for cities. But American sized stadiums are enormous and don't fit easily into urban street grids. So if you want a stadium in an urban location, you have to accept that we're going to have a superblock that's somewhat disruptive to the surrounding neighborhood.

Of course if you want something less disruptive you can do a smaller European sized stadium. And we already have that... Nippert.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: cincydave8 on May 25, 2017, 08:09:54 AM
The new stadium will probably only hold 20 to 25K. So it will not take up too much space. Each site has its positive and negatives.

West End - Urban location, walking distance from tons of bars, basically on the streetcar route. Parking could be interesting, I wonder if they'd want a new garage or anything. Not sure they would need it.

Oakley - Plenty of space to build the stadium, plenty of parking, walk to Mad Tree and the other Oakley bars. Traffic would be a nightmare. There would have to be another way back there.

Newport - Plenty of space to build the stadium, would have a great views of downtown, somewhat walkable to bars, traffic could be an issue with 60 to 70% of fans coming from Ohio. A lot of fans feel like it's FC Cincinnati not FC Newport or whatever.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on May 25, 2017, 08:27:16 AM
West End and OTR Community Council would lose. their. minds. if FCC proposed a West End Stadium with no parking garage nearby.

I'm pretty certain that the West End site will be the first to be eliminated, though. Newport and Oakley are big wide open sites and West End is a complicated, smaller site with many more limitations. I can't see them picking the site that's the hardest to work with.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Jimmy Skinner on May 25, 2017, 08:35:21 AM
^The West End site has the Music Hall/WCET Parking Garage which has severe deferred maintenance and could be rebuilt much bigger.  This site is good for handling large crowds, super easy access to the freeway and is IMO hands down the best location. 

100 years ago Central Avenue was a business artery with tons of businesses and streetcar tracks.  Now it is a barely travelled side street.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thebillshark on May 25, 2017, 10:15:14 AM
100 years ago Central Avenue was a business artery with tons of businesses and streetcar tracks.  Now it is a barely travelled side street.

I think part of this is due to how it goofily and unnecessarily changes from a two way street into a one way and then back into a two way in the span of a few blocks. If it didn't do that, it would be a navigable, direct route from West End/OTR all the way to Covington.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on May 25, 2017, 10:32:23 AM
West End is the no brainer choice to me. It fits with the urban redevelopment plan. It would integrate into the neighborhood. There is some parking infrastructure in place already and more can be built. More importantly, it offers the availability for the most uses. 
The garages can be used for multiple purposes. Music Hall events, Washington Park events, Police events, etc.
It offers easy highway access with the exit ramps nearby.
It offers the ability to add more critical access to the streetcar and other events to draw additional streetcar riders. Also, it would help with parking because people can park farther away and take the streetcar to the game.

It provides a nice urban setting with bars and other places nearby to walk to after and before the games (unlike Columbus which is just a sea of grassy parking nearby.)
It can be used for other events easily such as HS games, concerts etc.


Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on May 25, 2017, 11:07:52 AM
I think the ownership of FC understands that the popularity of the team is almost completely based on where it is playing -- Nippert.  They risk losing the fans they never thought they were going to get if a new stadium has poor atmosphere.  The Lindners and the team could earn a lot of goodwill if they broker a deal to replace the not-historic CMHA housing with more and better affordable housing nearby in order to preserve the theater and handful of historic buildings on Central Ave (which could become bars, a spirit shop, etc.). 

The odd party that looks to make out huge from all of this is the Jehova's Witnesses, who own over an acre of land just north of the Taft stadium that they got from the city back in 1992 or thereabouts for $1. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on May 25, 2017, 11:23:34 AM
FC Cincinnati shares new details on stadium planning

FC Cincinnati could be eying three sites for a possible soccer-only stadium to be built in Greater Cincinnati, the Enquirer reports.

Team president Jeff Berding confirmed that the franchise has looked at sites in the West End, Oakley and Newport as it reviews possible plans to build a stadium to satisfy requirements to join Major League Soccer.

More below:
http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/05/25/fc-cincinnati-shares-new-details-on-stadium.html
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Cygnus on May 25, 2017, 12:12:42 PM
Oakley & Newport are just distractions to keep West End costs down...

FC Cincinnati pins down two stadium sites, hires architect, report says (http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/02/06/fc-cincinnati-pins-down-two-stadium-sites-hires.html)
“Berding said FCC has zeroed in on two potential stadium sites, both of which are in the city’s urban core that stretches (between) the river, downtown, Over-the-Rhine and UC,” Brian Straus, who covers soccer, wrote on SI.com.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thebillshark on May 25, 2017, 12:41:30 PM
I think the ownership of FC understands that the popularity of the team is almost completely based on where it is playing -- Nippert.  They risk losing the fans they never thought they were going to get if a new stadium has poor atmosphere.  The Lindners and the team could earn a lot of goodwill if they broker a deal to replace the not-historic CMHA housing with more and better affordable housing nearby in order to preserve the theater and handful of historic buildings on Central Ave (which could become bars, a spirit shop, etc.). 

The odd party that looks to make out huge from all of this is the Jehova's Witnesses, who own over an acre of land just north of the Taft stadium that they got from the city back in 1992 or thereabouts for $1.

I think we're arguing just to argue now since it has not been proposed anywhere but demolition of any of the City West public housing is a complete non starter. This housing is relatively new and creates some great urban streets unlike some of the stuff built in a previous era. There's other public housing not far from there that is truly ancient so the idea of tearing down the newer stuff even it were replaced one for one is truly unpalatable.  In any case we need every last unit of public housing we have right now because there's absolutely no money to build more of it and it's preventing a large number of people from becoming homeless.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thebillshark on May 25, 2017, 01:30:48 PM
Another thing to consider is the news is suggesting the Taft HS football stadium site for some reason, but I think it would fit straight up with no modifications to the street grid in the large open lot on the SW corner of Ezzard Charles and John St. I wonder how educated a guess these news reports are.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Flyboy41 on May 25, 2017, 01:36:41 PM
Just an aside. Don't use Mapfre Stadium as a stand-in. Its so outdated.
Use Orlando or Sporting KC's stadium.
Sorry, just a pet peeve.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on May 25, 2017, 01:40:36 PM
^CMHA owns that, too.  John St. was always the line of demarcation between ordinary property and public housing.  Also, that lot is probably not quit large enough to accommodate a stadium without taking some adjacent property. 

Although FC might actually be looking at a different site in the West End in order to fool speculators around Taft.  A vacant lot at 411 Wade St. just sold for $10,000 to an agent the first day it was listed.  The transfer hasn't been recorded yet but should appear by the end of the week. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on May 25, 2017, 01:54:42 PM
That lot at Ezzard Charles and John is almost certainly too small.

The stadium I like to use for comparison is Avaya Stadium in San Jose. Very compact, and likely the smallest footprint we can expect.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thebillshark on May 25, 2017, 02:07:05 PM
MAPFRE stadium is 500x600 feet. The big empty lot at EC & John that was used as streetcar contruction staging area is just under that. They could do it, if they built up instead of out. (Nippert is 460x500)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmblec2 on May 25, 2017, 02:21:21 PM
That lot at Ezzard Charles and John is almost certainly too small.

The stadium I like to use for comparison is Avaya Stadium in San Jose. Very compact, and likely the smallest footprint we can expect.

talk about a terrible location. Any way that looks doable in, what is the footprint of that? and what is the capacity of that stadium?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on May 25, 2017, 02:22:27 PM
Avaya is ~500x600 as well. I don't think you'll be able to get a full stadium in a smaller footprint, assuming you want stands on all 4 sides.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on May 25, 2017, 04:25:19 PM
Avaya only has a capacity of 18,000, one of the smallest in MLS. The building is very compact, though, opposed to the sprawling Mapfre Stadium. I think it's a realistic expectation for the dimensions of a stadium in Cincinnati. Unfortunately Google Maps doesn't have the new Orlando City Stadium yet on Earth view, so I can't measure the stadium.

Avaya is about 500x550. You aren't going to get anything much narrower than 500ft wide. That lot on Ezzard/John is only about 450 feet, and Stargel Stadium's site is only 400 ft. You probably need some more width to make a stadium fit unless there's an extremely creative solution (which is probably more expensive).
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on May 25, 2017, 04:47:55 PM
It's actually possible that these buildings could be preserved under the slope of bleachers.  It would be a pretty amazing design element if they are converted into a part of the stadium complex -- i.e. an on-site restaurant/bar/spirit shop: 
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1113435,-84.5221217,3a,75y,141.51h,105.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1se-L7UdvrMHccGIVtaGW0yA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Flyboy41 on May 25, 2017, 05:05:22 PM
Providence Park in Portland is crammed into a small area. Not counting the Multnomah Athletic Club (which sits on the same block, Providence has a footprint of about 500 wide by 600 long. They're even adding 4,000 seats to bring capacity to 25,000 without expanding the footprint. You could maybe squeeze something similar into the West End. The issue of course is parking. Providence doesn't have much in the way of parking, relying on the light rail stop adjacent to the stadium.

My photoshop skills suck so I'm not making a "rendering". Avaya stadium is certainly expandable as well with the open end.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on May 25, 2017, 07:21:40 PM
From Paul Daugherty:

One advantage the Reds and Bengals had that FCC does not: They could claim that central riverfront development and the redone Ft. Washington Way depended on new stadia attracting critical mass. And they were right. Without the draw of sports, the central riverfront would be a lesser spot.

What area is FCC going to improve with its presence? The Oakley area is already booming. The Newport suggestion is OK, but Newport already has the Levee and the aquarium. Taft HS football stadium? What?



This is so typical of how the typical suburban Cincinnatian just doesn't get the city.  They didn't get it when OTR came back from the dead and even though that just happened they can't see similar redevelopment spilling over into the West End. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thebillshark on May 25, 2017, 08:01:31 PM
Avaya only has a capacity of 18,000, one of the smallest in MLS. The building is very compact, though, opposed to the sprawling Mapfre Stadium. I think it's a realistic expectation for the dimensions of a stadium in Cincinnati. Unfortunately Google Maps doesn't have the new Orlando City Stadium yet on Earth view, so I can't measure the stadium.

Avaya is about 500x550. You aren't going to get anything much narrower than 500ft wide. That lot on Ezzard/John is only about 450 feet, and Stargel Stadium's site is only 400 ft. You probably need some more width to make a stadium fit unless there's an extremely creative solution (which is probably more expensive).

You're right about there only being 450ft. There's a big difference measuring street to street in Google map view which is what I did initially and measuring sidewalk to sidewalk in Google satellite view. Would be extremely tight.

It's actually possible that these buildings could be preserved under the slope of bleachers.  It would be a pretty amazing design element if they are converted into a part of the stadium complex -- i.e. an on-site restaurant/bar/spirit shop: 
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1113435,-84.5221217,3a,75y,141.51h,105.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1se-L7UdvrMHccGIVtaGW0yA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Would be cool if the tall one poked through the stands and there was a rooftop deck on it you could watch the game from. Or just have a cutaway in the seats forming a plaza in front of the buildings.  That may work if the field was a few feet lower than street level.

Re: Daugherty, he recently said he's never coming downtown again because of a parking ticket he got on a Sunday, so we can see the grumpy suburbanite mindset there. (Incidentally I had wlw on this morning to hear traffic and McConnell made like 3 unsolicited anti city comments in 15 seconds talking about business news.)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: bendixondavis on May 25, 2017, 09:31:08 PM
I know there is "pressure" on them from MLS to have a soccer specific stadium but I really don't get it. At nippert we can have 35000 or 10000 at a game and the atmosphere is amazing. Why build something new? Why fix something that isn't broken? I feel we should have some leverage with this because we regularly are having higher attendance than other MLS teams. MLS would be fools to not move us up and take advantage of the already existing market for one that is not already proven just because of a stadium.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Cincy513 on May 25, 2017, 10:32:08 PM
I know there is "pressure" on them from MLS to have a soccer specific stadium but I really don't get it. At nippert we can have 35000 or 10000 at a game and the atmosphere is amazing. Why build something new? Why fix something that isn't broken? I feel we should have some leverage with this because we regularly are having higher attendance than other MLS teams. MLS would be fools to not move us up and take advantage of the already existing market for one that is not already proven just because of a stadium.
MLS wants the teams to own their stadiums, or at the very least control revenue in the stadiums they play in. FC does neither at Nippert. They're not getting into MLS without building a stadium.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: moonloop on May 25, 2017, 10:54:44 PM
It's official: FC Cincinnati moves forward on stadium plan

Berding said the form of public money hasn’t been determined yet but club officials have had a lot of conversations with public officials. He sees an opportunity in using existing economic development tools. Public financing could be used for infrastructure or parking-related costs, he said.

The club wants to finalize financing and site selection by summer, Berding said.

“However, we have an MLS expansion bid with 12 cities. Of those 12 cities, we’re the smallest market. The feeling is we will not win a bid to get one of those expansion franchises without our own stadium. Would we win a bid to bring MLS to Cincinnati? No, we would not.”

"...And MLS wants teams to own their stadium and control all of its revenue streams. That wouldn’t be the case at Paul Brown Stadium. “We’d be looking for something that’s not there,” Berding said.

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/05/25/its-official-fc-cincinnati-moves-forward-on.html (http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/05/25/its-official-fc-cincinnati-moves-forward-on.html)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on May 26, 2017, 01:18:37 PM
The City West housing owned by CMHA west of John St. was a HUD Hope VI project:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HOPE_VI

According to this document, the replacement of Lincoln Court and Laurel Homes by City West received a total of $66,093,590 from HUD:
https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=DOC_10014.pdf

It appears to me -- and again appears -- that cuts to HUD under George Bush explain why City West has never been completed.  Aside form the giant grassy lot south of Ezzard Charles, there are many undeveloped parcels within the old Lincoln Court property.  And some of the original 1930s Lincoln Court housing was merely rehabbed, not bulldozed and replaced, and still stands at the corner of Liberty and Linn.  It looks like the whole Hope VI thing in Cincinnati was underfunded from the very beginning. 

I was not able to find information indicating a process for doing a land swap with HUD/CMHA or when, if ever, public housing stops being public housing and can be auctioned off.  In other situations I have heard of 50-year contracts, which puts City West at 2055 before it can be bulldozed by a developer. 

It's also important to note that a fundamental tenant of Hope VI was the move away from multi-floor apartment buildings and toward side-by-side attached row houses.  So if it is possible to do a swap, the replacement housing presumably would have to be low-rise housing similar to what exists west of John St. 





Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: moonloop on May 26, 2017, 02:31:47 PM
I would think FCC getting CPS to selling their football stadium would be a bigger obstacle. In the Business Courier story, FCC supposedly will allow high schools to used the new stadium for events. Considering it would be a grass field that would be suprising.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: gaslight on May 26, 2017, 04:23:23 PM
I would think FCC getting CPS to selling their football stadium would be a bigger obstacle. In the Business Courier story, FCC supposedly will allow high schools to used the new stadium for events. Considering it would be a grass field that would be suprising.

If CPS selling their football stadium is the answer. Why cant UC sell Nippert to FCC? Heck FCC could use equity to buy it, and it the equity could go into UC investment portfolio. UC is already putting money into hedge funds why would this be any different.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on May 26, 2017, 04:52:39 PM
I wonder if MLS itself collects revenue from non-MLS events held at soccer-specific stadiums.  That alone would cause a problem in a stadium with a state university as a tenant, aside from the fact that UC's land was deeded to the city, all of the athletic booster money that has gone into Nippert, etc. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on May 27, 2017, 01:40:35 PM
^^That's along the lines of what I was suggesting about bringing UC on as a part owner. If UC has an equity stake in FCC, then the ownership group could say to the MLS that collectively they "own" the facility... and I don't see how it would be any different than the situation in Atlanta (aside from being new versus old stadium). Would be a great way to save the owners from having to pony up the cash to build a new stadium. The savings from not building (and maintaining!) a new stadium could allow for a) more money spent on personnel, b) more money spent on marketing, and c) more revenue sharing back to the MLS. That strikes me as a win for all stakeholders: fans, UC, current ownership group, the players, the coaching staff, and the MLS.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Tobias C on May 27, 2017, 03:22:02 PM
The reality is MLS has plenty of suitors for expansion teams in bigger markets. Also Cincinnati isnt a huge market and the Crew kind of got the state covered as one territory with their central location (similar to the Blue Jackets). Theres absolutely room for another MLS team in Ohio, but its definitely not a pressing need or desire for the league office and board.

Not saying FCC doesnt deserve a team because they do, but they absolutely arent a priority for MLS and MLS can demand anything of them and string them along. FCC is the eastern version of Sacramento Republic. Theyre in the same boat and are even more prepared for MLS then Cincy. Solid financial backing, solid fanbase with consistent sold out games (about 11,000 capacity). They already have their stadium plans drawn up, land owned and prepped for construction. Theyre literally just waiting for the go ahead from the league. MLS uses them as a pawn to get other expansion bids to be more proactive. Im afraid Cincy might fall into this category.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: TroyEros on May 27, 2017, 06:47:57 PM
Bigger markets mean nothing. It's about fan support and right now the mls is suffering with that. From Philadelphia, Chicago and New England to Columbus all the way down to Houston and Dallas the attendance is abysmal. Constant low figures, mainly because of horrible stadium location decisions.

Larger markets mean absolutely nothing if you don't have a fan support system in full stride, and right now FCC attendance figures are beating half of the mls teams which is absolutely embarrassing for the mls.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: bendixondavis on May 28, 2017, 12:28:59 AM
Which is exactly why I argue that it would be stupid for them to not let us in. More tickets sold means more jerseys and gear sold, more food sold, more beer sold. So overall if they're getting revenue from all of that there is more money to be made from us than other teams.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Tobias C on May 28, 2017, 01:40:10 AM
You guys are all correct but dont underestimate Garbers focus on media market size.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: TroyEros on May 28, 2017, 02:03:14 AM
Are we really that small of a market when Dayton/NKY/IND are a factor in the FCC audience as well?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: moonloop on May 28, 2017, 01:54:07 PM
^^That's along the lines of what I was suggesting about bringing UC on as a part owner. If UC has an equity stake in FCC, then the ownership group could say to the MLS that collectively they "own" the facility... and I don't see how it would be any different than the situation in Atlanta (aside from being new versus old stadium). Would be a great way to save the owners from having to pony up the cash to build a new stadium. The savings from not building (and maintaining!) a new stadium could allow for a) more money spent on personnel, b) more money spent on marketing, and c) more revenue sharing back to the MLS. That strikes me as a win for all stakeholders: fans, UC, current ownership group, the players, the coaching staff, and the MLS.

That’s creative. I've never heard of a college owning a professional sports team.

Oh wait, how could I forget that just north of here, a college owns a semi-pro football team, tOSU.

And it gets better, even further north a city built a stadium for a complete rank amateur football club.

What a crazy state we live in.

**double rim-shot**
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Tobias C on May 28, 2017, 04:58:05 PM
Colleges having professional teams is actually a thing in some other countries I believe. Teams in Mexico and Chile come to mind. No idea its ever happened in any American sport.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on May 29, 2017, 02:09:16 PM
It's a bit different in Mexico since the professional teams use the university's name/mascot/logo, usually through a licensing agreement. That only works because "university athletics" in Mexico are nothing like college sports in the US. I'm not suggesting that FCC use UC's logo/mascot/name (that'd be super confusing)... rather, I just want the ownership group to put together an agreement that allows for shared use of facilities and shared revenue from parking. That is a bit complicated, but it seems A LOT simpler and cheaper than setting up a new public/private partnership to construct a new stadium. From the MLS's perspective, they want a) committed owners b) good fan experience and c) maximum revenue from concessions/parking/etc. All of these can be addressed by bringing UC on as a part owner.

But even if FCC could easily build a new stadium, here's what it comes down to for me: nobody has made an argument of why a new facility would be superior to Nippert for the MLS, the owners, or the fans.

The only arguments I've heard against Nippert is that its surface (FieldTurf) and size (too big) aren't ideal. Other MLS stadiums use FieldTurf, and I think it makes sense for a shared facility to use FieldTurf since it is so much more durable and versatile. A smaller stadium would sell out more frequently and possibly be a better fan experience... but I view Nippert's size as both a pro and con. Even with just 18,000 fans, Nippert feels full of energy, and having the extra capacity allows for special games to accommodate much larger attendance. I haven't heard any complaints from fans about Nippert! I don't hear people say, "Oh Nippert feels too big and cavernous". Rather, I hear constantly that people love the atmosphere, even on days with low attendance. The design of Nippert makes it feel compact and intimate, even when it isn't full (which is very different from Paul Brown). Looking at all of the other MLS stadiums, I think Nippert would be in the top 5 of best designs/locations (Seattle, Portland, DC's under construction Audi Field are my favorites for the location/design).

By contrast, there are numerous ways in which a new stadium would be inferior to Nippert:I'm genuinely curious to hear if anybody thinks a new stadium would be superior to Nippert, and if so, in what ways. Until I hear a compelling argument, I'm going keep hoping that the MLS, FCC, and UC show some creativity and find a way to make Nippert work long term.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: SleepyLeroy on May 29, 2017, 02:30:04 PM
^^^^^ I agree, but if a new location HAS to be built.....


The locations all mentioned are a let down as i see it. They seem more like concessions to investors who own the property or nearby property than they are to being chosen for being a good place to grow or even maintain the enthusiasm of the fan base. You would think that with all the work going on at the MLK exit the could find some corner in that vast swath of real estate to tuck in a stadium so that UC students could easily walk to the games and pregame near campus. What about the site of the walnut hills Kroger store? Incorporate the theater lobby on the corner into a new/old stadium and bring life back to Prout's Corner!!!! Use it for off game day programming too of course like concerts if possible. FCCincinnati central with shuttles to the casino parking lot to bring people up the hill and back for pregame in OTR. Everything else will need infrastructure/parking/construction from scratch or require demo of what is left of west end history (maybe) and look to make already difficult traffic MUCH worse on game days. Gilbert ave is way overbuilt for what walnut hills is currently and it even has a direct connection to the new MLK exit on one end and downtown on the other. The current plans have all the excitement in my opinion of the Crewe stadium, a new bland histortless structure on empty land. https://goo.gl/maps/mBaG39tFoGo


Moderator Note: Edited Google Maps link to be a short url

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thebillshark on May 29, 2017, 02:30:25 PM
@jwulsin that's an excellent summary and you should share it with the team & other involved parties.

It seems to me that MLS's marketing mission is to recreate the tradition and fan following of European leagues here in the USA.  Wouldn't a historic stadium like Nippert only help in that regard? (It's historic but it still has all the modern bells and whistles like luxury boxes that UC just built)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: TroyEros on May 29, 2017, 04:16:33 PM
It will be the West End.

The land speculation prices for both the Ovation site and the Oakley site will be massive. The west end is by far the cheapest land value option, and doesn't carry the controversy that a FC Kentucky will bring, or a suburban Oakley site will bring.

 The West end will be great for pre game drinking, and accessibility via the street car. The life blood of this team are urbanites who want to walk to the game, and are very supportive of urban progress in cincinnati in general.

Parking might be a massive concern, but maybe Jack Casino can work some type of deal with FCC? Or maybe a parking garage can be built? I don't know, but what I do know is that an urban stadium in the west end will be great for the progress that OTR is encountering, and maybe even be a catalyst for saving the old west end quicker than forseen.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on May 29, 2017, 04:21:09 PM
But even if FCC could easily build a new stadium, here's what it comes down to for me: nobody has made an argument of why a new facility would be superior to Nippert for the MLS, the owners, or the fans.

The only arguments I've heard against Nippert is that its surface (FieldTurf) and size (too big) aren't ideal. Other MLS stadiums use FieldTurf, and I think it makes sense for a shared facility to use FieldTurf since it is so much more durable and versatile.

While FieldTurf is more durable, it seems to me that the preferred surface for most players seems to be grass. For example, the US Men's National Team will play only on grass and not on turf. In Seattle, when they (USMNT, CONCACAF, International Friendlies, etc) play at Century Link, a grass surface is brought in over the turf even though the MLS franchise typically plays on turf.

Quote
I haven't heard any complaints from fans about Nippert! I don't hear people say, "Oh Nippert feels too big and cavernous". Rather, I hear constantly that people love the atmosphere, even on days with low attendance. The design of Nippert makes it feel compact and intimate, even when it isn't full (which is very different from Paul Brown). Looking at all of the other MLS stadiums, I think Nippert would be in the top 5 of best designs/locations (Seattle, Portland, DC's under construction Audi Field are my favorites for the location/design).

I've been to nearly every FCC match and Nippert and here's my take: the stadium has far exceeded my expectations. When this club was announced, I couldn't believe Nippert was chosen over Paul Brown. The first match really won me over. I didn't attend UC for school, have not attachment to the venue outside of FCC, and have only been to a handful of UC Football games, but Nippert is a really good venue. That being said, it does have some downsides:

- No dedicated booths for merchandise and no room to put them in. March is sold in tents that have often have lines backing up into the concourse.
- Limited concession areas where the lines often compete with concourse traffic. Also, beer sold from tents has this issue. In particular: the Madtree tent line always moves quickly (with wonderful beer flowing), but it's always very crowded as the line from it meets the line from food, bathrooms, and general traffic.
- Restroom facilities that exist are fairly clean, but crowded and the club brings in a ton of "port-a-john's" to accommodate.
- Outside of the club, you're left with just bleachers. While The Bailey stands and doesn't seem to care, the red bleachers in the lower bowl (metal in the upper deck) feel cheap and aren't the most comfortable.

Quote
By contrast, there are numerous ways in which a new stadium would be inferior to Nippert:
  • Worse location - Nippert is a great location by virtue of being near so much in Uptown. Short Vine and McMillan are great for pre/post game. The bars/restaurants benefit greatly from having a source of revenue that isn't tied to students and the academic schedule. Uptown can grow as it attracts more residents/users in addition to the student base.
Couldn't agree more with this, the location is great and while the downtown/OTR renaissance has been wonderful, it's great seeing so many people in Uptown that aren't just UC students. If FCC moves to its own venue elsewhere, the thing I will miss most is Mecklenburg Gardens. It's the absolute perfect pre and post match hangout spot. Great local business, great food, great beer, and you can always find a spot to to sit and relax with friends.

Quote
  • The West End site has real geometry challenges (both for the stadium and for new parking infrastructure). A large stadium won't fit in to the street grid, and the streets/parking infrastructure of OTR and the West End aren't set up for 20,000 people to arrive/depart all at the same time. The streetcar will be nice, but won't make a huge difference in terms of traffic/parking.
  • Ovation is an exciting opportunity for Newport and the region (riverfront, beautiful views of Cincinnati, near downtown), but Newport would benefit more from adding high density residential/office rather than a stadium that sits empty most days. It could be a nice spot for a stadium helping drive surrounding development, but I don't think a stadium is the BEST use for the space.
  • The Oakley site is uninteresting since pretty much everybody will drive to it and the surrounding "Center of Cincinnati" development (mega Kroger, large movie theater, single story out lots) wasn't designed to accommodate high density.
[/li]
[li]Worse utilization rate. All stadiums sit empty most days, so from a neighborhood/public perspective, this is a HUGE cost to a new stadium. Aside from FCC games, I don't know of any events that a new stadium would attract that can't be accommodated by existing venues (PBS, Nippert, Gettler, Stargel, etc). The rest of the time, the stadium sits empty. Adding an additional stadium to our urban core is not the best use of space, when we really need to be adding more residents.[/li]
[li]Worse quality construction. Nippert is built extremely well. I worry that a new stadium will be much more "flimsy" and cheaply constructed.[/li]
[li]Ongoing maintenance upgrades: the long term success of a facility depends on continuously upgrading the facilities. By virtue of being shared with UC, Nippert has more revenue to justify ongoing upgrades, which will help improve the fan experience for both UC Football and FCC. By contrast, an underutilized facility that neglects maintenance because they can't justify the ROI will languish (see US Bank Arena).[/li]
[li]Student fan base: being on campus is a huge opportunity for FCC and the MLS to get a steady stream of new fans, who can be converted to lifelong fans. Over the long term, this is a HUGE opportunity that the team/league would be foolish to waste.[/li]
[/list]

I currently live in Oakley and the idea of being able to wake up and walk to the stadium/bar and then home is incredibly appealing. As someone who spent 5 years in NKY (Ft. Thomas (nice, but not great walkability and nothing going on after 4 PM with poor transit connections) and the one year in the suburbs (West Chester hell), I've loved living somewhere where I hardly ever touch my car and can utilize my bike or walk. However, that Kroger/Center of Cincinnati development is complete garbage with more garbage going in. I don't think it would provide a decent environment at all for the stadium. Not to mention, the stadium would be surrounded by residential housing and while there's great bars around here, most of them are small.

Totally agree that the Newport Ovation site should be geared towards density and residential. Loved Newport when I lived in NKY and would love to see its nightlife on par with Covington/downtown/OTR.

West End would be my preferred option: help move the development of OTR in that direction. Hopefully reasonable proximity to the streetcar (or a SC extension to Union Terminal where a daily Cardinal would bring in tons of rival fans from Chicago).

Quote
I'm genuinely curious to hear if anybody thinks a new stadium would be superior to Nippert, and if so, in what ways. Until I hear a compelling argument, I'm going keep hoping that the MLS, FCC, and UC show some creativity and find a way to make Nippert work long term.

I believe FCC's own venue would be superior to Nippert. No matter if UC is a partner or not, FCC will always be the second hand tenant. I'm not saying this is negative, but the building is clearly there to serve primarily for UC's football program. You can put up all the FCC logos you want, but you're still renting a room in UC's house. While it's been a great temporary home (and could be an excellent long term USL home should MLS not happen), it's not soccer specific. I'd love to see a venue with a safe standing section, where we could maybe have a capo stand, where all seats line up with the pitch, where a true grass surface can be maintained. Where I don't have to wait in line at a port-a-john. Something top class and on par with others in the league.

Ultimately, this is what it comes down to for right or wrong: MLS is no longer sticking their hand out hoping someone wants to invest/join. They don't need to rush and add teams to keep the league afloat. They're no longer the beggars, they're the choosers. While Seattle was a market with a fanbase that they needed for revenue and they could overlook playing in a cavernous facility, times have changed. If FCC wants to be in MLS, they'll need their own facility where they control almost everything. If they don't/can't go that route, MLS isn't going to wait. There's plenty of other markets out there. It comes down to who can make it work and deliver what they want. FCC could take a strong stance and stand by Nippert, but there's 9 other markets who MLS could turn to and those are just the other applicants. There's still even more who are up and coming or could jump on the radar eventually. Not saying that it's right, but it's just reality.

I'm waiting to hear all these details about public/private partnership, I think that is what makes or break this. However, in the meantime: You want in to MLS? Build a stadium. You want to stay at Nippert? Get used to USL. I'm content to support this club in either venture. While I'd love to see them jump to the highest level, I'm enjoying Nippert and league/US Open Cup play.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on May 30, 2017, 11:34:22 AM
@Gordon Bombay - I also live in Oakley and feel the same way about the Oakley site. While I technically could walk there... I would never *want* to walk across the sea of surface parking lots. That whole development area is a such a missed opportunity since it *could* have been a great extension of walkable Oakley.

I also agree with your comments about the areas where Nippert could be improved (need for more restrooms, dedicated store for merchandise) but I view those as solvable issues that both UC and FCC would benefit from. But maybe I'm wrong and there simply isn't room to add any more facilities. As for the surface, grass is - undeniably - the preferred surface for soccer, so no arguing with you there. I just think FieldTurf is an acceptable compromise in situations like this. In terms of seating, I've wondered if the bleacher seats in the lower bowl could be replaced with actual seats. That would a) make the seats more comfortable and b) reduce total capacity (which would make it easier to fill the lower bowl). Anybody know if the bleachers could be replaced with fold-up seats?  The Box Seat company makes a seat called the 901 (http://www.theboxseat.co/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/TBS-901-BROCHURE.pdf) that has a very slim profile when collapsed (only 7.5" when collapsed). The new Bordeaux stadium (http://www.theboxseat.co/new-bordeaux-stadium/) uses these seats, and I think they'd look great in Nippert. Fold up seats would make it easier to walk past people to get to your seat. Currently, the bleacher width plus your legs doesn't leave much room for somebody to walk by. With fold-up seats, it would allow for more space for people to walk by each other (would still require people to stand up).
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on May 30, 2017, 12:31:05 PM
Looking at satellite imagery, I think the logistics of the Oakley site are much more complicated than they first appear.  Doing absolutely nothing will cause a lot of trouble for the existing Oakley Station tenants.  Adding access to the site from local streets in Norwood across I-71 will require a $50+ million bridge (that will be a big boost for Oakley Station tenants, but Norwood might oppose it if they think it will poach Norwood business).  Putting an underpass under the B&O mainline tracks to Robertson and connecting to Edwards would help, but the traffic situation will still be pretty bad, and that improvement will cost upwards of $50 million as well. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on May 30, 2017, 12:33:24 PM
It will be the West End.

The land speculation prices for both the Ovation site and the Oakley site will be massive. The west end is by far the cheapest land value option, and doesn't carry the controversy that a FC Kentucky will bring, or a suburban Oakley site will bring.

The Taft site is of course already publicly owned.  Sounds like FC has already done some back room negotiations with CPS, but there is a risk that our public school system will get hosed out of what will soon become very valuable land. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Chas Wiederhold on May 31, 2017, 02:08:58 AM
Do people think that FCC could fit a stadium of the capacity they need between John St and Central Ave? Upon first consideration, it seems like they may have to close Central Ave and expand east to Providence Street to get everything in. Although I like to think that all seating needs could be accommodated within the existing block and auxiliary services (parking, vending, team shop, offices) could be built on the east side of Central Ave.

David Beckham’s Miami soccer stadium won’t include parking
https://archpaper.com/2017/05/david-beckham-miami-soccer-stadium/

It also might be interesting to see FC Cincinnati not build structured parking, instead, relying on the streetcar stops that are within 5 blocks of the stadium (two at Washington Park, two at Liberty on Elm and Race). Would FC Cincinnati contribute to an extension of the streetcar to Uptown or Northern Kentucky?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: TroyEros on May 31, 2017, 03:44:01 AM
Hugggggggggggggge risk ^

So many of the current fans are suburban mason moms and dads, bringing there 8 year old pee wee soccer kids.

Many of them are still afraid to enter OTR, let alone the West End. Parking will be crucial simply because we have so many suburbanites who just detest walking/any forms of urban life.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on May 31, 2017, 09:21:42 AM
Do people think that FCC could fit a stadium of the capacity they need between John St and Central Ave? Upon first consideration, it seems like they may have to close Central Ave and expand east to Providence Street to get everything in. Although I like to think that all seating needs could be accommodated within the existing block and auxiliary services (parking, vending, team shop, offices) could be built on the east side of Central Ave.

The stadium almost certainly cannot fit between John and Central Ave. The smallest MLS stadium I've seen is Avaya Stadium in San Jose, which measures ~ 500'x550'. The distance from John to Central is only 410' wide. I suppose it might be physically possible, but that would cut down significantly on the capacity of the stadium, and likely remove an entire sideline from having substantial stands. I think to make it work, the stadium itself would need to cross Central. Perhaps they could find a way to build over Central and just close it on game days, but I find that highly unlikely.

It also might be interesting to see FC Cincinnati not build structured parking, instead, relying on the streetcar stops that are within 5 blocks of the stadium (two at Washington Park, two at Liberty on Elm and Race). Would FC Cincinnati contribute to an extension of the streetcar to Uptown or Northern Kentucky?

If the stadium is built on that site, I believe they will be paying some property taxes for the streetcar via the VTICA. If the Skyhouse development is within the range, this stadium would have to be as well. And at the ~$150 Million price tag, I think it would provide a lot of funding for the streetcar. I doubt they would provide additional funding unless they located in Uptown or Newport/Covington and wanted an extension.

I would like to see the team rely on existing garages as much as possible. If they do build a new garage, I hope it is easily accessible to other areas of OTR so it doesn't sit unused for most days.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: OHSnap on May 31, 2017, 10:19:14 AM
...Upon first consideration, it seems like they may have to close Central Ave and expand east to Providence Street to get everything in...

Here's what I wrote in February:

Did we already rule out the Stargel Stadium site?  The area bounded by John St., Wade, Providence, and Taft HS has a similar footprint to MAPFRE.  Nothing immediately east along Central Pkwy is very high-value, so you could even have a "front lawn" facing the parkway.

Central Ave. could be curved east around the site a la the way Mehring curves around the Reds and Bengals stadiums.  You'd have highway access via Ezzard Charles and Liberty, and a short gameday loop of the streetcar could be built to connect to the core.  Some parking already exists at the Music Hall garage, lowering the amount that would need to be built.

If Stargel is still used for high school games, I can't see why it couldn't still on FC off-days - they're clearly used to sharing.  And the sale of the site could be seen as a nice boost for CPS.

I can imagine the fan groups congregating at Taft's and Taste of Belgium or wherever, marching around/through Washington Park, and then over to the stadium.

To me, it just fits.

The city will be doing something similar by curving Erkenbrecher around the new Children's expansion.  Central Ave would need to be curved to lay in the footprint of Providence, which only exists between 14th and Wade, so you wouldn't be disrupting the grid.

As for the streetcar, my pie-in-the-sky dream would be for a gameday-only loop to be constructed branching off Elm via 14th and Wade with a stop right in front of the stadium, and then for two hours before and after games, the northern section of the streetcar route (north of Central Parkway) would be a fare-free circulator.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on May 31, 2017, 02:50:06 PM
Just heard from a credible source that FC Cincinnati is under contract to purchase the "lower bowl" of the Hartwell Golf Course:
 https://www.google.com/maps/@39.2053097,-84.4824974,829m/data=!3m1!1e3

The guy didn't know if it was for a stadium or for a practice facility.  They are worried that they might have to back out of the purchase because of the rec center building on the property which has asbestos and lead issues. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on May 31, 2017, 03:11:28 PM
hope its a practice facility. Cant see it as a great site for a stadium. Not very walkable area. pretty industrial, not easy transportation access, not sufficient parking.


If you are going to build a stadium out that direction, just build it where the Gardens sits. There is already the parking infrastructure in place there and the roads are more capable of handling the traffic. Caldwell and North Bend are only 2 lane streets in that area.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: GCrites80s on May 31, 2017, 03:13:09 PM
The Crew practice facility is in a very similar area.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: old edale on May 31, 2017, 03:42:53 PM
What economic benefits have the Crew provided to the area around their stadium? I think this stadium is going to be way more trouble than it's worth. Who even cares about the MLS like that? It's not like having an MLS team is suddenly going to make Cincy seem more big league. The media rarely discusses MLS soccer, there are very few true stars in the league, and all the real die hard soccer fans follow European teams and leagues. All this talk of rerouting roads, building massive garages in the West End, and even creating streetcar spurs to serve the stadium seems ludicrous for the very small benefit we'd be getting in return.

If fans truly like the team as is, why not just continue to play in the league they're in and use Nippert and UC's parking facilities. We have already heard that FCC is a great driver of business in Uptown in the summer months when business slows due to the students being gone. Why mess with a good thing? Create a bunch of traffic and an unsightly stadium in a neighborhood that has already been the ugly recipient of generations of top-down planning decisions? Yeah, I'll pass.

If a new stadium must be built, I'd say to go for Newport. Let the residents of NKY finally pay for something themselves rather than reaping the benefits of the goods Ohio taxpayers fund. The views from the stadium would be cool, lots of parking could be provided, and it could finally jump start a modified version of the Ovation project. The bars and restaurants at the Banks might even benefit from a stadium there. Also could serve as a rallying point for expanding the streetcar to NKY.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on May 31, 2017, 03:50:33 PM
^ Do they have an impact like the Reds, Bengals, Browns, Indians, or Cavs? No they don't. However, they do provide a noticeable impact to the community as an amenity for companies like Nationwide to attract talent to the area. It also provides visibility to the city and allows them to better hold themselves out to peer cities. People in Chicago and NY will notice Columbus more because of the exposure the Crew provide. It is what allows Columbus to separate itself from say places like Des Moines Iowa

No, it is not one of the Big 3 sports but soccer is also growing now and it is a good value for getting a team now. Imagine in 30 years if MLS becomes as big as the NBA, people would not be having this discussion. That is part of
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: oakiehigh on June 01, 2017, 09:34:21 AM
So the Crew will play FCC at Nippert on Wednesday June 14 @ 7pm
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on June 01, 2017, 09:38:20 AM
Tickets go on sale to the general public Tuesday, June 6 at 9am. Season Ticket Holders have until then to purchase their seats before they are released to the public.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on June 01, 2017, 09:59:05 AM
^ Do they have an impact like the Reds, Bengals, Browns, Indians, or Cavs? No they don't. However, they do provide a noticeable impact to the community as an amenity for companies like Nationwide to attract talent to the area. It also provides visibility to the city and allows them to better hold themselves out to peer cities. People in Chicago and NY will notice Columbus more because of the exposure the Crew provide. It is what allows Columbus to separate itself from say places like Des Moines Iowa

No, it is not one of the Big 3 sports but soccer is also growing now and it is a good value for getting a team now. Imagine in 30 years if MLS becomes as big as the NBA, people would not be having this discussion. That is part of

The soccer crowds are a windfall for all of the restaurants and bars on Short Vine and Calhoun during the months when UC is dead.  That said, if the team stays there for 5+ years, the landlords will raise their rents accordingly. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: moonloop on June 03, 2017, 12:57:18 PM
Stadium design will be revealed June 12. The event is open only to season ticket holders. There are a few those here, right?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: joshknut on June 03, 2017, 03:54:42 PM
A statement from Lindner:

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/opinion/contributors/2017/06/02/fc-cincinnati-were-not-asking-voters-build-stadium/367161001/

What stuck out to me:

"Downtown, Over-the-Rhine and neighboring areas are all experiencing tremendous growth. Companies are choosing to locate operations in the Queen City, bringing talented people from around the world to work, live and play here. I am proud that our new professional soccer team, FC Cincinnati, is a part of the renaissance that is occurring here."

Along with:

"Moreover, we will leverage our private dollars to ensure the new soccer stadium is a community asset that can host high school and college games, international and national matches and concerts. Our vision also includes helping to create a dramatic transformation in one of our community’s neighborhoods."

This sounds like the West End to me. I don't see Oakley needing a "dramatic transformation" and he didn't really seem to be championing NKY either.

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on June 03, 2017, 04:00:44 PM
^I sensed that too but I'm not sure that this meeting is going to declare a location as much as possibly 3 different preliminary designs for 3 different locations. 

If FC can keep this stadium speculation in the press through the fall, it will really take the heat off of the streetcar in the mayoral campaign.  That's bad for Cranley, because it's his only issue. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Cygnus on June 05, 2017, 12:20:41 PM
The team was all set to announce their international friendly opponent today...

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DBkFHKtXsAAxhcb.jpg:large)

They had a press conference and were live on Facebook and then this:

"An unexpected delay means we can't announce who we'll be facing in our international friendly on 7/24, but we will do so soon! #RiseTogether"

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on June 05, 2017, 12:25:51 PM
Basically, the team they are playing is sending a representative from Spain to help announce (was on a flight to Miami at the time of the scheduled announcement). The team was not made aware of this, and Berding (GM of FCC) was made aware of this on his way to the presser. Contracts have been signed, but they will wait to announce until later today when the club's representative arrives in Cincinnati.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: moonloop on June 05, 2017, 01:36:15 PM
A team from Spain's La Liga. Pretty cool.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: surfohio on June 05, 2017, 01:46:10 PM
A team from Spain's La Liga. Pretty cool.

Darn. I was hoping FCC was playing The Riddler.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on June 06, 2017, 10:57:47 AM
Today I had the thought that considering the ownership of the soccer team, there is some chance that a new soccer facility could be built as part of a larger complex that could see the W&S Tennis tournament moved into the city. 

Guessing by the financial figures shared re: the Lindner Family Tennis Center's 2010 renovation, it seems like the whole thing (11 tennis courts - four with bleachers or grandstands) could be bulldozed and rebuilt for less than $50 million.  I think there would have to be a new center court tennis-only stadium, but there is probably a way to put 10~ tennis courts temporarily onto a field turf soccer stadium. 

The Lindners could make a pretty strong case for public money if they promise to bring MLS soccer *and* move the tennis tournament into the city. 

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Jakelley on June 06, 2017, 11:36:05 AM
I've been wondering if PromoWest would be a suitable partner for the stadium and then use it as a concert venue. I've seen multiple news articles mentioning that the stadium could also be used for concerts. After the rumors that they wanted to open a venue at the Banks, this might be there way to break into the Cincinnati market. Cincinnati Symphony Orchestra could be interested as well if for no other reason than keeping PromoWest out of the Cincinnati. Not sure what kind of capital either of these could contribute but I'm sure they could help get FCC closer to $200 million.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on June 06, 2017, 11:38:55 AM
FC Cincinnati names international friendly opponent (http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/06/06/fc-cincinnati-names-international-friendly.html)

FC Cincinnati will play its much-awaited international friendly exhibition match this year against Spanish first-division team Valencia.

Second-year soccer club FC Cincinnati will host the match, which is expected to draw a huge crowd, at 7 p.m. July 24 at Nippert Stadium on the University of Cincinnati campus.

The league in which Valencia competes, La Liga, is Spain’s top league and often considered the best league in the world. It’s highlighted by world soccer powers Barcelona and Real Madrid. Valencia finished in 12th place in the 20-team league this season.

“To bring a team from first-division Spain, you’re bringing one of the top clubs in the world,” said Jeff Berding, FC Cincinnati’s president and general manager. "To attract a club of Valencia’s magnitude speaks to the passion our fans and our city have demonstrated for the game of soccer.”

The match follows last year’s wildly successful first international friendly match hosted by FC Cincinnati in its first year of existence. The match against the English Premier League’s Crystal Palace became the first soccer sellout at Nippert Stadium, drawing 35,061 fans and marking the largest soccer crowd in Ohio.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Ram23 on June 06, 2017, 12:12:50 PM
So the assumption is that FC Cincinnati is going to try to get at least some public funding (up to $100 million based on previous comments) – be it for infrastructure, parking, land, etc. – without a tax increase. What are the chances someone comes forward with a streetcar type ballot initiative that prevents the city (and/or county) from spending any money on a soccer stadium? Would it pass?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on June 06, 2017, 12:20:04 PM
So the assumption is that FC Cincinnati is going to try to get at least some public funding (up to $100 million based on previous comments) – be it for infrastructure, parking, land, etc. – without a tax increase. What are the chances someone comes forward with a streetcar type ballot initiative that prevents the city (and/or county) from spending any money on a soccer stadium? Would it pass?

That could explain why FC ownership is delaying a specific financing plan until much later in the year.  I remember correctly, ballot issues need signatures by late August. 

Also, people don't remember what happened back in 1996.  Early that year, the Hamilton County Commissioners enacted a 1/2 cent sales tax.  A citizens group led by Tim Mara and Tom Luken had just 30 days to get a huge number of signatures -- like 50,000 -- to challenge the tax on the May 1996 ballot.  They got it on the ballot but the tax passed anyway about 55/45.

This isn't the same situation at all.  The dollar amounts are much, much lower. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on June 06, 2017, 05:52:46 PM
My understanding is that any city ordinance that allocated money is considered an "emergency ordinance" and is not subject to the city's rule that allows petitioners to collect signatures to challenge it. Unless the anti-tax get out in front of this issue with an Issue 9 style charter amendment saying that "the city of Cincinnati shall not spend any money on professional sports facilities without an affirmative public vote to approve those funds" or similar.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on June 07, 2017, 03:24:00 AM
I am hearing chatter elsewhere that the design of the West End stadium will not require demolition of any buildings.  Mapfre in Columbus is the closest soccer-only stadium so it is our go-to reference point but I looked at a variety of stadiums around the country and globe and it's a pretty anomalous setup and so not useful to our conversation. 

A few pages back someone mentioned Avaya Stadium in San Jose and looking at it again it's pretty obvious that a similar design could work on the Taft High School site.  Avaya has "decorative" structural elements that create a 500-foot width but the top rows of the grandstands are just 450 feet apart.  They would only have to shave off a few rows AND complete the fourth side to reach 20,000 seats.  So watch this video and imagine the top 5 or 6 rows shaved off each side but a completed stadium bowl:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSG9uRPKV3w

From the looks of it, all of the soccer stadiums where the stands surround all four sides of the field have much better atmosphere than the various 3-sided stadiums like Avaya.  In fact, various crude online tours of MLS stadiums show that most of them kind of suck, including some of the recent soccer-only stadiums.  Some of them have bad designs and others are in dumb out-of-the-way locations.  An MLS stadium at the Taft HS site could be the best of the new stadiums in both respects -- a field surrounded on all sides by stands and a site within the city proper instead of cheap land out by the airport.   

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Cygnus on June 09, 2017, 11:26:10 AM
WCPO Insider:

Oakley is packed with entertainment. Will FC Cincinnati join the crowd? (http://www.wcpo.com/news/insider/oakley-is-packed-with-entertainment-will-fc-cincinnati-join-the-crowd)

Options for having fun in Cincinnati's Oakley neighborhood have mushroomed in the last five years.

Mad Tree Brewery, a movie theater complex with leather loungers and a host of restaurants and bars clustered in and around Oakley Station barely scratch the surface of the entertainment boom in the east-side neighborhood.

Would an FC Cincinnati soccer stadium be a good addition to the mix? The soccer club aims to find out.

Cont (http://www.wcpo.com/news/insider/oakley-is-packed-with-entertainment-will-fc-cincinnati-join-the-crowd)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on June 09, 2017, 11:42:13 AM
From what I hear, Crossroads already creates gridlock in the area. A stadium of 20,000+ would be chaos without some serious investments (new bridges over the interstate kind of investments).
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on June 09, 2017, 11:43:12 AM
^IMHO, Oakley is the WORST of the three options. Personally, I'd love being able to walk to and from matches, but the surrounding area just isn't great. Several of the bars in Oakley near the square are small and would be unbearably packed on match day. MadTree is already packed without 20,000 fans in the area and Bar Louie just sucks. That's great there's a movie theatre nearby, but for tomorrow's match I have absolutely no plans to catch a movie before or after the game. There's a Kroger and Target, so I guess if I need off brand Doritos that's a plus.

West End helps jumpstart development in that area. Newport has the view and close connection to downtown.

Oakley has an Olive Garden.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on June 09, 2017, 12:19:37 PM
I think the public money going into the stadium is going to be mostly street improvements, sewer and lighting improvements in the area as opposed to the actual build. Also, I sense it will be Stargell site which would probably mean the school district would give the land to the team in exchange for another property somewhere else in the city and covenants by the team to allow HS time to play and use  the field.

All and all that could add up to the $100 million gap they are talking about
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on June 09, 2017, 12:52:05 PM
I think the public money going into the stadium is going to be mostly street improvements, sewer and lighting improvements in the area as opposed to the actual build. Also, I sense it will be Stargell site which would probably mean the school district would give the land to the team in exchange for another property somewhere else in the city and covenants by the team to allow HS time to play and use  the field.

All and all that could add up to the $100 million gap they are talking about

It is curious that CPS hasn't been vocal since they have to have had conversations with them about this.  Obviously, there is potentially zero land acquisition cost for the ownership...probably the only spot near downtown where they could pull this off. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: moonloop on June 09, 2017, 01:15:48 PM
Oakland, CA is the most anti- new stadium city in the country and before they lost the Raiders, even they offered nearly $350M in land and infrastructure. Now there's a good chance Oakland won't have any major sports teams.

The city/county need to treat the stadium like just another development and all the resources that can be put together for that.

I think timing will be a big problem. FCC (and MLS) want the stadium funding sorted out soon, like now.  I can't see Cranley, council, and the county agreeing to anything before the Nov. election.

FCC may offer up some funding ideas June 12.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on June 09, 2017, 01:35:15 PM
I think the public money going into the stadium is going to be mostly street improvements, sewer and lighting improvements in the area as opposed to the actual build. Also, I sense it will be Stargell site which would probably mean the school district would give the land to the team in exchange for another property somewhere else in the city and covenants by the team to allow HS time to play and use  the field.

All and all that could add up to the $100 million gap they are talking about

I know Withrow HS has a soccer team, but do all of the CPS schools? The new stadium could be a great way to start up programs at all CPS schools at all age levels similar to how the Blue Jackets arriving in Columbus really got high school hockey going in that area.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Cygnus on June 12, 2017, 02:45:14 PM
Stumbled upon this article from last week on nextSTL, MLS Expansion: St. Louis vs. Cincinnati (https://nextstl.com/2017/06/mls-expansion-st-louis-vs-cincinnati/), and this comment caught my eye:

Quote from: SkylineIsGross
I currently work in Cinci and my employer routinely sends out company-wide emails offering 100 free tickets for FC Cinci games. When those tickets run out, they magically have 100 more. This happens at many other large employers in Cinci. The "grassroots" support is corporate astroturf that will evaporate once tickets cost more than $10 (see awful Reds attendance and empty sections at Bengal playoff games.) Anyone who has avoided the koolaid can see that FC Cinci is a handout to the Lindner family at the expense of the rust belt's poorest large city.

Now I have a friend who lives in Columbus that has mentioned the same thing to me before, i.e. free tickets. I counter with the fact at least 10k season tickets have been sold. Not to mention that as a season ticket holder (of Zone 1 seats), 4 of the 5 games I was unable to attend I was able to sell the tickets on StubHub (with 3 of those 4 at a profit). And at my work the only FCC offers we get are the occasional 15% off. Friends that work at P&G, CinBell, Convergys, Duke, Paycor have never seen a free ticket offer either.

Have any of you?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on June 12, 2017, 02:47:02 PM
Stumbled upon this article from last week on nextSTL, MLS Expansion: St. Louis vs. Cincinnati (https://nextstl.com/2017/06/mls-expansion-st-louis-vs-cincinnati/), and this comment caught my eye:

Quote from: SkylineIsGross
I currently work in Cinci and my employer routinely sends out company-wide emails offering 100 free tickets for FC Cinci games. When those tickets run out, they magically have 100 more. This happens at many other large employers in Cinci. The "grassroots" support is corporate astroturf that will evaporate once tickets cost more than $10 (see awful Reds attendance and empty sections at Bengal playoff games.) Anyone who has avoided the koolaid can see that FC Cinci is a handout to the Lindner family at the expense of the rust belt's poorest large city.

Now I have a friend who lives in Columbus that has mentioned the same thing to me before, i.e. free tickets. I counter with the fact at least 10k season tickets have been sold. Not to mention that as a season ticket holder (of Zone 1 seats), 4 of the 5 games I was unable to attend I was able to sell the tickets on StubHub (with 3 of those 4 at a profit). And at my work the only FCC offers we get are the occasional 15% off. Friends that work at P&G, CinBell, Convergys, Duke, Paycor have never seen a free ticket offer either.

Have any of you?

If the dude is spelling it as Cinci, he's lying.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: old edale on June 12, 2017, 02:51:09 PM
Someone from St. Louis is calling Cincinnati the "poorest Rust Belt city"? Lol! Other then Detroit, St. Louis is probably the most run down, destroyed city in the country. The entire north side of the city is a disaster unlike anything in Cincinnati. They're probably just butt hurt because they lost the Rams.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: hoerstw on June 12, 2017, 02:52:59 PM
I have seen/heard this 'free ticket' argument as well and not sure where it comes from. I work for a fortune 500 company based in Downtown Cincinnati and have never been offered free tickets through work, nor have any of my friends/family who work in the city.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: moonloop on June 12, 2017, 03:09:41 PM
Any FCC sponsor or advertiser probably gets tickets for games. Just like any other prof. sport. Whether those are counted as "sold" IDK.

I do noticed on twitter, when FCC post attendance during games they started adding "Paid Attendance".


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DB__qF5XcAAfQhi.jpg:large)

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DCIHxHkXkAAc1FF.jpg)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Ram23 on June 12, 2017, 03:10:31 PM
Note that the post from the St. Louis guy was made during the reds 13-1 rout of the Cardinals (at 9:03PM so right in the midst of the trouncing). He was probably just really salty at the time.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: chinkley on June 12, 2017, 03:57:55 PM

If the dude is spelling it as Cinci, he's lying.

I prefer this spelling to Cincy any day of the week. The 'y' is beyond kitschy.

edit: spelling
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on June 12, 2017, 04:07:56 PM

If the dude is spelling it as Cinci, he's lying.

I prefer this spelled to Cincy any day of the week. The 'y' is beyond kitschy.

Florence, Ya'll!
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: GCrites80s on June 12, 2017, 05:06:24 PM
Cincy, You All

Cbus, you guys!
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on June 12, 2017, 05:52:29 PM

If the dude is spelling it as Cinci, he's lying.

I prefer this spelling to Cincy any day of the week. The 'y' is beyond kitschy.

edit: spelling

I normally would agree but it's one of those words that you get used to, much like Philly.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on June 12, 2017, 07:21:51 PM
Or you can be olde tymey and go with Cinti, O.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: moonloop on June 12, 2017, 07:37:34 PM

Here they come . . .

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DCJzUxMU0AA5ARM.jpg)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: moonloop on June 12, 2017, 07:38:28 PM
Special tax for Trump voters required...


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DCJzUxIU0AAl_7O.jpg)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: SleepyLeroy on June 12, 2017, 07:38:52 PM
Oh man! WLWT WAS live streaming the event, despite the shaming by the host to not do that and to keep the info for season ticket holders right now but they must have been found out. Live feed cut off before anything interesting happened. They did say that the stadium was initially designed for a certain site, but they "liked it so much" they did follow up renders of the same stadium design for the other two sites. Looks like we may see a look tonight, but nothing final on the location yet.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: moonloop on June 12, 2017, 07:39:26 PM

FCC in KY?

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DCJzZwrUMAEPn2H.jpg)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: moonloop on June 12, 2017, 07:40:42 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DCJzaxbUMAEUuMu.jpg)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: SleepyLeroy on June 12, 2017, 07:41:20 PM
Wow! not conservative at all. Looks like Newport in the second view and the West End in the first. Forth view is on a barge floating down the ohio in case a land based location cant be found (I kid).
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: moonloop on June 12, 2017, 07:42:58 PM
Design for 25K seats but could increase to 30K!! And Newport it could be...
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: old edale on June 12, 2017, 07:48:49 PM
With such public opposition to stadium taxes (and rightly so imo), it makes sense to let KY fund this one.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: moonloop on June 12, 2017, 07:58:05 PM
If it's in Newport...


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DCJ5nWzWsAMq8Ug.jpg:small)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: moonloop on June 12, 2017, 08:04:51 PM
Some branding options... Notice the model in the lower right. Credit: @PBrennanENQ





(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DCJ6vsYXsAEImdX.jpg)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Ram23 on June 12, 2017, 08:21:14 PM
Special tax for Trump voters required...

Was this zinger a moonloop original or something someone from FC came up with?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: old edale on June 12, 2017, 08:22:48 PM
Putting banners or team signage on the Roebling bridge?! Hell no!!!
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Chas Wiederhold on June 12, 2017, 08:36:27 PM
My guess is that all graphics you see, including the blue and orange tint of the stadium canopy, are all projection and lighting effects.

I really hope so anyway... a blue or orange canopy like that wouldn't look good anywhere/would fall out of fashion.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Cygnus on June 12, 2017, 08:56:36 PM
Putting banners or team signage on the Roebling bridge?! Hell no!!!

I think this was to signify that it's easy to get from "Cincinnati" to the Newport site. 1+ mile walk...
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: joshknut on June 12, 2017, 09:38:55 PM
This was a "read between the lines" PR stunt to detract people from thinking it's going to be in the west end. It has the media now focusing on Newport while they get their ducks in order to close on the west end without a media backlash/neighborhood disagreement. If it fails, Newport will be it and no loss
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on June 12, 2017, 09:39:57 PM
I think it would be a big mistake to do this in Newport.  Aside from it being in Newport, this location is pretty ugly -- down in a bowl cut off from the water by the levee.  It is of course possible that FC really wants the West End site (or another site) but is trotting this out to keep speculators away.  They could also be proposing this to keep COAST, etc., on the sidelines during a council/mayoral election year. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Jimmy_James on June 12, 2017, 10:38:01 PM
^it looks like the plaza/fan zone's elevation meets the top of the flood wall.  It's hard to tell what the rest of the site would be like, but there would be some nice views from that end. The site is very ugly right now, but I'm thinking this project is big enough that it would be basically unrecognizable at completion.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: SleepyLeroy on June 12, 2017, 10:47:41 PM

Here they come . . .

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DCJzUxMU0AA5ARM.jpg)



This one pic isn't Newport at least. The Italianate on the right is on central ave here. https://www.google.com/maps/place/Central+Ave,+Cincinnati,+OH/@39.1110724,-84.5220562,3a,90y,13.66h,91.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sN3B8ZouJn3vxTJ_4hwg76g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!4m5!3m4!1s0x8841b6aa6757a445:0x40eddc3bce9d883f!8m2!3d39.1087285!4d-84.5214836!6m1!1e1 Very happy to see some thought into this location and with working using existing historic assets on the site. Wonder who owns this building now?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: SleepyLeroy on June 12, 2017, 10:55:22 PM
Didn't Jake have info or a realtor ad on a building for sale in this area of the West end at a ridiculous price recently? Perhaps they are trying to quell speculation.....as i speculate.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on June 12, 2017, 11:08:42 PM
I am coming around to Newport in the Ovation area. It would serve as a catalyst for that project and really help make that area more walkable. Although I prefer the West End. I am starting to think Newport may be the winner given the money involved to fund it. If Bill Butler is a key investor in the team/project, he will likely have enough influence to steer it to his project.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: joshknut on June 12, 2017, 11:22:42 PM
This is also a West End rendering
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ucgrady on June 13, 2017, 12:57:06 AM
The site plan for the Newport option is interesting, and shows altering the portion of 3rd street that was recently built between the new traffic circles, which is a state funded project that hasnt finished yet. I feel like this implies either the state is involved, or this plan was thrown together quickly and since the aerial shot doesn't show the street grid lining up at all with the existing, I'm inclined to think the latter. I really like the site plan though especially the raised plaza area on the levee wall. It may be true that Newport is being used as a bargaining chip, but we saw what happened with the aquarium, and this isn't bad for a "fall back" location at all. I would love to see a similar plan of the west end site to see how they are squeezing it into the street grid, because I still feel like that option is 1a, with Newport being 1b. Was Oakley even presented as option 3?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on June 13, 2017, 01:20:05 AM
Didn't Jake have info or a realtor ad on a building for sale in this area of the West end at a ridiculous price recently? Perhaps they are trying to quell speculation.....as i speculate.


Urban Fast Forward is trying to sell two buildings on Central Ave. immediately across from the Taft Stadium, but there are no MLS listings or info on their website. 

You might be thinking of the $900k sale of an ordinary house in Walnut Hills near the MLK interchange.  I heard that from a legit source but I haven't been able to find the sale on the county's site.  I'm not sure which street it was on. 

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thomasbw on June 13, 2017, 09:24:05 AM
If it's in Newport...


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DCJ5nWzWsAMq8Ug.jpg:small)

Another cinema's going to do great there
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: SleepyLeroy on June 13, 2017, 10:32:23 AM
Didn't Jake have info or a realtor ad on a building for sale in this area of the West end at a ridiculous price recently? Perhaps they are trying to quell speculation.....as i speculate.


Urban Fast Forward is trying to sell two buildings on Central Ave. immediately across from the Taft Stadium, but there are no MLS listings or info on their website. 

You might be thinking of the $900k sale of an ordinary house in Walnut Hills near the MLK interchange.  I heard that from a legit source but I haven't been able to find the sale on the county's site.  I'm not sure which street it was on.

Found the building I was thinking of. It is a block north but the crazy price makes me think they are in the know, or clueless about real estate. One of those. Not sure where it was in the fourm or who brought it up though. I'll stick to FC from here on out in this topic but this popped into my head when i saw the render. http://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/514-Oliver-St_Cincinnati_OH_45214_M32274-66761
I think the price was even higher originally. Still unsold at a half mil.

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on June 13, 2017, 10:36:27 AM
What is the vision for the "auditorium"?  Visiting lecturers? 

Also the doomed "Riverchase" apartments have a lot of units -- maybe 100.  So after the dust settles Newport might not have added any net residents. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on June 13, 2017, 10:40:31 AM
Didn't Jake have info or a realtor ad on a building for sale in this area of the West end at a ridiculous price recently? Perhaps they are trying to quell speculation.....as i speculate.


Urban Fast Forward is trying to sell two buildings on Central Ave. immediately across from the Taft Stadium, but there are no MLS listings or info on their website. 

You might be thinking of the $900k sale of an ordinary house in Walnut Hills near the MLK interchange.  I heard that from a legit source but I haven't been able to find the sale on the county's site.  I'm not sure which street it was on.

Found the building I was thinking of. It is a block north but the crazy price makes me think they are in the know, or clueless about real estate. One of those. Not sure where it was in the fourm or who brought it up though. I'll stick to FC from here on out in this topic but this popped into my head when i saw the render. http://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/514-Oliver-St_Cincinnati_OH_45214_M32274-66761
I think the price was even higher originally. Still unsold at a half mil.



I have a hard time believing that thing is going to get much more than $100k.  About a month ago I scrolled through every single property in the west end on the auditor's website and nothing of note has changed hands in 2017.  That doesn't mean people aren't negotiating though.  That's the tricky thing about real estate -- some cards must be played face up by law, but you have no way of knowing if entities are negotiating sales of non-listed properties.   


Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: IAGuy39 on June 13, 2017, 11:36:20 AM
Ha honestly those are cool looking renderings but would think it would look horrible in the West End.  Get something a bit more classy to fit into a historic neighborhood if that is what they are trying to do.  I could care less if it's in Newport, there is literally nothing around there.  I just don't see how this fits in the West End
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thomasbw on June 13, 2017, 11:38:21 AM
Ha honestly those are cool looking renderings but would think it would look horrible in the West End.  Get something a bit more classy to fit into a historic neighborhood if that is what they are trying to do.  I could care less if it's in Newport, there is literally nothing around there.  I just don't see how this fits in the West End

With the AA highway bounding the site, it's going to be kinda cut off from a pedestrian standpoint aside from directly from the Levee/Taylor Southgate
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: JYP on June 13, 2017, 12:00:59 PM

Here they come . . .

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DCJzUxMU0AA5ARM.jpg)



This one pic isn't Newport at least. The Italianate on the right is on central ave here. https://www.google.com/maps/place/Central+Ave,+Cincinnati,+OH/@39.1110724,-84.5220562,3a,90y,13.66h,91.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sN3B8ZouJn3vxTJ_4hwg76g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!4m5!3m4!1s0x8841b6aa6757a445:0x40eddc3bce9d883f!8m2!3d39.1087285!4d-84.5214836!6m1!1e1 Very happy to see some thought into this location and with working using existing historic assets on the site. Wonder who owns this building now?


That is not Central Ave. That is a reversed photo of the west side of Vine Street looking from the building with Switch and Incredible Creations north.
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1086698,-84.5148876,3a,75y,195.65h,113.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4JxgajYOtGz9XNdL8HIv5g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Clever clever...
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: IAGuy39 on June 13, 2017, 12:15:04 PM
...I just, have so many questions about these renderings... I really like the podium, but what is this like futuristic columns and plastic looking roofline and all this?  Why can't it be a solid, Nippert like one way or the other and wouldn't that actually save money?

You can fit it into Cincinnati FC just fine but please don't deck out the roof of the stadium orange, it just does not fit into the neighborhood at all IMO
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Jimmy Skinner on June 13, 2017, 12:23:58 PM
"The exterior canopy of the stadium is made of a new material called ETFE, which Meis described as a pillowy material that is capable of having LED lighting run through it that would allow the projection of color, images and even video onto the facade of the building."
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: SleepyLeroy on June 13, 2017, 12:35:04 PM

Here they come . . .

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DCJzUxMU0AA5ARM.jpg)



This one pic isn't Newport at least. The Italianate on the right is on central ave here. https://www.google.com/maps/place/Central+Ave,+Cincinnati,+OH/@39.1110724,-84.5220562,3a,90y,13.66h,91.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sN3B8ZouJn3vxTJ_4hwg76g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!4m5!3m4!1s0x8841b6aa6757a445:0x40eddc3bce9d883f!8m2!3d39.1087285!4d-84.5214836!6m1!1e1 Very happy to see some thought into this location and with working using existing historic assets on the site. Wonder who owns this building now?


That is not Central Ave. That is a reversed photo of the west side of Vine Street looking from the building with Switch and Incredible Creations north.
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1086698,-84.5148876,3a,75y,195.65h,113.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4JxgajYOtGz9XNdL8HIv5g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Clever clever...

Haha you are right!! I was surprised that they took the time to render the rest of the street intact and remodeled. Work smarter not harder indeed.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on June 13, 2017, 12:54:07 PM
The material would be mostly white, but could light up to different colors during events. Trying to "fit in" a stadium design with the surroundings would be a disaster IMO. It would never succeed and would probably look like a cheap suburban building. I would rather have something eye-catching and modern whether it's in the West End or Newport.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thebillshark on June 13, 2017, 01:08:36 PM
What is the vision for the "auditorium"?  Visiting lecturers?

The original plans called for a large dinner theater: http://www.newportriverfront.com/proposal_page8.asp

Might be time to update that plan a little.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Chas Wiederhold on June 13, 2017, 01:17:52 PM
The material would be mostly white, but could light up to different colors during events. Trying to "fit in" a stadium design with the surroundings would be a disaster IMO. It would never succeed and would probably look like a cheap suburban building. I would rather have something eye-catching and modern whether it's in the West End or Newport.

The best way to have new construction "fit in" is to use high quality materials and good detailing. It is difficult to imagine any contemporary stadium being contextual, but I see this as one huge festival tent. I like what ETFE does and can do; the lightness and softness, the opportunity for lighting and projection. I like how MEIS/MSA has a reveal around the super columns; sort of expressing this cleat coming down in the corner. I think the plinth is key for the urban context... it will give folks a sense of arrival at a monument, of sorts. There are some elements that could really contribute to the vitality of the street on the West End site when the design is explored for site specific application. It would be great to see team shops, concessions, bars all engaging with the street and the stadium. I'd love for this facility, on the West End site, to be a year round venue.

All said... this is barely even at a schematic design level (a site response is needed for this to be considered schematic, and a building that can be plopped in 1 of 3 very different locations is NOT site specific.) When/if this building is constructed... it will look very, very, very different from what it does now.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Cygnus on June 13, 2017, 02:05:15 PM
Would KY finally update the 471S Route 8 exit (5) if Newport wins the bid? The rush hour/weekend (Levee) traffic on the Daniel Carter Beard bridge produces many accidents. Can't see inbound access via Covington being much better...
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on June 13, 2017, 02:21:16 PM
Well access to this spot wouldn't be a problem if the 1970 OKI Rapid Transit plan had been built...this was the MARTA-era rapid transit plan we didn't build because Tom Luken built a political career attacking the public takeover of Cincinnati Transit, then extended his career attacking newly-formed Metro and called for the abolishment of OKI.  So if we had actually had a tax in place we could have gotten the federal funds through UMTA 1970 to build what OKI planned -- a true rapid transit system with a continuous subway tunnel from Clifton to Covington and a branch under the Licking River to what is now the "Ovation" site. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Cygnus on June 13, 2017, 03:30:28 PM
This is also a West End rendering
(https://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/fb6f0707084a7b3255a9185f450d6de44c0c27ea/c=1-0-959-720&r=x393&c=520x390/local/-/media/2017/06/12/Cincinnati/Cincinnati/636328994195436755-Slide4.JPG)

The Enquirer's crack reporting ignores that this rendering exists and that they published it yesterday...

Looking at Newport as FC Cincinnati's potential future home (http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2017/06/13/looking-newport-fc-cincinnatis-potential-future-home/370620001/)

Newport is emerging as Futbol Club Cincinnati's best option for building a stadium, a fact that became more clear Monday night when the burgeoning franchise unveiled the design of a $200 million soccer-specific venue.

The renderings showed the stadium only from the ready-to-build site at the confluence of the Ohio and Licking rivers, although FC Cincinnati officials also continued to discuss locations in Cincinnati's Oakley and West End neighborhoods.

"Our preference is to be in Cincinnati," FC Cincinnati President Jeff Berding told a group of season-ticket holders on Monday.

However, he added, "we have to win the bid."

Cont (http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2017/06/13/looking-newport-fc-cincinnatis-potential-future-home/370620001/)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: joshknut on June 13, 2017, 03:54:21 PM
I think the ownership group is relying on their crack reporting to get all eyes off public money and their West End aspirations at a CPS location. Now they can keep their eyes on the prize while the media and the public chew on and argue over their red herring. If that's what they really are trying to do, the PR stunt worked.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: joshknut on June 13, 2017, 04:01:35 PM
Also, this little nugget is in this piece toward the end:

"FC Cincinnati has not officially talked to the city of Newport, Fromme said. It's believed the club has not launched a lobbying effort with Kentucky politicians like it has in Ohio. "

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: MGM on June 13, 2017, 04:15:56 PM
Also, this little nugget is in this piece toward the end:

"FC Cincinnati has not officially talked to the city of Newport, Fromme said. It's believed the club has not launched a lobbying effort with Kentucky politicians like it has in Ohio. "
That seems small, maybe the county or even the State or maybe nobody. Ky has no tier 1 professional sports teams.
Just hoping the MLS selects FC Cincy, both locations are solid.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Ram23 on June 13, 2017, 04:29:36 PM
I wonder if Newport or the state of Kentucky will try to get them to re-brand in exchange for tax dollars. FC Newport? FC Kentucky (though FCK might be a bit too crude of an acronym)?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on June 13, 2017, 04:30:21 PM
Since the same stadium design will be plopped down in any location, if we have detailed renderings, we can see if the thing was custom-made for the tight West End location. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on June 13, 2017, 04:53:42 PM
Since the same stadium design will be plopped down in any location, if we have detailed renderings, we can see if the thing was custom-made for the tight West End location.

Can anybody estimate the width of the proposed design? This "OTR Street View" makes it look like it has plenty of "breathing room" with a row of trees between the stadium and the street... but I can't imagine that'd be the case at the Stargel site (~405 ft wide between John St and Central Ave):
(https://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/fb6f0707084a7b3255a9185f450d6de44c0c27ea/c=1-0-959-720&r=x393&c=520x390/local/-/media/2017/06/12/Cincinnati/Cincinnati/636328994195436755-Slide4.JPG)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: joshknut on June 13, 2017, 05:10:44 PM
Very crudely using google maps measuring tool and eyeballing the approximate location of the stadium at the Ovation site:

Width: ~450 ft
Length: ~650 ft

It seems as if it would fit in Stargel, bounded by John and Central Ave. Potentially the buildings to the north on Wade would have to be bought and destroyed
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: MGM on June 13, 2017, 05:19:23 PM
I wonder if Newport or the state of Kentucky will try to get them to re-brand in exchange for tax dollars. FC Newport? FC Kentucky (though FCK might be a bit too crude of an acronym)?
LOL, they might try if the $$$ was huge but I don't see it happening.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on June 13, 2017, 05:24:02 PM
Maybe moving to Kentucky wouldn't cause FCC to lose many fans, but rebranding to "FC Kentucky" (or something like that) certainly would.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on June 13, 2017, 05:27:06 PM
Aside from TIF funds, was there any mention of where additional funding might come from? And how much? Stadium naming rights only fetch a few million a year (LA Galaxy has best deal with $7m/year from StubHub Center). http://www.mercurynews.com/2014/11/18/san-jose-earthquakes-sign-naming-rights-deal-as-stadium-cost-soars/
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on June 13, 2017, 05:31:26 PM
What if both Ohio and Kentucky (and Cincinnati and Newport) say, "no thanks, you're not getting any tax breaks"? Do the owners spend their own money to build the stadium or do they threaten to take the team to another city? Would it really be the worst thing in the world for them to remain a USL team and continue playing at Nippert?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on June 13, 2017, 05:37:26 PM
^That's not how it works. They applied to open an MLS franchise in Cincinnati. That can't be changed. Where in the region it is could potentially change before they win a bid, but they aren't going to be able to simply pick up and move to another city. If this bid doesn't get one of the next 4 MLS spots, that's it for the ownership group.

They likely can't make it work without ANY tax breaks. Also, why would any municipality say no to all types of tax breaks? That's a bad decision.

If they don't win the MLS bid, they likely stay in the USL at Nippert as long as it is financially viable. I think it would be a huge missed opportunity to not get into MLS. The USL will never provide the level of national/international attention MLS brings.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: MGM on June 13, 2017, 05:40:25 PM
What if both Ohio and Kentucky (and Cincinnati and Newport) say, "no thanks, you're not getting any tax breaks"? Do the owners spend their own money to build the stadium or do they threaten to take the team to another city? Would it really be the worst thing in the world for them to remain a USL team and continue playing at Nippert?
Nada, the entire MLS deal has come about due to amazing attendance, branding, ownership. If they get the bid then a stadium gets done IMHO.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: RockyMountainHigh on June 13, 2017, 05:55:23 PM
I wonder if Newport or the state of Kentucky will try to get them to re-brand in exchange for tax dollars. FC Newport? FC Kentucky (though FCK might be a bit too crude of an acronym)?

Kaiserslautern in Germany's Bundesliga already owns that. And a badass logo it is.



Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on June 13, 2017, 06:00:46 PM
Very crudely using google maps measuring tool and eyeballing the approximate location of the stadium at the Ovation site:

Width: ~450 ft
Length: ~650 ft

It seems as if it would fit in Stargel, bounded by John and Central Ave. Potentially the buildings to the north on Wade would have to be bought and destroyed

At second thought, it is in their best interest -- if their true intent is to build on the Taft site -- to send out a decoy stadium proposal that can't quite fit. 

As I have posted already, they can build a 20,000 seat stadium in that footprint if the stadium has seats on all four sides (not the open-ended design we just got).  Doing that many seats on just three sides will require higher grandstands which would necessitate taking 1-2 lanes of both John and Central Ave. 

The bigger question is if they come after Taft High School itself, which is only about 12 years old and try to do a land swap.  That's only one property owner to deal with as opposed to the Jehovah's Witnesses and half dozen characters who own the lots along Wade St.  One of those lots just changed hands last month with an offer just hours after it listed.  So that's either a shrewd move by someone who has every intention of holding out or an agent of the Lindners. 

Also, 1 or 2 of the lots (going by memory) along the south side of Wade are owned by the much-maligned West End Renaissance Village. 





Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on June 13, 2017, 06:06:24 PM
The bigger question is if they come after Taft High School itself, which is only about 12 years old and try to do a land swap.

That would be interesting. Why not build a new school on the land reserved for future phases of City West that was used as a streetcar construction staging area?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on June 13, 2017, 06:18:50 PM
The sale of 419 Wade was just recorded to "CF Urban LLC", that's Cathy Frank, a Comey & Shepard realtor.  I know her! 

http://wedge.hcauditor.org/view/re/1340001025800/2016/summary
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thebillshark on June 13, 2017, 06:27:04 PM
The bigger question is if they come after Taft High School itself, which is only about 12 years old and try to do a land swap.

That would be interesting. Why not build a new school on the land reserved for future phases of City West that was used as a streetcar construction staging area?

Because the existing school is an asset that may last for decades more... That would be some conspicuous waste that would be hard to stomach for many.  That would be a bad move politically.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmicha on June 13, 2017, 06:41:26 PM
That and it would be moving one terribly planned school and likely building another terribly planned school on land that really should be developed in an urban manner. Taft already screwed up that plan with its ridiculous lawns and setbacks but that's said and done. No need to give them any ideas of furthering this mistake.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on June 13, 2017, 06:48:43 PM
^Pretty much all of the new schools CPS built with the $1 billion bond issue are already embarrassing.  Stroll one block south of Taft and you see its equally sad contemporary, Hays-Porter Elementary.  Takes up a huge amount of space with a useless lawn.  Drive around town and all of the 10 year-old schools already look a little worn-out. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmicha on June 13, 2017, 06:55:19 PM
Don't even get me started...that school is a disgrace to urban planning.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: MGM on June 13, 2017, 08:13:58 PM
^Pretty much all of the new schools CPS built with the $1 billion bond issue are already embarrassing.  Stroll one block south of Taft and you see its equally sad contemporary, Hays-Porter Elementary.  Takes up a huge amount of space with a useless lawn.  Drive around town and all of the 10 year-old schools already look a little worn-out.
Dayam, I don't follow it much. Shameful.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on June 14, 2017, 12:40:17 PM
Jason Williams tweeted (https://twitter.com/jwilliamscincy/status/874783912169545728) that the West End site would require acquiring "30+ properties"... at first I took that mean they were looking at something other than the Stargel site (since I assumed most that the Stargel site had been consolidated into a single property)... but looking at CAGIS, the north part of the Stargel site is comprised of individual properties (all owned by Cincinnati Public Schools) north of Derrick Turnbow Av.

For example here is 419 David St which is a little slice of the end zone:
http://wedge3.hcauditor.org/view/re/1340001029100/2015/aerial_imagery

In addition to CPS, there are 5 other owners of properties in the block the south side of Wade:
-425+ Wade: Central Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses
-423 Wade: RJCPII LLC (purchased in 2015 by LLC based in Maryland)
-421 Wade: Historic Limited Liability (purchased 2009)
-419 Wade: CF Urban LLC (purchased 5/31/2017)
-413-415 Wade: West End Renaissance Village (purchased 2010)

So, if the stadium could be contained within the Wade/John/Central, then it would require working with at most 6 owners (who collectively own 30+ parcels). Regarding Taft, I don't think CPS or the FCC ownership would be interested in replacing Taft (that would mean finding $ to rebuild school elsewhere... and schools aren't cheap). The limiting factor with this site is the *width*, not the height of the block... so adding that extra height wouldn't help the site much.

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on June 14, 2017, 12:49:19 PM
The advantage of tearing down the school would be getting frontage on Ezzard Charles, which has direct access to I-75.  Also, there appears to be room to move Central Ave. between Ezzard Charles and 15th to abut the District 1 headquarters and that gets the site plenty of width without having to tear down anything other than the school.  The Jehovah's Witnesses don't get rich.   
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Chas Wiederhold on June 14, 2017, 02:29:51 PM
I used the footprint of Red Bull Arena to create this (because I haven't been able to stop thinking about it... I live a block away).

The opportunity to redevelop and infill this park of Central Parkway would be incredible. The major fatality in this is the Lighthouse Church/Theater. In my wildest of dreams, the façade would be deconstructed and reconstructed as an entry gate. I have thought about but haven't explored concepts that rotate the stadium 90 degrees or justify the stadium all the way to Central Parkway. This would terminate Central Ave. which I do not think is ideal, but that would alleviate John Street and the Laurel Homes development from an imposing building with a minimal setback, as is shown in the graphic.

(http://i.imgur.com/Q0SxjL6.jpg)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on June 14, 2017, 03:16:51 PM
It's a shame we have to work within the bounds of reality and can't go full Sim City on this. 🙃

If I had that ability, I'd rotate it 90 degrees from Chas' rendering above and place it right at the SW corner of Liberty & Central Parkway, going south to Wade Street (which you might have to push slightly further south, taking the Jehovah's Witness properties). We would have to relocate the Cincinnati Ballet from that site, so they'd get a new facility elsewhere. A handful of historic buildings between Liberty and Wade would be lost as well, but quite frankly, those buildings are unlikely to ever be rehabbed due to the number of "missing teeth" on those blocks from previous demolitions and light industrial businesses that have moved into the area. This plan would eliminate Central Avenue between Wade and Liberty but would likely leave everything south of Wade intact, meaning that Taft HS and Stargel Stadium could remain. It would also put the stadium as close as possible to the northbound and southbound streetcar stops on Liberty Street.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: chinkley on June 14, 2017, 05:17:22 PM
One of the issues I see with this site is that I'm sure there will be height restrictions put on the surrounding plots of land. I would like Central Parkway to be redeveloped into high rise buildings at least as tall as the Monster building, which means that the upper floors will have a clear view into the stadium.

It would be a shame to be left with awkwardly short, less dense buildings along CP once we're done.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Chas Wiederhold on June 14, 2017, 05:28:10 PM
It's a shame we have to work within the bounds of reality and can't go full Sim City on this. 🙃

If I had that ability, I'd rotate it 90 degrees from Chas' rendering above and place it right at the SW corner of Liberty & Central Parkway, going south to Wade Street (which you might have to push slightly further south, taking the Jehovah's Witness properties). We would have to relocate the Cincinnati Ballet from that site, so they'd get a new facility elsewhere. A handful of historic buildings between Liberty and Wade would be lost as well, but quite frankly, those buildings are unlikely to ever be rehabbed due to the number of "missing teeth" on those blocks from previous demolitions and light industrial businesses that have moved into the area. This plan would eliminate Central Avenue between Wade and Liberty but would likely leave everything south of Wade intact, meaning that Taft HS and Stargel Stadium could remain. It would also put the stadium as close as possible to the northbound and southbound streetcar stops on Liberty Street.

Ask and ye shall receive. Though... I do not feel that those historic buildings are so hopeless. Yes, it's more of a situation of "remaining teeth" than "missing teeth"... but the amount of demo required with this proposal makes me uncomfortable. I mean... I am not comfortable about the demo of the Lighthouse Church/Theater in the first option I drew, either.

If this were a real scenario, it becomes a question: would you rather save one piece of unique historic architecture or 10 pieces of common historic buildings. Also... in all scenarios, Revelations Baptist Church is untouched... that is one rad, goofy piece of architecture.

(http://i.imgur.com/dIqeOLt.jpg)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: CincyIntheKnow on June 14, 2017, 05:52:39 PM
^NO THANKS
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on June 14, 2017, 06:31:16 PM
I like the Central Parkway & Liberty plan better than the one that bends Central Avenue significantly and replaces Stargel Stadium.

Here's the other problem... in FCC's renderings, they show the stadium at a prominent street corner. If you put if where Stargel Stadium is located, that's not a prominent street corner. No one driving down Central Parkway, Liberty, or Ezzard Charles will see the stadium. You'd have to drive down Central Ave. or John Street (both are essentially side streets) to see it.

Central Parkway & Liberty is a much more prominent corner with tens of thousands of vehicles passing by each day.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thebillshark on June 14, 2017, 06:32:55 PM
^^^No way. That's razing 11 historic buildings (more than a "handful")(among other buildings) and obliterating the street grid. Also Travis I disagree with your assessment of the future of that area- the garages and such are much less likely to stand the test of time than the historic buildings. People will want to infill around those again someday.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on June 14, 2017, 06:34:12 PM
Let's also not forget that if the Liberty Street narrowing moves forward, that gives 20 more feet on the south side of Liberty for the stadium to occupy.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thebillshark on June 14, 2017, 06:48:28 PM
Let's also not forget that if the Liberty Street narrowing moves forward, that gives 20 more feet on the south side of Liberty for the stadium to occupy.

This is true, but if a stadium is built there, there might be some big time opposition to narrowing the street! (Moreso than today)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: mcmicken on June 14, 2017, 10:06:38 PM
The corner also houses a very viable business (Tri-State Building Supplies), a cultural institution (Ballet training center), and a pretty significant concentration of historic brewery structures and lagering cellars 40' deep under a significant portion of the site.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Chas Wiederhold on June 14, 2017, 10:20:00 PM
The corner also houses a very viable business (Tri-State Building Supplies), a cultural institution (Ballet training center), and a pretty significant concentration of historic brewery structures and lagering cellars 40' deep under a significant portion of the site.

And in the first scheme the Metropolitan Theater >> State Theater >> Lighthouse Worship Center would be at risk. It no longer looks like this, but it was, at one time, a stunner.

(http://i.imgur.com/JPkp6xv.jpg)

BUT: I just messed around with my first scheme... the theater's lobby and façade could be saved, its center line used as the center line of the field. Imagine: Midfield centered on the façade of this building. From the façade and west for 15 feet box seats would extend down into the bowl that they excavate for the field. Inside the restored lobby, a stadium bar/restaurant. On the second floor and roof, press and photographers. Above, the pillow-y contemporary canopy protecting this piece of architecture from further harsh damage from the environment.

(http://i.imgur.com/RYibnnK.jpg)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: old edale on June 14, 2017, 11:17:21 PM
I'm really uncomfortable with demolishing any more of the West End. What other community has suffered the amount of loss that the West End has? Having a stadium in the middle of the neighborhood is not going to help existing residents- in fact they will suffer from all of the normal negative side effects of stadiums. Traffic on game days, an unused dead zone on non-game days, drunks, noise. I just don't think it's an appropriate location, and I think the Lindners demolishing housing, theatres, schools, and churches in the West End while they own estates in Indian Hill large enough to fit the stadium is disgusting.

I think a good spot would be the old IRS building in Covington. If there's not enough room right on that site and its parking lot, you could include some of the fast food disaster across the street. That would probably require some road reconfiguration, but it's easily accessible from 75/71, and it'd be walkable from the Banks streetcar stop.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on June 15, 2017, 12:43:48 AM
^Well one of my sources (I have two or three of them) said that the official design (which I have not seen and no doubt differs from what has been made public) won't tear down anything.  That might be a story, but as I have pointed out, it is technically possible to build a 25,000 seat stadium without tearing anything down. 

So the team apparently drew 30k+ to Nippert on a Wednesday night...if they build a new stadium with 20-25k seats, tickets will get very expensive under these circumstances. 

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on June 15, 2017, 10:01:43 AM
We'll never play the Crew for the first time ever again. This was a special event. You want sell outs, but you want to get as many people in the stadium at the same time. Anything over 30k seems too ambitious, honestly.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ucgrady on June 15, 2017, 10:05:57 AM
Last night's game was awesome, great crowd, great atmosphere and we beat the MLS team nearest us. Couldn't have asked for a better outcome. I was hoping for a tie or just a close game to show we can hang with the big boys, but a win was just great. I hope the MLS commissioner was watching...

Because we can fit over 35,000 in Nippert for special games, and because it is already a proven successful location, I was reminded again last night that while all this potential new stadium talk can be fun, we really don't need a new stadium. The current situation is great, and I really hope the MLS could figure out something that involves long term deals with UC to make it work financially.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmblec2 on June 15, 2017, 10:34:51 AM
Last night's game was awesome, great crowd, great atmosphere and we beat the MLS team nearest us. Couldn't have asked for a better outcome. I was hoping for a tie or just a close game to show we can hang with the big boys, but a win was just great. I hope the MLS commissioner was watching...

Because we can fit over 35,000 in Nippert for special games, and because it is already a proven successful location, I was reminded again last night that while all this potential new stadium talk can be fun, we really don't need a new stadium. The current situation is great, and I really hope the MLS could figure out something that involves long term deals with UC to make it work financially.

It's either new stadium or no MLS bottom line, it has been now said straight from the owners mouth. We should move on from Nippert.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: IAGuy39 on June 15, 2017, 11:22:33 AM
So with the site plan that Chas put together, we would lose this group of buildings but that would be basically it, besides of course Taft High School Field? 

https://www.google.com/maps/uv?hl=en&pb=!1s0x8841b3ffea81ede1:0xdeaaf8e7da76af32!2m19!2m2!1i80!2i80!3m1!2i20!16m13!1b1!2m2!1m1!1e1!2m2!1m1!1e3!2m2!1m1!1e5!2m2!1m1!1e4!3m1!7e115!4s/maps/place/taft%2Bhigh%2Bschool%2Bcincinnati/@39.1090205,-84.5226241,3a,75y,357.24h,90t/data%3D*213m4*211e1*213m2*211sX_HQMEmtk3Qsct8fgelNBg*212e0*214m2*213m1*211s0x8841b3ffea81ede1:0xdeaaf8e7da76af32!5staft+high+school+cincinnati+-+Google+Search&imagekey=!1e2!2sX_HQMEmtk3Qsct8fgelNBg&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiSmP-VhsDUAhWHjz4KHfIMCTEQpx8IiAEwDQ

That wouldn't be so bad, but then of course you would want some agreements to keep the stadium in use as much as possible year round.  And the way they have it designed, I don't think they would have a retractable roof on this to double as an event center for NCAA Tourney games or winter concerts, etc.  So, this wouldn't be able to replace the form and functions of a US Bank at all. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Cygnus on June 15, 2017, 12:24:52 PM
And the way they have it designed, I don't think they would have a retractable roof on this to double as an event center for NCAA Tourney games or winter concerts, etc.  So, this wouldn't be able to replace the form and functions of a US Bank at all.

They addressed this question at Monday's season ticket holders meeting. After declaring the current US Bank arena site as too small for a soccer stadium, they stated that looking at a multi-purpose venue design would not meet the EOY deadline (and timeline if they get the bid) that MLS has.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Cygnus on June 15, 2017, 01:15:35 PM
Up next, Chicago Fire of the MLS at Nippert (June 28?)!
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on June 15, 2017, 02:44:08 PM
So with the site plan that Chas put together, we would lose this group of buildings but that would be basically it, besides of course Taft High School Field? 

https://www.google.com/maps/uv?hl=en&pb=!1s0x8841b3ffea81ede1:0xdeaaf8e7da76af32!2m19!2m2!1i80!2i80!3m1!2i20!16m13!1b1!2m2!1m1!1e1!2m2!1m1!1e3!2m2!1m1!1e5!2m2!1m1!1e4!3m1!7e115!4s/maps/place/taft%2Bhigh%2Bschool%2Bcincinnati/@39.1090205,-84.5226241,3a,75y,357.24h,90t/data%3D*213m4*211e1*213m2*211sX_HQMEmtk3Qsct8fgelNBg*212e0*214m2*213m1*211s0x8841b3ffea81ede1:0xdeaaf8e7da76af32!5staft+high+school+cincinnati+-+Google+Search&imagekey=!1e2!2sX_HQMEmtk3Qsct8fgelNBg&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiSmP-VhsDUAhWHjz4KHfIMCTEQpx8IiAEwDQ

That wouldn't be so bad, but then of course you would want some agreements to keep the stadium in use as much as possible year round.  And the way they have it designed, I don't think they would have a retractable roof on this to double as an event center for NCAA Tourney games or winter concerts, etc.  So, this wouldn't be able to replace the form and functions of a US Bank at all. 

You have to figure that they have 1-2 soccer games a week at the stadium primarily April - Sept. HS Soccer and football overlap for a month. They can certainly use it for HS playoff games easily, and probably regular season games because it is easy to schedule around FC games. In addition, they will likely have 5-6 nights of the week they can set it up for concerts and shows if they choose. My only question on that matter is do they prefer to go there or Riverbend in the summers, or even US Bank if the arena is cheaper to rent and accommodate them. I do not see too many concerts there, there are just too many venues (although, they could expand the Jazz festival to cover PBS and the soccer stadium too, imagine how great that would be)

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on June 15, 2017, 03:03:21 PM
I have a hard time believing that a MLS team would let a public high school use its stadium regularly ... other than maybe a few payoff games per year as a sign of goodwill towards the community.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Chas Wiederhold on June 15, 2017, 03:16:36 PM
What is the mysteriously incomplete part of the City West/Laurel Homes development doing? I know it was used for Streetcar staging ground. If FCC goes with the above scheme 1 and Stargel is demolished. And if CPS cannot use an MLS stadium for their regular games and practices. Would it then make sense to build a CPS stadium on the unfinished part of City West/Laurel Homes lot bound by Ezzard Charles, Cutter, Clark, and John? A facility with track and field and maybe amenities for Hays Porter Elementary as well? That would make a nice campus between those CPS facilities.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on June 15, 2017, 03:35:04 PM
I have a hard time believing that a MLS team would let a public high school use its stadium regularly ... other than maybe a few payoff games per year as a sign of goodwill towards the community.

Not necessarily. If it is a chance for revenue for the team and ownership, even if the revenue is just ancillary such as concessions, parking, sponsorship dollars (more events mean more people see the ads) they will
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on June 15, 2017, 04:14:05 PM
What is the mysteriously incomplete part of the City West/Laurel Homes development doing? I know it was used for Streetcar staging ground. If FCC goes with the above scheme 1 and Stargel is demolished. And if CPS cannot use an MLS stadium for their regular games and practices. Would it then make sense to build a CPS stadium on the unfinished part of City West/Laurel Homes lot bound by Ezzard Charles, Cutter, Clark, and John? A facility with track and field and maybe amenities for Hays Porter Elementary as well? That would make a nice campus between those CPS facilities.

Of course that makes a lot of sense, but it is unclear how that land is deeded.  City West was funded by the HUD HOPE VI program, which began in the late 1980s, and saw its budget cut under George W. Bush around 2003.  So everything that was built in the mid-2000s was from funding allocated a decade earlier.  They never finished it because of the funding cut.  I don't know if those funds shifted over to Section 8 or what. 

The Hope VI program was what provided the funds to tear down a lot of the hi-rise public housing around the country and replaced it with attached row houses.  They did renovate that one section of the 1930s Laurel Court public housing at the corner of Liberty and Linn and it actually looks better than a lot of City West.  Also, there are random empty lots around the "finished" sections of City West, not just the big completely untouched block. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Ram23 on June 15, 2017, 04:24:02 PM
I have a hard time believing that a MLS team would let a public high school use its stadium regularly ... other than maybe a few payoff games per year as a sign of goodwill towards the community.

Remember the huge ordeal about marching bands destroying the grass in Paul Brown Stadium (back when they still had grass)? There was actually some truth to it, it wasn't just the fault of the bands but overuse of the grass in general. They had to replace it several times, at a cost of something like $100k each time (paid for by the citizens of Hamilton County). I don't think FCC would be as willing to let people use their stadium for events, high school games, etc. as people are suggesting. I especially don't see them giving a high school free reign to use it as a home field.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on June 15, 2017, 04:43:18 PM
Yeah it won't be any other team's home field. It will host special events (high school championship games and the like), but it won't be used on a weekly basis by anyone except FCC.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: MGM on June 15, 2017, 04:45:53 PM
So is it a given that Cincy is a lock for MLS bid pending stadium deal finalization? Are they #1 #2 candidate?

FC Cincinnati upset Columbus Crew in US Open Cup before record crowd
Record crowd of 30,160 watch USL’s FC Cincinnati upset MLS’s Crew

A crowd of 30,160 turned out to watch FC Cincinnati’s 1-0 upset of the top-flight Columbus Crew on Wednesday night in the fourth round of the US Open Cup.

Djiby Fall’s header in the 64th minute made the difference for the second-year club of the United Soccer League, which shares second-division status with the NASL in the United States pyramid.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2017/jun/15/fc-cincinnati-us-open-cup-columbus-crew#comments
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on June 15, 2017, 05:05:18 PM
Definitely not a lock. There are many legitimate bids.

Charlotte
Cincinnati
Tampa
Detroit
Indianapolis
Nashville
Phoenix
Raleigh/Durham
Sacramento
Saint Louis
San Antonio
San Diego
Tampa Bay/St. Petersburg

Saint Louis, Indianapolis, Detroit, and San Diego are all stalling or hit huge roadblocks.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Ram23 on June 15, 2017, 05:23:26 PM
Yeah it won't be any other team's home field. It will host special events (high school championship games and the like), but it won't be used on a weekly basis by anyone except FCC.

There are suggestions that Taft could use it for football and soccer, should that site be chosen. Even if that ends up being nixed from the equation or another site is chosen, special events are all PBS was required to host and problems with the grass were routine. Grass is just one example of why the claim that the stadium could be utilized all the time for all sorts of events is a bit of a fantasy. Even with synthetic turf, PBS is rarely used for anything aside from Bengals games.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: MGM on June 15, 2017, 05:27:44 PM
Definitely not a lock. There are many legitimate bids.

Charlotte
Cincinnati
Tampa
Detroit
Indianapolis
Nashville
Phoenix
Raleigh/Durham
Sacramento
Saint Louis
San Antonio
San Diego
Tampa Bay/St. Petersburg

Saint Louis, Indianapolis, Detroit, and San Diego are all stalling or hit huge roadblocks.

How many of those have existing pro soccer teams? Checked attendance Cincy's attendance is superior to all, by a lot.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on June 15, 2017, 05:40:35 PM
^ attendance is only one piece of the puzzle. Market size, corporate sponsorship, ownership group, etc. Cincy is a small market in an area where there is concentration of teams (CBUS, Chicago). Therefore, Cincy needs all the other factors to be perfect to get a team. Even with the top attendance and stadium deal in place, they could be passed over for a market like phoenix or tampa which are larger and have better demographics long term than Cincy. They may pick a shakier stadium plan group or a team with less attendance, or demand more from the Cincy group in terms of Stadium availability and other issues than they would the other markets.

Point is Cincy has zero room for error where the other cities have some margin. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Chas Wiederhold on June 16, 2017, 04:51:42 PM
'HELL IS REAL,' and so is FC Cincinnati's threat to Columbus
Read more at https://www.fourfourtwo.com/us/features/hell-is-real-derby-fc-cincinnati-threat-columbus-crew-mls-usl#LBI902gwtGcRxAfP.99

"The Seattle-Portland rivalry might be the most coveted in American soccer, but this week showed two Midwestern clubs could have just as much fun."

Been to many games in Seattle. Been to a game in Portland. I was very excited to read the above comparison. And it also made me want FCC to buy Nippert from UC so we can stay there.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: moonloop on June 17, 2017, 11:51:59 AM
FCC has a deal in the works for a $25M headquarters and practice fields in ... Clermont County. Meh.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Cygnus on June 19, 2017, 11:34:06 AM
WCPO Insider...

Can FC Cincinnati leverage more out of Newport, Cincinnati for stadium? (http://www.wcpo.com/news/insider/can-fc-cincinnati-leverage-more-out-of-newport-cincinnati-for-stadium)

The future location of Futbol Club Cincinnati’s professional stadium could hinge on which city – Cincinnati or Newport, Kentucky – is the highest bidder.

The team, which is vying for one of the open spots in Major League Soccer, is considering sites in both cities to build a roughly $200 million stadium. FC Cincinnati ownership plans to kick in $100 million, which would still leave as much a $100 million funding hole.

In a talk with supporters last week, FC Cincinnati CEO Carl Lindner III made it clear: The team will go to the city that offers support for the stadium’s construction.

Cont (http://www.wcpo.com/news/insider/can-fc-cincinnati-leverage-more-out-of-newport-cincinnati-for-stadium)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on June 19, 2017, 11:36:11 AM
FCC has a deal in the works for a $25M headquarters and practice fields in ... Clermont County. Meh.

Not worried about that. The practice fields for the Crew are in the middle of nowhere. No need for those to be in the city proper. They need cheap land and it won't be a destination.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on June 19, 2017, 12:31:27 PM
^Yeah... it annoys me to no end that the Bengals use up ~8 acres of prime riverfront real estate for their practice fields next to Paul Brown. Those practice fields are used by the public only a handful of days. Not the highest and best use of that land.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on June 19, 2017, 02:19:43 PM
^ Right now I would not consider that prime Riverfront land. Prior to PBS, what was there? It was pretty much a bunch of run down warehouses. The fields give people more reason to visit there now. Plus, now that the Bengals have training camp there it gives people more reason to come to that part of the city.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: moonloop on June 19, 2017, 03:48:54 PM
FCC has a deal in the works for a $25M headquarters and practice fields in ... Clermont County. Meh.

Not worried about that. The practice fields for the Crew are in the middle of nowhere. No need for those to be in the city proper. They need cheap land and it won't be a destination.

Yes and no. Not having all the employees and players working in the city of Cincinnati prevents the city from capturing as much of their taxes as possible. On the other hand, we're not talking big money since it's minor league soccer and even if they make the jump to MSL, players salaries don't seem to be crazy high.

There's a lot to dislike with how the Bengals operate but at least their entire operation is in the city. Ditto for the Reds. So most of the taxes workers/players pay are in the city. Granted, I know a lot of players live in NKY. How much of Joey Votto's $25M a year go to the city?

I think Newport might have the advantage for the stadium if Bill Butler (Corporex) is involved. I haven't seen his name in the news in ages. He was the kingmaker in NKY. I can see him being able to put something together. FCC stadium could jumpstart Ovation. The renderings show Ovation type buildings.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on June 19, 2017, 04:26:11 PM
Visiting players pay taxes to the city they are playing in. I imagine it would be the same for home players.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on June 19, 2017, 04:47:39 PM
Visiting players pay taxes to the city they are playing in. I imagine it would be the same for home players.
Whoa?! Is that true for all major league sports? Seems like a nightmare to keep track of (lucrative for the accountants!).
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on June 19, 2017, 05:15:57 PM
Technically consultants who travel for work are supposed to pay income tax in the cities where they work, but that's hard to enforce and most don't do it. For pro athletes, I suppose it's a lot easier and more worthwhile for the IRS to keep track of, since the game schedules are public knowledge and the athletes make so much money.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: MGM on June 19, 2017, 05:33:33 PM
Visiting players pay taxes to the city they are playing in. I imagine it would be the same for home players.
Whoa?! Is that true for all major league sports? Seems like a nightmare to keep track of (lucrative for the accountants!).
It isn't the league or sport it is the city or state that does it. Players usually get credited in their own local taxes though.
As an example if you reside in Cincy and work in Blue Ash, you pay 1.1 % to Cincy and Blue Ash gets 1%. It is called the Jock Tax.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on June 19, 2017, 08:32:06 PM
Nashville's MLS bid centers around just one location -- the Nashville Fairgrounds:
https://www.google.com/maps/search/nashville+fairgrounds/@36.1336645,-86.765772,1715m/data=!3m1!1e3

That news caught my interest because like FC Cincinnati, the Nashville ownership group is a billionaire family (the Ingrams) and they are seeking out public land which they presumably can get for free or cheap.  People know these clubs are owned by billionaire families so they're going to hold out and hold out and hold out. 

Perhaps Bill Butler is willing to let go of some of that Newport land for cheap, but FC Cincinnati could in theory get the Taft HS site for free in lieu of special annual payments directly to Cincinnati Public Schools.  They could do a 100-year land lease of the site so that CPS retains title and the land is not subject to the typical stew of property taxes. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: moonloop on June 19, 2017, 11:16:52 PM
Visiting players pay taxes to the city they are playing in. I imagine it would be the same for home players.

The Jock Tax yes. A ton of cities(including Cincy) and states (Calif.) have one, but I meant regular old taxes like payroll, property and sales taxes. With the headquarters in Clermont Cty, the city would miss out.

Plus that's $25M could be used toward the new stadium. And that opens FCC to criticism the stadium will only be used 17x a year.

The Bengals always get hammer about PBS "only" being used 10x a year, but really it's their office 5 days a week, all year. They have about 85 office personal working at PBS. http://www.bengals.com/team/staff-directory.html (http://www.bengals.com/team/staff-directory.html)


And if your curious, the Reds have a ton more. I can't count that high. http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/team/front_office.jsp?c_id=cin
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Ram23 on June 20, 2017, 10:47:22 AM
Deadspin is a very dumb website but for some reason people read it. Here's their take on the new stadium:

Cincinnati, Home Of Terrible Stadium Deals, Is Being Extorted For A New MLS Stadium

http://deadspin.com/cincinnati-home-of-terrible-stadium-deals-is-being-ex-1796232899

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on June 20, 2017, 10:51:51 AM
^The actual text of the article wasn't too inflammatory, but the headline is clickbait. Deadspin is against any public involvement in any sports anywhere in any fashion. And I think it's ridiculous. I agree that communities shouldn't be footing the bill for a stadium like Paul Brown entirely on their own. But some public involvement is expected and reasonable.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: brian korte on June 20, 2017, 02:59:36 PM
The bigger question is if they come after Taft High School itself, which is only about 12 years old and try to do a land swap. 

Enrollment at Taft has been steadily, and quickly, declining....
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on June 23, 2017, 11:20:11 AM
On Wednesday, June 14 FC Cincinnati hosted the Columbus Crew with an attendance of 30,160. This is the third highest attendance for any US Open Cup match in modern history (both higher attendances were set in finals by Seattle Sounders). That clearly got national attention, and for the first time in years, ESPN will be broadcasting a US Open Cup match that is not a final.

FC Cincinnati will be hosting Chicago Fire of MLS on Wednesday, June 28. The game will be broadcast on ESPN2. Kickoff has been pushed back to 8:00pm to accommodate the broadcast.

More details here (http://www.fccincinnati.com/news_article/show/806749?referrer_id=2584136).
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thomasbw on June 26, 2017, 02:54:42 PM
Nashville's MLS bid centers around just one location -- the Nashville Fairgrounds:
https://www.google.com/maps/search/nashville+fairgrounds/@36.1336645,-86.765772,1715m/data=!3m1!1e3

That news caught my interest because like FC Cincinnati, the Nashville ownership group is a billionaire family (the Ingrams) and they are seeking out public land which they presumably can get for free or cheap.  People know these clubs are owned by billionaire families so they're going to hold out and hold out and hold out. 

Perhaps Bill Butler is willing to let go of some of that Newport land for cheap, but FC Cincinnati could in theory get the Taft HS site for free in lieu of special annual payments directly to Cincinnati Public Schools.  They could do a 100-year land lease of the site so that CPS retains title and the land is not subject to the typical stew of property taxes. 


I tried to get FCC to put their stadium at the Hamilton County Fairgrounds. They were not interested.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: oakiehigh on June 26, 2017, 03:22:50 PM
My prediction is this stadium ends up in Queensgate. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: joshknut on June 26, 2017, 03:22:54 PM
Does anyone have an opinion on this? It seems as if FCC is trying to get a Cincinnati deal, but they want the plans secret. There doesn't seem to be any negotiation or planning of this kind of secrecy on the NKY side. Is it normal to have non-disclosure agreements for something like this but it's just getting press do to its potentially political significance?
http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2017/06/21/two-pols-promised-secrecy-fc-stadium-talks/417044001/

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on June 26, 2017, 03:48:35 PM
Does anyone have an opinion on this? It seems as if FCC is trying to get a Cincinnati deal, but they want the plans secret. There doesn't seem to be any negotiation or planning of this kind of secrecy on the NKY side. Is it normal to have non-disclosure agreements for something like this but it's just getting press do to its potentially political significance?
http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2017/06/21/two-pols-promised-secrecy-fc-stadium-talks/417044001/



This is one of the things that concerns me: I prefer the West End as the top option and Newport second, but are there any, concrete details about money on either side of the river? Some seem to think that Newport is "shovel ready," are there any concrete examples of financing/assistance/agreements in place? And if the club wants Cincinnati, what exactly are they requesting from the county/city?

I think it's reasonable to expect some sort of political support, but what exact type of support is that? Money that could be used elsewhere? Tax Incremental Financing? Infrastructure? Sorry, but the kind of information needs to be out there if they want to win the PR battle.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on June 26, 2017, 04:57:59 PM
I think that the West End is FCC's first choice, but they are dangling the Newport stadium idea out there in order to get Cincinnati/HamCo to offer more incentives.

I'm thinking that HamCo will either propose a new tax on hotel rooms, car rentals, and tickets (stadium, arts, etc.); or they will simply leverage the existing stadium tax to issue new bonds, if they can get away with it legally. On top of that, the city would probably put a TIF district around the stadium site and leverage that for funding the street improvements and utility work needed for the stadium. It will likely be built by the Port Authority so that construction materials are tax exempt and then sold to its final owner, either FCC or the county. If the stadium ends up being owned by the county, it won't pay property taxes.

Those are all the tax loopholes I can think of right now, but I'm sure there's more that's possible...
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on June 26, 2017, 05:09:45 PM
I don't believe that there is any special status to the "stadium" sales tax.  It was simply an increase in the county's overall sales tax. 

People need to step back and realize that the overall cost of this project is very low compared to Paul Brown Stadium or Great American Ballpark.  It will be a much smaller building, and either would likely cost twice as much now as they did in 1998 and 2001. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on June 26, 2017, 05:14:04 PM
The most dangerous part of the county giving FCC money is that it creates a slippery slope where either the city or county are pressured to invest in a new US Bank Arena.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on June 26, 2017, 10:52:38 PM
I'm surprised that the NW corner of MLK and Reading wasn't considered for a potential stadium site. We have a brand new interchange at MLK that can get cars quickly to and from the stadium, and virtually every arterial street in the area was widened as well. For all the people who pregame at Mecklenburg Gardens, it would be a shorter walk to the new stadium than the current walk to Nippert Stadium. It would still be convenient for UC students and easily accessible via bus.

In the photo below, it's the top right corner:

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4281/35520130226_7bb6cca204_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/W7MXdo)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on June 27, 2017, 12:45:56 AM
Do you really wonder that or are you just showing off that awesome drone?

For real, this would've been a really good site to consider.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Jimmy Skinner on June 27, 2017, 08:32:37 AM
There was a preservation battle on that site in the 70s-80s, a beautiful old school building was demolished there
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: chinkley on June 27, 2017, 09:58:04 AM
The buildings and holdover streets in the bottom right corner are not long for this world.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: JYP on June 27, 2017, 10:45:50 AM
So then why isn't FC Cincinnati considering this as a potential site?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on June 27, 2017, 11:00:43 AM
Maybe they approached UC Health and they said no, end of conversation
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on June 27, 2017, 11:24:49 AM
So then why isn't FC Cincinnati considering this as a potential site?

I remember back when Xavier planned Cintas Center thinking that they could build a shared arena with UC at this site.  Would have saved each school $50+ million, but it made too much sense so it couldn't happen. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: joshknut on June 28, 2017, 10:47:52 AM
25,000+ sold and is now bumped up to ESPN from ESPN2
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: LAW 21 on June 29, 2017, 12:02:22 AM
Victory!  I've never watched more than a few minutes of soccer, but I may have been hooked tonight.  I wish I would have gone to the game.  Such a great atmosphere and it really is a shame that Nippert can't be used as an MLS stadium.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on June 29, 2017, 12:24:47 AM
FC Cincinnati downs Chicago Fire on penalty kicks, 3-1

FINAL: FC Cincinnati 0, Chicago Fire 0 (FC Cincinnati wins, 3-1, on penalty kicks).

A superlative performance by FC Cincinnati goalkeeper Mitch Hildebrandt sent the club through to the Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup quarterfinals.

In penalty kicks, Hildebrandt saved three of the four shots he faced. Meanwhile, FC Cincinnati converted three out of four takes to win the match, 3-1, in penalties.

Cincinnati will now travel to Miami FC for its quarterfinal match. Miami beat Atlanta United FC of MLS earlier Wednesday.

More below:
http://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/soccer/fc-cincinnati/2017/06/28/live-updates-fc-cincinnati-vs-chicago-fire-u-s-open-cup/437900001/
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: surfohio on June 29, 2017, 01:16:41 AM
What a game!

CHI comes out attacking and FCC starts out on their heels, to put it nicely.

Then at the 30 min. mark FCC starts playing. Midway second half they are the aggressor now!

Hey there's Aodhan Quinn, gotta love the Akron Zips alums. I used to watch his dad play for the San Diego Sockers.

Times running out....and it's a breakaway!!! How in the world does that Bone guy miss?

Handball in the box NOT called on CHI defender. An outrage! Times up.

OT/Shootout/yadda/yadda/yadda.

Just another great show in front of a national audience :-) 

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: bendixondavis on June 29, 2017, 02:06:20 AM
Yeah the game tonight was so fun! The only complaint i would have is i felt it was a little disrespectful to boo a world cup winning player every time he took a corner kick and when it was his turn at penalties.  I feel with these cup games and other games in the past where there are crowds of 25-30000+ the new stadium really should be designed to hold 25-30000 at least, not 20-25000 like what was reported on a couple weeks ago.  If you build it, they will come!
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: YABO713 on June 29, 2017, 08:17:58 AM
Yeah the game tonight was so fun! The only complaint i would have is i felt it was a little disrespectful to boo a world cup winning player every time he took a corner kick and when it was his turn at penalties.  I feel with these cup games and other games in the past where there are crowds of 25-30000+ the new stadium really should be designed to hold 25-30000 at least, not 20-25000 like what was reported on a couple weeks ago.  If you build it, they will come!

Shrinking stadium size is a national trend across all professional sports. Though, I love the idea of having an MLS stadium that sells out at 30k
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: MGM on June 29, 2017, 11:34:08 AM
I'm surprised that the NW corner of MLK and Reading wasn't considered for a potential stadium site. We have a brand new interchange at MLK that can get cars quickly to and from the stadium, and virtually every arterial street in the area was widened as well. For all the people who pregame at Mecklenburg Gardens, it would be a shorter walk to the new stadium than the current walk to Nippert Stadium. It would still be convenient for UC students and easily accessible via bus.

In the photo below, it's the top right corner:

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4281/35520130226_7bb6cca204_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/W7MXdo)
Bunch of office buildings, garages, hotel being marketed in that area.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Clevelander17 on June 29, 2017, 01:34:35 PM
The FC Cincinnati situation is fascinating to me for a number of reasons. First of all, this run through the U.S. Open Cup is impressive, particularly with the amount of enthusiasm it has generated in the Queen City in just a few years of existence. In terms of Cincy's chances of being elevated to MLS, it's looking more and more like there's a really strong chance of that happening. I read a piece in Sports Illustrated recently that details how many of the other potential MLS locales are much weaker than previously imagined and that the list of 12 may only consist of 5-6 legitimate bids.

MLS should and probably does realize, however, that Cincinnati's bid doesn't exist in a complete bubble. The franchise just down the road in Columbus is struggling for attendance and some have argued that the city should be exploring building a new stadium for the team. Further, it was just three years ago that MLS Commissioner Don Garber, when asked about a potential expansion team in Cleveland (an idea that almost came to fruition a decade ago), stated, "What I would say to folks that are living in Cincinnati, the folks that are living in Dayton, folks that are living in Cleveland: Support the [Columbus] Crew." In looking at the bigger picture, it's hard to imagine that an expansion team in Cincinnati won't cannabalize at least some fans from the Crew, though to what extent is hard to know for sure. Worst case scenario, I don't think it's a stretch to believe it's possible that expansion to Cincinnati might be the first step towards the Crew folding or moving to another city.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Chas Wiederhold on June 29, 2017, 01:50:39 PM
Well, I, culturally speaking, do not hope that the Crew folds or moves to a new city. I do hope an intrastate rivalry emerges with two teams at the MLS level. Something as rich as Portland-Seattle but more potent because Cincinnati and Columbus are nearly twice as close. I hope each team emboldens and concentrates the local flavor of the places each represent in the way that soccer fans are able to pull up cultural obscurities and shine new light on historical, geological, local humor.

Lukewarm Columbus fans are redoubling on their support for the Crew. Originally from Wilmington, smack dab between the two cities, I want both to succeed and I feel like the markets are big enough to support that success.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ucgrady on June 29, 2017, 03:19:35 PM
I think having a built in natural rival makes fan support more 'real'. As a person who doesn't really care about baseball or soccer, the only games I find myself going to are against teams from Columbus, Louisville, Pittsburgh, St. Louis etc. Half the fun of being a UC or UK fan is making fun of Xavier or Louisville respectively. Without a good rival, sports become boring. Look how mad Dayton was when Xavier left their conference.
I think if the nearest MLS rival was Chicago or Atlanta only real soccer fans would be going to these games, but with civic pride on the line many people who go to the games (myself included) are going more because they like cheering for <insert local sports team> who represents "their city", and because they like having a good time.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on July 01, 2017, 05:02:36 AM
(http://i81.photobucket.com/albums/j231/jmecklenborg/2017/soccer_zps8ywbj5gp.jpg) (http://s81.photobucket.com/user/jmecklenborg/media/2017/soccer_zps8ywbj5gp.jpg.html)

I ran across a physical copy of The Enquirer on Friday and saw that they ran an FC Cincinnati cover story and inside they had Paul Daugherty write a separate story.  What's interesting about this is that The Enquirer paid Karl Lindner $10 million back in 1999 and promised to never negatively report on Chiquita or any o his other businesses.  You've got to wonder how much Lindner's boys are twisting the paper's elbows and how much of it is a slow news week.  Also, the paper might think it's going to attract a younger and broader audience. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: TroyEros on July 01, 2017, 07:12:55 PM
(http://i81.photobucket.com/albums/j231/jmecklenborg/2017/soccer_zps8ywbj5gp.jpg) (http://s81.photobucket.com/user/jmecklenborg/media/2017/soccer_zps8ywbj5gp.jpg.html)

I ran across a physical copy of The Enquirer on Friday and saw that they ran an FC Cincinnati cover story and inside they had Paul Daugherty write a separate story.  What's interesting about this is that The Enquirer paid Karl Lindner $10 million back in 1999 and promised to never negatively report on Chiquita or any o his other businesses.  You've got to wonder how much Lindner's boys are twisting the paper's elbows and how much of it is a slow news week.  Also, the paper might think it's going to attract a younger and broader audience.

Okayyyy...

There were over 32K fans at Nippert that Day. The game was televised on ESPN, a national stage, and the game itself was a miracle and was a nail biter to say the least. You essentially had the Louisville Bats defeat the Chicago Cubs in a 1 game playoff. Not to even mention the fact that Chicago has one of the most legendary soccer players of our generation in Shweinsteiger who was the main cog who helped Germany secure the World Cup in 2014.

Everyone the day after was talking about this match, and whether they were at the match or watched on ESPN.

So your post honestly makes you sound as if your someone who just doesn't, "get it".
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: bendixondavis on July 01, 2017, 08:10:36 PM
Lol agreed.  It was a big deal and they're reporting on it.  Glad to see them focusing on something positive rather than streetcar bashing etc.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on July 02, 2017, 01:21:39 PM


There were over 32K fans at Nippert that Day. The game was televised on ESPN, a national stage, and the game itself was a miracle and was a nail biter to say the least. You essentially had the Louisville Bats defeat the Chicago Cubs in a 1 game playoff. Not to even mention the fact that Chicago has one of the most legendary soccer players of our generation in Shweinsteiger who was the main cog who helped Germany secure the World Cup in 2014.




32,000 fans at a soccer game versus a baseball or football game aren't close to the same thing.  The gate revenue is huge thanks to club seats and luxury boxes and the TV contracts are huge. 

For some perspective on how big "major league" soccer is compared to football, baseball, basketball, and hockey, take a look at this list.  It only has 1/6th the revenue of hockey, the fourth-biggest professional sport in the United States:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_professional_sports_leagues_by_revenue

In addition, NASCAR has about $3 billion in annual revenue (about the same as hockey, or 6X major league soccer).  WWE professional wrestling has about $800 million in annual revenue, so it is still significantly bigger than MLS.   


Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: MGM on July 02, 2017, 05:23:41 PM
(http://i81.photobucket.com/albums/j231/jmecklenborg/2017/soccer_zps8ywbj5gp.jpg) (http://s81.photobucket.com/user/jmecklenborg/media/2017/soccer_zps8ywbj5gp.jpg.html)

I ran across a physical copy of The Enquirer on Friday and saw that they ran an FC Cincinnati cover story and inside they had Paul Daugherty write a separate story.  What's interesting about this is that The Enquirer paid Karl Lindner $10 million back in 1999 and promised to never negatively report on Chiquita or any o his other businesses.  You've got to wonder how much Lindner's boys are twisting the paper's elbows and how much of it is a slow news week.  Also, the paper might think it's going to attract a younger and broader audience.
Enquirer put 75% of their office space on the sublease market. PDoc brings in about 40% of the online traffic.
Other websites seem to be much active with soccer traffic. I remember the law suit against the Enquirer back then. One of their employees hacked into the voicemail system at Chiquita. Enquirer seems kinda dead.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: TroyEros on July 05, 2017, 03:37:57 PM


There were over 32K fans at Nippert that Day. The game was televised on ESPN, a national stage, and the game itself was a miracle and was a nail biter to say the least. You essentially had the Louisville Bats defeat the Chicago Cubs in a 1 game playoff. Not to even mention the fact that Chicago has one of the most legendary soccer players of our generation in Shweinsteiger who was the main cog who helped Germany secure the World Cup in 2014.




32,000 fans at a soccer game versus a baseball or football game aren't close to the same thing.  The gate revenue is huge thanks to club seats and luxury boxes and the TV contracts are huge. 

For some perspective on how big "major league" soccer is compared to football, baseball, basketball, and hockey, take a look at this list.  It only has 1/6th the revenue of hockey, the fourth-biggest professional sport in the United States:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_professional_sports_leagues_by_revenue

In addition, NASCAR has about $3 billion in annual revenue (about the same as hockey, or 6X major league soccer).  WWE professional wrestling has about $800 million in annual revenue, so it is still significantly bigger than MLS.

Why we are even discussing about revenue?

Who cares? I'm talking about the fact that there were 32K fans all screaming in unison for there home team. Why are we even comparing revenue now? That wasn't my point, but rather about the buzz that is being created because of this team. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Jimmy Skinner on July 05, 2017, 04:02:18 PM
All I can say is that after attending some FC games, a Reds game is a big letdown.  I did both in one week and there is no comparison. 

Soccer like this... in-person is a fantastic fan experience.  And this is coming from someone who has never in his life watched a soccer game on TV and who really likes baseball.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Cygnus on July 07, 2017, 01:37:23 PM
FC Cincinnati to host U.S. Women's National Team match (http://www.wcpo.com/sports/fc-cincinnati/fc-cincinnati-may-host-us-womens-national-team-match)
Club will sponsor girls development academy


CINCINNATI - FC Cincinnati will host hometown soccer star Rose Lavelle and the U.S. Women’s National Team in an international friendly against New Zealand on Sept 19.

The match will be at 7:30 p.m. at Nippert Stadium, FC Cincinnati announced at a Friday morning news conference attended by Lavelle, a 2013 Mount Notre Dame grad.

Tickets will go on sale July 21 at 10 a.m. only through ussoccer.com and by calling 1-800-745-3000. Tickets will be sold at Nippert Stadium on the day of the match only.

Cont (http://www.wcpo.com/sports/fc-cincinnati/fc-cincinnati-may-host-us-womens-national-team-match)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on July 13, 2017, 10:19:26 PM
I'm surprised that the NW corner of MLK and Reading wasn't considered for a potential stadium site. We have a brand new interchange at MLK that can get cars quickly to and from the stadium, and virtually every arterial street in the area was widened as well. For all the people who pregame at Mecklenburg Gardens, it would be a shorter walk to the new stadium than the current walk to Nippert Stadium. It would still be convenient for UC students and easily accessible via bus.

Well, now we know why... that site will be the location of the new NIOSH lab (https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/07/13/site-selected-for-110-million-niosh-lab-in.html).
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Cygnus on July 14, 2017, 12:25:37 PM
MLS needs to accept Nippert, Portune says (http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics-extra/2017/07/14/px-mls-needs-accept-nippert-portune-says/478016001/)

Todd Portune is calling the shots on whether Futbol Club Cincinnati gets a new stadium in Hamilton County, and the commissioner doesn't sound like he's budging on giving the club public money.

But Portune does want FC Cincinnati to join Major League Soccer. So he's asked the University of Cincinnati to partner with Hamilton County on approaching MLS to see if the league will allow the Queen City club to play permanently at Nippert Stadium.

"MLS, you tell us why it doesn't work," Portune told Politics Extra on Thursday night. "You saw the same thing we did two Wednesdays ago. You're telling me you don't want that?"

Cont (http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics-extra/2017/07/14/px-mls-needs-accept-nippert-portune-says/478016001/)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on July 14, 2017, 12:29:22 PM
The quarter final match of the US Open Cup was postponed due to weather in Miami. If FCC beats Miami at the TBD makeup date, we will host the New York Red Bulls in the semifinals.

If we win that match, we will either travel to Kansas City, or we will host San Jose at Nippert Stadium for the US Open Cup Final.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on July 14, 2017, 01:03:21 PM
As part of the Open Cup, the New England Revolution played New York Red Bulls last night... and for some reason, the match was played at a tiny (4,100 seat) field on Harvard's campus... and it doesn't look like they even filled the bleachers. Not sure why their ownership groups allowed this to happen... definitely doesn't look good for either club or the MLS.

https://www.mlssoccer.com/post/2017/07/13/new-england-revolution-vs-new-york-red-bulls-u-s-open-cup-quarterfinals

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: surfohio on July 14, 2017, 01:20:51 PM
Some insight on reddit by u/mattkaybe.

It's been said on here multiple times, but I'll say it again: Nippert (or PBS, or "insert your own non-soccer stadium solution here") does not work as a long-term home for an MLS team. Even if MLS were to magically rescind their demand that all bids come with a soccer-specific stadium -- which they will not do (and, if they did, cities like San Diego & St. Louis would vault to the top of the list) -- the economics of soccer in the US simply don't work in a non-team controlled building.

The first thing you have to understand about MLS is that it simply isn't as popular, nationally, as any of the other major sports. When you talk about economics in the NFL or the NBA, the leagues make billions of dollars in revenue on their TV deals alone. That money is divided up evenly among the teams . Each NFL team makes roughly $225 million dollars before ticket one or jersey one is sold. Under the NBA's deal, each team makes roughly $100 million dollars from the national TV deal alone (they each get to ink their own local deal on top of this) before any tickets are sold. MLS? Their last TV deal went for $90 million -- which means each team makes roughly $4 million (plus whatever they negotiate locally for a local TV rights deal, but these deals are incredibly small compared to other sports).

What does that mean? It means that MLS is more reliant on outside revenue streams, beyond TV, than any other major American sport. An MLS team can't behave like the Cincinnati Bengals, which can cash a huge TV check every year to cover all player expenses and still have tens of millions left over for other expenses.

It's also worth noting, at this point, that the likelihood of MLS ever "cashing in" with a huge NBA/NFL/MLB national TV deal of their own is incredibly remote. The business model of televised sports (especially cable televised sports) is currently dying. Networks like ESPN, TNT, and Fox Sports paid billions of dollars in rights fees for these sports to, in part, justify large per-household subscriber fees for their channels on cable and satellite. That was great when everyone was signing up for Time Warner or DirecTV, but people now have alternatives for entertainment that don't require a cable subscription -- and the cable industry is hemmorhaging subscribers daily. ESPN can't afford to hand out more billion dollar agreements because it's primary source of revenue -- the approximately $10 per month every person with cable pays for ESPN (regardless of whether or not they watch a single minute of ESPN) -- is drying up. MLS is a growing league, but it missed the window for getting a huge payday in the sports rights fee arms race.

And, unfortunately, running an MLS team isn't exactly cheap. Moving from USL to MLS will mean an escalation in player costs: the MLS salary cap is currently $3.9 million. Not so bad, right? Well, the $3.9 million doesn't count "Designated Players" under MLS's salary structure. If you don't follow MLS, a DP is basically a player that can be paid an amount in excess of what would normally put a team over the salary cap. These are the "superstars" on your MLS team that get brought in from overseas or command large contracts to prevent them from going overseas, and each team gets to have 3 of them on their roster. Our friend Bastian Schweinsteiger from Chicago, for example, is a DP that's making over $5m in guaranteed money by himself. An FC Cincinnati side being promoted to MLS is going to be expected to go out and sign talent to allow them to compete on Day 1 -- Orlando City (our "model" in this process) went out and paid Kaka $7m for just one of their DP spots. This is just player salary, mind you; other expenses the team will have to incur include increased travel budgets (no more bus rides), higher salaries for coaching and assistants, maintaining a practice facility, and that little business of running a full youth academy.

The TL;DR at this point: Moving to MLS is going to be really expensive, relative to what the team is doing at USL. Not a shock, though -- it''s a lot cheaper to run the Louisville Bats than it is to run the Cincinnati Reds. And we know that TV revenue isn't going to come close to covering the shortfalls.

So, this is where a stadium comes in. In order to make ends meet, an MLS FC Cincinnati is, quite literally, going to need to sell and monetize every aspect of the club -- and that simply isn't possible at Nippert Stadium. Let's just look at the "big" aspects and see where it doesn't work:

Naming Rights: UC (shortsightedly, but that's a different bag of worms entirely) agreed a long time ago to never rename Nippert Stadium. They also agreed to never rename the actual field itself (named after a former AD at the school). There is, as best anyone can figure, nothing that can be done about this. Naming rights to your average professional sports stadium easily run over $1m per year, and go even higher. That's revenue directly out of FC Cincinnati's pocket every year.

Concession & Merchandise: Nippert stadium doesn't have the ability to offer premium concessions, where most teams make the bulk of their food money these days (it's no coincdence that every ballpark in America is upgrading from hot dogs and popcorn). For one, there's no ability to actually cook food inside the stadium, and for two there's no additional space available to build new concessions. Similarly, there's limited ability to offer merchandise for sale on matchday. Most, if not all, teams wants to have their team shop on premsies to get the captive audience that comes for matches each week. There's simply no space to build a team shop on Nippert's footprint. Again, all of those lost sales on matchday is money out of FCC's pocket.

Seating Reconfiguration: Nippert's all-bench seating is fine for a minor-league soccer club, but when prices go up are people really going to be OK with metal bleachers for a premium price? Chairback seating is almost a must at any modern stadium facility (outside of a supporters section, where safe standing should be in place), and Nippert simply cannot accommodate it without massive restructuring. And, that's assuming you'd get UC to go along with it, given that chairback seating would significantly reduce capacity (eating into their bottom line for football sales).

Non-Soccer Event Hosting: Clubs have the ability to monteize their own stadiums when they aren't in use by hosting things like tournaments, other sporting events (college football bowl games, in some cases), concerts, etc. Nippert stadium doesn't work for these events because it's also in use by the university on a daily basis, if not by the football team, than by student organizations and activities.

I've described Nippert in previous posts as "Death by 1,000 paper cuts" -- some of the cuts are big (naming rights is a HUGE loss), some are small (not being able to sell a premium sandwich v. a brattwurst), but they all keep adding up. Financially, there isn't a workable model that leads you to FC Cincinnati surviving, as a successful MLS team, in a stadium like Nippert. Even if you could, in some fantasy universe, buy the building and "control it," you'd still need to solve the problem of Jimmy Nippert's name and the physics of fitting more facilities onto an already completely full footprint. Absent solutions to ALL of these issues, I don't see any way the math works there. And, at the end of the day, that's why MLS requires teams to own their own buildings and control all revenue streams coming in -- because they don't want to admit teams that can't pay their bills and/or can't run compettive teams.

I understand we're all new at this, and that a lot of people don't follow MLS or really look at MLS economics -- but I encourage everyone to read up on it. I think when you do, you'll understand just how horridly uninformed people like Todd Portune really are.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on July 14, 2017, 02:40:20 PM
MLS will probably never "accept" Nippert but FCC needs to "accept" the fact that they aren't going to get taxpayer funding for their stadium. Fans may have to "accept" the fact that the team will not join the MLS. Them's the breaks.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Flyboy41 on July 14, 2017, 04:10:39 PM
MLS will probably never "accept" Nippert but FCC needs to "accept" the fact that they aren't going to get taxpayer funding for their stadium. Fans may have to "accept" the fact that the team will not join the MLS. Them's the breaks.

From everything Berhing has said, it looks like Newport is a go. Portune is politicing and he's showing a top reason why the team will move to Newport...Hamilton County politics. I don't think it's anywhere near a "fact" that FCC is going to be left out of MLS. MLS isn't stopping at 28 anyway but even if they were, FCC has most of its ducks in a row and will get shovels in the ground in Newport as soon as MLS says "go".
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Chas Wiederhold on July 14, 2017, 04:16:44 PM
Who pays for the stadium if it is built in Newport?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on July 14, 2017, 04:25:39 PM
How can you blame Portune for politicking here? I'm not sure if any scientific survey has been done, but I would guess that the vast majority of Hamilton County does not support using taxpayer dollars to help FCC build a new stadium.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmblec2 on July 14, 2017, 04:47:49 PM
Is there any chance MLS lowers the franchise fee to help pay for the stadium ($100M down to $50M)? Tax payer stadiums deals are very rare these days. The MLS may run out of cities because no one can finance a stadium.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: JYP on July 14, 2017, 05:06:26 PM
There is all this noise on the Hamilton County side about the stadium but nary a peep on the Newport/KY side. Either they are quietly working on a deal or there is no deal.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Clevelander17 on July 14, 2017, 05:15:23 PM
Has there been any discussion about "selling" the stadium to the public on potential uses for a new stadium beyond simply hosting an MLS soccer team for ~17 home dates? Soccer-specific stadia are versatile and in other cities have held a number of events, including all levels of rugby, lacrosse, and soccer, college football, high school football, major concerts, marching band competitions, political rallies, etc.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on July 14, 2017, 05:22:03 PM
^ ha ha ha ha ha, very comical (Says MLS commissioner Garber about lowering the franchise fee to pay for stadiums).

In all seriousness, if this were Miami or Los Angeles or New York or San Fran, then yes because they are the right media markets that the MLS absolutely wants.

In Cincinnati, no. It has to be perfect. Cincinnati will get an MLS team because it is too appealing to say no too and they have their ducks in a row to be the most deserving. We are not really a market MLS wants to have but since we prove the most viable at this time, they will take our money, if we have all the details taken care of.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: surfohio on July 14, 2017, 05:26:08 PM
Has there been any discussion about "selling" the stadium to the public on potential uses for a new stadium beyond simply hosting an MLS soccer team for ~17 home dates? Soccer-specific stadia are versatile and in other cities have held a number of events, including all levels of rugby, lacrosse, and soccer, college football, high school football, major concerts, marching band competitions, political rallies, etc.


San Diego's MLS stadium plan was to house SDSU football.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Cygnus on July 17, 2017, 10:57:33 PM
Dayton could help FC Cincinnati’s bid to join Major League Soccer (http://www.daytondailynews.com/sports/soccer/dayton-could-help-cincinnati-bid-join-major-league-soccer/hDkddPa9W6EAHaBYlhUC2J/)

WEST CHESTER - FC Cincinnati, the second-year United Soccer League team, has a secret weapon it hopes will help it elevate to the country’s top professional rung, Major League Soccer: Dayton.

FC Cincinnati has set attendance records for the USL and Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup, in which it already upset two MLS teams, the Columbus Crew and Chicago Fire. An esteemed arena architect also has created plans for an eye-catching stadium.

But its weakest asset in the quest to join MLS is Cincinnati’s market size, team General Manager Jeff Berding recently told team season-ticket holders.

Cont (http://www.daytondailynews.com/sports/soccer/dayton-could-help-cincinnati-bid-join-major-league-soccer/hDkddPa9W6EAHaBYlhUC2J/)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on July 18, 2017, 12:36:12 AM
If they want to go for Dayton as the secondary television market for the team, it'd be wise.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: MGM on July 18, 2017, 08:25:40 AM
Has there been any discussion about "selling" the stadium to the public on potential uses for a new stadium beyond simply hosting an MLS soccer team for ~17 home dates? Soccer-specific stadia are versatile and in other cities have held a number of events, including all levels of rugby, lacrosse, and soccer, college football, high school football, major concerts, marching band competitions, political rallies, etc.


San Diego's MLS stadium plan was to house SDSU football.
Does an ownership group even exist in San Diego?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: MGM on July 18, 2017, 08:26:41 AM
If they want to go for Dayton as the secondary television market for the team, it'd be wise.
Gross or national ratings are more important than local ratings.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: surfohio on July 18, 2017, 04:27:07 PM
Has there been any discussion about "selling" the stadium to the public on potential uses for a new stadium beyond simply hosting an MLS soccer team for ~17 home dates? Soccer-specific stadia are versatile and in other cities have held a number of events, including all levels of rugby, lacrosse, and soccer, college football, high school football, major concerts, marching band competitions, political rallies, etc.


San Diego's MLS stadium plan was to house SDSU football.
Does an ownership group even exist in San Diego?

Yep. FS Investors ($$$$) have already qualified from MLS to apply for expansion. Landon Donovan is their pitch guy. The holdup is that FS wisely hit the ground running as soon as the Chargers bolted. Other developers who were asleep at the wheel swayed city council to delay a public vote that would have certainly given FS the green light to develop the stadium site with no public money. SD's situation is indeed an interesting contrast to FCC.   

http://www.soccercitysd.com/
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on July 18, 2017, 04:51:23 PM
How can you blame Portune for politicking here? I'm not sure if any scientific survey has been done, but I would guess that the vast majority of Hamilton County does not support using taxpayer dollars to help FCC build a new stadium.

I have now seen multiple people blaming Portune for "politicking" on social media. I think most of those people are two young to remember the stadium deal and how it soured local politics for at least 15 years after it passed. (Of course many people still remember it, or have read about it, but the vitriolic anti-government attitude seems to have mostly gone away.)

Meanwhile, the Western Hills Viaduct is currently closed because a chunk of concrete fell onto the lower deck. I would rather have the county spend $300 million on replacing the viaduct (or whatever its local share would be, assuming we could get state or federal funds to cover the rest) rather than giving incentives for a new FC stadium.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Clevelander17 on July 18, 2017, 05:07:23 PM
Dayton could help FC Cincinnati’s bid to join Major League Soccer (http://www.daytondailynews.com/sports/soccer/dayton-could-help-cincinnati-bid-join-major-league-soccer/hDkddPa9W6EAHaBYlhUC2J/)

WEST CHESTER - FC Cincinnati, the second-year United Soccer League team, has a secret weapon it hopes will help it elevate to the country’s top professional rung, Major League Soccer: Dayton.

FC Cincinnati has set attendance records for the USL and Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup, in which it already upset two MLS teams, the Columbus Crew and Chicago Fire. An esteemed arena architect also has created plans for an eye-catching stadium.

But its weakest asset in the quest to join MLS is Cincinnati’s market size, team General Manager Jeff Berding recently told team season-ticket holders.

Cont (http://www.daytondailynews.com/sports/soccer/dayton-could-help-cincinnati-bid-join-major-league-soccer/hDkddPa9W6EAHaBYlhUC2J/)

Cleveland doesn't "claim" Akron, the two cities are in contiguous counties that are actually part of the same Combined Statistical Area per the U.S. Census Bureau. But putting aside that strange quote from the piece, obviously F.C. Cincinnati would be wise to market itself to Dayton fans, but this gets back to Garber's quote from just a few years back imploring fans from around Ohio to root for the Crew. Cincinnati is not that much closer to Dayton than Columbus, and there is a pretty good chance that if Dayton has deeply-committed MLS fans, they likely pull for the team from Capital City. Meaning, either they're going to be switching affiliations or sticking with their current team. Either of which isn't exactly an ideal situation from an MLS Commissioner's office point of view.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: MGM on July 18, 2017, 05:11:21 PM
Has there been any discussion about "selling" the stadium to the public on potential uses for a new stadium beyond simply hosting an MLS soccer team for ~17 home dates? Soccer-specific stadia are versatile and in other cities have held a number of events, including all levels of rugby, lacrosse, and soccer, college football, high school football, major concerts, marching band competitions, political rallies, etc.


San Diego's MLS stadium plan was to house SDSU football.
Does an ownership group even exist in San Diego?

Yep. FS Investors ($$$$) have already qualified from MLS to apply for expansion. Landon Donovan is their pitch guy. The holdup is that FS wisely hit the ground running as soon as the Chargers bolted. Other developers who were asleep at the wheel swayed city council to delay a public vote that would have certainly given FS the green light to develop the stadium site with no public money. SD's situation is indeed an interesting contrast to FCC.   

http://www.soccercitysd.com/
I heard that the fine print in the development of the Qualcomm site did not even require a soccer stadium (that SDSU football needs to use also).  Was the city thinking about just giving away that real estate for next to nothing?

San Diego City Council members voted unanimously, 8-0, to put the SoccerCity initiative on the November 2018 ballot Monday, instead of a special election. San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer was less than pleased with the council's decision.

"The City can now move forward expeditiously with a fair, transparent and competitive process to bring alternate options for the development of the Mission Valley site to the public prior to the November 2018 election," said Bry, in a statement.

SoccerCity supporters say that failure to create a special election essentially kills the project, and time is money. They don't expect investors to wait around until 2018, with their plan calling for housing, hotels, a river park and a soccer stadium.
Major League Soccer officials say they are deciding on a city in December and won't pick San Diego if there's no soccer stadium.
http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/City-Council-Votes-8-0-to-Put-Soccer-City-on-Ballot-in-November-2018-429561433.html
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: surfohio on July 18, 2017, 05:29:55 PM
Has there been any discussion about "selling" the stadium to the public on potential uses for a new stadium beyond simply hosting an MLS soccer team for ~17 home dates? Soccer-specific stadia are versatile and in other cities have held a number of events, including all levels of rugby, lacrosse, and soccer, college football, high school football, major concerts, marching band competitions, political rallies, etc.


San Diego's MLS stadium plan was to house SDSU football.
Does an ownership group even exist in San Diego?

Yep. FS Investors ($$$$) have already qualified from MLS to apply for expansion. Landon Donovan is their pitch guy. The holdup is that FS wisely hit the ground running as soon as the Chargers bolted. Other developers who were asleep at the wheel swayed city council to delay a public vote that would have certainly given FS the green light to develop the stadium site with no public money. SD's situation is indeed an interesting contrast to FCC.   

http://www.soccercitysd.com/
I heard that the fine print in the development of the Qualcomm site did not even require a soccer stadium (that SDSU football needs to use also).  Was the city thinking about just giving away that real estate for next to nothing?

Apparently the cost to develop the area is astronomical due to the fact it's a flood plain and there's a bevy of pre-existing issues with soil contamination . So it would be akin to a city selling a crumbling old mansion for $1 to an able and resourceful buyer. The "leadership" at SD State was unhappy with 1. the small size of the proposed stadium and 2. certain rules the MLS would have imposed regarding use that were seen as too rigid and unfair.

Is SD's expansion bid dead? Maybe for now. But I do believe it's a no-brainer for MLS to have both Cincy and SD in the fold. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on July 18, 2017, 05:42:13 PM
How can you blame Portune for politicking here? I'm not sure if any scientific survey has been done, but I would guess that the vast majority of Hamilton County does not support using taxpayer dollars to help FCC build a new stadium.

I have now seen multiple people blaming Portune for "politicking" on social media. I think most of those people are two young to remember the stadium deal and how it soured local politics for at least 15 years after it passed. (Of course many people still remember it, or have read about it, but the vitriolic anti-government attitude seems to have mostly gone away.)

Meanwhile, the Western Hills Viaduct is currently closed because a chunk of concrete fell onto the lower deck. I would rather have the county spend $300 million on replacing the viaduct (or whatever its local share would be, assuming we could get state or federal funds to cover the rest) rather than giving incentives for a new FC stadium.

It's because Portune always does things like this: http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics-extra/2017/07/14/px-mls-needs-accept-nippert-portune-says/478016001/

Portune's probably well aware that MLS isn't going to consider or accept Nippert Stadium. I'm not saying that's right/wrong or that public money should go towards a new stadium, but the reality of the situation is this: MLS doesn't need Cincinnati to the point where they'll let FCC in while renting a college football stadium. Yet, here's Todd Portune still going on about Nippert and Paul Brown Stadium as worth MLS options. It's a smart play, because to the average voter unfamiliar with MLS expansion: how do you argue with that logic? Average joe taxpayer: "Hey, Todd's right. Why isn't Nippert good enough for the MLS, didn't ya see em play on ESPN?"

MLS isn't interested in Nippert, FCC isn't interested in pursuing an MLS bid with Nippert in mind. End of story.

Portune pulls this kind of crap a lot and even as a Democrat, I find him incredibly frustrating. You can go back and pull up so many articles where he claims we're finally going to get the Oasis Rail Line running. First it was going to be as simple as purchasing used Diesel Motor Units in the 90s and then progressed to "we'll have it before the All-Star Game (2015)" We can walk down to the Transit Center right now and not only can we not go in, but there's no trains running and most transit-minded folks seem to agree that the Oasis Line is a bad idea anyways. Yet, Todd will roll it out every few years.

Another example is Metro's recent funding woes. Portune has floated two ideas while asking Metro to hold off on seeking out a tax levy. He's suggested using money from other levies (while offering little detail as to if this can even be done, how much would go to Metro, etc) and creating a multi-state, truly regional transit agency. All of that sounds good in theory, but he never follows up on how to make any of that come about, nor does it do anything to fix the current situation. https://www.freep.com/story/news/2017/04/25/todd-portune-pitches-plan-county-levies-help-sorta-shortfall/100912124/

He's also the guy claiming we'll be able to cap Fort Washington Way, one cap at a time: http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2017/03/13/next-up-riverfront-decks-over--71/99131430/

I'll be honest, I'm a big fan and supporter of FC Cincinnati. I'd like to see a stadium get built whether that'd be Newport or Cincinnati. However, I'm watching cautiously at what funding method will be proposed and I believe the county and city have far more pressing matters at hand than a stadium. This latest round of comments from Portune is just more of the same though. He's not going to convince MLS to change their minds and he knows that.

Gets his name in the paper though and he comes off as sounding reasonable.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on July 18, 2017, 06:12:12 PM
Honestly, with Portune, it's hard to say if he's pandering or he actually believes he believes in what he's saying. I think that he actually has a lot of the right ideas, but just has no concept of how difficult it is to implement those ideas.

When he said that we could have Oasis Line rail up and running in time for the All Star Game, I think he actually believed that we could just order some trains and have them on the tracks in 6 months as soon as the funding was in place. It's like he has no concept of the fact that most rail vehicles have to be custom built, and he thinks we can just go buy one that's sitting around somewhere.

So I would put him more in the "naive" category than the "politicking" category when it comes to his statements on big projects like this.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on July 18, 2017, 07:31:53 PM
Honestly, with Portune, it's hard to say if he's pandering or he actually believes he believes in what he's saying. I think that he actually has a lot of the right ideas, but just has no concept of how difficult it is to implement those ideas.

When he said that we could have Oasis Line rail up and running in time for the All Star Game, I think he actually believed that we could just order some trains and have them on the tracks in 6 months as soon as the funding was in place. It's like he has no concept of the fact that most rail vehicles have to be custom built, and he thinks we can just go buy one that's sitting around somewhere.

So I would put him more in the "naive" category than the "politicking" category when it comes to his statements on big projects like this.

^Definitely see where you're coming from. I'm just not sure with him. I feel like even if he was naive, he would've learned at some point or listened to what someone told him. In a recent interview on WVXU he claimed yet again that the Oasis Line was "ready to go." Either he truly believes that the rails are in good shape or he just keeps dangling carrots out there.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: MGM on July 18, 2017, 08:16:54 PM
Has there been any discussion about "selling" the stadium to the public on potential uses for a new stadium beyond simply hosting an MLS soccer team for ~17 home dates? Soccer-specific stadia are versatile and in other cities have held a number of events, including all levels of rugby, lacrosse, and soccer, college football, high school football, major concerts, marching band competitions, political rallies, etc.


San Diego's MLS stadium plan was to house SDSU football.
Does an ownership group even exist in San Diego?

Yep. FS Investors ($$$$) have already qualified from MLS to apply for expansion. Landon Donovan is their pitch guy. The holdup is that FS wisely hit the ground running as soon as the Chargers bolted. Other developers who were asleep at the wheel swayed city council to delay a public vote that would have certainly given FS the green light to develop the stadium site with no public money. SD's situation is indeed an interesting contrast to FCC.   

http://www.soccercitysd.com/
I heard that the fine print in the development of the Qualcomm site did not even require a soccer stadium (that SDSU football needs to use also).  Was the city thinking about just giving away that real estate for next to nothing?

Apparently the cost to develop the area is astronomical due to the fact it's a flood plain and there's a bevy of pre-existing issues with soil contamination . So it would be akin to a city selling a crumbling old mansion for $1 to an able and resourceful buyer. The "leadership" at SD State was unhappy with 1. the small size of the proposed stadium and 2. certain rules the MLS would have imposed regarding use that were seen as too rigid and unfair.

Is SD's expansion bid dead? Maybe for now. But I do believe it's a no-brainer for MLS to have both Cincy and SD in the fold.
City should put the real estate on the open market and see what they can get.

Various recent estimates of the land value have ranged from zero in its present condition to $3 million per acre, or $240 million for the 79.9 acres once infrastructure was in place. FS is not seeking all 166 acres at Qualcomm to avoid a city charter requirement that sales of 80 acres or more of city land require voter approval. The leftover land remaining in city hands would be used for roads, parks and other public purposes.
http://soccerstadiumdigest.com/2017/03/potential-qualcomm-stadium-sale-terms-revealed/

The land is worth $110 million, according to the appraisal, which was completed by a third party hired by the city. It includes not only the area under and around Qualcomm Stadium, but the property and office space in Murphy Canyon — the former Chargers headquarters
http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/land-use/bombshell-appraisal-puts-qualcomm-stadium-land-at-110-million-as-is/

Part of the real estate is subject to flooding/wetlands.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: surfohio on July 19, 2017, 12:05:55 AM
City should put the real estate on the open market and see what they can get.

Various recent estimates of the land value have ranged from zero in its present condition to $3 million per acre, or $240 million for the 79.9 acres once infrastructure was in place. FS is not seeking all 166 acres at Qualcomm to avoid a city charter requirement that sales of 80 acres or more of city land require voter approval.

So I take it you don't want SD to get a MLS franchise lol.

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: MGM on July 19, 2017, 08:50:21 AM
City should put the real estate on the open market and see what they can get.

Various recent estimates of the land value have ranged from zero in its present condition to $3 million per acre, or $240 million for the 79.9 acres once infrastructure was in place. FS is not seeking all 166 acres at Qualcomm to avoid a city charter requirement that sales of 80 acres or more of city land require voter approval.

So I take it you don't want SD to get a MLS franchise lol.
:-D I would rather see Cincy get in, but who the others are to be included I have don't care. I have a
friend in SD who has followed this and has said the development deal does not require that the soccer stadium must be built, even with that they might not be granted a franchise. For the sake of SDSU football I hope a new stadium gets built somewhere in that footprint, cause where else would they play, PETCO Park?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: surfohio on July 19, 2017, 12:44:14 PM
City should put the real estate on the open market and see what they can get.

Various recent estimates of the land value have ranged from zero in its present condition to $3 million per acre, or $240 million for the 79.9 acres once infrastructure was in place. FS is not seeking all 166 acres at Qualcomm to avoid a city charter requirement that sales of 80 acres or more of city land require voter approval.

So I take it you don't want SD to get a MLS franchise lol.
:-D I would rather see Cincy get in, but who the others are to be included I have don't care. I have a
friend in SD who has followed this and has said the development deal does not require that the soccer stadium must be built, even with that they might not be granted a franchise. For the sake of SDSU football I hope a new stadium gets built somewhere in that footprint, cause where else would they play, PETCO Park?

Nah, if they don't build a stadium by 2024 the property reverts back to the city.
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/business/growth-development/sd-fi-soccerplan-20170217-story.html

SDSU can play at Petco in the short term but it's not seen by anyone as a solution.

I sure hope the good people of Cincinnati are spared the melodrama and political b.s. we have in SD.


Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: MGM on July 19, 2017, 01:01:47 PM
City should put the real estate on the open market and see what they can get.

Various recent estimates of the land value have ranged from zero in its present condition to $3 million per acre, or $240 million for the 79.9 acres once infrastructure was in place. FS is not seeking all 166 acres at Qualcomm to avoid a city charter requirement that sales of 80 acres or more of city land require voter approval.

So I take it you don't want SD to get a MLS franchise lol.
:-D I would rather see Cincy get in, but who the others are to be included I have don't care. I have a
friend in SD who has followed this and has said the development deal does not require that the soccer stadium must be built, even with that they might not be granted a franchise. For the sake of SDSU football I hope a new stadium gets built somewhere in that footprint, cause where else would they play, PETCO Park?

Nah, if they don't build a stadium by 2024 the property reverts back to the city.
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/business/growth-development/sd-fi-soccerplan-20170217-story.html

SDSU can play at Petco in the short term but it's not seen by anyone as a solution.

I sure hope the good people of Cincinnati are spared the melodrama and political b.s. we have in SD.
Gotcha, if you are in SD then you are probably up to speed on all of this. Curious, did the city only focus on the 1 development plan? No other investment groups were invited to submit proposals? SD is a pretty appealing market to only have 1 Tier 1 team, Padres. Hopefully the Qualcomm site gets developed with a Stadium for MLS and SDSU.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: surfohio on July 19, 2017, 01:30:03 PM
^
There wasn't a formal submission process. FS group just had their act together and, unlike every other developer or SDSU, they were prepared to go forward if and when the Chargers left. They won over the mayor with their self funded plan that's almost too good to be true -  it's transit-oriented development, it cleans up the property, it solves SDSU's stadium issue, it preserves park space, gives much needed residential,  the people get pro sports, it has public support....and then the ballot initiative is blocked by city council lol. Now it could very well be vacant lot for 10 years.

Well, SD's dysfunction does help FCC. I just wish both cities the best.     
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: cincydave8 on July 20, 2017, 10:17:48 AM
http://www.wcpo.com/news/insider/port-authority-getting-into-the-soccer-stadium-business-its-on-the-table

Port Authority getting into the soccer stadium business? It's on the table

With Hamilton County officials leery of owning another sports stadium, FC Cincinnati has approached the Port Authority of Greater Cincinnati with the idea of owning its proposed possibly $200 million soccer stadium. Port Vice President Gail Paul emphasized that discussions with the Port are preliminary, but she’s pleased that the Port is in the conversation. “The county and the city created the Port Authority to be a creative, flexible tool for development,” Paul said. “I think there are certain advantages for partnering with the Port on complex, capital-intensive projects.”
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on July 20, 2017, 10:41:30 AM
^That's interesting. I am very curious to know what kind of a structure could be set up that all sides could agree to.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: savadams13 on July 20, 2017, 10:51:29 AM
It just seems more and more like Newport is going to be the overall winner. I know I know so many people on here would boo and hiss at the thought of the soccer stadium in Kentucky, but Bill Butler with Corporex wants to jump start that development, and Campbell County and Newport have been working behind the scenes lately. Plus with the county and city having backs against the wall with the Tea Party anti tax folks it seems like a stadium deal in Cincinnati will become harder to achieve.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on July 20, 2017, 05:18:57 PM
Who knew that SAY soccer started and is based in Cincy

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/2017/07/20/say-soccer-celebrates-50-years-has-big-plans-future/482890001/
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: MGM on July 20, 2017, 05:36:23 PM
^That's interesting. I am very curious to know what kind of a structure could be set up that all sides could agree to.
They are much better positioned to be a partner of sorts than city/county. For the W. End I was even thinking 3CDC as a partner, they were created and funded by the local Fortune 500 and the big companies which really made OTR what it is today. I don't know if the return on investment is there with a stadium though. Linder could bring a number of corporate entities that could own a piece of the Stadium or the Franchise. If the Stadium gets built a bunch of them are going to buy advertising in and outside of the Stadium anyway.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: MGM on July 20, 2017, 05:37:43 PM
Who knew that SAY soccer started and is based in Cincy

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/2017/07/20/say-soccer-celebrates-50-years-has-big-plans-future/482890001/
LOL I still remember that SAY patch on my soccer uniform as a kid.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: MGM on July 20, 2017, 05:43:12 PM
It just seems more and more like Newport is going to be the overall winner. I know I know so many people on here would boo and hiss at the thought of the soccer stadium in Kentucky, but Bill Butler with Corporex wants to jump start that development, and Campbell County and Newport have been working behind the scenes lately. Plus with the county and city having backs against the wall with the Tea Party anti tax folks it seems like a stadium deal in Cincinnati will become harder to achieve.
That it isn't it, it pretty much everyone including democrats. The Bengals lease was a bad deal. Politicians are not experts on this and should not negotiate stadium deals.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on July 20, 2017, 06:15:00 PM
The Port Authority prospect is really interesting.  It offers a way to operate beyond the reach of COAST, Tim Mara, Tom Luken, etc. 

It's unfortunate that this community has a pavlovian response to the word "stadium".  This will be a very small project compared to either the Reds or Bengals stadiums.  Take a walk around either PBS or Great American and remove the upper decks with your mind.  That's what we're talking about.  A much, much smaller structure. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: MGM on July 20, 2017, 06:32:12 PM
The Port Authority prospect is really interesting.  It offers a way to operate beyond the reach of COAST, Tim Mara, Tom Luken, etc. 

It's unfortunate that this community has a pavlovian response to the word "stadium".  This will be a very small project compared to either the Reds or Bengals stadiums.  Take a walk around either PBS or Great American and remove the upper decks with your mind.  That's what we're talking about.  A much, much smaller structure.
Can anyone post a detailed city/county tax bond proposal to build this stadium, who owns it, who takes care of the maintenance, details, spreadsheet etc.? PBS was designed to be converted to soccer. Correct me if I am wrong ...Hamilton County let go of 30% of their employees because of the stadium lease. Why can't MLS realize that the atmosphere at Nippert is incredible and make an exemption? ESPN put them on ESPN1 vs. Chicago just because it would better than a lot of MLS games.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on July 20, 2017, 06:37:45 PM
Only the county can do a sales tax, the city does not have that option.  But $100 million in public money does not necessarily require a new tax.  It's just not that much money anymore.  The City of Cincinnati just funded a $150 million streetcar project with $100 million in local funds.  Some of it was TIFS, some of it was new debt.  Interest rates for municipal bonds are at historic lows. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: MGM on July 20, 2017, 06:44:18 PM
Only the county can do a sales tax, the city does not have that option.  But $100 million in public money does not necessarily require a new tax.  It's just not that much money anymore.  The City of Cincinnati just funded a $150 million streetcar project with $100 million in local funds.  Some of it was TIFS, some of it was new debt.  Interest rates for municipal bonds are at historic lows.
If the city county wants to do any tax to come up with 100 Million, have at it. But do not float bonds, do not own it, and give it to Linder over 5-10 years. Cheaper just to give him the money. He knows a lot of other Billionaires and many would be interested in buying shares in exchange for stadium $$$.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on July 20, 2017, 08:00:26 PM
^Maybe even the school district could be compelled to build and own title to the thing.  Chris Finney would have to waste a ton of time in the law library trying to figure out how to block that in such a way that his law firm could exploit it. 

The Lindners know that asshat is out there ready to pull his same old city charter b.s.  Get a charter on the ballot with confusing ballot language, confuse the public, get it passed, then sue, then settle.  Over and over again for the past 25 years until Cranley paid him $600k to go away. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: surfohio on July 20, 2017, 08:32:21 PM
Why can't MLS realize that the atmosphere at Nippert is incredible and make an exemption? ESPN put them on ESPN1 vs. Chicago just because it would better than a lot of MLS games.

Here's a post re: this from some guy on reddit:

In order to make ends meet, an MLS FC Cincinnati is, quite literally, going to need to sell and monetize every aspect of the club -- and that simply isn't possible at Nippert Stadium. Let's just look at the "big" aspects and see where it doesn't work:

Naming Rights: UC (shortsightedly, but that's a different bag of worms entirely) agreed a long time ago to never rename Nippert Stadium. They also agreed to never rename the actual field itself (named after a former AD at the school). There is, as best anyone can figure, nothing that can be done about this. Naming rights to your average professional sports stadium easily run over $1m per year, and go even higher. That's revenue directly out of FC Cincinnati's pocket every year.

Concession & Merchandise: Nippert stadium doesn't have the ability to offer premium concessions, where most teams make the bulk of their food money these days (it's no coincdence that every ballpark in America is upgrading from hot dogs and popcorn). For one, there's no ability to actually cook food inside the stadium, and for two there's no additional space available to build new concessions. Similarly, there's limited ability to offer merchandise for sale on matchday. Most, if not all, teams wants to have their team shop on premsies to get the captive audience that comes for matches each week. There's simply no space to build a team shop on Nippert's footprint. Again, all of those lost sales on matchday is money out of FCC's pocket.

Seating Reconfiguration: Nippert's all-bench seating is fine for a minor-league soccer club, but when prices go up are people really going to be OK with metal bleachers for a premium price? Chairback seating is almost a must at any modern stadium facility (outside of a supporters section, where safe standing should be in place), and Nippert simply cannot accommodate it without massive restructuring. And, that's assuming you'd get UC to go along with it, given that chairback seating would significantly reduce capacity (eating into their bottom line for football sales).

Non-Soccer Event Hosting: Clubs have the ability to monteize their own stadiums when they aren't in use by hosting things like tournaments, other sporting events (college football bowl games, in some cases), concerts, etc. Nippert stadium doesn't work for these events because it's also in use by the university on a daily basis, if not by the football team, than by student organizations and activities.

I've described Nippert in previous posts as "Death by 1,000 paper cuts" -- some of the cuts are big (naming rights is a HUGE loss), some are small (not being able to sell a premium sandwich v. a brattwurst), but they all keep adding up. Financially, there isn't a workable model that leads you to FC Cincinnati surviving, as a successful MLS team, in a stadium like Nippert. Even if you could, in some fantasy universe, buy the building and "control it," you'd still need to solve the problem of Jimmy Nippert's name and the physics of fitting more facilities onto an already completely full footprint. Absent solutions to ALL of these issues, I don't see any way the math works there. And, at the end of the day, that's why MLS requires teams to own their own buildings and control all revenue streams coming in -- because they don't want to admit teams that can't pay their bills and/or can't run compettive teams.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on July 20, 2017, 08:50:41 PM
The situation with FCC reminds me so much of what happened with MidPoint Music Festival.

MidPoint previously operated in venues that were not owned by MPMF's owners. It was popular with fans largely because of the really cool atmosphere that this created. You could see awesome bands in interesting venues, and the area around those venues was filled with energy and excitement. However the festival was only breaking even each year and not making a profit. In order to that that music festival into the big leagues and attract bigger headliners, it was sold to a new owner who moved it to venues that they owned or completely controlled. The new owners would be able to make a profit since they would get all of the revenue from ticket and alcohol sales, instead of having to share it with the venue owners.

Most long-time MPMF fans dislike the new format. Even though there are now bigger bands headlining the festival, fans miss the "underdog" feel of the old festival with its odd venues and up-and-coming bands.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Ram23 on July 20, 2017, 10:32:36 PM
^Maybe even the school district could be compelled to build and own title to the thing.  Chris Finney would have to waste a ton of time in the law library trying to figure out how to block that in such a way that his law firm could exploit it. 

The Lindners know that asshat is out there ready to pull his same old city charter b.s.  Get a charter on the ballot with confusing ballot language, confuse the public, get it passed, then sue, then settle.  Over and over again for the past 25 years until Cranley paid him $600k to go away. 

I'm honestly surprised COAST hasn't floated the idea of an Issue 9 style ballot initiative - basically, a short catch-all amendment that would prohibit the City of Cincinnati from spending any money on a new soccer stadium. It would probably pass.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on July 20, 2017, 10:59:18 PM
The situation with FCC reminds me so much of what happened with MidPoint Music Festival.

MidPoint previously operated in venues that were not owned by MPMF's owners. It was popular with fans largely because of the really cool atmosphere that this created. You could see awesome bands in interesting venues, and the area around those venues was filled with energy and excitement. However the festival was only breaking even each year and not making a profit. In order to that that music festival into the big leagues and attract bigger headliners, it was sold to a new owner who moved it to venues that they owned or completely controlled. The new owners would be able to make a profit since they would get all of the revenue from ticket and alcohol sales, instead of having to share it with the venue owners.

Most long-time MPMF fans dislike the new format. Even though there are now bigger bands headlining the festival, fans miss the "underdog" feel of the old festival with its odd venues and up-and-coming bands.

I think this is an apt comparison, but not in all cases. Some MLS teams have a pretty dull atmosphere (the revs have passionate fans, but a cavernous stadium), while others enjoy a pretty rabid fan base in a great venue (Orlando/Toronto/ and especially Portland).

MLS isn't going to consider Nippert. They've made that clear. If FCC wants in, they'll need a stadium deal. To that end, it's up to the Public/their elected officials to decide whether or not they support a deal when or if that deal occurs.

There's a lot to consider.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: MGM on July 20, 2017, 11:02:13 PM
The situation with FCC reminds me so much of what happened with MidPoint Music Festival.

MidPoint previously operated in venues that were not owned by MPMF's owners. It was popular with fans largely because of the really cool atmosphere that this created. You could see awesome bands in interesting venues, and the area around those venues was filled with energy and excitement. However the festival was only breaking even each year and not making a profit. In order to that that music festival into the big leagues and attract bigger headliners, it was sold to a new owner who moved it to venues that they owned or completely controlled. The new owners would be able to make a profit since they would get all of the revenue from ticket and alcohol sales, instead of having to share it with the venue owners.

Most long-time MPMF fans dislike the new format. Even though there are now bigger bands headlining the festival, fans miss the "underdog" feel of the old festival with its odd venues and up-and-coming bands.
FC has a sweetheart deal right now. Very lucky Nippert exists and they can use it. Although the fans are behind the support.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on July 20, 2017, 11:18:58 PM
Why can't MLS realize that the atmosphere at Nippert is incredible and make an exemption? ESPN put them on ESPN1 vs. Chicago just because it would better than a lot of MLS games.

Here's a post re: this from some guy on reddit:

In order to make ends meet, an MLS FC Cincinnati is, quite literally, going to need to sell and monetize every aspect of the club -- and that simply isn't possible at Nippert Stadium. Let's just look at the "big" aspects and see where it doesn't work:

Naming Rights: UC (shortsightedly, but that's a different bag of worms entirely) agreed a long time ago to never rename Nippert Stadium. They also agreed to never rename the actual field itself (named after a former AD at the school). There is, as best anyone can figure, nothing that can be done about this. Naming rights to your average professional sports stadium easily run over $1m per year, and go even higher. That's revenue directly out of FC Cincinnati's pocket every year.

Concession & Merchandise: Nippert stadium doesn't have the ability to offer premium concessions, where most teams make the bulk of their food money these days (it's no coincdence that every ballpark in America is upgrading from hot dogs and popcorn). For one, there's no ability to actually cook food inside the stadium, and for two there's no additional space available to build new concessions. Similarly, there's limited ability to offer merchandise for sale on matchday. Most, if not all, teams wants to have their team shop on premsies to get the captive audience that comes for matches each week. There's simply no space to build a team shop on Nippert's footprint. Again, all of those lost sales on matchday is money out of FCC's pocket.

Seating Reconfiguration: Nippert's all-bench seating is fine for a minor-league soccer club, but when prices go up are people really going to be OK with metal bleachers for a premium price? Chairback seating is almost a must at any modern stadium facility (outside of a supporters section, where safe standing should be in place), and Nippert simply cannot accommodate it without massive restructuring. And, that's assuming you'd get UC to go along with it, given that chairback seating would significantly reduce capacity (eating into their bottom line for football sales).

Non-Soccer Event Hosting: Clubs have the ability to monteize their own stadiums when they aren't in use by hosting things like tournaments, other sporting events (college football bowl games, in some cases), concerts, etc. Nippert stadium doesn't work for these events because it's also in use by the university on a daily basis, if not by the football team, than by student organizations and activities.

I've described Nippert in previous posts as "Death by 1,000 paper cuts" -- some of the cuts are big (naming rights is a HUGE loss), some are small (not being able to sell a premium sandwich v. a brattwurst), but they all keep adding up. Financially, there isn't a workable model that leads you to FC Cincinnati surviving, as a successful MLS team, in a stadium like Nippert. Even if you could, in some fantasy universe, buy the building and "control it," you'd still need to solve the problem of Jimmy Nippert's name and the physics of fitting more facilities onto an already completely full footprint. Absent solutions to ALL of these issues, I don't see any way the math works there. And, at the end of the day, that's why MLS requires teams to own their own buildings and control all revenue streams coming in -- because they don't want to admit teams that can't pay their bills and/or can't run compettive teams.


This argument for the annual naming rights completely ignores the fact that there would be no construction debt service.  Do the math on a 30-year repayment of $250 million @4%.  We're talking at least $15 million per year to pay down stadium construction costs. 

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on July 20, 2017, 11:59:43 PM
But Jake, the revenue stream from the naming rights often increases in value over the years. Also you have to figure FC is paying a decent rental payment that will only go up if they become an MLS team.  Plus, depending how the bonds are structured, there will be opportunities to re-finance into lower debt service instruments down the line to free up cash. Having your own stadium just gives you leverage.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on July 26, 2017, 01:03:19 PM
Somebody just posted this photo of FCC practicing at Nippert... but there are football lines painted: https://twitter.com/UCGaffer/status/890237740087902209

Which is weird... because there were no football lines during Monday's friendly against Valencia, and FCC responded on Twitter that they will re-paint before Saturday's home match against Rochester. Is there some big football game/event this week that required painting the football lines?

https://twitter.com/fccincinnati/status/890241613133484032
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: MGM on July 26, 2017, 01:07:12 PM
Somebody just posted this photo of FCC practicing at Nippert... but there are football lines painted: https://twitter.com/UCGaffer/status/890237740087902209

Which is weird... because there were no football lines during Monday's friendly against Valencia, and FCC responded on Twitter that they will re-paint before Saturday's home match against Rochester. Is there some big football game/event this week that required painting the football lines?

https://twitter.com/fccincinnati/status/890241613133484032
I am guessing that UC football has been practicing at Nippert. With the demo and rebuild of 5/3 Arena, the weight room was moved to the practice bubble.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on July 26, 2017, 01:22:41 PM
http://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/college/university-of-cincinnati/2017/07/25/play-ball-uc-fickell-set-first-preseason-practice/507740001/

First UC Bearcats Football practice is at 2:30 today. I expect a lot of re-striping happening this year due to the construction of the basketball arena/weight room.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on July 26, 2017, 10:45:00 PM
Here's an aerial of the proposed West End site:

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4329/35349896903_aee5f077ba_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/VRKsM6)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on July 31, 2017, 01:58:17 PM
Since the USWNT will be playing at Nippert in September... last night's game between USWNT and Brazil was an exciting game to watch. The US were down 3-1 in the 79th minute... and then proceeded to score 3 goals in 9 minutes, ultimately winning 4-3.

http://www.ussoccer.com/stories/2017/07/31/00/59/20170730-recap-wnt-wins-dramatic-4-3-comeback-vs-brazil-tournament-of-nations

The game was played at Qualcomm Stadium in San Diego with attendance of 21,096, though it seemed like less since Qualcomm is pretty massive and they didn't seat fans at all on the half of the stadium sitting behind the players. I hope we have a great turnout for the game on September 19th when the USWNT play New Zealand. Tickets can be purchased at:
http://www.ussoccer.com/schedule-tickets
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on July 31, 2017, 02:57:01 PM
^Already at 20,000 for USWNT in September. That match will probably be a sell out or at least close to it.

In other FC Cincinnati news, Todd Portune still insists on being blissfully oblivious: http://www.wcpo.com/news/government/hamilton-county-commission-president-todd-portune-says-hes-working-to-keep-team-at-nippert
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on August 03, 2017, 05:34:59 PM
UC is installing a new video board at Nippert, prior to the football home opener against Austin Peay on August 31: http://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/college/university-of-cincinnati/2017/08/03/ucs-nippert-stadium-getting-new-video-board/537663001/

Here's what the new board will look like:
(https://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/cca33c1845494d331faa201e7c60aa27dcf6bed5/c=211-0-1838-1223&r=x404&c=534x401/local/-/media/2017/08/03/Cincinnati/Cincinnati/636373725399041969-Videoboard-Rendering-Full-Screen.jpg)

That means that the FCC home games in Sept (Sept 2 and Sept 16) will get to enjoy the new board, along with any post season matches played at Nippert. This is great news and will improve the fan experience a lot at Nippert.

Don't want to get too ahead ourselves, but if we win against New York Red Bulls on August 15th, and San Jose beats Kansas City... then we would play San Jose in the Open Cup finals at Nippert some time in September. (If Kansas City advances, the finals would be in Kansas City). The Open Cup Finals... in Nippert... with the new score board... oh man, it'd be awesome.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on August 07, 2017, 06:17:30 PM
Cincinnati Business Committee weighs in on FC Cincinnati stadium bid

The influential Cincinnati Business Committee, which includes the region’s largest corporations, is urging the city and Hamilton County’s elected leaders to get on board with a new stadium for FC Cincinnati.

In a letter to Mayor John Cranley and Hamilton County commissioners, the CBC’s executive director, Gary Lindgren, touted the United Soccer League team’s impact on the region and urged them to help with FC Cincinnati’s stadium plans as it attempts to jump to Major League Soccer. The CBC’s members traditionally have included the CEOs of Procter & Gamble, Macy’s, Kroger, North American Properties, American Financial Group and other companies.

More below:
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/08/07/exclusive-cincinnati-business-committee-weighs-in.html
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: MGM on August 09, 2017, 10:48:22 AM
FC Cincy / NY Red Bulls sold out.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DGyneQyXYAATse1.jpg)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on August 14, 2017, 03:06:35 PM
Since the potential stadium sites were announced in June, the thought of a stadium in Newport has drawn up passionate arguments on both sides of the issue (and river). I wrote an article today about where the stadium would go in KY, what incentives there might be, and if it really counts as "Cincinnati."

Couple things I'd like to highlight:
- A Newport stadium would likely be the catalyst to finally starting some sort of mixed-use development like Ovation.
- I'd love to see riverboats shuttling people across the river like they do for Red's games.
- The view would be spectacular.
- Nearby Covington provides a lot of great spots for pre and post match activities.

You can read it here: http://queencitydiscovery.blogspot.com/2017/08/sun-sets-on-downtown-cincinnati-and.html

(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-UkVeO0jHEyo/WZEdR0xgk4I/AAAAAAAAHWo/WYhdpdrDO_UGCJR8MB3XAUn-ysziwaYrgCEwYBhgL/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2017-08-13%2Bat%2B11.17.38%2BPM.jpg)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ucgrady on August 14, 2017, 05:53:20 PM
That's a great article, and I agree with most all of your reasons why Newport would still be a great choice. I have thought a lot about how to refer to the Cincinnati urban core in a more inclusive way, usually referring to the "basin" to include downtown Cincinnati, Newport/Bellevue and Covington but we need a better name for the urban core that includes both sides of the river. Most normal people don't really know what you are talking about when you call it the "basin" however. I also tend to be a smart a$$ when people ask what part of town I live or what part I'm from and say the South Side. It takes a few seconds for them to remember that Cincinnati doesn't have a South Side, but then they laugh and ask if I'm from Covington.

I believe that to encourage Cincinnati to continue it's momentum it also needs Newport and Covington to pick up the slack and help that process in a 'rising tides lift all boats' kind of way. I think it is important for them all to provide something unique and complimentary. Cincinnati for sports and arts, Newport for family activities, Covington for bars/smoking...

Also it isn't mentioned in your article, but it's worth reminding people that the New York Giants/Jets both play in New Jersey, the Redskins play outside of Washington D.C. in Maryland etc.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: MGM on August 15, 2017, 02:31:55 PM
Friendly reminder

Tuesday, August 15th, 2017  |  8:00PM ET

NEW YORK RED BULLS
NIPPERT STADIUM | U.S. OPEN CUP
Tickets-SOLD OUT
Local TV-Star 64
Stream
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmblec2 on August 15, 2017, 03:05:35 PM
Where is the best place to park? serious question.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Ram23 on August 15, 2017, 03:05:43 PM
Did they sell tickets for the upper deck? Is the sellout a full 40,000?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on August 15, 2017, 03:14:16 PM
Did they sell tickets for the upper deck? Is the sellout a full 40,000?

They did sell out the upper deck, but it won't be 40,000. Due to the modifications made last winter (widening the field and cutting out the corners), the stadium doesn't have 40,000 capacity any longer. And because a lot of the seats are General Admission, they don't want to sell all the seats because they want people to be comfortable in the general admission sections. Jeff Berding spoke to these details in this Cincy Soccer Talk podcast: http://cincinnatisoccertalk.com/2017/08/09/fc-cincinnati-jeff-berding-back

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: MGM on August 15, 2017, 03:14:38 PM
Where is the best place to park? serious question.

Parking garage across the street from Deaconess, on Straight St. and next to Stratford.
Best way to get up there, if not coming from the far North, is to take Ravine, off of Central Pkwy, up the hill to
Straight.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: cincydave8 on August 15, 2017, 03:25:27 PM
Cranley is meeting with the MLS commish Don Garber tonight in Cincinnati. Probably at Nippert during the game to help make the case for MLS to Cincinnati.

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on August 15, 2017, 03:30:01 PM
Just head down early and park in Corryville. Go to a bar beforehand and then walk to Nippert. My group will be at Mecklenburg Gardens (about a one mile walk) and leave for the stadium at 7.

They sold every ticket they feel comfortable selling. Their sellout is going to be somewhere around 33k-34k. Their sell out last year against Crystal Palace was 35,061. They removed seats with the renovation, and from the sound of it, they are limiting the number of GA tickets they sell so it's not too crowded. They apparently thought the Crystal Palace game was too many. From candid conversations I've had, they don't quite understand how UC Football sells 40k+ at Nippert. Unless they sell way more seats in the student section than FCC does in the GA section.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on August 15, 2017, 03:37:36 PM
Just head down early and park in Corryville. Go to a bar beforehand and then walk to Nippert. My group will be at Mecklenburg Gardens (about a one mile walk) and leave for the stadium at 7.

They sold every ticket they feel comfortable selling. Their sellout is going to be somewhere around 33k-34k. Their sell out last year against Crystal Palace was 35,061. They removed seats with the renovation, and from the sound of it, they are limiting the number of GA tickets they sell so it's not too crowded. They apparently thought the Crystal Palace game was too many. From candid conversations I've had, they don't quite understand how UC Football sells 40k+ at Nippert. Unless they sell way more seats in the student section than FCC does in the GA section.

I think the main difference for football is that almost all of the tickets (except for the student section) are sold with designated seats. And, for the student section, I assume UC is willing to sell 1 ticket per seat (since students are ok squeezing in).

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Ram23 on August 15, 2017, 03:43:04 PM
I didn't realize they just sold general admission tickets - so the seats aren't assigned? It makes sense that they take the total seat count and reduce it by ~12% then. The assigned bleacher seats at Nippert are very narrow - not many people are going to voluntarily pack in that tight. Unless you've got seat numbers forcing 20 people to sit on a bleacher meant for 20 people, you're probably only going to get 16-17 people on it. You'd have a couple thousand people standing around, unable to find seats, because every group of 4 in the place took up 5 seats.

College football stadiums in general pack people in like sardines, it's part of the atmosphere. Every one I've ever been to is like that.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: cincydave8 on August 15, 2017, 03:51:33 PM
I didn't realize they just sold general admission tickets - so the seats aren't assigned? It makes sense that they take the total seat count and reduce it by ~12% then. The assigned bleacher seats at Nippert are very narrow - not many people are going to voluntarily pack in that tight. Unless you've got seat numbers forcing 20 people to sit on a bleacher meant for 20 people, you're probably only going to get 16-17 people on it. You'd have a couple thousand people standing around, unable to find seats, because every group of 4 in the place took up 5 seats.

College football stadiums in general pack people in like sardines, it's part of the atmosphere. Every one I've ever been to is like that.

They sell GA tickets for the south end horseshoe and the upper decks. The rest of the stadium is assigned seating. Well, The Bailey is GA but it sold out before the season started.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on August 15, 2017, 03:55:08 PM
I think the Upper Deck for this game is assigned seating. But typically, if they sell out the lower bowl, they just let people go up top and keep selling GA seats. The GA ticket gets you up there if it's a regular game.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Rabbit Hash on August 15, 2017, 04:06:59 PM
Just a heads up for those fans interested that FCC will be presenting at a local customer experience conference.  DJ Switzer of FCC and Matt Dooley of Dooley Media will be appearing on 9/22.

http://amacincinnati.org/ignite/agenda/ (http://amacincinnati.org/ignite/agenda/)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on August 16, 2017, 08:02:32 PM
Last night I drove home during the FC - NY Redbulls game around 9pm and noticed that almost every parking space had been taken on the W. Clifton hill from Vine uphill to the bend near Hastings St.  UC students aren't back yet.  So about 100 cars were parked that incredible distance away from Nippert for the game. 

Facebook page for no-new stadium group:
https://www.facebook.com/NoMoreStadiumTaxes

Featured today on Channel 9:
http://www.wcpo.com/sports/fc-cincinnati/citizen-group-calls-upon-mls-to-accept-nippert-stadium-instead-of-forcing-new-taxpayer-funded-venue
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Columbo on August 16, 2017, 08:19:33 PM
Quite the U.S. Open Cup Semi-Final last night at Nippert.  Sold-out stadium, wonderful atmosphere and some wild on-the-field action.

- FCC goes up 2-0 with a first-half goal at 31' and a second-half goal at 62'.
- NYRB ties it up with a 2-goal-in-4-minute flurry at 75' and 78'.
- NYRB nearly wins it at the end of 90 with a header that rings off the crossbar.
- Game goes to extra-time and NYRB gets a third goal in the 101th minute.
- FCC nearly ties it back up only two minutes when the NYRB keeper loses control of a diving save attempt and an FCC gets the ball with only him and an NYRB defender between him and the net. But the NYRB defender was able to make a game-saving save

So the Red Bulls advance to the U.S. Open Cup Final with the 3-2 win and the magical run of FC Cincinnati ends.

VIDEO HIGHLIGHTS:  https://matchcenter.mlssoccer.com/matchcenter/2017-08-15-fc-cincinnati-vs-new-york-red-bulls/recap
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on August 17, 2017, 09:38:51 AM
^^Tuesday was move-in day for UC students living on campus
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: cincydave8 on August 17, 2017, 10:38:56 AM
Wow, that WCPO article and group is an embarrassment. It's like when Portune thought he could get MLB to let the Reds stay in a half demolished Riverfront. MLS has said over and over again for new team to get an invite they must have a soccer specific stadium owned by the team. Otherwise there will be no MLS team in Cincinnati. 18 to 20 cities trying to get 4 spots in MLS and this kind of nonsense will cause Cincinnati to get passed over.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Cincy513 on August 17, 2017, 03:17:28 PM
The City has blown their chance, the new stadium is going to be built in Newport. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on August 17, 2017, 05:40:24 PM
FC Cincinnati’s TV ratings soar

More than 60,000 Greater Cincinnati households tuned in to at least part of the telecast of FC Cincinnati’s semifinal U.S. Open Cup soccer match on Tuesday night, making it the second-most-watched show of the night.

FC Cincinnati’s 3-2 overtime loss to Major League Soccer’s New York Red Bulls posted a 6.1 rating, meaning 6.1 percent of all TV households in Greater Cincinnati tuned into the game broadcast on WSTR-TV (Channel 64), according to Nielsen TV ratings data.

More below:
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/08/17/fc-cincinnati-s-tv-ratings-soar.html
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on August 18, 2017, 10:57:14 AM
That's a great article, and I agree with most all of your reasons why Newport would still be a great choice. I have thought a lot about how to refer to the Cincinnati urban core in a more inclusive way, usually referring to the "basin" to include downtown Cincinnati, Newport/Bellevue and Covington but we need a better name for the urban core that includes both sides of the river. Most normal people don't really know what you are talking about when you call it the "basin" however. I also tend to be a smart a$$ when people ask what part of town I live or what part I'm from and say the South Side. It takes a few seconds for them to remember that Cincinnati doesn't have a South Side, but then they laugh and ask if I'm from Covington.

I believe that to encourage Cincinnati to continue it's momentum it also needs Newport and Covington to pick up the slack and help that process in a 'rising tides lift all boats' kind of way. I think it is important for them all to provide something unique and complimentary. Cincinnati for sports and arts, Newport for family activities, Covington for bars/smoking...

Also it isn't mentioned in your article, but it's worth reminding people that the New York Giants/Jets both play in New Jersey, the Redskins play outside of Washington D.C. in Maryland etc.

Thanks so much for taking the time to check it out and read it over. Couldn't agree more about the rising tides lift all boats mantra, I feel like the Cov is starting to make some really positive momentum and my hope is that this stadium would be an impetus for Newport to take a more urban minded approach when connecting with Cincinnati.

Totally forgot to mention the Jets/Giants/RBNY thing, but didn't want to get too into the weeds about that and get people all hot and bothered about how "Columbus will still say they're Ohio's team."

For the record, only people in Columbus seem to care about The Crew.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on August 18, 2017, 11:16:13 AM
I actually like the idea of calling NKY the "south side". The NKY river cities have been trying to push the "South Bank" moniker for awhile but it hasn't really caught on, other than the South Bank Shuttle.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on August 18, 2017, 11:34:23 AM
other than the South Bank Shuttle.

If a stadium lands in Newport, I really think TANK could boost ridership on this with some tweaks. Market it as a way to connect that stadium with Covington and Downtown Cincinnati and have hours that actually help out people on weekend nights. With $1 a ride, these faux trolleys would be PACKED on match days. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thomasbw on August 18, 2017, 02:58:48 PM
other than the South Bank Shuttle.

If a stadium lands in Newport, I really think TANK could boost ridership on this with some tweaks. Market it as a way to connect that stadium with Covington and Downtown Cincinnati and have hours that actually help out people on weekend nights. With $1 a ride, these faux trolleys would be PACKED on match days. 

Southbank Shuttle and Streetcar and maybe routes 1 and 85 need to have a unified 'circulator' fare
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on August 18, 2017, 03:28:28 PM
Don't Metro and TANK already have a unified stored value card and a monthly pass option for both systems? They should install some TVMs at the Southbank Shuttle stops, make the passes valid on both systems, and share the revenue.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: MGM on August 18, 2017, 06:23:51 PM
other than the South Bank Shuttle.

If a stadium lands in Newport, I really think TANK could boost ridership on this with some tweaks. Market it as a way to connect that stadium with Covington and Downtown Cincinnati and have hours that actually help out people on weekend nights. With $1 a ride, these faux trolleys would be PACKED on match days.

Yes, no need to park in Newport is you don't want to.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on August 29, 2017, 05:03:05 PM
Things that make you go hmmm...
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/08/29/cincinnati-ballet-hunting-for-new-larger-facility.html
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: TroyEros on August 29, 2017, 05:08:56 PM
How would this be related to anything FCC wise?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: old edale on August 29, 2017, 05:17:07 PM
The ballet location is right next to where the proposed West End stadium would go. Come on man...
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on August 29, 2017, 05:24:09 PM
Here is the location:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1127013,-84.5222101,371m/data=!3m1!1e3

This would be a great location for a stadium.  Easy access from two major roads, plus a subway stop. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ucgrady on August 29, 2017, 05:38:58 PM
When I read that story this was my very first thought as well. It's hard to tell how this site would work either as an alternate or in combination with the Stargel Stadium site, but it's interesting nonetheless.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: bendixondavis on August 29, 2017, 06:33:38 PM
Things that make you go hmmm...
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/08/29/cincinnati-ballet-hunting-for-new-larger-facility.html

Agreed.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Cygnus on August 29, 2017, 06:42:10 PM
"There is no set timeline for finding a new facility at this point. The organization still has about six years on its existing lease and overall the ballet is “very healthy” from a financial stand point. Fundraising for a new facility has not started at this point and it’s unclear what the total cost would be."
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Chas Wiederhold on August 30, 2017, 03:13:09 PM
Pretty certain the ballet has been interested in finding a new location since before FCC has grown to what it is now, but that doesn't mean that FCC's success hasn't expedited their search.

I personally wonder if the story could be triggered or linked to the North Wing of the Main Library. Things that make you go hmmmm.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Cygnus on August 30, 2017, 04:10:06 PM
I personally wonder if the story could be triggered or linked to the North Wing of the Main Library. Things that make you go hmmmm.

See: https://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,133.msg871863.html#msg871863
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on August 30, 2017, 04:57:12 PM
What Market is FC Cincinnati’s Biggest Threat for MLS Expansion Bid

(https://www.geothermal.org/Annual_Meeting/Images/Sacramento_Skyline_Dusk.jpg)

FC Cincinnati find themselves in the dog days of summer chasing a USL playoff berth for the second consecutive year. However, while the club’s league performances have not quite lived up to last year’s incredible inaugural campaign, FC Cincinnati did do well in the U.S. Open Cup. In fact, FC Cincinnati currently holds a 2-1 overall record against Major League Soccer (MLS) clubs. This Cinderella story of epic proportions has a lot of people asking how does FC Cincinnati not get an invitation to join MLS?

Going back to January of this year, twelve different teams/cities submitted bids to join MLS. Those twelve bids were from Raleigh, Charlotte, Tampa Bay, Nashville, Cincinnati, Indianapolis, Detroit, San Antonio, Saint Louis, Phoenix, Sacramento, and San Diego. Most of them have current USL or NASL teams attached to their bids, but not all of them. Detroit and San Diego would be new teams built from scratch, and Nashville will have a team eventually, joining USL in the Spring of 2018.

As of right now, we expect MLS to extend an invitation to two teams at the beginning of December, with two more invitations being offered by 2020. That will bring the total number of MLS teams to 28. MLS could expand beyond 28 teams and if I could speculate if there was such a thing as a “hard cap” on the number of teams in MLS, that number is probably 32. It is worth pointing out here that FIFA has a guideline that top-flight leagues be limited to twenty teams. But in years past, FIFA has mandated that leagues cap themselves to eighteen teams, and well, the world collectively shrugged its shoulders and ignored FIFA.

More below:
http://cincinnatisoccertalk.com/2017/08/28/market-fc-cincinnatis-biggest-threat-mls-expansion-bid
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: surfohio on August 30, 2017, 05:07:43 PM
^ As far the market and demographics go, Nashville is in a virtual tie with Cincinnati on things like TV market, Fortune 500 companies, and percentage of population under the age of 35.

Surprising to read this. I just assumed Nashville was overflowing with Millenials.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thebillshark on August 31, 2017, 08:37:23 AM
Anyone have an extra ticket for the Bailey this weekend they'd be willing to part with? Message me to work out details if so
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: cincydave8 on August 31, 2017, 09:19:39 AM
Anyone have an extra ticket for the Bailey this weekend they'd be willing to part with? Message me to work out details if so

Try The Bailey Facebook group. https://www.facebook.com/groups/1479848725665133/
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thomasbw on August 31, 2017, 10:48:20 AM
Pretty certain the ballet has been interested in finding a new location since before FCC has grown to what it is now, but that doesn't mean that FCC's success hasn't expedited their search.

I personally wonder if the story could be triggered or linked to the North Wing of the Main Library. Things that make you go hmmmm.

I though the exact same thing about the North Library building, that or the UC Law School.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on August 31, 2017, 11:02:30 PM
Pretty certain the ballet has been interested in finding a new location since before FCC has grown to what it is now, but that doesn't mean that FCC's success hasn't expedited their search.

I personally wonder if the story could be triggered or linked to the North Wing of the Main Library. Things that make you go hmmmm.

I though the exact same thing about the North Library building, that or the UC Law School.

I talked to someone at UC who has his finger on the pulse of such things, and he basically told me there's no way in h*ck that the College of Law is moving off campus.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on September 01, 2017, 09:36:56 AM
^Yeah from the whole conversation about the Law College moving to the Banks, it sounded like they were set on keeping them on main campus. Speculating about a possible move seems like a waste of time.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on September 01, 2017, 12:03:39 PM
^ This is a dead issue now. They closed the door on moving it over a year ago now.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on September 01, 2017, 05:16:22 PM
Here's how much money UC makes from stadium lease to FC Cincinnati

FC Cincinnati’s big soccer crowds the past two years have netted the University of Cincinnati an extra $100,000-plus.

That’s just one of the details unveiled in the pro soccer team’s lease with UC for its use of Nippert Stadium, the on-campus home of UC football, for home games and for practice and training. After weeks of waiting, the Courier has obtained a copy of the lease following a public records request to the University of Cincinnati. The lease, signed in Aug. 2015, covers FC Cincinnati’s first three seasons and is renewable after that.

More below:
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/09/01/heres-how-much-moneyuc-makes-from-stadium-lease-to.html
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: bendixondavis on September 07, 2017, 10:53:08 PM
Guessing this is where the stadium would go if it's in Oakley?
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/09/06/exclusive-cast-fab-selling-former-oakley-facility.html
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Cygnus on September 13, 2017, 03:50:42 PM
This story has been updated several times in the past 36 hours...

CVB President: FC Cincinnati practice facility would bring $50 million to Clermont County over 5 years (http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2017/09/11/secrecy-potentiaclermont-county-fc-cincinnati-practice-facility-necessary-official-says-ahead-meetin/647556001/)

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: old edale on September 13, 2017, 05:23:50 PM
^ I highly doubt that.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on September 13, 2017, 11:06:15 PM
^ I highly doubt that.

Yeah, I agree and frankly I'm surprised to see local governments scrambling to offer incentives for not a stadium, but a practice facility.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on September 14, 2017, 05:35:14 PM
Berding talks about FC Cincinnati’s upcoming record crowd

Amid a sea of records set by FC Cincinnati in its first two years of existence, the one it will set Saturday might be the most impressive.

The club will break the United Soccer League regular season single-game attendance record Saturday when it hosts New York Red Bulls II at Nippert Stadium on the University of Cincinnati campus.

More below:
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/09/14/berding-talks-about-fc-cincinnati-s-upcoming.html
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: The_Cincinnati_Kid on September 23, 2017, 11:51:58 AM
PX: FC Cincinnati stadium issue back in political spotlight
Jason Williams, jwilliams@enquirer.com Published 4:56 p.m. ET Sept. 22, 2017 | Updated 9:09 p.m. ET Sept. 22, 2017



It's been really quiet lately on the FC Cincinnati stadium front.

But the public debate will heat back up on Tuesday night. Soccer fans are expected to show up en masse for a 7 p.m. public meeting at the Hamilton County Board of Elections in Norwood to implore commissioners to spend taxpayer money on a new stadium.

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics-extra/2017/09/22/px/690116001/ (http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics-extra/2017/09/22/px/690116001/)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on September 28, 2017, 05:09:39 PM
FC Cincinnati stadium’s potential economic impact detailed

A new FC Cincinnati stadium would have a total ongoing economic impact on the region’s output of $62 million, according to a new study of the stadium’s financial effect on Greater Cincinnati.

That impact combines the effect of the soccer team’s operations and the visitor impact on Greater Cincinnati’s 15-county region, according to the study.

Stephen Buser, professor emeritus at Ohio State’s business school, and Bill LaFayette, owner of Columbus economics firm Regionomics, conducted the study, which was commissioned by law firm Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease.

More below:
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/09/28/exclusive-fc-cincinnati-stadium-s-potential.html
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on October 04, 2017, 01:02:52 AM
FC Cincinnati rival for MLS bid finalizes stadium financing

The clock is ticking on FC Cincinnati, and the ticking just got louder.

A rival of FC Cincinnati in the race for a coveted Major League Soccer expansion franchise appears to have financing lined up to build a soccer stadium.

Nashville, Tenn.’s Metro Council approved a plan on Monday to provide financing for a $250 million stadium that would seat 27,500 fans. The stadium would be paid for by $200 million in revenue bonds, $25 million in Metro general obligation bonds and $25 million from the team’s ownership group.

FC Cincinnati’s MLS expansion bid is competing with 11 other cities, including Nashville, for four expansion franchises. MLS will award two of those in December and two others at a future date. MLS has said expansion franchises need to have firm plans for a soccer-specific stadium. That means they need to have a site under control and financing in place. Sacramento, Calif., has already started pre-construction work on a site for a new soccer stadium.

More below:
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/10/03/fc-cincinnati-rival-for-mls-bid-finalizes-stadium.html
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: TroyEros on October 04, 2017, 04:03:25 AM
Hamilton county portune to prioritize FCC stadium and 3 other Hamilton county projects. Final decision on financing and whether or not it's feasible to fund stadium will come in November
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: unusualfire on October 04, 2017, 12:20:57 PM
I'm sorry I would rather have them put all their marbles in getting the Amazon HQ instead of another stadium.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on October 04, 2017, 12:39:57 PM
I'm sorry I would rather have them put all their marbles in getting the Amazon HQ instead of another stadium.

I would've rather seen them truly give a damn about transit at any point since 1973, but here we are.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on October 05, 2017, 01:00:56 PM
Carl Lindner III wrote this: http://www.cincinnati.com/story/opinion/contributors/2017/10/05/viable-stadium-plan-essential-winning-mls-bid/732592001/

But he doesn't include details about what options are being pursued regarding public-private partnership structures. Seems clear he does NOT want to put anything before the voters, so he's hoping something can be put together just at the city/county level. He mentions Hamilton County, but no details about any idea of how they could partner with the City of Cincinnati, the Port Redevelopment Authority, or any entities in Kentucky.  I understand that Lindner wants to raise public support for the idea, but it annoys me that we haven't gotten any more specifics in the last few months. And with the MLS decision looming in the next month or two, I'm worried the team isn't making progress on a financing plan.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: TroyEros on October 05, 2017, 02:31:40 PM
No rush needed. Mls has a December deadline. Anything before that is really irrelevant.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on October 11, 2017, 11:38:59 PM
WVXU links to the text of the 1997 Bengals lease re: shared use of the stadium by a soccer team:
http://wvxu.org/post/lease-says-stadium-could-house-soccer-franchise#stream/0

Some have suggested that Hamilton County could sell Paul Brown Stadium to FC Cincinnati and then The Bengals could become a tenant.  That would require a renegotiation of the 1997 Bengals lease, obviously.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: TroyEros on October 12, 2017, 12:23:56 AM
Not an option. MLS require full control of revenue streams. FCC would miss on all concession stand revenue streams and would go instead to bengals .
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on October 12, 2017, 12:48:28 AM
^You didn't pay attention to what I wrote. Earlier, people proposed that UC sell Nippert to the soccer team.  This is a similar speculative proposal. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: cincydave8 on October 12, 2017, 07:58:39 AM
MLS would not allow it and FCC would not accept it. It would be an awful venue for soccer. I'd rather stay in the USL and keep the games in Nippert than have the games played in a stadium with 40,000 empty seats every match. It's a lazy political move by Portune and Driehaus to act like they're trying to save money. Their complete lack of awareness and leadership on this issue will cost us the bid or allow the stadium to be built in Kentucky.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on October 27, 2017, 03:06:33 PM
As a big FCC fan (disclaimer: my first choice would be to stay at Nippert)... my initial thought was to also think that Paul Brown would be a bad venue for FCC... but I'm not sure *why*? Is it just because it's "too big"? Could that be solved with banners on the upper level (like Nippert)? Seeing Atlanta average 48k this past year sets a new standard for the MLS. I'm not sure we could average Atlanta-level attendance, but at the same time it seems short-sighted to spend $200+ million to build a small 25k stadium.  If we really believe soccer is only going to increase in popularity (as I believe), why should we spend so much money building a deliberately small new stadium?

As we've seen in Columbus recently, the owners and the MLS want dedicated stadiums because it gives them great leverage to negotiate ongoing public investment. I would really like to avoid that situation here in Cincinnati, though I know we don't have a ton of bargaining power when there are so many cities clamoring to get a new MLS team.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on October 30, 2017, 10:05:02 AM
Paul Brown Stadium won't work for several reasons:


1) MLS won't let us in if our long-term plan is to utilize PBS. I shouldn't have to go further, but I will.
2) Mike Brown would receive way too much of the revenue to justify using it.
3) PBS is a characterless dungeon and provides no atmosphere
4) It's enormous. Atlanta has almost 3X the metro population of Cincinnati. We shouldn't expect to get close to Atlanta's attendance, even with the growing popularity of the sport. The biggest damper to a loud stadium is empty seats. A poor atmosphere decreases attendance. Part of the reason Nippert works right now is that it's an intimate venue where an empty upper deck doesn't seem bad.


They want a dedicated stadium for a lot of reasons. They want it so the MLS team can dictate scheduling. NYCFC has had to play two games in Connecticut because the Yankees went deep into the postseason. That makes the look look amateur. MLS teams in rented facilities often don't receive much from concessions or advertising because there are already deals in place and the revenue structure is established by the primary tenant.

Nippert has a lot of issues too. Aside from not controlling scheduling and revenue, FCC also doesn't have a locker room outside of game days. From what I've heard, there has been tension between UC Athletics and FCC due to the limited space availability. There isn't even a kitchen at Nippert to provide high quality food (which in turn, can charge a premium for club seats). It's worlds better since the renovation, and UC football should never leave Nippert, but it just isn't a great long-term solution for FCC.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on November 02, 2017, 05:39:26 PM
^Yeah... certainly using Paul Brown wouldn't make sense unless major changes were made to the ownership structure of both the stadium and FCC.


Detroit just today announced something along those lines, bringing the Ford family into the ownership group so that they can make Ford Field their preferred site. This is a change from their previous plan to build a new, dedicated 23,000-seat soccer stadium.


From the MLS's perspective, I have to think this puts Detroit near the top of expansion cities.


http://www.wxyz.com/news/ford-family-joins-bid-for-detroit-mls-team-with-ford-field-as-stadium (http://www.wxyz.com/news/ford-family-joins-bid-for-detroit-mls-team-with-ford-field-as-stadium)
http://www.freep.com/story/sports/nba/pistons/2017/11/02/detroit-mls-bid-ford-field/823112001/ (http://www.freep.com/story/sports/nba/pistons/2017/11/02/detroit-mls-bid-ford-field/823112001/)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on November 02, 2017, 06:00:24 PM
A bit more detail on Detroit's decision to use Ford Field as their stadium site for their MLS application:
http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article/20171102/news/643951/plan-for-mls-stadium-scrapped-team-would-play-at-ford-field (http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article/20171102/news/643951/plan-for-mls-stadium-scrapped-team-would-play-at-ford-field)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on November 02, 2017, 06:35:21 PM
From the MLS's perspective, I have to think this puts Detroit near the top of expansion cities.

I thought that too, until I saw MLS' response: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DNpvMxDVoAA6mTh.jpg

Specifically, the bottom comment about "prioritizing" soccer-specific stadia.

Even if Ford Field is allowed to be a venue and Detroit is awarded a bid, the scuttlebutt seems to be that they're lining it up for Atlanta-style renovations which provide a more intimate atmosphere and make soccer a priority on par with the football team.

Paul Brown Stadium lacks a lot of those merits.


Not to mention, a TIF district exists in Newport and there's a memorandum of understanding with the developer. If FC Cincinnati's options are playing in Cincinnati (but at PBS) or playing in Newport, but controlling dates, schedule, and revenue completely - I think they'll choose Newport.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: troeros on November 02, 2017, 08:19:20 PM
This will probably kill Detroits bid for this round. Gilbert and company essentially lied about the usage of the prison site. He wanted the prison site, and said it was for an mls sss but when he actually he got the land, he was like sike! That will likely anger mls higher ups alot.

Also in the latest renderings they stole alot of detroit city fc logos and branding. The owners of Detroit City FC are livid about this on there twitter.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: cincydave8 on November 03, 2017, 08:13:52 AM
I just wish Portune would see what Detroit just did and realize the idea of playing at PBS is moronic.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thebillshark on November 03, 2017, 09:29:52 AM
I think having three separate stadiums for three sports teams is an incredibly fragile situation. Focusing On FC and the Bengals in particular:


1. MLS could skyrocket in popularity leaving a ~20k stadium too small and obsolete. This scenario could happen very quickly, perhaps within five years


2. NFL could decline in popularity making PBS a hardly used venue (might take awhile but look at California crowds)


3. NFL could continue rise in popularity and go global causing Bengals to leave town
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on November 07, 2017, 05:12:16 PM
FC Cincinnati season tickets off to record sales

FC Cincinnati is selling season tickets at a record-breaking rate that’s blowing away team projections.

The team has sold 10,000 season tickets for its 2018 season to date. That’s double the number of season tickets that were sold at the same time last year.

More below:
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/11/07/fc-cincinnati-season-tickets-off-to-record-sales.html (https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/11/07/fc-cincinnati-season-tickets-off-to-record-sales.html)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: surfohio on November 07, 2017, 08:56:05 PM
Are you FC Cincy fans absolutely sure you want to be in MLS?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: bendixondavis on November 07, 2017, 09:04:07 PM
Lol I don't want to be anymore after this Crew thing and understanding more of how the league works.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: surfohio on November 07, 2017, 09:12:36 PM
Lol I don't want to be anymore after this Crew thing and understanding more of how the league works.

Best case scenario would be a successful league operating outside of the strictures of MLS. Cincinnati is a kickass example that this is actually possible.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on November 17, 2017, 11:21:50 AM
I have split off the discussion about a new stadium into this new thread in the Southwest Ohio Projects & Construction board (https://www.urbanohio.com/forum/index.php?topic=31667.0). This thread will remain in the Sports Talk board and be used to talk about sporting things.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on November 21, 2017, 12:04:27 PM
Someone put together this graphic to show the current roster for 2018. Discussions are still ongoing with defender Austin Berry and goalkeeper Mitch Hildebrandt to my knowledge.

(https://i.redd.it/pprh5sebm5zz.jpg)

Here are the announcements about the signing of Paddy Barrett (http://www.fccincinnati.com/news_article/show/857775?referrer_id=2584136), Forrest Lasso (http://www.fccincinnati.com/news_article/show/858557?referrer_id=2584136), Dekel Keinen (http://www.fccincinnati.com/news_article/show/854748?referrer_id=2584136), and Daniel Haber (http://www.fccincinnati.com/news_article/show/856872?referrer_id=2584136).

Also, the news that Harrison Delbridge (https://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/soccer/fc-cincinnati/2017/11/17/sources-harrison-delbridge-wont-return-fc-cincinnati-and-hes-not-going-mls/876721001/) is leaving FCC to pursue a career with FC Melbourne and perhaps have a shot at making the Australian National Team in time for the 2018 World Cup.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Robuu on November 21, 2017, 12:36:49 PM
I'd love to keep Hildebrandt, but the dude deserves to play at a higher level.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on November 21, 2017, 12:47:24 PM
He played out of his mind in the US Open Cup, and is generally a good keeper, but he ended 2017 pretty poorly. Not saying it was entirely his fault, because we had some bad passing and poor lapses on defense, but he didn't play well in league play after that Open Cup run. He only had one clean sheet in the last 13 games, and he gave up three or more goals on 6 of those 13 occasions. I wouldn't mind seeing him fight for his position next year.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on November 21, 2017, 12:57:00 PM
Another signing announced: Midfielder Tyler Gibson (http://www.fccincinnati.com/news_article/show/859017?referrer_id=2584136) from the San Francisco Deltas (they won the NASL in 2017).

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on November 21, 2017, 06:50:45 PM
Updated graphic with 3 new signings: Cicerone, Seymore, and Village (http://www.fccincinnati.com/news_article/show/859184?referrer_id=2584136).

(https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/23795468_10210883427183518_6427972323980829301_n.jpg?oh=cf5429ac2b8c4bd273f9dbcf7521758f&oe=5A92D77E)

Also, this is a cool video of Cicerone scoring a goal.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5isd7ys8gpM
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: surfohio on November 21, 2017, 07:16:09 PM
^ Sorry to see Quinn didn't get resigned.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on November 29, 2017, 05:03:55 PM
If the MLS picks Sacramento and Cincinnati, it would be a validation for the USL, showing that success in the USL is rewarded... but it would also take the top two teams (in terms of attendance) out of the USL. I'm curious how the managers at the USL view it: are they hoping Sacramento and Cincinnati get the MLS bids? Not that they have any say in the matter... but it's just an interesting situation they're in as the USL continues to grow (and the NASL dwindles).

If Nashville is passed over, it means Nashville would play the next few years in the USL, presumably biding their time until the next round of MLS expansion. That would probably be good for the USL to have Nashville as an "up and coming" team for a few years.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on November 29, 2017, 05:31:08 PM
^I think that's what holds Nasvhille back for this particular round. That market will still be there for Round 2, the government has already shown they're willing to pay.

Cincinnati and Sacramento have proven attendance and support.  FC Cincinnati has unbelievable sponsorship support.

FCC also hit 15k STH today. 15,000 people committed for a 2nd Division team.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on November 29, 2017, 05:37:54 PM
Did they hit 15k already? I thought that was the goal by the time the season started.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on November 29, 2017, 06:17:41 PM
Did they hit 15k already? I thought that was the goal by the time the season started.

Apparently told 700 WLW: https://twitter.com/cincysoccertalk/status/935936990704558080
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Jimmy Skinner on November 30, 2017, 12:40:16 AM
A Cincinnati businessman just bought the Dayton Dynamo (the old Cincinnati Saints) and is planning on making them a fully professional team. Does this have any connection FCC?  Would the Dynamo be a partner in any way with FCC?  Or if FCC stays in the USL, and the Dynamo gets into the USL, could a good rivalry develop?

http://wvxu.org/post/dayton-dynamo-making-jump-professional-soccer-league/ (http://wvxu.org/post/dayton-dynamo-making-jump-professional-soccer-league/)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on November 30, 2017, 01:38:05 AM
Hell, I didn't even know the Dayton Dynamo were still around.  Apparently, according to "The Googles," the one I'm thinking of ended in 1995 and they restarted again a couple of years ago and play at my old high school's football stadium.

Huh.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on November 30, 2017, 10:31:05 AM
They will likely never directly compete with FCC (unless it's in the US Open Cup by chance). And the new ownership is not related to FCC ownership at all to my knowledge. They brought on a new majority owner to move on to a professional league.

The Dynamo are taking a one year sabbatical to prepare for a professional team, so they will not play in 2018. They were playing in the NPSL (National Premier Soccer League) last year, which is a semi-pro league. A lot of players are college students who cannot get paid due to NCAA regulations, and many others are just older players who never made it professionally, but can still compete.

The Dynamo will be moving into either NISA (National Independent Soccer Association) or USL D3. The USL is starting a parallel league in the third division of the US Soccer pyramid since the main USL league was moved up to division 2 starting in this year. USL D3 and NISA will have much lower financial, stadium, etc. requirements than NASL or USL. But both of these leagues are still technically all professional, meaning the players get paid.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on November 30, 2017, 12:04:08 PM
Hell, I didn't even know the Dayton Dynamo were still around.  Apparently, according to "The Googles," the one I'm thinking of ended in 1995 and they restarted again a couple of years ago and play at my old high school's football stadium.

Huh.

Go go, Dyanamo! Ready for some history?

The original Dayton Dynamo played in the AISA and then the National Professional Soccer League. This NPSL was an indoor league and the team played at Hara Arena, Nutter Center, and the Convention Center from 1988 to 1995. After the 95 season they moved to the Cincinnati Gardens and re-branded as the Cincinnati Silverbacks. The Silverbacks and Cyclones (IHL hockey) were both owned by Doug Kirchoffer, who purchased the Riverfront Coliseum, renovated it, and named it "The Crown." Many speculated that this was all done in an effort to boost the arena's value so that when the Reds needed to purchase the building and demolish it to make room for a new ballpark, The Crown would be worth more. When the Silverbacks/Cyclones moved, the Gardens got a new hockey team (The Mighty Ducks of the AHL) and they put out posters saying "Hit the road Cyclones, and take the Silverbacks with you!"

The Reds ended up building their new park in "the wedge" between The Crown and Cinergy Field. Kirchoffer eventually sold his interest in the arena and the teams. The Crown became The Firstar Center and now is US Bank Arena. The Silverbacks folded relatively quickly, the Cyclones later on(but, since returend). In the wake of the Silverbacks' death, Cincinnati has had a colorful variety of indoor and outdoor teams among the lower divisions of American soccer.

The Cincinnati Saints of the 4th division NPSL (a new NPSL not affiliated with the preceding indoor league) played for awhile at various spots around town. They also fielded a women's team and both sides played indoor seasons too at various points. When FC Cincinnati was announced, The Saints were still active. In an early promo video for FCC, the intro started by flashing the logos of teams that had come and gone. The Saints' logo was in that montage of defunct brands, but they still existed. Nevertheless, The Saints relocated their men's NPSL side to Dayton and adopted the old brand name of "The Dayton Dynamo."

As @ryanlammi pointed out, they're taking a year off to develop a fully professional side presumably at the division III level in either the new USL D3 or the new NISA. It was recently rumored that The Dynamo could've been one of the NPSL teams brought up to the NASL (and backed financially by other D2 NASL teams) to help keep that league afloat. The NASL's future isn't looking great, though.

What will be interesting is if a professional side with more cash can attract more of an audience (although the Dyanamo do have a loyal following) and if FCC reaches MLS, if they will be affiliated in any way. Also, I've seen more and more FCC marketing materials along the I-75 corridor and around Dayton. With no soccer in Dayton for this coming season, I think FCC will aggressively market there.

Whether they go NISA or USLD3, I love the idea of Dayton having a fully professional side. Soccer teams tend to be more rooted in the community even if they're lower division. Many D3 and D4 sides have strong followings. I could see The Dynamo becoming a source of pride for Dayton in the way FCC has for Cincinnati. A proper, small stadium tied in to a lot of great things happening Downtown could be great.

Also to note: Dayton has another 4th division team. The Dayton Dutch Lions play in the USL Premier Development League, a competitor to the NPSL. There are also the Cincinnati Dutch Lions of the PDL who play at NKU.

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on November 30, 2017, 12:22:44 PM
Speaking of USL expansion, there's news that a developer in Chicago wants to buy a USL expansion spot and build a Skidmore, Owings & Merrill-designed stadium with a retractable roof and seating for 20,000:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/columnists/ori/ct-biz-lincoln-yards-soccer-stadium-ryan-ori-20171121-story.html (http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/columnists/ori/ct-biz-lincoln-yards-soccer-stadium-ryan-ori-20171121-story.html)

If that comes to pass, please remind me to pick my jaw up from the floor.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: surfohio on November 30, 2017, 12:30:28 PM
Speaking of USL expansion, there's news that a developer in Chicago wants to buy a USL expansion spot and build a Skidmore, Owings & Merrill-designed stadium with a retractable roof and seating for 20,000:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/columnists/ori/ct-biz-lincoln-yards-soccer-stadium-ryan-ori-20171121-story.html (http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/columnists/ori/ct-biz-lincoln-yards-soccer-stadium-ryan-ori-20171121-story.html)

If that comes to pass, please remind me to pick my jaw up from the floor.

I love this. I wish USL wasn't in the hierarchy below MLS. To me it's far more interesting being outside of league rules which can be constricting. FCC wouldn't have to be seeking MLS salvation if USL was a viable competitor league. Maybe it will be in the future?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on November 30, 2017, 12:36:26 PM
If that comes to pass, please remind me to pick my jaw up from the floor.

That's been my thought too. That situation is... odd. The USL trend recently has been that when they confirm an expansion team for the next season (or evern for another year out) they do a big announcement, a video, social media press, etc. They really, really promote it. In one Chicago press release they say a franchise has been purchased, but it hasn't been given anywhere near the fanfare you'd think scoring a team in the heart of a major market would get.

My speculation is that this is one of two things:

1) Just the developer posturing to lure Amazone (Build HQ2 and we'll build this as well!).
2) A backdoor attempt for the Chicago Fire to flee the suburb of Bridgeview and land downtown.

Even if USL starts backing away from direct MLS affiliation at the D2 level, it's in their best interest to maintain a good relationship with the top league. I doubt they'd really try to cut MLS out of a top market.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on November 30, 2017, 03:21:52 PM
Hell, I didn't even know the Dayton Dynamo were still around.  Apparently, according to "The Googles," the one I'm thinking of ended in 1995 and they restarted again a couple of years ago and play at my old high school's football stadium.

Huh.

Go go, Dyanamo! Ready for some history?

The original Dayton Dynamo played in the AISA and then the National Professional Soccer League. This NPSL was an indoor league and the team played at Hara Arena, Nutter Center, and the Convention Center from 1988 to 1995. After the 95 season they moved to the Cincinnati Gardens and re-branded as the Cincinnati Silverbacks. The Silverbacks and Cyclones (IHL hockey) were both owned by Doug Kirchoffer, who purchased the Riverfront Coliseum, renovated it, and named it "The Crown." Many speculated that this was all done in an effort to boost the arena's value so that when the Reds needed to purchase the building and demolish it to make room for a new ballpark, The Crown would be worth more. When the Silverbacks/Cyclones moved, the Gardens got a new hockey team (The Mighty Ducks of the AHL) and they put out posters saying "Hit the road Cyclones, and take the Silverbacks with you!"

The Reds ended up building their new park in "the wedge" between The Crown and Cinergy Field. Kirchoffer eventually sold his interest in the arena and the teams. The Crown became The Firstar Center and now is US Bank Arena. The Silverbacks folded relatively quickly, the Cyclones later on(but, since returend). In the wake of the Silverbacks' death, Cincinnati has had a colorful variety of indoor and outdoor teams among the lower divisions of American soccer.

The Cincinnati Saints of the 4th division NPSL (a new NPSL not affiliated with the preceding indoor league) played for awhile at various spots around town. They also fielded a women's team and both sides played indoor seasons too at various points. When FC Cincinnati was announced, The Saints were still active. In an early promo video for FCC, the intro started by flashing the logos of teams that had come and gone. The Saints' logo was in that montage of defunct brands, but they still existed. Nevertheless, The Saints relocated their men's NPSL side to Dayton and adopted the old brand name of "The Dayton Dynamo."

As @ryanlammi pointed out, they're taking a year off to develop a fully professional side presumably at the division III level in either the new USL D3 or the new NISA. It was recently rumored that The Dynamo could've been one of the NPSL teams brought up to the NASL (and backed financially by other D2 NASL teams) to help keep that league afloat. The NASL's future isn't looking great, though.

What will be interesting is if a professional side with more cash can attract more of an audience (although the Dyanamo do have a loyal following) and if FCC reaches MLS, if they will be affiliated in any way. Also, I've seen more and more FCC marketing materials along the I-75 corridor and around Dayton. With no soccer in Dayton for this coming season, I think FCC will aggressively market there.

Whether they go NISA or USLD3, I love the idea of Dayton having a fully professional side. Soccer teams tend to be more rooted in the community even if they're lower division. Many D3 and D4 sides have strong followings. I could see The Dynamo becoming a source of pride for Dayton in the way FCC has for Cincinnati. A proper, small stadium tied in to a lot of great things happening Downtown could be great.

Also to note: Dayton has another 4th division team. The Dayton Dutch Lions play in the USL Premier Development League, a competitor to the NPSL. There are also the Cincinnati Dutch Lions of the PDL who play at NKU.

You, sir, are a Soccer God!
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: bendixondavis on November 30, 2017, 10:30:18 PM
Very good history! Went to saints games the last two years they were here.  Hoped maybe this local guy buying them might mean they'd move back to cincinnati.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Gordon Bombay on December 01, 2017, 11:47:50 AM
Very good history! Went to saints games the last two years they were here.  Hoped maybe this local guy buying them might mean they'd move back to cincinnati.

Not sure if we'd see that with FCC around. The video montage incident certainly didn't sit well with the core group of loyal Saints fans. The owner at the time was also very outspoken about how the new club didn't reach out or even attempt to work with him. He's an interesting character, though, has me blocked on Twitter. Also, a lot of the original FCC FO responsible for some of the flat marketing and questionable communications was replaced rather quickly. With this new owner, not sure if those wounds have healed. Would be interesting to see if FCC goes to MLS, if the Dayton club becomes a USL affiliate.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on December 04, 2017, 04:10:35 PM
Austin Berry just announced his retirement as a player... and will be joining FC Cincinnati on the technical staff.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on December 05, 2017, 06:07:30 PM
Did they hit 15k already? I thought that was the goal by the time the season started.
I think you're right. According to this article (https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/12/04/fc-cincinnati-breaks-own-season-ticket-sales.html), they're currently around 13k in season tickets sold (up from 11,739 last year), but they haven't yet opened sales up to the public... so that's just from existing season ticket holders and people who put down deposits last season. Starting tomorrow (Dec 6), they'll open it up to new season ticket buyers. Their goal is to sell 15k season tickets before the season starts.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on December 07, 2017, 11:18:36 AM
Does anybody know anything about the potential/proposed name change to "Fussball Club Cincinnati"? Without any more details... my first reaction is: meh. Seems kitschy, as if they're trying too hard to be German, and even though our city has a history with immigrants from Germany, FC Cincinnati has no authentic claim to any German connection. Similarly, I cringe a bit every time I see people (usually in the media) write out "Futbol Club Cincinnati" since our club also has no authentic claim to any Spanish-speaking heritage.

As it is now, in marketing materials, the club basically never spells out what "FC" stands for, and I'd like it to stay that way because it it seems like a no-good-option scenario: football, futbol, and fussball all have their own problems. So, keeping it abbreviated as "FC" seems like the best option.

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on December 07, 2017, 11:26:33 AM
They aren't changing the name. They filed a trademark for Fussbal and Fußball for merchandise basically. I think they will always be "FC Cincinnati", but legally Futbol Club Cincinnati. I think Futbol is the worst of the three, though.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Jimmy_James on December 07, 2017, 09:51:24 PM
Agreed. I didn’t even realize they were using Futbol, which is clearly the lamest of the options. They should stick with FC, and maybe Football if they really must spell it out. Fußball Club Zinzinnati might be a fun alternate name to tie in during Oktoberfest merchandise or something like that.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on December 12, 2017, 01:35:03 AM
Here’s what FC Cincinnati’s stadium could look like in the West End

As FC Cincinnati awaits a decision on its bid to become one of Major League Soccer’s two expansion clubs to begin play in 2020, a rendering has surfaced of one of its alternative stadium sites.

More below:
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/12/11/here-s-what-fc-cincinnati-s-stadium-could-look.html

(https://media.bizj.us/view/img/10729015/fc-cincinnati-west-end-rendering*1200xx2016-1135-32-0.jpg)
That skyline angle is all messed up!
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: SWOH on December 12, 2017, 09:01:21 AM
^Nice, but concerning rendering... that's no street interaction + there's a ton of light pollution on the West End with no barrier, which IMO would kill the vibe of the neighborhood.
It'd be nice to see a sunken stadium.

Here's a new article from CityLab on the expansion process:

https://www.citylab.com/design/2017/12/are-soccer-arenas-the-new-football-stadiums/547598/?utm_source=SFFB

It nicely ties in the Crew drama too.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on December 12, 2017, 10:46:59 AM
I don't get why the Business Courier ran this "story". The rendering is clearly not accurate. The Kroger building appears to be in there twice. The Great American tower is angled the wrong way. This was, I believe, an incredibly rushed job that has been around for most of 2017.

Also, the lights around the stadium would not be on the whole time, likely only during events. And if the buildings are so inaccurate, I can't imagine this is an accurate representation of lighting on the neighborhood.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on December 12, 2017, 11:10:48 AM
I don't get why the Business Courier ran this "story". The rendering is clearly not accurate. The Kroger building appears to be in there twice. The Great American tower is angled the wrong way. This was, I believe, an incredibly rushed job that has been around for most of 2017.

Also, the lights around the stadium would not be on the whole time, likely only during events. And if the buildings are so inaccurate, I can't imagine this is an accurate representation of lighting on the neighborhood.

I'm so perplexed by how that kind of stuff happens... I mean, if you're going to do a rush job, why not just take an existing aerial view and plop in your model. Whatever resulted in this Frankenstein version of downtown must have taken much more work than just merely using an existing photo.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on December 15, 2017, 12:17:22 PM
here's a really good interview of Justin Hoyte, the current right back for FC Cincinnati

http://picklesmagazine.co.uk/2017/12/12/justin-hoyte-brits-abroad/
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on December 15, 2017, 12:57:31 PM
here's a really good interview of Justin Hoyte, the current right back for FC Cincinnati

http://picklesmagazine.co.uk/2017/12/12/justin-hoyte-brits-abroad/

Neat article. Always fun to hear an outsider's view on the city and the club:
-I don't know whether to laugh or cry that the author views Yard House as the "archetypical American restaurant"
-What is "Nippert Park"?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: cincydave8 on December 19, 2017, 12:54:04 PM
Nashville picked. Probably not good news for Cincinnati. But Washington Post MLS writer Steven Goff thinks it will be Cincy and Nashville. But who knows.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: OC17 on December 19, 2017, 04:49:03 PM
Nashville picked. Probably not good news for Cincinnati. But Washington Post MLS writer Steven Goff thinks it will be Cincy and Nashville. But who knows.

I was reading about the MLS expansion and it seemed that Sacramento is a favorite, mainly due to its current team history and prior attempts to get an MLS team.  So I figured Sacramento is getting a team; then I see Nashville named today. 

Detroit has a huge metro area and its MLS team involves some big $$/NBA owners (Pistons & Cavs).  Detroit's Ford Field is the issue: can and will it attract Atlanta level crowds?  Seattle plays in an NFL stadium as well.  If MLS believes it can, then Detroit should get it, leaving Sacramento and Cinci out.  No stadium drama for Detroit.

Cinci can still pull this off though; there is still one announcement to go.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Rabbit Hash on December 19, 2017, 06:19:32 PM
Yep. I don’t have much hope. I think we are in the outside looking in. MLS has no credibility at this point re: franchise awarding.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: cincydave8 on December 20, 2017, 09:00:32 AM
Announcement appears delayed to until after New Years. Rumors abound but appears MLS wants FCC to have a plan in place for the West End or Newport or possible come up with the funding gap for Oakley. Sacramento's problem seems to be lack of investors. So it's wait and see but national soccer reporters seem to think FCC right now has the edge on Sacramento if FCC can make MLS happy regarding a stadium.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: OC17 on December 20, 2017, 08:58:31 PM
Announcement appears delayed to until after New Years. Rumors abound but appears MLS wants FCC to have a plan in place for the West End or Newport or possible come up with the funding gap for Oakley. Sacramento's problem seems to be lack of investors. So it's wait and see but national soccer reporters seem to think FCC right now has the edge on Sacramento if FCC can make MLS happy regarding a stadium.

Other posters here stated that MLS didn't care where the stadium actually ended-up; I thought that sounded fishy.  Didn't read anything about Sacramento's bid being in jeopardy due to lack of investors.  How did either cities' bid make it to the final selection with these major outstanding issues?

So, Detroit is out?  Deep pocket investors, Ford Field, and a huge metro population.

I thought maybe MLS announced Nashville (Tues-Weds) and would do the same for the 2nd city (Thurs-Friday).

How much more time is MLS going to give Cinci to get its stadium deal done? 

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thebillshark on December 20, 2017, 09:58:29 PM
Announcement appears delayed to until after New Years. Rumors abound but appears MLS wants FCC to have a plan in place for the West End or Newport or possible come up with the funding gap for Oakley. Sacramento's problem seems to be lack of investors. So it's wait and see but national soccer reporters seem to think FCC right now has the edge on Sacramento if FCC can make MLS happy regarding a stadium.

Well to my recollection we still don’t know what physical items the “funding gap” in Oakley would be needed for, so it’s all pretty opaque to the outside observer.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on December 21, 2017, 12:34:03 AM
Here is one angle I have not really seen raised and I don't know if it is really an issue at all, but MLS is primarily a Spring/Summer sport with a little in the fall.  Both Sacramento and Nashville do not have Major League Baseball teams while Cincy and Detroit do.  Not saying this is a big issue but wonder if it is something that is discussed?

In Nashville and Sacramento the NHL and NBA regular seasons end around the beginning of April so there is not much competition for the sports entertainment market in the Spring/Summer months. Whereas Cincy and Detroit have Spring/Summer/Fall professional sports in the market. Don't know if this is bad for Cincy or a non-issue.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: cincydave8 on December 21, 2017, 08:58:52 AM
I'm getting most of my information from soccer twitter and soccer reddit. 

Detroit has long considered to be out. But I guess nobody really knows. MLS favors small soccer stadiums for new teams, so Detroit really only made the finalists because of their money and it's a large market that MLS would like to have.

Sacramento has long had issues with ownership. The owner of HP left and then came back, but even with her they're still the least wealthy of the 4 bids. MLS doesn't want to bring an ownership that isn't willing (or can't) to spend money long term to field a good product. There's also rumors that MLS head Don Garber really doesn't like the Sacramento owners and a personal level.

The funding gap is like $10 million for infrastructure at the Oakley site. If MLS is going to pick Cincinnati they seem to be waiting to make sure the stadium plan in 100% done.

The finalist made it this far because of the original dozen or so teams that applied in January these were the 4 best bids. Other expansion teams didn't check all the boxes. St Louis and San Diego failed to get money for a stadium, for example.

EDIT: This being said only a handful of people really have any idea what's going on, I'm just stating the most common rumors I'm seeing.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: surfohio on December 21, 2017, 09:33:53 AM
The finalist made it this far because of the original dozen or so teams that applied in January these were the 4 best bids. Other expansion teams didn't check all the boxes. St Louis and San Diego failed to get money for a stadium, for example.

Thanks for the update. Just wanted to say that San Diego's owners have the money, but the city council delayed the ballot initiative that would have allowed construction to begin. If Cincy gets to MLS you can probably thank SD's politicians because the stadium initiative had public support; it would have passed.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on December 21, 2017, 10:50:10 AM
I have heard the same about SAC's bid. The issue with the ownership is not Meg Whitman's money, but they want her deep pockets as the main owner instead of a secondary owner.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on December 21, 2017, 01:00:35 PM
The funding gap is like $10 million for infrastructure at the Oakley site. If MLS is going to pick Cincinnati they seem to be waiting to make sure the stadium plan in 100% done.

The city and county have already agreed to build the roads, sewers, other utilities, and a parking garage. It would be nice if FCC's owners would tell us specifically what other "infrastructure" they still want us to build. Amazing that these details are still only being discussed in smoke-filled rooms and not out in public.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: cincydave8 on December 21, 2017, 01:07:44 PM
FCC listed what they wanted and said they think would cost $70 million and I think the city/county funding only adds up to $54 Million or something along those numbers. There's been discussions for months on this, especially with the county, its all on the BOCC archived minutes as far back as August. There was also a large public meeting in Norwood months ago on the issue. All the major news media covered it. The public is rarely in the know on every detail of major development news. It hasn't been handled perfectly but the idea that it's all been hidden is untrue.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on December 21, 2017, 01:28:31 PM
Okay, so what is the the $10 million "funding gap" intended to be spent on? What do they need that hasn't already been announced (new roads, sewers, utilities, and a parking garage)?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on December 21, 2017, 01:33:23 PM
the announced ask was $70M iirc. The county/city came up with about $54M. It's not an additional $10M they are adding on. This is from the original ask. I don't think I've seen an itemized list, though.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: cincydave8 on December 21, 2017, 01:34:21 PM
It was my first sentence. FCC seems to think those roads/sewers/utilities/parking/etc will cost more than the money the city/county have put up. I think the Biz Journal and WVXU both published the list. Removing bump outs and adding a lane on Vandecar, making the road in front of Meijer and Sams public, widening Madison Rd between Ridge and Kennedy and building a new circle road around the stadium. There might have been others.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on December 21, 2017, 03:05:02 PM
Details are coming out, essentially confirming the rumors that Scaramento's problem is the need for more wealthy owners:
https://twitter.com/BrianStraus/status/943904588956164096 (https://twitter.com/BrianStraus/status/943904588956164096)

This article says that FCC is just working through questions regarding the potential stadium sites. Article says we should expect a statement from FCC later today (Thursday):
https://www.si.com/soccer/2017/12/21/mls-expansion-timeline-don-garber-cincinnati-detroit-sacramento (https://www.si.com/soccer/2017/12/21/mls-expansion-timeline-don-garber-cincinnati-detroit-sacramento)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on December 21, 2017, 03:29:56 PM
FCC in the drivers seat, just need to quickly get their act together to check the boxes. They should have gone to Newport from the start and the deal would be done by now.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on January 04, 2018, 04:40:40 PM
Still no news on the MLS front, but that doesn't stop FC Cincinnati from stacking their team for 2018.

They signed Argentinian midfielder Emmanuel Ledesma (http://www.fccincinnati.com/news_article/show/872096?referrer_id=2584136) today. He most recently played for the New York Cosmos of the NASL where he scored 10 goals and 6 assists in 19 games (17 starts).

Yesterday they signed Guyana National Team striker Emery Welshman (http://www.fccincinnati.com/news_article/show/871594?referrer_id=2584136).

Before the new year they also signed Jamaican National Team fullback/winger Lance Laing (http://www.fccincinnati.com/news_article/show/867970?referrer_id=2584136) and American forward Tommy Heinemann (http://www.fccincinnati.com/news_article/show/863419?referrer_id=2861539).

Rumors have been circulating that FCC is going to sign American midfielder Nazmi Albadawi (http://cincinnatisoccertalk.com/2017/12/13/fc-cincinnati-gets-10). Rumors also say that his contract may be contingent on FC Cincinnati jumping to MLS in the coming years, but nothing has been confirmed as of yet.

Here's what the roster looks like right now:

(https://i.redd.it/x8tsa495o3801.jpg)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on January 04, 2018, 07:57:25 PM
Why does the USL exempt Canada from the international cap? For that matter, why do they have the international cap at all? What motivates the fear about rosters being "too" international?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on January 04, 2018, 08:36:04 PM
Domestic leagues are meant to build National Team rosters. Since there are teams in Canada for both the usl and MLS it would really throw a wrench in things if American teams had to count Canadian players as international and if Canadian teams would have to count American players as international.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: LtCheese on January 05, 2018, 11:49:00 AM
Why does the USL exempt Canada from the international cap?

NAFTA :)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: cincydave8 on January 08, 2018, 01:03:00 PM
Rumors are swirling that FCC will be invited this week with an event at Washington Park. If true, good chance it leaks today or tomorrow.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on January 08, 2018, 02:31:15 PM
Rumors are swirling that FCC will be invited this week with an event at Washington Park. If true, good chance it leaks today or tomorrow.

Washington Park Event = West End Stadium, I would tend to think. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Pdrome513 on January 08, 2018, 03:00:33 PM
As would the most recent OTR purchases in the Hamilton County Sales File, three buildings on Central Parkway for $1.1m. Not only does the sale price seem high considering the buildings, but the purchasing LLC is registered to a KMK lawyer who represents, among other firms, Cintas. Could be nothing, but the listing pointed out a few weeks ago in the West End thread also just sold, 1509 Providence Street for $25k.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: cincydave8 on January 10, 2018, 09:40:48 AM
Well clearly the rumors were wrong. At this point it's anyone's guess when it will happen. Rather annoying. There's a good chance it won't be until February. Lots of MLS events coming up. MLS Combine is 1/11-1/17, MLS Super Draft is 1/19 and US Soccer Coaches Convention is 1/17-1/21.

Jeff Berding was on the Cincy Soccer Talk Podcast last night (http://cincinnatisoccertalk.com (http://cincinnatisoccertalk.com)/). He didn't really say too much of interest. Just the MLS process is ongoing, there's nothing wrong with Cincy's bid and he remains "bullish" on invite chances.  Of interest to this site....he also said Oakley is the preferred site but until "community engagement" and traffic studies are completed West End is not off the table.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on January 10, 2018, 12:06:40 PM
^ I bet nothing will happen until February until they get clarity with the Miami situation.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on January 10, 2018, 12:20:40 PM
I don't think Miami will become any clearer by February. This saga has been going on for years and never gets any closer to closure.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on January 10, 2018, 12:32:09 PM
But that is the clarity they need to make a decision
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: OC17 on January 10, 2018, 01:32:10 PM
Well clearly the rumors were wrong. At this point it's anyone's guess when it will happen. Rather annoying. There's a good chance it won't be until February. Lots of MLS events coming up. MLS Combine is 1/11-1/17, MLS Super Draft is 1/19 and US Soccer Coaches Convention is 1/17-1/21.

Jeff Berding was on the Cincy Soccer Talk Podcast last night (http://cincinnatisoccertalk.com (http://cincinnatisoccertalk.com)/). He didn't really say too much of interest. Just the MLS process is ongoing, there's nothing wrong with Cincy's bid and he remains "bullish" on invite chances.  Of interest to this site....he also said Oakley is the preferred site but until "community engagement" and traffic studies are completed West End is not off the table.

Here's what I don't get about this MLS expansion issue:  MLS accepts 4 conforming city bids for a 2 city team expansion.  Nashville walks away with a quick win.  Then the 2nd announcement is delayed due to alleged issues with the remaining bids.  Sacramento had ownership issues post-bid yet is supposed to be the sentimental favorite because of its many past attempts to win a team.

So why wasn't Cinci awarded the 2nd team?  Is the MLS delaying to allow Sacramento to get its bid in order? Sounds like it was down to Cinci or Detroit.  Detroit's bid seemed solid as well, it was accepted after all.  Cinci's bid seemed wishy-washy about its stadium and did come across as being rushed to make the bid deadline. Regardless, the bid was accepted and if, as I've been reading, Cinci has the best bid, the MLS should just award the team there.  Or, is the MLS actually waiting to see what happens to the Columbus Crew?  Either way, if I were an FC Cinci proponent, I would be more than ticked-off at the MLS for this post-bid acceptance drama.

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: OC17 on January 10, 2018, 01:33:29 PM
Well clearly the rumors were wrong. At this point it's anyone's guess when it will happen. Rather annoying. There's a good chance it won't be until February. Lots of MLS events coming up. MLS Combine is 1/11-1/17, MLS Super Draft is 1/19 and US Soccer Coaches Convention is 1/17-1/21.

Jeff Berding was on the Cincy Soccer Talk Podcast last night (http://cincinnatisoccertalk.com (http://cincinnatisoccertalk.com)/). He didn't really say too much of interest. Just the MLS process is ongoing, there's nothing wrong with Cincy's bid and he remains "bullish" on invite chances.  Of interest to this site....he also said Oakley is the preferred site but until "community engagement" and traffic studies are completed West End is not off the table.

Then the MLS should just award Cinci its team if there's nothing wrong with the bid. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: YABO713 on January 10, 2018, 02:31:26 PM
The MLS has been sputtering some BS about Ohio's team and potential new team in the last 6 months.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Columbo on January 10, 2018, 03:16:16 PM
Anyone expecting an honest and upfront process from a league commissioner that uses the twitter handle of "@thesoccerdon" is going to be disappointed.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: OC17 on January 10, 2018, 03:24:45 PM
Anyone expecting an honest and upfront process from a league commissioner that uses the twitter handle of "@thesoccerdon" is going to be disappointed.

You've gotta be kidding?  ''@thesoccerdon'' is hilarious.  Wonder if the 2nd city team decision will be made at the Bada-Bing?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on January 15, 2018, 12:17:08 PM
FC Cincinnati will kick off the season in Charleston for the third straight year. We play the Charleston Battery on March 17th. The two previous years we have lost by a single goal to open the season in South Carolina.

We also travel to Indianapolis to play the Indy Eleven on March 31st! This is Indy's first home match in the USL after moving over from the NASL.

Our home opener is scheduled for April 7th against rivals and defending-USL-Champions Louisville City FC.

So far only home openers for each team have been announced (luckily we play in three home openers, so we know three games already). The rest of the schedule is expected to be released this week, but that hasn't been confirmed.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on January 24, 2018, 11:39:39 AM
The full FC Cincinnati schedule was release last Friday. Due to the number of teams, and the number of games, we play 4 teams a third time. We get a second home game against Louisville City FC and Pittsburgh Riverhounds. We get a second away game against the Indy Eleven and Nashville SC, both new to the league this year. They really couldn't have given FCC better teams to play a third time based on geography and rivalries. Here's the schedule:

(https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/26952091_1603552426350314_7258990787469576394_o.jpg?oh=4d4cfdeb7d7e165c53c6e819d8bdeda4&oe=5B21AFAB)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on January 26, 2018, 01:07:12 AM
MLS plans announcement Monday; here’s what it means for FC Cincinnati

Major League Soccer is reportedly planning an announcement Monday that could have an effect on FC Cincinnati’s chances to win an expansion franchise.

More below:
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/01/25/mls-plans-announcement-monday-here-s-what-it-means.html
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on January 26, 2018, 09:17:09 AM
MLS plans announcement Monday; here’s what it means for FC Cincinnati

Major League Soccer is reportedly planning an announcement Monday that could have an effect on FC Cincinnati’s chances to win an expansion franchise.

More below:
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/01/25/mls-plans-announcement-monday-here-s-what-it-means.html
Click-baity headline... the announcement is regarding Miami. Doesn't mean anything relative to FCC.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on February 05, 2018, 06:52:16 PM
Thoughts on the new jerseys?

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: cincydave8 on February 06, 2018, 08:53:01 AM
^ I really like the away white ones with darker shaded diamonds. Really nice.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: bendixondavis on February 06, 2018, 09:20:10 AM
Not sure what i think will have to see in person.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on February 06, 2018, 01:45:39 PM
Thoughts on the new jerseys?



The corporate logos are just about the lamest thing about soccer.  Toyota doesn't even have a local office anymore, aside from it not being a local company. 

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on February 06, 2018, 02:01:47 PM
It's coming to more sports soon. NBA has just started putting patches on the front corner of their jerseys. Only a matter of time before the NFL and NHL do it. I suspect baseball will be the last sport to introduce jersey sponsors, but I don't think it's as far away as some people believe.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thomasbw on February 06, 2018, 02:04:52 PM
Thoughts on the new jerseys?



The corporate logos are just about the lamest thing about soccer.  Toyota doesn't even have a local office anymore, aside from it not being a local company. 



Soccer doesn't have commercials. Fair trade off.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on February 06, 2018, 02:21:12 PM
The corporate logos are just about the lamest thing about soccer.  Toyota doesn't even have a local office anymore, aside from it not being a local company. 

Meanwhile, in Korean baseball (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KBO_League#Teams), the teams are named after sponsoring companies instead of cities, like the Samsung Lions, Kia Tigers, and LG Twins.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: LtCheese on February 06, 2018, 02:21:58 PM
^ I really like the away white ones with darker shaded diamonds. Really nice.

Agreed, the aways are sharp.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on February 09, 2018, 01:55:07 AM
FC Cincinnati is most likely MLS pick, expert says, but announcement could be delayed again

FC Cincinnati is the most likely candidate to be selected for the next Major League Soccer expansion franchise, according to a national soccer expert, but MLS commissioner Don Garber has opened the door for an announcement to be delayed yet again.

More below:
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/02/08/fc-cincinnati-is-most-likely-mls-pick-expert-says.html
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on February 26, 2018, 05:00:03 PM
Last we heard... Berding seemed confident a decision would come from MLS by March 3rd (start of MLS season)... but with no events planned/announced for this week... that seems unlikely. Any rumors out there regarding timing and/or if a decision has been made regarding MLS expansion?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on February 26, 2018, 05:25:29 PM
A lot of articles mention dotting i's and crossing t's but no other details. Hope that's all there is to it. But I don't know.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: subocincy on February 27, 2018, 08:36:20 AM
A lot of articles mention dotting i's and crossing t's but no other details. Hope that's all there is to it. But I don't know.
As for myself, I've grown very tired of it all...
  https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/02/26/fc-cincinnati-to-present-traffic-study-results-to.html

I'm thinking that the local media may feel the same way...
  https://www.wcpo.com/sports/is-fc-cincinnati-playing-musical-chairs-with-stadium-site

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on February 27, 2018, 02:27:14 PM
^also, all of the stadium drama would have been greatly reduced if 2017 hadn't been an election year.  They had to wait until the Cran-Man was reelected to dig into the west end.  Looking back, it seems like the Children's Hospital invented controversy was a way to damage Simpson on development issues in the event she had been elected. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on February 27, 2018, 06:21:04 PM
MLS on expansion bids: ‘We have made the most progress in Cincinnati’

FC Cincinnati’s bid for a Major League Soccer expansion franchise just got a positive jolt.

More below:
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/02/27/mls-on-expansion-bids-we-have-made-the-most.html

(https://ssl.c.photoshelter.com/img-get2/I0000P45fSXedWNk/fit=1000x750/Cincinnati-Skyline-Super-Moonrise-4.jpg)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on February 28, 2018, 06:07:04 PM
FC Cincinnati gets a very different reception from NKY business community

The applause FC Cincinnati president and general manager Jeff Berding received from the Northern Kentucky business community on Tuesday evening when he mentioned Newport as one of the candidates for a soccer stadium site was a stark contrast to the reception Berding has received from people related to two other potential sites.

More below:
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/02/28/fc-cincinnati-gets-a-very-different-reception-from.html

(https://www.e-architect.co.uk/images/jpgs/america/the_ascent_sdl210308_arielofbaldwin_097_c_corporex.jpg)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on March 01, 2018, 06:19:14 PM
FC Cincinnati has even higher attendance expectations this season

FC Cincinnati has its sights set this season on obliterating the attendance record it set last season, with expectations that would place it among a handful of top-drawing U.S. soccer teams.

More below:
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/03/01/fc-cincinnati-has-even-higher-attendance.html
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on March 16, 2018, 05:05:08 PM
Pretty cool hype video summarizing the 2017 season: https://mobile.twitter.com/fccincinnati/status/974633571125211136/video/1 (https://mobile.twitter.com/fccincinnati/status/974633571125211136/video/1)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on March 19, 2018, 12:40:24 PM
FCC's first match of the season was against Charleston Battery on Saturday. We won 1-0 (only goal in 10th minute by Blake Smith), but it wasn't exactly a pretty game. After our early score, we sat back on defense. Goalkeeper Evan Newton had several impressive/scary saves that could've easily brought Charleston back into the match. Last season, we had a lot of games where we blew early leads. It's hard to know if this first match represents anything significant, but it was nice to see the defense hold on to that lead, even if it didn't make for the prettiest of games.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: bendixondavis on April 01, 2018, 11:39:06 PM
Went to the game last night in Indy. It was a great game and an awesome showing from the fans on both sides. I think Indy might have the biggest supporter group section other than us in the usl. Was glad to see them sell out at a little over 17k.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on April 02, 2018, 12:05:01 PM
Went to the game last night in Indy. It was a great game and an awesome showing from the fans on both sides. I think Indy might have the biggest supporter group section other than us in the usl. Was glad to see them sell out at a little over 17k.

From the TV coverage - it seemed like there were a lot of empty seats in the lower bowl. Did they actually sell all of the seats in the lower bowl? In any case, I'm glad to see Indy has a good fan base. It's good to have nearby rivals like Indy and Louisville.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on April 03, 2018, 03:40:10 PM
MLS Players Association issued a statement saying that FCC did not have a basis for voiding their contract with Tom Heinemann.

https://twitter.com/MLSPlayersUnion/status/981206292596514816
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on April 03, 2018, 05:38:19 PM
MLS Players Association issued a statement saying that FCC did not have a basis for voiding their contract with Tom Heinemann.

https://twitter.com/MLSPlayersUnion/status/981206292596514816

FCC issues a statement that they're "looking forward" to resolving the dispute in arbitration: https://twitter.com/fccincinnati/status/981257246704324608
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on April 16, 2018, 05:45:57 PM
MLS board could decide on FC Cincinnati’s expansion bid Tuesday

(https://ssl.c.photoshelter.com/img-get2/I0000P45fSXedWNk/fit=1000x750/Cincinnati-Skyline-Super-Moonrise-4.jpg)

FC Cincinnati could win a Major League Soccer expansion bid as soon as Tuesday.

The MLS Board of Governors meets Tuesday in Los Angeles and will discuss expansion at the regularly scheduled meeting, MLS spokesman Dan Courtemanche told me. He didn’t comment on whether a vote on the next expansion club will take place Tuesday.

MLS still has one more expansion franchise to award in the latest round of expansion, and FC Cincinnati is expected to win it.

More below:
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/04/16/mls-board-could-decide-on-fc-cincinnati-s.html
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on April 16, 2018, 05:56:57 PM
City council will find a way to screw this up, they always do.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: bendixondavis on April 22, 2018, 10:54:56 AM
Fc fought hard last night against Pittsburgh to draw. They broke Pittsburgh's streak of not being scored on yet in the season and only having to defend 3 shots on target in 4 games.  It was a rough game but I'm proud of the guys for coming back to tie.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on April 23, 2018, 10:54:42 AM
^Our second half looked a lot better. Kenney Walker subbing in brought an immediate impact. He's probably our best player, and that concussion threw us out of sync IMO.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on April 25, 2018, 04:42:30 PM
FC Cincinnati adds on-field suites at Nippert Stadium

(https://media.bizj.us/view/img/10875708/fc-cincinnati-field-suite-game-day*150xx640-480-0-0.jpg)

FC Cincinnati has unveiled two premium seating locations this season that put fans on the field and put the team in the company of major league franchises in the U.S. and Europe.

The third-year soccer club added two on-field suites with space for 30 fans each this season.

“The crowd sounds different down there,” Jeff Smith, FC Cincinnati’s vice president of sales, told me. “And being down there for warmups gives fans an up-close view. We now have two auxiliary premium seating areas that didn’t exist last year.”

More below:
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/04/25/fc-cincinnati-adds-on-field-suites-at-nippert.html
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on April 25, 2018, 04:47:48 PM
^It's a good sign that there is so much demand for club/group suites.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on May 03, 2018, 12:37:15 PM
Big road win for FCC last night in Indianapolis with an exciting 2-3 scoreline. In all of 2017 we had 16 points on the road. This year, after 5 games, we already have 13 points on the road with 4 wins and a draw.

The win catapulted FCC into second in the Eastern Conference. Still a lot of games to play, but things are looking positive right now. Next home match is Saturday, May 5.

Also, there was this wonder goal by Kenney Walker in the game on Saturday against Ottawa Fury. #1 play on Sports Center's Top 10.

https://twitter.com/fccincinnati/status/990567531881680896?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.wcpo.com%2Fnews%2Finsider%2Ffc-cincinnatis-kenney-walker-enjoys-spotlight-after-goal-appears-on-espns-sportscenter&tfw_site=wcpo
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on May 10, 2018, 07:48:43 AM
FCC’s first game of the Open Cup (the second round overall of the tournament) will be next Wednesday against Detroit. The match will be played at Gettler and is already sold out. Any idea why they didn’t choose to play at Nippert? Gettler is tiny and given last year’s excitement around the Open Cup, it seems like they could have gotten good turnout at Nippert.

https://twitter.com/fccincinnati/status/994408751263354881?s=20
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: cincydave8 on May 10, 2018, 08:48:40 AM
^ Because the first 2 games of the open cup last drew under 10,000 fans. Wednesday night games against lower division teams just aren't a big draw and it's cheaper to have them at Gettler.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on May 10, 2018, 10:42:19 AM
Gettler also just sold out yesterday. This first round isn't as in demand as a lot of people were worried about early on. People thought it would be sold out in hours, but it took weeks to sell out this game.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: carnevalem on May 10, 2018, 01:19:30 PM
I've also heard that the Open Cup has rules about revenue sharing with the away team that supposedly ramp up based on stadium size. So if the game were played at Nippert, FCC would have to share more of the revenue with the away team. Given the lower attendance of the early round Open Cup and the increased costs for operating at Nippert, it isn't worth it. Many MLS teams don't play their first Open Cup games at their stadium either.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on May 22, 2018, 04:33:14 PM
FC Cincinnati owner Lindner on MLS bid: ‘I think we’re going to get over the finish line'

FC Cincinnati owner Carl Lindner III told me Tuesday he believes his soccer club has done all that it needs to do to win a Major League Soccer expansion bid.

“I certainly think so,” he told me after the annual shareholders meeting of American Financial Group Inc. (NYSE: AFG), the insurance company for which he’s co-CEO. “I think we’ve checked all the boxes. We’re working very hard to get over the finish line. I”m optimistic and excited.

“I think we’re going to get over the finish line.”

FC Cincinnati finalized a community benefits agreement last week with the West End neighborhood where it plans to build a $200 million-plus soccer stadium. That’s viewed as the last major step in the lengthy, often-extended process of making the cut for an MLS expansion franchise.

More below:
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/05/22/fc-cincinnati-owner-lindner-on-mls-bid-i-think-we.html
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: cincydave8 on May 24, 2018, 07:54:16 AM
Cincinnati's MLS expansion bid: FC Cincinnati announcement imminent

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/soccer/fc-cincinnati/2018/05/24/fc-cincinnati-mls-expansion-don-garber-announcement-nashville-sacramento-detroit-miami/635835002/

Major League Soccer is coming to Cincinnati next week, and league officials are likely bringing with them an invitation for Futbol Club Cincinnati to join their ranks. Sources confirmed to The Enquirer that a major club announcement is coming Tuesday and MLS commissioner Don Garber will be in attendance. Team and league officials declined to comment further on the nature of the announcement. Perhaps there's nothing for officials to add, though, as Garber's presence for an announcement in Cincinnati points an invitation for FC Cincinnati to join MLS. "Major soccer announcement" was the phrasing used as a not-so-subtle heads up prior to the December expansion announcement in Nashville.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on May 24, 2018, 03:58:29 PM
Here are details of FC Cincinnati's 'significant announcement'

FC Cincinnati has confirmed details of its “significant announcement” involving Major League Soccer.

“FC Cincinnati and special guests will hold a special event on Tuesday, May 29, to make a significant announcement about the future of soccer in Cincinnati,” the soccer club said Thursday in a media alert.

The event is expected to officially announce FC Cincinnati’s entry as Major League Soccer’s newest expansion club. The team could begin MLS play as early as 2019.

MLS commissioner Don Garber, FC Cincinnati majority owner Carl Lindner III, FC Cincinnati president and general manager Jeff Berding and Cincinnati Mayor John Cranley will attend. The event will begin at 5:30 p.m. at Rhinegeist Brewery, 1910 Elm St. in Over-the-Rhine. Doors open at 3 p.m.

Rhinegeist is about a half-mile from FC Cincinnati’s West End site for a $200-million-plus soccer stadium that it will build as part of its rise to MLS.

Fountain Square will host a watch party for the event 4:30-9 p.m. Tuesday, a 3CDC spokesman said.

More below:
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/05/24/here-are-details-of-fc-cincinnatis-significant.html
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on May 25, 2018, 01:20:32 PM
Apparently Cincinnati's first pro soccer team was called the Kids:
https://www.wcpo.com/news/insider/john-popovich-we-re-not-used-to-winning-but-cincinnati-was-just-too-big-for-mls-to-ignore

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UI6pSkIs_tc
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on May 29, 2018, 11:01:48 PM
MLS commissioner credits Lindner as FC Cincinnati celebrates bid

(https://media.bizj.us/view/img/10923495/fccmlsch7290*750xx1800-1013-0-94.jpg)

If there’s one thing that put FC Cincinnati over the top in winning a Major League Soccer expansion franchise, it was the person at the helm.

“Carl Lindner,” was MLS commissioner Don Garber’s instant response when I asked him after Tuesday’s announcement what put FC Cincinnati in the position to win the bid.

“This is a first-class, world-class ownership team. Carl’s is one of the great families in the city, and Scott’s company is really successful. He gets a guy like George Joseph to come in, and these are real people. We went to the Commercial Club dinner (during Garber’s 2016 visit) and the level of support was amazing,” he said.

FC Cincinnati expects to start playing at its to-be-constructed, $200-plus million stadium in the West End in 2021, team president and general manager Jeff Berding said. It plans to play its first two MLS seasons at Nippert Stadium. The club will begin MLS play in 2019.

More below:
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/05/29/mls-commissioner-credits-lindner-as-fc-cincinnati.html
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: bfwissel on May 30, 2018, 09:07:18 AM
So apparently a group is gathering petitions to cancel the public infrastructure improvements needed to build the new West End stadium.  I saw people last night collecting signatures in the neighborhood.  They have 30 days to collect 6,000 valid signatures to put it on the ballot.  Are there that many registered voters who are that against the new stadium?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on May 30, 2018, 09:22:21 AM
People have already suggested that they can't stop most of it because money was appropriated via an emergency ordinance. The only thing this would do, from what I've heard, is put the hotel tax portion on the ballot. Which doesn't seem like a strong position.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on May 30, 2018, 09:41:06 AM
So apparently a group is gathering petitions to cancel the public infrastructure improvements needed to build the new West End stadium.  I saw people last night collecting signatures in the neighborhood.  They have 30 days to collect 6,000 valid signatures to put it on the ballot.  Are there that many registered voters who are that against the new stadium?

Michelle Dillingham is going to harm her candidacy with her actions. I had really never heard of her before this FC Cincy issue and the more she talks the more she sounds like a moron and hurts her credibility.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: bfwissel on May 30, 2018, 09:43:57 AM
Yeah, I decided at the last minute to vote for Michelle in the last City Council election.  I won't make that mistake again.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: cincydave8 on May 30, 2018, 09:52:20 AM
The majority of the money was passed with an emergency ordinance but apparently the $17 M from the hotel tax was only passed by 5 votes and lawyers from outside of Cincinnati think that could be challenged. At this point worst case for FCC is the WE stadium gets delayed or they find some other way pay for it. I'd also imagine the council could revote to make it 6 to avoid referendum which is commonly done, Seelbach actually did that earlier for FCC, even though he's against it. I imagine most the council wants to move on from this. Dillingham doesn't live in the West End and the only other thing she's done is accuse of Pastor of holding up getting a stop sign on her street in Mt Lookout.

More here: https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/05/29/key-part-of-fc-cincinnati-stadium-package-could.html 

EDIT: My bad I got her confused with Quillivan.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: JohnClevesSymmes on May 30, 2018, 09:57:42 AM
Quote
Dillingham doesn't live in the West End and the only other thing she's done is accuse of Pastor of holding up getting a stop sign on her street in Mt Lookout.

That was Quinlivan.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thomasbw on May 30, 2018, 09:57:55 AM
The majority of the money was passed with an emergency ordinance but apparently the $17 M from the hotel tax was only passed by 5 votes and lawyers from outside of Cincinnati think that could be challenged. At this point worst case for FCC is the WE stadium gets delayed or they find some other way pay for it. I'd also imagine the council could revote to make it 6 to avoid referendum which is commonly done, Seelbach actually did that earlier for FCC, even though he's against it. I imagine most the council wants to move on from this. Dillingham doesn't live in the West End and the only other thing she's done is accuse of Pastor of holding up getting a stop sign on her street in Mt Lookout.

More here: https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/05/29/key-part-of-fc-cincinnati-stadium-package-could.html 

Dillingham lives in Kennedy Heights I think and I'm pretty sure it was LQ on the stop sign.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on May 30, 2018, 10:06:27 AM
Yeah, I decided at the last minute to vote for Michelle in the last City Council election.  I won't make that mistake again.

I have just heard her conduct herself on some pretty softball interviews and she just comes across as a deer in headlights.

I may not agree with Quinliven or Landsman, but at least they know hold their own in an interview (Quinliven doesn't count because she is media trained professional) but I respect Landsman for coming across as knowledgeable on an issue even when challenged.  Dillingham is just awful.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on May 30, 2018, 03:06:17 PM
As part of the move to MLS, the official name will change to Fussball Club Cincinnati. I really wish they'd follow the lead of IBM and HP, making their name simply be the letters: "FC Cincinnati". I cringe every time I read an article about "Futbol Club Cincinnati" and I'm not looking forward to reading about '"Fussball Club Cincinnati". As a name, it's a) hard to spell/pronounce, b) looks/sounds a lot like foosball, and c) will occasionally be written as "Fußball Club Cincinnati". In any case, it just looks like the club is trying WAAAY too hard to lean on the fact that we (like many cities) have had German immigrants move to our city: https://www.fccincinnati.com/mls#9

Quote
Q: Will FC Cincinnati be rebranded? 
Almost every existing team that has joined MLS has undergone a brand review and made slight changes as they began play in MLS. We anticipate that there will be updates to the current FCC logos and marks. We have already begun to solicit ideas and opinions from the community our Fan Council, as well as ideas from MLS and its partners.

One item that will change – although it will be less noticeable to most – is that we will go from being formally called Futbol Club Cincinnati to Fussball Club Cincinnati in recognition of the city’s German heritage. We will remain FC Cincinnati publicly, however.

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/soccer/fc-cincinnati/2018/05/30/fc-cincinnati-futbol-2018-usl-fussball-2019-mls-expansion/655354002/
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on May 30, 2018, 03:16:45 PM
Yeah, totally lame.  If they want something that stands out, come up with an actual...name.  The Columbus Crew is actually a good name. 

Want German?

Cincinnati Schwienhunden

Cincinnati Leberkase mit Senf

Cincinnati Ich gehe in die schule mit dem Moped


Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: thebillshark on May 30, 2018, 03:20:45 PM
Yeah, totally lame.  If they want something that stands out, come up with an actual...name.  The Columbus Crew is actually a good name. 

Want German?

Cincinnati Schwienhunden

Cincinnati Leberkase mit Senf

Cincinnati Ich gehe in die schule mit dem Moped


Someone still has their “Neue Freunde” textbook!
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on May 30, 2018, 03:35:42 PM
Someone still has their “Neue Freunde” textbook!

Chapter Six was "Eine Party!", featuring Margit Dastl. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on May 30, 2018, 03:56:40 PM
I've got it, the Cincinnati Schenkelmeisters.

The Thigh Masters. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: DEPACincy on May 30, 2018, 04:05:52 PM
As part of the move to MLS, the official name will change to Fussball Club Cincinnati. I really wish they'd follow the lead of IBM and HP, making their name simply be the letters: "FC Cincinnati". I cringe every time I read an article about "Futbol Club Cincinnati" and I'm not looking forward to reading about '"Fussball Club Cincinnati". As a name, it's a) hard to spell/pronounce, b) looks/sounds a lot like foosball, and c) will occasionally be written as "Fußball Club Cincinnati". In any case, it just looks like the club is trying WAAAY too hard to lean on the fact that we (like many cities) have had German immigrants move to our city: https://www.fccincinnati.com/mls#9

Quote
Q: Will FC Cincinnati be rebranded? 
Almost every existing team that has joined MLS has undergone a brand review and made slight changes as they began play in MLS. We anticipate that there will be updates to the current FCC logos and marks. We have already begun to solicit ideas and opinions from the community our Fan Council, as well as ideas from MLS and its partners.

One item that will change – although it will be less noticeable to most – is that we will go from being formally called Futbol Club Cincinnati to Fussball Club Cincinnati in recognition of the city’s German heritage. We will remain FC Cincinnati publicly, however.

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/soccer/fc-cincinnati/2018/05/30/fc-cincinnati-futbol-2018-usl-fussball-2019-mls-expansion/655354002/

I don't like that it sounds so close to foosball for sure but I actually like that it will honor our German heritage and I like it written out as Fußball Club Cincinnati. It's not just that we have had German immigrants, it's that they played a role in shaping our culture in a way that very few other cities can claim. Milwaukee might be the only other major city as "German" as Cincinnati is.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on June 02, 2018, 12:39:04 AM
Isn't the "German Triangle" St. Louis, Milwaukee, and Cincinnati?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: RJohnson on June 02, 2018, 02:37:45 PM
Or maybe the Cincinnati Stormtroopers or the Cincinnati Blitzkreig or tweak the colors to black and red and call it Cincinnati SS
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on June 11, 2018, 05:28:52 PM
FC Cincinnati changing national perception of city, Forbes says

Amid all of the infighting over a soccer stadium location and how to pay for it, Cincinnati has emerged as a shining example of how to get things done at least in the eyes of one sports business expert. In his eyes, FC Cincinnati’s victory in the Major League Soccer expansion sweepstakes on May 29 is playing a prominent role in changing the way Cincinnati is viewed nationally.

Forbes magazine contributor Patrick Rishe, director of the sports business program at Washington University in St. Louis, called FC Cincinnati “among the most compelling sports business stories of the last three years. Because it shows that with tremendous fan support, you can sway detractors into believing in your brand as a community,” in a recent Forbes article.

More below:
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/06/11/fc-cincinnati-changing-national-perception-of-city.html
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on June 11, 2018, 05:49:46 PM
^Um, St. Louis City is not in a county, it is a county. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: edale on June 11, 2018, 05:56:52 PM
Yeah, but for most large projects, cooperation is needed between the city and the larger county, i.e. Cincinnati and Hamilton County. St. Louis City County is too small to do much by itself. From my understanding, the city to suburb relationship in St. Louis is more toxic than just about anywhere else in the country.

As an aside, I have always found the city as county thing to be quite weird. I know St. Louis, Baltimore, and San Francisco all operate this way, but each set up probably exists for different reasons.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: taestell on June 19, 2018, 10:57:42 PM
St. Louis is an independent city, meaning that the city is not part of a county, and the city itself provides the services that would normally be provided by counties. St. Louis is an unusual situation because the City of St. Louis was originally part of the County of St. Louis (and was the county seat). They voted to divorce, so the City of St. Louis became an independent city and the County of St. Louis retained the rest of the county's area. So again, this specific situation is confusing because of the naming -- the County of St. Louis no longer contains the City of St. Louis. There are frequent debates about whether the city and county would be better off reuniting in order to better deal with situations like this.

But in general, I like the concept of independent cities. For a geographically isolated, highly populated city like San Francisco, why complicate things by adding an additional layer of government between the city and state? The city can easily handle those "county" functions.

This is of course a different concept than a unified city-county government (sometimes called a unigov), which are usually the result of two separate entities merging. Those can be much more complicated due to the fact that unigovs often contain other cities that still get their county services from the unigov but retain their own city functions.

Sorry to continue this tangent but I think it's a fascinating subject... back to soccer now...
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: LAW 21 on June 20, 2018, 04:51:19 PM
Just heard on the news that FCC's training facility will be located at Expressway Park in Milford.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on June 20, 2018, 08:35:10 PM
FC Cincinnati reportedly has found training facility site

FC Cincinnati has apparently identified the site of its new training facility.

The owner of softball complex Expressway Park in Milford has told teams he signed a purchase agreement to sell the facility just off Interstate 275 on U.S. 50 to a non-softball entity and will be shutting down in early July. The facility will change hands on July 7 but the last games will be played there July 8. 

Soccer club FC Cincinnati is reportedly buying the complex to use as a training facility. A source told WKRC-TV that's the case. FC Cincinnati has been looking for a site to establish a training facility where it can conduct practices on grass fields and house workout facilities.

FC Cincinnati has “no updates on our potential training facility or its location or any anticipated announcement about the future facility,” team spokeswoman Lizz Summers told me.

More below:
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/06/20/fc-cincinnati-reportedly-has-found-training.html

(https://mediaassets.wcpo.com/photo/2018/06/20/WCPO_Expressway_Park_1529510119395_90336980_ver1.0_640_480.jpg)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on June 26, 2018, 04:24:16 PM
FC Cincinnati announces details of their training facility, with three full size fields (two grass, one turf): https://www.fccincinnati.com/news_article/show/929970

Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on June 27, 2018, 12:11:09 AM
FC Cincinnati shares plans for $30M facility

(https://media.bizj.us/view/img/10957021/18118fctraining180516origrgb0001*750xx4000-2250-0-145.jpg)

FC Cincinnati is planning a huge $30 million soccer facility in Milford that it expects to be a “world-class team training complex” where it will hold its practice sessions and build a youth academy.

The project will cover nearly 24 acres at the Expressway Park softball site on U.S. 50 near Interstate 275. FC Cincinnati plans to have the facility fully operational by July 2019. The club signed a purchase agreement last week to buy Expressway Park.

FC Cincinnati plans to begin training at the new complex in January. It will use temporary team facilities until it finishes construction next summer.

The agreement with the city of Milford, Clermont County, the Clermont County Port Authority and the Clermont County Ohio Convention and Visitors Bureau still requires local government approval. Milford City Council meets tonight and the Clermont County Commissioners meet Wednesday morning, with both planning to consider FC Cincinnati’s plans.

More below:
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/06/26/fc-cincinnati-shares-plans-for-30m-facility-photos.html
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on July 17, 2018, 05:26:55 PM
FC Cincinnati hires branding giant for new MLS identity

FC Cincinnati has taken the first concrete step in forging a new brand identity for its entry next season in Major League Soccer.

The club has hired branding giant Interbrand, a global brand consulting firm, to head up the development of its brand strategy and identity for its inaugural MLS season.

Interbrand will update FC Cincinnati’s logo and visual brand identity as well as developing verbal branding to share FC Cincinnati’s story. Interbrand will use fan-based research in its process of developing the new branding. The club’s Fan Council has already provided significant input.

More below:
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/07/17/fc-cincinnati-hires-branding-giant-for-new-mls.html

(https://media.bizj.us/view/img/10923488/fccmlsch7115*1200xx1800-1013-0-94.jpg)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on July 17, 2018, 06:12:43 PM
^I'm excited for the rebrand. Interbrand did great, bold work for the Juventus rebrand in early 2017: https://www.underconsideration.com/brandnew/archives/new_logo_and_identity_for_juventus_by_interbrand.php

Maybe after Interbrand finishes their redesign of FCC's brand, we'll sign Ronaldo.... that's how it works, right?

I'm a big FCC fan and have been a season ticket holder since the first season, but the FCC branding definitely needs some work. It will be fun to see the identity evolve as they have the foundation in place for a really great team identity, if they can leverage what's great about the existing brand and build on it for a more cohesive, refined look.

Adidas has an exclusive right for all MLS kits, so Interbrand will work with Adidas on this.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Columbo on July 18, 2018, 12:15:39 PM
FC Cincinnati game tonight hosting Charlotte will be on ESPN2:

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/soccer/fc-cincinnati/2018/07/16/fc-cincinnati-espn-2-and-midseason-usl-standings-hoyte-koch-charlotte-independence/790538002/
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on July 19, 2018, 04:52:02 PM
FC Cincinnati's MLS ticket prices soar for 2019

Some FC Cincinnati season tickets will double in cost next year when it joins Major League Soccer, with ticket prices in two other sections climbing more than 70 percent.

Season ticket prices have climbed as the club makes the leap from the second-tier United Soccer League to the top-level Major League Soccer. But the team has added four price levels, largely on the lower end of pricing. And it will sell season tickets in the upper deck on the east end of the stadium for the first time.

The club announced 2019 season ticket prices Thursday, giving fans the first look at how much ticket prices will rise. FC Cincinnati hasn’t announced single-game ticket prices for 2019 yet.

The cheapest tickets, general admission seats behind the south goal, have doubled. They’ll be $199 for the season, or $11.71 per match, next year. They were $99 this season, or $5.82 per match.

More below:
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/07/19/fc-cincinnatismls-ticket-prices-soar-for-2019.html
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on July 19, 2018, 05:12:34 PM
"ticket prices soar" is such an exaggeration. Yes, prices went up. But almost everyone online is happy about the prices. If you look at comments on their twitter and facebook posts, you'll see almost everyone is relieved that prices will remain among the lowest in MLS while we are at Nippert. The cheapest tickets were absurdly cheap while in the USL compared to any MLS team.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ucgrady on July 20, 2018, 10:41:34 AM
Dumb question: Is FC considered an expansion and therefore getting all new players from an expansion draft (similar to the Las Vegas Knights in NHL last year), or are they simply 'stepping up' from USL to MLS keeping their contracted players and adding new?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on July 20, 2018, 10:49:22 AM
It's a mixture of the two. Technically, the MLS version of FC Cincinnati will be different business from the USL version of FC Cincinnati. Technically, every player that joins the MLS team will have a brand new contract with the MLS team, even if players previously signed multi-year contracts with the USL team.

FCC will sign some current players to their MLS team, but the remaining players will be acquired through an expansion draft, the regular MLS draft, and other signings that every other team could make. The expansion draft will allow FCC to select up to 5 players (with max of one player from any one team).

It's anticipated that about 5-9 players will carry over from the USL team, but no one is certain who that will be or exactly how many.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Brutus_buckeye on July 20, 2018, 10:50:45 AM
The vast majority of the team will be new. The draft will take a few players and they will look to sign and develop some international players too. The holdover players on the team this year will likely play minor roles after the step up to the MLS.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ucgrady on July 20, 2018, 11:27:39 AM
That's interesting. The fanbase didn't wane when we lost Mitch or Djiby so I don't think a completely new roster will hurt any feeling of connection to FC Cincinnati, but it is an interesting position to be rooting for a whole new group of people (though as a UK basketball fan I've gotten used to it with one-and-done). Maybe in the draft we can steal Mitch back from Atlanta so I can break out my Mitch Says No shirt again...
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: YABO713 on July 20, 2018, 11:27:48 AM
It's a mixture of the two. Technically, the MLS version of FC Cincinnati will be different business from the USL version of FC Cincinnati. Technically, every player that joins the MLS team will have a brand new contract with the MLS team, even if players previously signed multi-year contracts with the USL team.

FCC will sign some current players to their MLS team, but the remaining players will be acquired through an expansion draft, the regular MLS draft, and other signings that every other team could make. The expansion draft will allow FCC to select up to 5 players (with max of one player from any one team).

It's anticipated that about 5-9 players will carry over from the USL team, but no one is certain who that will be or exactly how many.

I'd reallllllllly love to see a relegation and promotion set up. Absolute travesty that the players that essentially built the club won't be able to enjoy the fruits of their labor.

An additional few signings is obviously necessary, but bleh.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on July 20, 2018, 11:49:29 AM
I would love to see Pro/Rel as well, but it's such a long way away. The only way I could have seen it being implemented is if the 2026 World Cup was contingent on having pro/rel established. But that ship has sailed.

At this point, I don't know if it will ever happen. Implementing it too soon would be catastrophic for the league(s).
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: YABO713 on July 20, 2018, 11:56:38 AM
I would love to see Pro/Rel as well, but it's such a long way away. The only way I could have seen it being implemented is if the 2026 World Cup was contingent on having pro/rel established. But that ship has sailed.

At this point, I don't know if it will ever happen. Implementing it too soon would be catastrophic for the league(s).

I disagree. I think implementing it too soon would be catastrophic for team sponsors, and that's why it will never happen.

To me, one of the most charming things about the underdog teams that get promoted in Europe is that you'll have Tottenham playing a game at Bournemouth, with a capacity of 11,000. It's inspiring, it's what sports in its purest sense is about.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ryanlammi on July 20, 2018, 01:58:27 PM
If promotion existed starting last year, Louisville City FC would have been promoted to MLS. They probably have a total player salary of about $750,000. When their coach left to go to Orlando City SC, they promoted three players to be co-head coaches. They had no plan for filling a vacancy in their technical staff. Their technical staff page is literally blank (https://www.louisvillecityfc.com/technical-staff).

An MLS roster is typically in the $10 million range. The lowest player salary in 2017 was $5 million. That doesn't include the huge increase in spending that you need for the technical staff, front office, marketing, etc.

Louisville City would also be playing at Slugger Field. Literally a minor league baseball field. And Louisville's situation is better than many others in the league.

There are probably only 3 teams that could ramp up operations to compete in MLS if they won the league (Nashville, Cincinnati, and Sacramento) and two of those teams are moving up to MLS.

Again, I would love to see pro/rel, but it simply isn't realistic until we have a profitable division 2 league where most teams have control of stadiums and much richer owners.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: JaceTheAce41 on July 20, 2018, 04:02:48 PM
It's a mixture of the two. Technically, the MLS version of FC Cincinnati will be different business from the USL version of FC Cincinnati. Technically, every player that joins the MLS team will have a brand new contract with the MLS team, even if players previously signed multi-year contracts with the USL team.

FCC will sign some current players to their MLS team, but the remaining players will be acquired through an expansion draft, the regular MLS draft, and other signings that every other team could make. The expansion draft will allow FCC to select up to 5 players (with max of one player from any one team).

It's anticipated that about 5-9 players will carry over from the USL team, but no one is certain who that will be or exactly how many.

I'd reallllllllly love to see a relegation and promotion set up. Absolute travesty that the players that essentially built the club won't be able to enjoy the fruits of their labor.

An additional few signings is obviously necessary, but bleh.

That doesn't happen in pro/rel leagues. Typically, a team gets promoted to the top level, takes on a bunch of debt to get players that will help them stay up and if it fails; they unload those players.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: YABO713 on July 20, 2018, 04:05:03 PM
It's a mixture of the two. Technically, the MLS version of FC Cincinnati will be different business from the USL version of FC Cincinnati. Technically, every player that joins the MLS team will have a brand new contract with the MLS team, even if players previously signed multi-year contracts with the USL team.

FCC will sign some current players to their MLS team, but the remaining players will be acquired through an expansion draft, the regular MLS draft, and other signings that every other team could make. The expansion draft will allow FCC to select up to 5 players (with max of one player from any one team).

It's anticipated that about 5-9 players will carry over from the USL team, but no one is certain who that will be or exactly how many.

I'd reallllllllly love to see a relegation and promotion set up. Absolute travesty that the players that essentially built the club won't be able to enjoy the fruits of their labor.

An additional few signings is obviously necessary, but bleh.

That doesn't happen in pro/rel leagues. Typically, a team gets promoted to the top level, takes on a bunch of debt to get players that will help them stay up and if it fails; they unload those players.

Not entirely true. Fulham still have the majority of their team, as do Wolves. As a matter of fact, Grealish to Spurs is one of the bigger moves from the Championship level and Villa didn't even get promoted.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: cincydave8 on July 23, 2018, 07:59:00 AM
FC Cincinnati meanwhile continues to roll through USL play. 9 points last week and 10 match unbeaten streak.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Cincy513 on July 23, 2018, 09:20:50 AM
It's a mixture of the two. Technically, the MLS version of FC Cincinnati will be different business from the USL version of FC Cincinnati. Technically, every player that joins the MLS team will have a brand new contract with the MLS team, even if players previously signed multi-year contracts with the USL team.

FCC will sign some current players to their MLS team, but the remaining players will be acquired through an expansion draft, the regular MLS draft, and other signings that every other team could make. The expansion draft will allow FCC to select up to 5 players (with max of one player from any one team).

It's anticipated that about 5-9 players will carry over from the USL team, but no one is certain who that will be or exactly how many.

I'd reallllllllly love to see a relegation and promotion set up. Absolute travesty that the players that essentially built the club won't be able to enjoy the fruits of their labor.

An additional few signings is obviously necessary, but bleh.
Probably half of the players on this years team weren't with us last year and only a couple are still left from the first year.  We've already had large roster turnover so having another one when moving to MLS isn't anything new. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: YABO713 on July 23, 2018, 09:54:40 AM
It's a mixture of the two. Technically, the MLS version of FC Cincinnati will be different business from the USL version of FC Cincinnati. Technically, every player that joins the MLS team will have a brand new contract with the MLS team, even if players previously signed multi-year contracts with the USL team.

FCC will sign some current players to their MLS team, but the remaining players will be acquired through an expansion draft, the regular MLS draft, and other signings that every other team could make. The expansion draft will allow FCC to select up to 5 players (with max of one player from any one team).

It's anticipated that about 5-9 players will carry over from the USL team, but no one is certain who that will be or exactly how many.

I'd reallllllllly love to see a relegation and promotion set up. Absolute travesty that the players that essentially built the club won't be able to enjoy the fruits of their labor.

An additional few signings is obviously necessary, but bleh.
Probably half of the players on this years team weren't with us last year and only a couple are still left from the first year.  We've already had large roster turnover so having another one when moving to MLS isn't anything new. 

I get all of that, and @ryanlammi made some relevant points that I wasn't entirely aware of...

Nonetheless, I'd still love to see relegation and promotion. I think USSF or CONCACAF could create a list of "promotion eligible" teams in the USL's highest division. If only one of those eligible team finishes in the top 3, then only one team gets promoted and one gets relegated. If every team in the top 3 is approved for promotion, then all three would go.

I think this would be a fun way to incentivize clubs to make their USL stadiums in such a fashion that would allow for expansion, and would also allow bigger money to be invested in the USL - if I'm worth $400 million dollars, and I know I only have to put $5 million down for a USL team, and get approved for a soccer specific stadium with 5,000+, but I have a chance at promotion if my organization is sustainably ran and well funded, that ROI is MUCHHHH greater than the down payment required to start an MLS expansion.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on July 23, 2018, 11:13:33 AM
I think this would be a fun way to incentivize clubs to make their USL stadiums in such a fashion that would allow for expansion, and would also allow bigger money to be invested in the USL - if I'm worth $400 million dollars, and I know I only have to put $5 million down for a USL team, and get approved for a soccer specific stadium with 5,000+, but I have a chance at promotion if my organization is sustainably ran and well funded, that ROI is MUCHHHH greater than the down payment required to start an MLS expansion.

USL owners already have that incentive (see: FC Cincinnati), and MLS can modify the standards/rules over the coming years however is necessary. The US is such a huge country with so many cities, I think MLS should continue to gradually add teams, if/when new ownership groups are sufficiently well organized, until the league has ~32 teams.

The bigger question would be if/how to handle relegating under-performing MLS teams. That's not something that any owners (or fans) would be particularly excited about. The US has a unique approach to dealing with under-performing teams: owners can move their team to a new city (see: Columbus Crew SC). In most other countries/leagues, that's basically unheard of.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on July 25, 2018, 04:39:59 PM
FC Cincinnati shows confidence by extending coach’s contract

FC Cincinnati’s ownership likes the job coach Alan Koch is doing so much that it decided to lock him up for another year by extending his contract.

FC Cincinnati extended Koch’s contract by a year to take him through the 2020 season. The move cements Koch’s status as the first coach in FC Cincinnati’s Major League Soccer history starting next season as well as showing the club’s confidence in his performance. FC Cincinnati was awarded an MLS expansion franchise on May 29.

Koch, who took over FC Cincinnati before the 2017 season, has led the United Soccer League club to first place in the Eastern Conference with a 13-3-5 record. His overall regular-season coaching record with FC Cincinnati is 25-13-15.

More below:
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/07/25/fc-cincinnati-shows-confidence-by-extending-coach.html
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Tobias C on July 31, 2018, 03:04:12 PM
FC Cincinnati has made their first two MLS signings in Fanendo Adi and Fatai Alashe.

https://www.mlssoccer.com/post/2018/07/30/fc-cincinnati-announce-forward-fanendo-adi-clubs-first-mls-player

Pretty impressive. I already have faith that they will at least hit the ground running better than Minnesota did. Adi gives them a proven, star goal scorer. Alashe will be more of a project but will definitely contribute.

Im a Crew fan, not a FCC fan, but I'm already getting excited about the games against each other.
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jwulsin on August 01, 2018, 03:53:37 PM
Another signing, Pa Konate (left back): https://www.fccincinnati.com/news_article/show/938344
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on August 06, 2018, 06:01:25 PM
FC Cincinnati sets sights on 25,000 season tickets for inaugural MLS season

FC Cincinnati could sell as many as 25,000 season tickets for its inaugural Major League Soccer season at Nippert Stadium, officials said on Monday.

FC Cincinnati has added 1,000 season ticket accounts since it started accepting deposits, according to a news release from the club. Because each account has multiple tickets associated with it, the total season tickets sold is more than 1,000, according to the club. It had capped season ticket sales for 2018 at 18,000 because of pre-sold multiple-game package and single-game sales.

More below:
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/08/06/fc-cincinnati-sets-sights-on-25-000-season-tickets.html
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on August 22, 2018, 05:24:08 PM
FC Cincinnati’s training facility just cleared a hurdle

FC Cincinnati’s training facility planned for Milford got a boost on Wednesday as Clermont County commissioners voted to approve a tax increase to help make it happen.

The commissioners voted 2-1 on the 1 percent lodging tax increase that will go into effect Oct. 1.

The money generated from the tax will be used toward the $5 million cost of land for the soccer complex. The city of Milford has agreed to pay $3.5 million of the cost through the sale of securities, and the $244,000 expected to be generated by the tax will likely be used for debt service. FC Cincinnati will pay the remaining $1.5 million for the purchase.

More below:
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/08/22/fc-cincinnati-s-training-facility-just-cleared-a.html

(https://media.bizj.us/view/img/10957021/18118fctraining180516origrgb0001*1200xx4000-2250-0-145.jpg)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on August 30, 2018, 04:53:02 PM
FC Cincinnati wants fan input for its inaugural MLS season

FC Cincinnati is trying to gather input to prepare for its inaugural Major League Soccer season next year by initiating an in-depth fan survey.

The team is seeking fan input about “potential initiatives” at its new $200 million-plus stadium it’s building in the West End. It also wants to gauge interest in various seating and hospitality plans and get input on fan preference for its game-day atmosphere.

The club is emailing all fans who have previously bought tickets through FC Cincinnati with a link to an online survey beginning today.

“From the beginning, we’ve strived to be a club that not just listened to its fans but also heard what they said,” Jeff Smith, FC Cincinnati's vice president of ticket sales and service, said in a news release. “As we move into the club’s next stage in MLS, we want to know exactly what our fans are thinking and what their opinions are on a variety of topics. With us moving to a new league and building a downtown stadium, we want to make sure we’re getting a comprehensive look at what our fans want and hope for out of these moves.”

More below:
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/08/30/fc-cincinnati-wants-fan-input-for-its-inaugural.html
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on September 05, 2018, 08:01:17 PM
Owner born into billion-dollar fortune avoids paying taxes:
https://www.wcpo.com/sports/fc-cincinnati/fc-cincinnati-could-have-a-practice-facility-by-next-summer-but-why-won-t-it-pay-taxes-
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Cincy513 on September 06, 2018, 09:28:42 AM
Smart businessman gets the best deal possible for his business.  Not exactly a shocker. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on September 06, 2018, 11:20:28 AM
FC Cincinnati training facility gets final OK

FC Cincinnati’s $30 million training complex can now move forward after putting the final piece of its financing puzzle in place.

The Clermont County Port Authority on Wednesday approved issuing $30 million in lease revenue bonds to finance the construction costs of the facility.

Under the agreement, the Port Authority will lease 24 acres on U.S. 50 in the city of Milford and the buildings that will be constructed there to FC Cincinnati. The franchise, which will join Major League Soccer next season, will privately purchase the bonds. The project’s expected $1 million in construction materials will be exempted from sales tax as a result of the agreement.

More below:
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/09/06/fc-cincinnati-training-facility-gets-final-ok.html
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on September 06, 2018, 11:35:51 AM
Smart businessman gets the best deal possible for his business.  Not exactly a shocker. 

He's not any smarter than the average immigrant who opens a corner store.  The difference is he was born into a huge fortune.  The corner store pays a much higher rate of taxation than the guy born into it. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Cincy513 on September 06, 2018, 02:41:14 PM
Smart businessman gets the best deal possible for his business.  Not exactly a shocker. 

He's not any smarter than the average immigrant who opens a corner store.  The difference is he was born into a huge fortune.  The corner store pays a much higher rate of taxation than the guy born into it. 
He's co-CEO of a fortune 500 company, I'd say he's slightly smarter then "the average immigrant."  Big money getting big tax breaks isn't breaking news in this country it happens all the time. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on September 06, 2018, 02:59:44 PM
^His dad founded the company.  There are still Fords on Ford's board, 100~ years after the old man died.   

The second I heard Lindner was starting a soccer team and Berding was his point man, I was out.  Another giant money grab at the public's expense. 
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: edale on September 06, 2018, 04:21:01 PM
Smart businessman gets the best deal possible for his business.  Not exactly a shocker. 

He's not any smarter than the average immigrant who opens a corner store.  The difference is he was born into a huge fortune.  The corner store pays a much higher rate of taxation than the guy born into it. 
Big money getting big tax breaks isn't breaking news in this country it happens all the time.

So we should all just be cool with it?
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: jmecklenborg on September 19, 2018, 01:02:20 PM
Why must everything involving this soccer team be so sleazy? Oh yeah, Lindner III didn't fall far from the tree. 
https://www.wcpo.com/news/insider/lawsuit-alleging-secret-illegal-meetings-by-milford-leaders-may-jeopardize-fc-cincinnati-complex
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: Pdrome513 on September 19, 2018, 01:13:58 PM
Why must everything involving this soccer team be so sleazy? Oh yeah, Lindner III didn't fall far from the tree. 
https://www.wcpo.com/news/insider/lawsuit-alleging-secret-illegal-meetings-by-milford-leaders-may-jeopardize-fc-cincinnati-complex

Accepting your premise that there do seem to be issues around most corners, the reasoning is likely that FCC is starting MLS play in 2019, and as such things need to move at a faster pace than normal. FCC doesn't want to be another Minnesota. That is, they want to be competing for titles right out of the gate. Hence the added urgency in terms of getting all their infrastructure up and running ASAP. The philosophy seems to be, if they have to cut corners here and there, so be it. If I was worth $x billion, I might think the same way. (I'm not, and I don't.)
Title: Re: FC Cincinnati Discussion
Post by: ColDayMan on September 19, 2018, 05:30:36 PM
Mercy Health lands naming rights for FC Cincinnati training complex

(https://media.bizj.us/view/img/11051346/fccmercyhealthtrainingcenter1*750xx6000-3372-0-0.jpg)

Mercy Health has scored the naming rights for FC Cincinnati’s planned training complex in Milford.

Cincinnati-based Mercy Health, which operates five local hospitals and 16 others in Ohio, declined to disclose how much the system will pay to be the title sponsor.

Construction began this afternoon for the Mercy Health Training Center, which is to cost $30 million. A 30,000-square-foot building is to rise on 24 acres off Lila Avenue (U.S. 50). The site near Interstate 275 in Clermont County is to include several practice fields for the soccer team.

More below:
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/09/19/mercy-health-nabs-naming-rights-for-fc-cincinnati.html