Jan 4, 2013, 2:45 PM EST
Some stories are so silly that I need some time, and maybe even a second or third cup of coffee, to get my arms fully around it. They look so out of place that I need some extra minutes or hours to ensure I have not missed something – or to determine whether I’m having a Back to the Future moment, where I’ve somehow slipped back in time.
This morning we saw a story out of New York that says baseball’s New York Mets are interested in bringing an MLS team to Citi Field.
Well, isn’t that special? Personally, I thought we were past the time in Major League Soccer where NFL teams or MLB clubs thoughtfully and graciously propose that one of those cute little professional soccer clubs take advantage of their fine facilities. “I mean, wouldn’t it be great if we get a soccer team in here to fill some dates. I mean … there’s a soccer league here, right?”
I shake my head.
This is a little bit like me saying I have some interest in dating one of the darlins from Indie music group Those Darlins. Perhaps (and, truly, this a ginormous “perhaps”) there was a time in the past when this might have been possible.
But that horse is way, way out of the barn. Now it doesn’t make sense for about 117 different reasons – not the least of which is that I am absolutely positive none of them want to have a thing to do with me.
So why would I ever consider getting the word out that I might be interested in one of them? Great question.
And yet, here you go. According to this story: “The Mets are ‘very interested and fully capable’ of bringing Major League Soccer to Citi Field, City Councilman Peter Vallone Jr. (D-Astoria) announced Thursday.”
Right. Except for that part about actually landing a team. Because that’s not really their call. It may come as some surprise to a local politician, but the Mets (or anyone else beyond the MLS board of governors) don’t get to say who joins or doesn’t join MLS.
This is just local politics, I suppose. It’s someone saying something to local press to look like they are standing up for local constituency. I guess. But it generally demonstrates an ignorance of a situation … not to mention a certain amount of disrespect for MLS.
An MLS spokesperson (someone who works as a special PR consultant on the league’s ongoing efforts to build a stadium and add a team in Queens) says in the piece that the idea is a “non-starter.”
According to the story, “The move would boost the baseball team’s coffers and eliminate potential competition from a $300 million MLS soccer stadium proposed for Flushing Meadows-Corona Park.”
Yes, because what Major League Soccer is most concerned about is “boosting the baseball’s teams coffers.” I am sure that if I were to sit and have a delicious café latte today with MLS commissioner Don Garber, one of the first items on our “chat list” would be how MLS can best add money into a sport that has a 100-plus year head start in generating U.S. fan interest.
What MLS really is interested in: developing that 25,000-seat stadium at the eastern end of Flushing Meadows-Corona Park, and then identifying the right group of soccer backers who want to own Major League Soccer’s 20th franchise.
That is the venue that makes sense for MLS. And what makes sense for MLS (certainly in conjunction with community interests and concerns) is where this story starts and stops.
- Manchester United’s Jonny Evans denies spitting, but Cisse apologizes as ban looms (video) 0
- 2015 MLS season preview: New York Red Bulls 0
- Who, if anybody, won the CBA negotiations in MLS: The players or the league? 2
- MLS, union come together to avoid calamitous work stoppage 7
- Wednesday’s Premier League roundup: Chelsea, Man City win; six of top seven prevail 0
- Jose Mourinho says his Chelsea team “were brothers on the pitch” in crucial win 0