http://www.worldfootballinsider.com/Story.aspx?id=32556

I agree with you that Icahn stadium, while a good idea for a potential home for the Cosmos, would require a lot of work and development. As you said, Randall’s Island is very small, so heavy congestion and traffic could prove to be very problematic. A great deal of work would have to be put in to improve the stadium and the grounds surrounding the stadium to create a fan-friendly and enjoyable environment for all.

The issue of politics in the city will undoubtedly slow and hinder any plans of putting a team on the island, and I’m sure any changes or improvements to the island would be heavily monitored and followed by the city board of development.

As for the sewage plant, this strikes an obvious problem and one that would undoubtedly need to be dealt with if a team and a healthy following is ever able to play soccer on Randall’s island again.

The situation is far from perfect, but certainly possible to put a team on Randall’s, which would be appropriate indeed as it relates to the earliest roots of Cosmos soccer.

Icahn Stadium? That is an interesting one! For those readers who don’t know, Icahn Stadium is named for the billionaire take-no-prisoners financier Carl Icahn. I agree with you that it’s a potential venue, but it would need a great deal of development. The necessary expansion would consume a great deal of space on tiny Randall’s Island, so if this gets taken further, expect the usual messy NYC politics.

Something else strikes me as a problem – there is a sewage processing plant on Randall’s Island. For a few months last year, I coached my son’s soccer team at the playing fields there, and there were days, depending on which direction the wind was blowing, when the odour from the plant would leave you feeling nauseous. That would have to be dealt with in some way.

It is interesting that you bring up celebrity-driven development and the way it could potentially affect MLS in the future. The salary cap that the league uses is very interesting in that it allows teams to only to have a small number of players that can make above a certain amount. I believe the current salary cap in the league is 2.3 million per team, and teams are able to have a small number of “designated” players that are able to make a larger salary what does not count against the cap. It is kind of a weird system, but it prevents players from earning gigantic contracts and therefore in effect prevents a team from fielding a celebrity-ridden roster. The league’s policy and salary cap have come under much scrutiny and the mechanics of it are being changed every few years.

In regard to your point about a possible playing venue for the team, one place that comes to mind is Icahn Stadium on Randall’s Island in the East River across from Manhattan. Randall’s Island was the home of the Cosmos before their move to Giants Stadium, and they played in a facility called Downing Stadium. Downing has since been replaced by Icahn, which from what I hear has a premier FIFA certified soccer field complete with artificial surface, fencing, lighting and bleachers. The facility would need to be expanded and enlarged to meet the league’s guidelines for stadium seating and other upgrades, but I believe that this is one very good possibility for a place where the team could play.

I’m thinking about the practicalities at the same time. Firstly, who would a renewed Cosmos sign? There’s been much discussion on this site about the perils of celebrity-driven development – so how could the Cosmos avoid that? Secondly, where would they play? Is there anywhere suitable in the 5 boroughs which make up the city? The Red Bulls are opening up their own stadium next year in Harrison, NJ, which underlines your point about them being a team for the greater metro area. Notwithstanding the fact that the Cosmos played at Giants Stadium, also in Jersey, I think that the kind of vision for a Mark II version you’ve outlined here necessitates playing in New York.

I don’t know too much about the Houston/Dallas rivalry, but I would say to the best of my knowledge that the two teams probably have a little bad blood between them. Houston has had great success in MLS since joining the league, while Dallas has struggled of late, so I’m sure Dallas would consider Houston its in-state foe.

The movement for the Cosmos is small, but growing. I have found a couple of blogs and articles online in support of the team and I hope these feelings continue to grow. I appreciate the support for the movement and think it is great that the Cosmos are receiving support from Europe as well.

As for the rivalries for the expansion teams, I have heard good things about Seattle, Vancouver, and Portland developing great rivalries in the northwestern part of the country. The game is very big in the pacific northwest, so I anticipate these three teams to compete fiercely for supremacy. I would imagine that Philadelphia will establish an interesting rivalry with DC United, which is always one of the league’s better teams. I also believe that Philly will develop a rivalry with New York based on how intensely the two cities compete in other major sports (see hockey, baseball, and American football).

Do Houston and Dallas not have a rivalry of sorts? Is there a movement for the Cosmos? Would love to sign up. Where do you see as being the main rivals for an expansion team after Vancouver, Portland and Philadelphia start.

It is interesting that you bring up the promotion/relegation argument for MLS. At least for the time being, I do not believe MLS will use a promo/releg system with the USL for a number of reasons. As opposed to teams in Europe, MLS teams aren’t clubs, they are franchises, and in order to be granted an expansion team, owners need to pay between 35-40 million dollars. Not many owners would be willing to pay that type of money only to have their team relegated after one season. I also do not believe that MLS’s fan base is large enough yet, and if attendance in MLS games is low, attendance in a relegation league will be even lower. I hope one day MLS uses the system that is in place in Europe, but for the time being, I don’t see it happening. MLS is more focused on expansion and building soccer-specific stadiums for all of the teams.

Regarding merging MLS and USL, could you ever envisage a multi-tiered league system in the US, with promotions and relegations?

Steven I definitely agree that single entities like David Beckham are not exactly what MLS needs to grow and develop in the future. Much like Beckham, the Cosmos grew in popularity due to their celebrity names and flashy style of play. Although this is not a perfect solution to gaining a following in the United States, I believe that the Cosmos will do wonders for attracting curious viewers to the sport and from there anything can happen. MLS needs more exposure in its own country, and the Cosmos can play a very big hand in that. In NASL day’s the Cosmos popularity prevented the other teams in the league from growing and developing, but with the different league structure of MLS, I don’t really see that being a problem in the current time.

Steve A, you are right about Tampa Bay, they will be joining the USL-1 in the coming year or two, as well as a team named F.C. New York, based out of either Queens or Long Island. While I don’t believe that MLS and USL-1 will ever merge entirely, MLS is currently taking teams from USL-1 (Seattle, Portland, and Vancouver are/were USL-1 teams before being granted expansion status in MLS). Montreal Impact, one of the USL-1 top teams is also pushing for an expansion franchise. As far as other markets are concerned, I believe Montreal will get its team, and I believe a team will be placed in the Carolina region of the country as well. And of course, I’ll be pushing for my Cosmos too.

I also noticed that the Tampa Bay Rowdies have reformed in USL-1 recently. Not sure if they’re actively in that league until next year though? Could the two leagues ever merge? Do you think that the MLS would look to expand into new markets first?

I certainly hope to see the Cosmos back in action sooner rather than later, here’s hoping your enthusiasm catches and a few decision makers take note.

One thing I feel about this is that the Cosmos reap the same benefits as David Beckham brought, but without the reliance on one player. Ben Cohen, in an article last week on here said that we need to forget about Beckham single entities that make US football good. I wonder despite the advantages of having a team such as the Cosmos does that hold back other teams and prevent them from becoming big in their own right?