Don't claim to know all the 'ins & outs' of the soccer system since it isn't the same, so I stand corrected, PattyShack.

USL soccer is comparable to PCL AAA play; it would be the next level to the highest caliber of play in the U.S. is all I am saying. Many MLS franchises now have USL affiliates; again, don't know if they act in the same capacity of AAA, my reference is limited to what I have read--NASL OKC Rayo vs USL Oklahoma City Energy FC in that the arrangement is reminiscent of an MLB club's AAA farm team in the caliber of play.

So forgive me if my knowledge of being politically correct offended you and any others. Just want to maintain the highest level of soccer sports entertainment available for our city.

...and if you really want to know the truth; based on the Funks' previous track records, not so sure their group would be the ones to get us to MLS; IIRC they had a good opportunity to bring MLS to OKC (Pre NBA in OKC) in 2002 when the franchise fee was $10 million; now it's nothing less that $100 million.


Don't think OKC is even on the MLS radar at this time, there's a decent sized waiting list in larger markets. If this was for MLS I would be all in on building the stadium if it was a first class 200 mil + project. That would draw fans in the 15-20k range every game. What they are proposing here is not even in the same ballpark. I just don't think it's worth it. This would be a gift to the owners.

Don't think OKC is even on the MLS radar at this time, there's a decent sized waiting list in larger markets. If this was for MLS I would be all in on building the stadium if it was a first class 200 mil + project. That would draw fans in the 15-20k range every game. What they are proposing here is not even in the same ballpark. I just don't think it's worth it. This would be a gift to the owners.

'First class $200 mil + project...' thought you were initially against the stadium because of the price, you did say the owners should foot that bill. Unfortunately, OKC doesn't have a wealth of potential owners like Sacramento & St. Louis (potential markets on MLS' radar).

Clarification purposes: The stadium will not be a gift to the owners, it will be solely owned & operated by the City of Oklahoma City or its designee agent like an SMG management group who have access to events they could book into the venue to get more use from it. The lease agreement with NBA Thunder & PCL Dodgers pays for their operational expenses.

MAPS 4 Stadium will be similar to the operations of Chesapeake Energy Arena & Chickasaw Bricktown Ballpark--solely owned by our city.

Energy FC will be the anchor tenant paying for upkeep and maintenance with a least agreement. The stadium project won't need an endowment with a USL tenant on the waiting list.

You are correct about larger markets, MLS wants 2 million metro population markets with name recognition like Sacramento & Cincinnati; OKC has name-recognition--with an NBA franchise.

Probably why you won't see our sister city (Tulsa) in MLS (name-recognition) unless a billionaire like George Kaiser steps up with a mega investment as he did with The Gathering Place. Tulsa is more capable of supporting Major League Soccer than OKC, they don't have an NBA franchise in their market.

Except for the end of the NBA season, the seasons don't overlap much but my thinking is soccer would mostly be a separate audience? Maybe I'm mistaken.

Except for the end of the NBA season, the seasons don't overlap much but my thinking is soccer would mostly be a separate audience? Maybe I'm mistaken.

USL/MLS: March to October,

both professional soccer leagues; each team playing 34 games


[October, March, April = shared months]

NBA: October 2019 – April 2020; each team playing 82 games.

Seasons overlap October, March & April are 3 months the NBA and USL/MLS share.

Watched the presentation today and to me the Chesapeake Arena upgrades are a no-brainer to me. Not including the upkeep/maintenance items (which are the most important but boring) the package is well rounded and would greatly improve the total experience of this arena. As someone who uses the arena quite frequently for both concerts and Thunder games (Loud City), the best part of the experience right now is the atmosphere not the actual arena itself. The NE corridor has always needed to be widened as it is has the most foot traffic this would fulfill that need. I suspect that even with the park and streetcar being closer to the new SW entrance, this NE entrance will continue to be the primary entrance since many people still park in Bricktown/Cox Center and walk. If anything were to get cut, IMO it should be the new scoreboard but again that would improve the experience and quite frankly, most arenas have much nicer scoreboards which relates to competitiveness in amenities offered by arenas. These improvements everyone will get to enjoy which is why I am excited at the possibility.

That being said, if things needed to get cut the thunder practice facilities should be the first to go. As someone who has gone through collegiate sports recruitment very recently, I completely understand and agree that these facilities are vital to players and their importance should not be minimized. However, I'm not sure if this is the proper way to fund the improvements as the public would not have access to something their tax dollars paid millions to. I see both sides to this debate but I think the Thunder should pay for the improvements of that specific facility and we should help with the arena improvements.

Also, there were renderings presented that show exactly what they plan on doing but I couldn't get a good picture of them to post here.

City Channel 20 Live

City Government meeting in progress...


https://www.youtube.com/user/cityofokc/live Inactive, someone needs to end the video recording.

Chesapeake Energy Arena enhancements: advance to -3 hours, 20 minutes on the stretch band.

We need to keep our arena up to date.

Sampling of the groups requesting MAPS 4 funds; our city has grown far beyond what I imagined. You'll need nothing less than a $1 billion MAPS 4 initiative to provide some assistance to help these groups.

the arena upgrades might be enough for me to vote for maps 4

the arena upgrades might be enough for me to vote for maps 4

I was thinking the same thing. I think the Chesapeake arena improvements is enough to get a maps 4 vote passed. Probably why the more riskier things have been thrown out like streetcar expansion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFYDtgwJLog

the arena upgrades might be enough for me to vote for maps 4

For me, not if they include a soccer stadium. I'll concede that the NBA franchise is the lens through which the rest of the world knows OKC exists. The Thunder has consistently been a value to all Oklahomans--and there has always been an affordable way to see the games.

No one is going to care about a 2nd rate soccer franchise at the same level as the Yard Dawgz (RIP).

The only item I have a problem with is the one for the Parks Department, it's hard for my to justify new or upgraded Parks when they can't, or don't, properly take care of what they have.

With that said, in fairness to the Parks Department, probably about have of what they maintain is actually Parks, they also maintain center medians, right-or-ways, some highways and the open areas around the 3 lakes (Draper, Hefner, Overholser)

The only item I have a problem with is the one for the Parks Department, it's hard for my to justify new or upgraded Parks when they can't, or don't, properly take care of what they have.

With that said, in fairness to the Parks Department, probably about have of what they maintain is actually Parks, they also maintain center medians, right-or-ways, some highways and the open areas around the 3 lakes (Draper, Hefner, Overholser)

They're asking for $60-80 million for improvements, and $20 million for an "Operating and Maintenance Investment Fund". Not sure if the $20 million is part of or in addition to the $60-80 million, though, not clear on the slides I looked at.

They need more for transit. A measly 85 million is pathetic. A quarter billion should be minimum.

Ideally I'd like to see everything built and more monies for transit, but drop the soccer stadium, innovation district funding, and the senior wellness centers and use that money for mass transit.

Let's not get into a fight about my project is more important than your project; therefore cut project X in favor of more funds for project Y.

Make Oklahoma City a more attractive city will not be narrowed down to how much we spend on a specific project. The average MAPS initiatives have always been about a variety of projects to build our city's quality of life; address the needs & wants for as many projects as possible.

Fund 7 to 10 projects (7 year collection period); stay with the previous success formula formats.

For me, not if they include a soccer stadium. I'll concede that the NBA franchise is the lens through which the rest of the world knows OKC exists. The Thunder has consistently been a value to all Oklahomans--and there has always been an affordable way to see the games.

No one is going to care about a 2nd rate soccer franchise at the same level as the Yard Dawgz (RIP).

What an ignorant statement. The Energy are nowhere near the same level as the Yard Dawgz. Just last month, the Energy had 4 players that played in the Gold Cup with their national teams. Most Americans don't understand the pyramid structure of professional soccer. The Energy ARE NOT A FARM CLUB OR MINOR LEAGUE TEAM. Soccer is succeeding in other US cities of similar size. There is no reason it cant succeed here, but a new stadium is necessary.

What an ignorant statement. The Energy are nowhere near the same level as the Yard Dawgz. Just last month, the Energy had 4 players that played in the Gold Cup with their national teams. Most Americans don't understand the pyramid structure of professional soccer. The Energy ARE NOT A FARM CLUB OR MINOR LEAGUE TEAM. Soccer is succeeding in other US cities of similar size. There is no reason it cant succeed here, but a new stadium is necessary.

I was just about to waste my time trying to convince people this point, thank you for getting here first. I have known far many more soccer fans over arena football fans here in OK. I don't understand why everyone is okay that we spend tax dollars on minor league baseball, college softball, or the NBA arenas and not on soccer. If you ask me, everyone who is against the soccer stadium, but for the upgrades to CHK are hypocrites. I say you either get both or neither one in MAPS.

If you ask me, everyone who is against the soccer stadium, but for the upgrades to CHK are hypocrites.

Well, you're wrong. I think upgrades to the Chesapeake Arena will have clear, well defined benefits for the city. Tangible results. I think a soccer stadium is spending a lot of money on a vain hope.

Well, you're wrong. I think upgrades to the Chesapeake Arena will have clear, well defined benefits for the city. Tangible results. I think a soccer stadium is spending a lot of money on a vain hope.

Fun fact: You don't have to play in MLS to have a successful soccer team. Albuquerque is averaging almost 13,000 fans a game for their team in the same division of soccer. MLS doesn't have to be an end goal because USL is not a minor league. Some players choose to play in the USL over MLS, because they can make more money being a starter in the USL versus being a bench warmer in the MLS. Every year, MLS teams play USL teams in Open Cup play (An annual tournament held every year with games that actually matter), and every year, a few USL teams win.

I agree Hoya. I personally have no issue with publicly funding a soccer stadium but as Laramie (I believe) has said at one time I think if we do it we need to go all out which also would not make sense as I echo other posters in saying we are likely nowhere near the MLS radar at this time.

Fun fact: You don't have to play in MLS to have a successful soccer team. Albuquerque is averaging almost 13,000 fans a game for their team in the same division of soccer. MLS doesn't have to be an end goal because USL is not a minor league. Some players choose to play in the USL over MLS, because they can make more money being a starter in the USL versus being a bench warmer in the MLS. Every year, MLS teams play USL teams in Open Cup play (An annual tournament held every year with games that actually matter), and every year, a few USL teams win.

That is a valid point. To me, while the Energy and Dodgers both have decent AVG attendances, I highly question how much those will grow in the coming years. On the bright side, the residential development downtown could possibly do just that but I guess only time will tell.

I was just about to waste my time trying to convince people this point, thank you for getting here first. I have known far many more soccer fans over arena football fans here in OK. I don't understand why everyone is okay that we spend tax dollars on minor league baseball, college softball, or the NBA arenas and not on soccer. If you ask me, everyone who is against the soccer stadium, but for the upgrades to CHK are hypocrites. I say you either get both or neither one in MAPS.

Wrong! If they include a bush league soccer stadium downtown I will vote NO and there are many others that will do the same. They just don't draw enough fans to make it feasible. The arena upgrades are not just for the Thunder and 100s of thousands attend the arena every year. It's apples vs oranges.

If we were talking MLS and building a real Pro Soccer stadium that would hold 20-25k people and house an MLS team I would be all in. There's just not that many people that care about the level of soccer we have in the city and it does prob. compare to the Yard Dawgs.

How about OKC get on a serious list for MLS expansion then we talk about funding a stadium. I think people would go for that.

Wrong! If they include a bush league soccer stadium downtown I will vote NO and there are many others that will do the same. They just don't draw enough fans to make it feasible. The arena upgrades are not just for the Thunder and 100s of thousands attend the arena every year. It's apples vs oranges.

If we were talking MLS and building a real Pro Soccer stadium that would hold 20-25k people and house an MLS team I would be all in. There's just not that many people that care about the level of soccer we have in the city and it does prob. compare to the Yard Dawgs.

How about OKC get on a serious list for MLS expansion then we talk about funding a stadium. I think people would go for that.

On what planet is Arean Football equivalent to Division 2 soccer? This board is usually pretty progressive, but for some reason when it comes to soccer, there is so much ignorance that it's infuriating.

Louisville is currently building their USL team a new stadium, and they are in the same boat as OKC in regards to MLS. https://www.louisvillecityfc.com/stadium. I can't understand why you people want OKC to be a one sport city. Baseball is dying a slow death, and soccer continues to rise in America.

Why on earth would you vote down arena improvements if soccer is included. Are you so anti soccer that you'd want to possible jepordize the Thunder's long term future here? OKC DOESN'T NEED TO BE A ONE SPORT CITY.

And just like the Peake is not just for the Thunder, the Stadium would also not just be for the Energy.

It will host shows, it will hold tournaments, it can hold a minor league football team. It would be a city owned stadium just like the Peake.

the sacramento republic a very successful USL team that averages far more fans than OKC got a new stadium in 2014 that cost less than 5 mil dollars ...

i am not against a new soccer stadium for the energy i am against a 60-80 mil + soccer stadium for a USL team ...

for 15-20 mil they can build a stadium far better than one that they actaully need until the time comes that they get an MLS expansion (which i doubt ever comes)

On what planet is Arean Football equivalent to Division 2 soccer? This board is usually pretty progressive, but for some reason when it comes to soccer, there is so much ignorance that it's infuriating.

Louisville is currently building their USL team a new stadium, and they are in the same boat as OKC in regards to MLS. https://www.louisvillecityfc.com/stadium. I can't understand why you people want OKC to be a one sport city. Baseball is dying a slow death, and soccer continues to rise in America.

Why on earth would you vote down arena improvements if soccer is included. Are you so anti soccer that you'd want to possible jepordize the Thunder's long term future here? OKC DOESN'T NEED TO BE A ONE SPORT CITY.

Thank you for being among the those of us who speak out.

I'm not that well versed on minor league soccer as PattyShack clarified and corrected me in an earlier post.

Want the best for our city in a variety of projects. Once we get the MAPS 4 projects approved with the stadium, OKC will be on the MLS radar.

I do not think Chesapeake arena need any improvements or expansion because it is nice enough but that is just me....

I have read very very little about any of the MAPS initiatives, but the arena updates makes this a more difficult decision for me:

On the one hand, I've very much considered not voting for MAPS 4 because I want there to be enough voting power left for funding the RTA.

On the other hand, updates to CHK Arena pretty well squash any possibility that we make a colossal mistake and put a new arena on the current Cox site.

The Cox site is the one large scale development project we cannot afford to do incorrectly and transit is probably the #1 issue that OKC needs to nail in 2020.

well, cox and the old ford site between MBG and scissortail

the sacramento republic a very successful USL team that averages far more fans than OKC got a new stadium in 2014 that cost less than 5 mil dollars ...

i am not against a new soccer stadium for the energy i am against a 60-80 mil + soccer stadium for a USL team ...

for 15-20 mil they can build a stadium far better than one that they actaully need until the time comes that they get an MLS expansion (which i doubt ever comes)

Spot on.

Is Funk Jr. making the same mistake his dad did with the Blazers? People loved the Blazers but everything fell apart when he attempted to rebrand the team and jump up to a higher level of competition. I have a friend who lives in DFW and was a professional soccer player. He said even Dallas struggles to keep its MLS team afloat. I realize this isn’t about getting an MLS team, but why not do what Boulder Sooner suggests? That seems like a good fit for where we are as a city. And if we are talking about $20 million, why should that investment all be borne by taxpayers?

2014 Bonney Field at Cal Expo cost $3 million initially; it's just a pop up stadium at the Cal Expo fairgrounds on city owned land. It will not allow Sacramento to obtain an MLS franchise. They are making plans for a $250 million, 19,621 seat MLS stadium on 13 acres expandable to 25,000.

You pass a MAPS 4 Stadium on $20 million budget constructed on city owned land like the 440 acre State Fair Park to mirror Sacramento's situation, you've potentially wasted $20 million.

Why invest $20 million into a predominately bleacher-type stadium without the necessary amenities to invest in the future.

If you're not going to invest in a strong solid infrastructure foundation venue that's expansion ready--strike the stadium from the MAPS 4 initiative, abandon soccer for now, risk the Energy FC being forced to relocate and continue this discussion in 2028 MAPS 5 initiative when a 10,000 seat stadium will cost you $200 million for the same venue we can build now for $65 - $80 million.

Construct a 10,000 seat $72.5 million (chair back seats) stadium in the core with solid infrastructure near downtown, convention center complex & bricktown (restaurant amenities) near the streetcar, you'll have a future investment for a stadium that could be expanded far beyond MLS current standards. You'll see crowds of 8,000 to 10,000 on a regular basis.

USL's 17 home games downtown will support the restaurants in the area that could use more event dates. thru SMG management.

Is Funk Jr. making the same mistake his dad did with the Blazers? People loved the Blazers but everything fell apart when he attempted to rebrand the team and jump up to a higher level of competition. I have a friend who lives in DFW and was a professional soccer player. He said even Dallas struggles to keep its MLS team afloat. I realize this isn’t about getting an MLS team, but why not do what Boulder Sooner suggests? That seems like a good fit for where we are as a city. And if we are talking about $20 million, why should that investment all be borne by taxpayers?

This is why you don't want to put a USL or MLS franchise in a suburb. The long-term support may not be sustainable. MLS brand is growing in popularity.

The Funk's track record speaks for itself (Blazers, AHL Barons, RedHawks, IGA women's tennis). They are the current USL owners--I'll leave it at that...

The rebrand & upgrade with the CHL Blazers (AHL Barons) came after OKC secured the NBA. Funk had an opportunity to bring AHL/IHL or MLS to OKC in the early 2000s.

As for a $20 million venue in the core, majority of those funds ($6 million to $12 million) would be eaten up by site acquisition which doesn't include infrastructure; unless you opt to build at State Fair Park (SFP) --where there's an infrastructure spur & adequate surface paved parking.

What OKC could get for $20 million (Outside of SFP) once you deduct site acquisition & infrastructure would be a 'Pop up' stadium that doesn't include parking--don't repeat the mistake OKC made with the convention center complex.

I’m trying to advocate something sellable. I may live in a bubble but I’m not hearing much excitement about funding a private team’s stadium when there are so many other needs that have been presented than can be funded.

I’m gonna be the grump today and say that Soccer has been “The Next Big Thing” since Pele was playing for the New York Cosmos in the 1970s. Speculators have made pro Soccer the biggest financial black hole in American sports history.
I have zero issue with a Stadium downtown with more than about a 15,000 capacity and a UCO or “best in Oklahoma” high school program. I think Oklahoma City is around number 40 on the MLS Soccer team interest location scale.
Build a Stadium that could host football for large class high school playoffs, HBCU bowl and “special interest” games, NCAA FCS and NAIA playoff games, in addition to USL Soccer, and count me in. I would not be a supporter of an MLS focused Stadium.

I’m trying to advocate something sellable. I may live in a bubble but I’m not hearing much excitement about funding a private team’s stadium when there are so many other needs that have been presented than can be funded.

It's been stated MANY times in here before, the stadium WILL NOT belong to the Energy. It'll be owned by the city of OKC and can be used for many different kinds of events. The Energy will only be a tenant.

I’m gonna be the grump today and say that Soccer has been “The Next Big Thing” since Pele was playing for the New York Cosmos in the 1970s. Speculators have made pro Soccer the biggest financial black hole in American sports history.
I have zero issue with a Stadium downtown with more than about a 15,000 capacity and a UCO or “best in Oklahoma” high school program. I think Oklahoma City is around number 40 on the MLS Soccer team interest location scale.
Build a Stadium that could host football for large class high school playoffs, HBCU bowl and “special interest” games, NCAA FCS and NAIA playoff games, in addition to USL Soccer, and count me in. I would not be a supporter of an MLS focused Stadium.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/filipbondy/2018/01/08/soccer-will-soon-be-americas-third-favorite-spectator-sport/#1d87e8243c53

"But among adults aged 18-34, soccer was the favorite sport of 11%, tying basketball; only 6% of younger adults chose baseball as their favorite sport."

You've apparently never seen images or videos from some of the these US soccer teams that have great fan bases already. Atlanta United just had 72,000 for a regular season game. They're averaging 53,000 a game this season!

I'm tired of this kind of talk from older generations that refuse to see soccer in the same light as the other popular team sports in America. This isn't the 1970s

Good information from your link, mattyiceokc


I’m trying to advocate something sellable. I may live in a bubble but I’m not hearing much excitement about funding a private team’s stadium when there are so many other needs that have been presented than can be funded.

MAPS 4 will be able to fund so many of those needs without cutting funds for other items requested if they appear on MAPS 4 on or slightly below requests. Some of these projects will bring out-of-state dollars to our city much like the new convention center under construction.

Again, as it has been stated so many times; this stadium will be owned by the City of Oklahoma City. The stadium, much like so many of OKC owned facilities: Chesapeake Energy Arena, State Fair Arena, Civic Center Music Hall will be managed by SMG management. Energy FC will be the major tenant paying rent where this facility will not be a burden to the city.

You want to eventually see events brought to OKC like the OSSAA 6A championship in football will need a stadium that seats beyond 20,000 to compete with University of Tulsa's 30k Chapman Stadium and bring the OSSAA coaches association convention & H.S. championships back to Oklahoma City on a rotation basis.

Starting with a 10,000 seat stadium will help us reach the goal of expansion which wouldn't be that costly once you have the foundation & infrastructure in place. Whether or not we obtain a Major League Soccer (MLS) franchise; a stadium for our city is long overdue.

I'm about 60. So I am the last generation that didn't play organized soccer in grade school. But, I am also the first generation of "Soccer dads". Soccer is a great sport. It's a great participation sport and it's a good sport for parents to help and bond with their children. I have been watching Premier League matches for 15 years. It's a good product.

Soccer has not been a money making enterprise in the United States at the level of the "Big 4" leagues. Youth participation has not translated into viewing interest at the level hoped for. Every factor suggests that soccer should be more popular in the United States than it has been. Those have been the same factors that have driven investment for 40 years.

There have pockets of intense interest and periods of popularity over the last decades, but it hasn't translated to a lasting national popularity and revenue production. The Cosmos drew numbers in the 1970s equal to what Atlanta is currently. I hope it sticks this time.

I'm about 60. So I am the last generation that didn't play organized soccer in grade school. But, I am also the first generation of "Soccer dads". Soccer is a great sport. It's a great participation sport and it's a good sport for parents to help and bond with their children. I have been watching Premier League matches for 15 years. It's a good product.

Soccer has not been a money making enterprise in the United States at the level of the "Big 4" leagues. Youth participation has not translated into viewing interest at the level hoped for. Every factor suggests that soccer should be more popular in the United States than it has been. Those have been the same factors that have driven investment for 40 years.

There have pockets of intense interest and periods of popularity over the last decades, but it hasn't translated to a lasting national popularity and revenue production. The Cosmos drew numbers in the 1970s equal to what Atlanta is currently. I hope it sticks this time.

Like you, my two boys played organized soccer. It's a great conditioning sport, main reason they were allowed to play soccer before organized basketball. Viewing, the United States has been making progress. Women's recent World Cup domination created renewed interests.

Oklahoma City doesn't have to be limited to a one major league sports town; saying we can attain the highest level of play in soccer be it USL or MLS, all for giving it a try.

You can't gauge the interests of a minor league franchises' performance in a stadium like Taft (non regulation field) in an area that doesn't provide a host of family friendly amenities as a stadium built in the core would offer with nearby Midtown & Bricktown.

It's been stated MANY times in here before, the stadium WILL NOT belong to the Energy. It'll be owned by the city of OKC and can be used for many different kinds of events. The Energy will only be a tenant.

Of course they would be a tenant. That way all they would pay is a measly little lease and everything else like maintenance upkeep renovations and whatever else comes up would be up to the tax payers to foot the bill. It's a scam that team owners have been pulling for years all over the USA in all sports to line their pockets. This would be a bad investment for the tax payers.

Of course they would be a tenant. That way all they would pay is a measly little lease and everything else like maintenance upkeep renovations and whatever else comes up would be up to the tax payers to foot the bill. It's a scam that team owners have been pulling for years all over the USA in all sports to line their pockets. This would be a bad investment for the tax payers.

The above is what you said today... ...$65 million to $80 million stadium.

Below is what you said earlier 07-29-2019... ...$200 million you would give IF for MLS; I'm really confused: :dizzy: :dizzy: :dizzy:


Don't think OKC is even on the MLS radar at this time, there's a decent sized waiting list in larger markets. If this was for MLS I would be all in on building the stadium if it was a first class 200 mil + project. That would draw fans in the 15-20k range every game. What they are proposing here is not even in the same ballpark. I just don't think it's worth it. This would be a gift to the owners.

Where are you on the stadium OKCRT?
.

The above is what you said today... ...$65 million to $80 million stadium.

Below is what you said earlier 07-29-2019... ...$200 million you would give IF for MLS; I'm really confused: :dizzy: :dizzy: :dizzy:



Where are you on the stadium OKCRT?
.

We are talking about USL VS MLS. No one cares about minor league soccer and it would be a waste of tax payers money to build a stadium for that. They would draw a few thousand fans. MLS on the other hand would require a first class stadium and would def. have a much bigger draw. An MLS stadium downtown would prob. spur a lot of other development around it. So we are talking apples and oranges. So I would be in favor of an MLS stadium if that time comes.

We are talking about USL VS MLS. No one cares about minor league soccer and it would be a waste of tax payers money to build a stadium for that. They would draw a few thousand fans. MLS on the other hand would require a first class stadium and would def. have a much bigger draw. An MLS stadium downtown would prob. spur a lot of other development around it. So we are talking apples and oranges. So I would be in favor of an MLS stadium if that time comes.

Are you aware that 3 of the recent MLS expansion teams came from the USL? Orlando, FC Cincinatti, and Nashville SC all competed in the USL first. OKC is never going to get an MLS team without having a successful USL team. Also, plenty of people care about division 2 soccer (Not minor league. It's really a simple concept to understand). Total attendance at all USL division 2 games this season has been 1.6 million and we still have 2.5 months left.

Of course they would be a tenant. That way all they would pay is a measly little lease and everything else like maintenance upkeep renovations and whatever else comes up would be up to the tax payers to foot the bill. It's a scam that team owners have been pulling for years all over the USA in all sports to line their pockets. This would be a bad investment for the tax payers.

So you should also be against the upgrades and idea of the CHK arena. The taxpayers are footing the bill just to keep the Thunder in OKC.

So you should also be against the upgrades and idea of the CHK arena. The taxpayers are footing the bill just to keep the Thunder in OKC.

It's different, because arenas will get a lot more use than a soccer stadium. And OKC already owned the arena years before the Thunder got here. Apples to sweet potatoes comparison.

It's different, because arenas will get a lot more use than a soccer stadium. And OKC already owned the arena years before the Thunder got here. Apples to sweet potatoes comparison.

well... not really, yes, the city owned it years before the Thunder, but solely for the purpose of hoping to lure either and NBA or NHL franchise here... and as for usage... both can be used regularly pretty much year round... the soccer stadium isn't any less useful, just often cities don't know how to schedule them properly.

this is what Las Vegas is showing with their new Football stadium... while a normal facility for the NFL only gets used on average 60 times a year... Las Vegas is already saying that they plan to use the facility close to 100 days a year, for bigger events. and perhaps even more than that. now the cost of using an arena is cheaper, yes... but that doesn't necessarily mean it gets much more use, when you look at it from a return on investment standpoint.

NOTE: i'm saying this as someone who does not support a MAPS 4 soccer stadium

It's different, because arenas will get a lot more use than a soccer stadium. And OKC already owned the arena years before the Thunder got here. Apples to sweet potatoes comparison.

For the hundredth time, it's not just for soccer. It's a multipurpose stadium that can be used for a number of other sports, as well as concerts, etc. Obviously, the Energy would be the main tenant, just like the Thunder are for CHK.

The taxpayers are footing the bill just to keep the Thunder in OKC.

Whether voters should approve the Peake upgrades is a fair issue to be debated, but the idea that OKC citizens must continually foot the bill for whatever the wealthy owners of the Thunder want just to keep the team in OKC sounds like citizens are being held hostage for corporate welfare. Of course, there are reasonable situations where citizens should decide how they support a professional franchise like the Thunder.... But every Thunder decision should not be tied to the idea that the owners will move the team if they don't get whatever they want all the time.

For the hundredth time, it's not just for soccer. It's a multipurpose stadium that can be used for a number of other sports, as well as concerts, etc. Obviously, the Energy would be the main tenant, just like the Thunder are for CHK.

Yes, you are right. I get it, for the 100th time. But you are probably greatly over-estimating the economic impact this stadium will have. The number of concerts this venue would have would be low, and community sporting events don't do much, revenue-wise. Whereas the Peake hosts 41 Thunder games and 15-30 (depending on year) concerts per year, along with dozens of other events (WWE, Big 3, circus-type events) per year. An outdoor 20k stadium would sit empty 315 to 325 days a year.

Yes, you are right. I get it, for the 100th time. But you are probably greatly over-estimating the economic impact this stadium will have. The number of concerts this venue would have would be low, and community sporting events don't do much, revenue-wise. Whereas the Peake hosts 41 Thunder games and 15-30 (depending on year) concerts per year, along with dozens of other events (WWE, Big 3, circus-type events) per year. An outdoor 20k stadium would sit empty 315 to 325 days a year.

And you are greatly under-estimating the amount of events that could be held at a multipurpose stadium. Think outside the box. It can host more than just soccer, football, and concerts.

Yes, you are right. I get it, for the 100th time. But you are probably greatly over-estimating the economic impact this stadium will have. The number of concerts this venue would have would be low, and community sporting events don't do much, revenue-wise. Whereas the Peake hosts 41 Thunder games and 15-30 (depending on year) concerts per year, along with dozens of other events (WWE, Big 3, circus-type events) per year. An outdoor 20k stadium would sit empty 315 to 325 days a year.

the Peake sits empty some 250 days a year... again... bad planning of events is a separate issue

Are you aware that 3 of the recent MLS expansion teams came from the USL? Orlando, FC Cincinatti, and Nashville SC all competed in the USL first. OKC is never going to get an MLS team without having a successful USL team. Also, plenty of people care about division 2 soccer (Not minor league. It's really a simple concept to understand). Total attendance at all USL division 2 games this season has been 1.6 million and we still have 2.5 months left.

it is a minor league it is just not the MLS minor league ...

however they have a deal with MLS and lots of USL teams ARE the minor league teams of their MLS owners .. .


also to get an MLS team at this point is a pipe dream

it is a minor league it is just not the MLS minor league ...

however they have a deal with MLS and lots of USL teams ARE the minor league teams of their MLS owners .. .


also to get an MLS team at this point is a pipe dream

exactly... i mean how many teams do we think MLS is going to get to? and if we aren't already putting in a bid... we are not going to get there. because too many other cities are already making their proposals for MLS expansion and are way ahead of us.

it is a minor league it is just not the MLS minor league ...

however they have a deal with MLS and lots of USL teams ARE the minor league teams of their MLS owners .. .


also to get an MLS team at this point is a pipe dream

Alright, since people are still equating minor league baseball with USL soccer, lets go ahead and break it down.

Lets take the OKC Dodgers. Every single player on the OKC Dodgers has a contract with the LA Dodgers. The LA Dodgers control where each player plays within their farm club system. The OKC Dodgers have ZERO control over what players are on the team.

The Energy are completely different from this. Each player on the Energy is under contract with the Energy. The Energy have complete control over their roster. Also, the USL has a partnership with MLS, but it still operates completely independent of the MLS and makes decisions based on whats best for the USL, not MLS. Yes, some MLS teams operate in the same league as the Energy (USL Championship, or Division 2). There is a big push among all of the independent clubs in USL (which make up more than 50 percent of the league) to force all of the MLS owned teams down into USL League One (aka Division 3).


There is no such thing as minor league in soccer. Honestly, minor league is term that should only be used for baseball, or other leagues that are branded as a developmental league (such as the NBA G League). USL is not a developmental league. The goal for a majority of the teams (excluding some of the MLS teams) is to win a championship with the best players available, regardless of player age. Developmental leagues like minor league baseball and NBA G-League focus on player development of young athletes instead of winning championships.

Oh, and of the 36 USL Championship teams, only 9 are owned by MLS teams. So I wouldn't say that "lots" or USL teams are the minor league teams of MLS. Other teams may be "affiliated" with a MLS team like OKC used to be with Sporting KC and FC Dallas, but it still is completely different than minor league baseball. When OKC was affiliated with FC Dallas for instance, they would loan us 2 or 3 players off and on for the season to play with us, but it was only done if it was a good fit for both teams. FC Dallas routinely would loan players out to other USL clubs, even when they were affiliated with us.

We are talking about USL VS MLS. No one cares about minor league soccer and it would be a waste of tax payers money to build a stadium for that. They would draw a few thousand fans. MLS on the other hand would require a first class stadium and would def. have a much bigger draw. An MLS stadium downtown would prob. spur a lot of other development around it. So we are talking apples and oranges. So I would be in favor of an MLS stadium if that time comes.

We had minor league basketball (Oklahoma City Calvary); they drew a few thousand fans. You can't use a minor league franchise operation in a non regulation facility (Taft Stadium) in an area of town with no fan friendly amenities to gauge major league potential.

Hopefully, the stadium will go before the voters to decide. If you want to vote everything down because of one project on MAPS 4 you are against; then think about The Peake, the same argument about not being able to fill the Myriad was being made to remove the downtown arena from the original MAPS ballot.

The recent posts which don't support building the stadium are disheartening and, I fear, shortsighted. You don't have to like soccer to be supportive of building a multi-use field adjacent to OKC's greatest tourism destination. We need to develop the COOP property and this is a fantastic way to jump start it. It is not a "hand-out" the the Funks as the City will own it. This seems like a no-brainer to me and I hope it makes the cut for Maps 4. I similarly hope that those who don't support this aspect of the Maps 4 projects will see the whole Maps package and vote yes. OKC needs to invest in itself as the State of Oklahoma is not making it any easier for our city to make progress.

I dislike the proposed renovations to the fairgrounds as I don't think the board that runs the fairgrounds have been transparent or fair. That said, one or two ticket items that I don't agree with won't stop me from supporting Maps as a whole.

I’m just always going back to thinking about a festival with performances at the new park, new stadium, the ballpark, and the many venues on the canal and in brick town.

Should we just call MAPS 4: STADIUMS?

I think its a guarantee that Chesapeake Arena upgrades will be on the ballot. Its also pretty much a guarantee that a new Fairgrounds arena will also be on there. If a multipurpose soccer stadium is built that will be three Stadium related projects on one MAPS proposal. Doesn't seem like that leaves much room for other things.

A big MAPS 4 takeaway today...

The grand plans for a massive highway cap over I-235 are DEAD.

Reasonable bridge yes. Floating albatross no.