USL's expansion problem: Rosy start-dates followed by practical realities setting in
The lesson is to NEVER believe the start dates announced by USL
In the ongoing conflicts between leagues and clubs within the closed-league, predatory structure of American men’s professional soccer, expansion dates are frequently announced but often prove unrealistic.
With the revelation from our Alex Ashton that Santa Barbara won’t begin USL Championship play until at least 2027 we have yet another example of a USL expansion announcement for the Championship having a date that slipped - because most have been wholly unrealistic and my sense is pushed by the league to create “momentum” for future announcements and investment.
But for the clubs impacted, and the list includes future USL Championship entries in Jacksonville (even as USL was implying 2025, the organization consistently told me 2026), Brooklyn, West Palm Beach (let’s see if this ever really happens), Milwaukee (same as West Palm Beach), Buffalo, Des Moines, and probably some I cannot remember these press statements have done little to help the situation on the local level.
In my opinion new clubs should NEVER be expected to kick a ball less than 18 months from a public announcement and ideally that should be 24-30 months. My timeline comes from my own experience in NASL and covering both that league and USL through the years. You just cannot get a robust team operation up and running and secure the proper financing and land for a Soccer-Specific Stadium in 18 months. It’s not impossible but incredibly difficult.
Stadium Struggles and Strategic Patience: Why USL Teams Inevitably Delay Their Debut
Sure USL is a growing force in American professional soccer, but as noted above they frequently announce ambitious expansion plans which get the usual array of “look how strong USL is” on message boards and articles—only to see the inaugural season dates for new teams repeatedly pushed back. This pattern of delays isn’t due to a lack of commitment, but rather a confluence of major logistical and financial challenges that new clubs face, with the soccer-specific stadium (SSS) and securing investors being the biggest hurdles.
The Most Critical Challenge: Securing the Stadium Land and Financing
For most modern professional soccer clubs in the U.S., a dedicated venue is non-negotiable for financial sustainability and community identity. However, stadium projects introduce the most significant risks for launch delays.
Complex Financing: Securing the massive capital for a new stadium is often the single most challenging step. Ownership groups must navigate a patchwork of private investment, bank loans, and often contentious public funding or tax-incentive negotiations- and this is FAR more difficult for USL clubs than for MLS clubs due to the built-in bias in government and political circles toward MLS as a “big league” (for the record though this does not impact my analysis, I oppose ALL taxpayer financing of pro sports stadium projects - living in Florida where I have seen incredible waste on these projects with little in return for the economy has informed my view on this). A single snag in this delicate funding structure can halt the entire project.
Construction Headwinds: Once financing is in place, the actual construction faces external variables like global supply chain disruptions, labor shortages, unexpected site remediation issues, and prolonged municipal permitting processes. For projects that are often part of a larger, mixed-use real estate development (a trend for modern USL stadiums), the complexity—and potential for delay—increases exponentially.
A delay in the proposal, financing or construction timeline directly translates to a delay in the team’s ability to host a professional season. As seen with various franchises, moving a launch date from, say, 2025 to 2026 or 2026 to 2027, often simply reflects the updated completion date of their home ground or in some cases a delay that then complicates securing a temporary ground (if a club even wants to broach that issue).
Building a Stable Business Foundation
Beyond the physical structure, new USL clubs are tasked with building a professional sports organization from scratch, a process that requires substantial lead time.
Operational Readiness: A launch isn’t just about fielding a team; it’s about establishing a stable business. An extra year allows ownership to successfully hire a front office staff, including sales, marketing, and operations personnel, and properly implement all ticketing, sponsorship, and gameday systems.
Branding and Marketing: To succeed, a team needs to deeply embed itself in the local community. An extended runway allows the organization to execute a more thoughtful and comprehensive branding campaign—including finalizing the team name, colors, and crest—and build the necessary hype to cultivate a robust season ticket and sponsorship base before the first match is played. Sporting Jacksonville is a perfect example of how to do this - but it must be noted that they were also simultaneously launching a First Division (Gainbridge Super League) women’s side and moreover appear to be a one-off on how to properly do this.
Scouting and Roster Construction: The delay also provides the technical staff with more time to scout, sign players, and construct a competitive roster, rather than rushing the player acquisition process in the months leading up to a debut. Even in USL L1 I have noticed new clubs that rush the technical side and scouting (Westchester, Texoma) have less success than those who took more time to develop a longer-term vision (AV Alta, Naples, Portland).
The Strategic Play: Stability Over Speed
Ultimately, pushing back a debut date is often a strategic decision by ownership and the league to prioritize long-term stability over a rushed launch. The USL aims for its expansion teams to be financially viable and deeply rooted in their markets.
Launching before a stadium is ready or before the business infrastructure is solid can lead to a chaotic inaugural season, a poor fan experience, and long-term financial instability, potentially jeopardizing the entire franchise. By exercising patience, USL expansion teams aim to ensure that when they finally take the field, they are well-funded, well-run, and have a permanent, dedicated home for years to come.
Divergent Interests Between USL and its Clubs
Ultimately, the biggest issue is likely the divergent interests between USL Corporate and individual clubs. We have to regularly remind readers that USL HQ is a separate entity from its clubs, unlike MLS, whose single-entity structure means club owners have stakes in the league.
With this in mind, USL’s primary interest is promoting investment in its league and selling expansion franchises; whether or not clubs are successful in their launches and penetrate local consciousness is important but secondary, in my opinion, to the league brass.
Whereas to the individual clubs themselves success is dependent on getting the above elements correct - and so in the case of let’s say Brooklyn, when USL announced in early 2024, that the club will kick a ball in 2025 and oh by the way it won’t be in League One as planned but in the Championship, that sort of timeline will NEVER work, short of some established local pro team in another sport setting up the club - and even that is difficult.
This seems to be a primarily USLC problem which may have to do with the increased funds for that level and possibly the egos of ownership groups. USL seems to have no problem launching USL1 teams having started 5 last year and 7 next year. I don't think USL is putting pressure on teams to shorten timelines I think teams and ownership groups get out over their own skis on hype. There have been multiple interviews where ownership groups talk about how helpful USL is in starting new teams and guiding ownership groups along in the process. One of those interviews that stands out to me at this time is one with I believe Westchester on Morning Kickaround where the owner says he pushed for a shortened timeline to launch against the advice of USL offices. I can't watch it now to confirm this because I'm at work so I will post a link. If someone watches it and I'm not correct feel free to holler at me LOL.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvjo_bJbHNA
It should also not go uncommented on that MLS Next Pro has had three of their recent expansions Connecticut, Cleveland, and Jacksonville delayed. The only one of their expansions that has been on schedule throughout the expansion process seems to be Grand Rapids. An expansion team hasn't come into that league since it launched in 2022 and one of those teams died immediately. The reason we aren't having a similar conversation about MLSNP is because frankly hardly anybody really cares about that league or pays attention to it outside of a few select fanbases.
Kartik, seeing these setbacks, is a D1 league really feasible for starting in 2027?