Does the timing of FC Cincinnati stadium deal matter in expansion process?

Futbol Club Cincinnati's push for a soccer-specific stadium with the aid of public money for infrastructure improvements was ultimately a success.

The process FC Cincinnati went through to reach that end wasn't always perceived as smooth, though.

Some contend the sum total of the winding path FC Cincinnati took to nailing down its stadium solution – a process that was publicly probed and criticized by media outlets and politicians alike – might have damaged the club's bid.

"It's our bid to lose. What are we waiting for?," FC Cincinnati majority owner Carl Lindner III said at a mid-November news conference in which he referenced finalized stadium plans in other cities.

FC Cincinnati might have been the last of the four MLS expansion finalists to complete its work, but could the timing of a process that ended in public support for FC Cincinnati's stadium actually harm the team's expansion bid?

Some seem to think so, although the criteria for expansion outlined by MLS long ago doesn't explicitly suggest a longer process like what played out in the Queen City would be penalized.

Expansion-finalist organizations in Sacramento, Nashville, and Detroit would have watched Lindner ask that rhetorical question at the Nov. 15 press conference from afar, and with their respective stadium plans long since finalized.

Sacramento's stadium plan was well across the finish line by July while Nashville Metro Council approved financing for a $275 million stadium in early November.

Though Detroit's final bid appears to be absent a soccer-specific stadium solution, it effectively put its bid to bed around the same time as Nashville when Ford Field, an NFL venue, came into view for housing the would-be MLS franchise there.

In particular, the perceived smoothness of Nashville's stadium process and the amount of public support for it caused consternation among some FC Cincinnati fans.

It caused some to wonder if Nashville could have an edge on Cincinnati in the expansion race simply because it finalized the stadium deal faster.

FC Cincinnati's stadium package reached a resolution one week before the club's Wednesday presentation at MLS headquarters in New York City.

Two separate government entities made separate votes that combined for $51 million in public infrastructure support for a stadium in Cincinnati's Oakley neighborhood.

"They read this stuff," Cincinnati Mayor John Cranley told The Enquirer Thursday when asked about media coverage of the stadium debate and the public discourse surrounding the matter. "We don't live in isolation. We're competing with cities like Nashville and Sacramento and Detroit who – I haven't read all the articles but the articles I have read have been 'this is exciting. We're going to rally around it as a city.' "

MLS declined Sunday to comment on whether public dialogue and the duration of municipal proceedings are of material consequence to the expansion process.

But it's likely MLS will simply weigh most heavily whether or not FC Cincinnati's bid meets the criteria long ago outlined by the league.

Many observers both locally and nationally view FC Cincinnati as having checked off those boxes.

That criteria emphasized three key areas: Club ownership, financial projections (along with corporate support and support from the soccer community) and, of course, stadium solutions.

Specific to the stadium side, MLS is chiefly concerned with details of the proposed site, financing plan, required governmental approvals and support from public officials – all features FC Cincinnati now has.

At no time during the ongoing and years-long expansion process did MLS stipulate that there wasn't time and room for public discussion.