The short story is that the vast majority of fans agreed that games should not continue to move around as much, but most were not enamored with the four cities I proposed (or even a “one city solution”).
Surprisingly (to me), Chicago was the “winner.” And the remaining cities (including “Other”) shook out like this:
Seattle (20 votes), Denver (14), Columbus (12), Houston (10), New York (8), Los Angeles (7), St. Louis (6), and then 14 other cities with 4 votes or less.
I’d be great to get some insight on all the love for Chicago. (Is it that much of a soccer town?) It is the headquarters of the US Soccer organization, but I don’t know what impact that really has on players (given they don’t train there).
Seattle is a strong contender given its support of MLS, but I’d like to see if that level of support is sustained beyond the inaugural season.
Meanwhile, in Bob’s post at Soccer Soap Box he talks about the buzz created when a USMNT match is played in your city. Buzz is great, but building fan support that shows up and creates a home field advantage should take precedence.
It is clear that there are passionate fans around the country, so perhaps a “one city solution” is a bit too restrictive geographically. However, US Soccer is doing the players on the pitch a disservice with the current strategy and should proactively focus on a few desirable locations throughout the country.