For Soccer Insider
By Kareem Rae, CEO, One Soccer Nation
January 7, 2026
If you want to understand how professional soccer clubs get built, financed, and scaled in the U.S., don’t start with tactics. Start with infrastructure and deal mechanics.
In this edition of Soccer Insider, I sat down with Mark McCullers (Principal) and Cortland McCullers (Director of Client Services) from McCullers Group, one of the most active firms working at the intersection of soccer, stadium delivery, public-private partnerships, and mixed-use development.
1) The biggest shift in U.S. soccer isn’t fandom, it’s the questions investors ask
Mark made a point that every serious investor should internalize: Back then: “Is soccer going to make it?” Now: “How much is required, what do I get, and what does the return look like?”
That shift matters because it signals a maturing market. When the conversation moves from legitimacy to capital structure, stadium control, and revenue rights, the sport is no longer trying to “survive.” It’s competing for capital like any other asset class.
Operator implication: If your pitch still sounds like “soccer is growing,” you’re late. The pitch now is:
- What are the cash-flow drivers?
- What is the stadium revenue control model?
- What does the risk mitigation plan look like?
- What does the municipal partnership actually fund (land, infrastructure, tax tools, cash)?
2) Lamar Hunt’s legacy is still the blueprint for lower-division growth
Mark’s time with Lamar Hunt and the original soccer-specific stadium era is more than history. It’s a playbook. Cortland’s three lessons from Lamar Hunt (through Mark’s stories) translate directly to today’s club builders:
- Visionary thinking: build what the market will become, not what it is today
- No isn’t final: if the system won’t accommodate your ambition, create a new path
- Humility with standards: leadership means being hands-on, not above the work
That mindset is exactly what second- and third-division soccer needs as it expands toward 2026 and beyond.
3) McCullers Group’s “turnkey” model is really two businesses: finance + sales
Mark described stadium delivery as two parallel tracks:
- A) The financial track
- Site selection and feasibility
- Capital stack and funding tools
- Lease/operating/development agreement negotiation
- Project management through construction
- Post-build optimization (operations, revenue performance)
- B) The sales track
You’re not just building a stadium. You’re selling:
- Invest-ability
- Economic impact
- Community utility
- Political feasibility
- A credible path to execution
If you can’t communicate “why this project wins” to investors and municipalities, you don’t have a stadium plan. You have a concept.
4) Site selection is a revenue decision, not a real estate preference
Cortland walked through a real-world framework that serious projects use. Their evaluation is closer to a weighted matrix than a “good location” opinion.
Key criteria they highlighted:
- Stadium fit + orientation (U.S. Soccer Federation: north-south ± 15°)
- Ingress/egress (how quickly people can arrive/leave)
- Constructibility + remediation (hidden cost multipliers)
- Visibility on major corridors (directly impacts sponsorship valuation)
- Development potential (land and surrounding activity)
- Public-private appetite (two sites can be identical physically but radically different politically)
Investor takeaway: A “cheap” site can destroy you later through remediation, approvals, or weak commercial upside. A “better” site can finance itself through smarter public tools and surrounding development.
5) Municipal funding is rising, but it’s not always “the city writing a cheque”
Mark’s answer was important: municipalities often support projects best through tools they’re structurally built for:
- Land control and land contributions
- Infrastructure and enabling works
- Tax increment mechanisms tied to incremental revenue created by the project
- Redevelopment incentives in targeted districts
He also noted the trend line: projects are increasingly seeing major municipal participation, often because 5,000 to 10,000-seat stadiums fill a civic niche:
- Too big for high school facilities
- Too small (and wrong “packaging”) for 50,000-seat venues
- Designed for broadcast, premium seating, and modern hospitality
Operator takeaway: Position the stadium as a year-round civic asset, not a 17-game venue.
6) “Modular stadiums” aren’t a silver bullet, and they can discount your revenue
This was one of the clearest operator truths in the conversation. Mark’s view: people assume modular equals cheaper. In practice, once you add:
- HVAC
- Plumbing
- Hospitality spaces
- Offices
- Premium inventory
- Broadcast and back-of-house requirements
…the cost often converges with more traditional methods. More importantly, revenue can suffer if you build too “base case”:
- Lower concessions performance (per-cap)
- Weaker premium product
- Less compelling sponsorship inventory
- Reduced overall “experience” value
Their alternative is a stadium kit concept: standardize components (lights, seats, video board, field systems) and customize what matters (site, concourse, buildings, integration with mixed-use).
Investor takeaway: The cheapest stadium can become the most expensive decision if it limits revenue upside.
7) Mixed-use isn’t a bonus, it’s how many stadium deals get financed now
If you’re still thinking “team + stadium,” you’re missing what capital markets increasingly want: stadium-anchored commercial districts. Mark explained why they expanded beyond “being the stadium people.” Mixed-use impacts:
- Market demand proof (pre-leasing and absorption)
- Incremental tax generation
- Public finance capacity
- Investor attention (scale attracts different pools of capital)
And yes, scale matters: some capital allocators won’t look at anything under a certain threshold. When stadium + district becomes a $200M+ story, a different investor class starts paying attention.
8) COVID changed contracting: Risk mitigation is now a standard part of deals
Mark noted that COVID is now baked into how lawyers and partners think:
- Force majeure language
- Operating risk scenarios
- Sponsor flexibility structures
- Contingency planning
The core lesson: the industry survived because stakeholders adjusted rather than walked away. That real-world precedent strengthens the “soccer as investable” argument.
9) EB-5 and foreign capital are back in the conversation
They haven’t closed EB-5 previously, but they’ve been deep in it, and they’re actively working with foreign investors now where EB-5 may be part of the capital stack.
Investor takeaway: international capital interest in U.S. soccer is real, and sophisticated projects are structuring for it.
What investors should steal from this discussion
If you’re evaluating a soccer investment in the U.S., your diligence should sound like this:
- Do we control the stadium economics, or are we a tenant with capped upside?
- What’s the site scorecard, and what are the hidden cost multipliers?
- What does the public participation actually consist of (land, infrastructure, tax tools, cash)?
- Does the stadium design enable revenue, or just “hold matches”?
- Is there a realistic mixed-use plan that increases finance ability and investor attention?
- What is the execution path and timeline, and who has done it before?
Final thought
Soccer in America isn’t asking permission anymore. The opportunity now is for investors and operators who understand that a modern club is not just a team. It’s a real estate and community platform with a stadium at the center. If you want the next wave of returns, you have to build like the next wave is real.
