Tulsa Athletic is set to kick off its 10th season and is flying high and feeling confident. The team finished last NPSL season with a deep playoff run and built off that success with a great 2023 USOC stretch that included a win over a professional USL Championship club. But all the momentum from the field of play is dissipating thanks to this week’s ruling from the NPSL that the team’s home venue is not in compliance with the league’s minimum standards. With just a week till the regular season kicks off, questions are swirling around the future of this little club from Tulsa.

The journey of Tulsa Athletic and its search for a home field is a long one with multiple stops along the way. After a season in a high school stadium in 2017, an environment that Sonny claims “almost killed us,” the team decided to look for another option. A high school wasn’t a good fit for Tulsa, “the nature of our club doesn’t mesh well with that environment.” So in 2018, Tulsa Athletic began playing matches in a literal park, Veterans Park, in downtown Tulsa. While some might have felt the park wasn’t up to minimum standards (technically that would be correct), Athletic obtained waivers from the league and, according to Sonny, “our conference teams got it.” So the club leaned into it. The club would set up fields on game day, installed modular showers and locker rooms. From Sonny’s perspective, it was a unique and cool environment. People could bring some beers, lay under the trees in the park and watch some soccer. However, long term, it wasn’t sustainable as the club couldn’t charge gate fees.

At the end of 2021, the Tulsa Parks and Recreation Department reached out to the club with a couple of properties that might be better homes for now well-established NPSL club. Those spaces were in underserved communities within the city and, for Sonny, fit the “clubs mission statement.” The team settled on Athletic Community Field at Hicks Park, because it seemed to check all the boxes. It had two locker rooms, showers, a lit field, concession stand, bleachers for 650. Sure, the playing surface needed work, but the club was game to invest the time, energy, and money to get it where it needed to be.

Tulsa has made its current venue a home for its fans.

According to Sonny Dalesandro, the issues began to escalate last year during the playoffs, when league officials “expressed concern about the venue, claiming we [the club] played in an open park.” Dalesandro denies that claim was true. The notice from the NPSL came hours before Tulsa’s opening match against Laredo. The league allowed that match to take place as scheduled, but wanted the club to change venues for the remainder of the playoffs. Tulsa complied with that order. At the time, the club wanted to fight the decision, but “didn’t want to disrupt club chemistry” with a playoff run set to begin.

At the NPSL’s owner meeting during the offseason, club co-owner Dr. Thomas Kern approached NPSL Chairman Kenneth Farrell regarding the league’s complaints about the venue and how the club could correct them before the 2023 season. According to Sonny, Farrell told Dr. Kern to “just give me a call and we’ll work things out.” At the same meeting, NPSL Managing Director, Cindy Spara, was also approached about the Hicks Park facility. Her response was less reassuring, “I make the final decision and you guys play in an open park [which would be a violation of the league’s minimum standards].” That decision was finalized this week, when the league declared that the club had to find a different venue before the season kicks off, originally scheduled for this weekend.

For Dalesandro and Tulsa Athletic, the issue is lack of transparency from the league regarding how the club could correct the issues with its venue. The team has repeatedly asked for an explanation for “what within the existing minimum standards is deficient” and, according to Dalesandro, the NPSL has yet to supply that information. In fact, knowing that the league had concerns, the club had already made steps to increase the effectiveness of the venue. The club had a standing $18,000 order with Canopy Tents, an NPSL sponsor, for mesh fencing around its facility, but chose to cancel the order after this ruling. Tulsa seems willing to work with the league, but the league doesn’t appear to be helping the situation.

Sonny, on right, working with Dr. Kern and Sid Stewart to improve the field at Veterans Park.

The venue, according to the club, meets the NPSL’s minimum standards. In a statement released on social media yesterday, Tulsa listed those standards:

Closed stadium (not an open park or a park with temporary enclosures)
Seating for five hundred (500) people
Field size measuring a minimumof 65 yards X 110 yards and a maximum of 80 yards X 120 yards
Locker room for visiting team
Showers onsite for visiting team (3)
Working PA system

As Sonny points out, the venue was good enough to host a US Open Cup match just a month ago (April 5) against a visiting USL Championship club, FC Tulsa. Club officials from FC Tulsa toured the facility and signed off before the match, even commenting that they liked the setup.

Upon the club announcing the conflict regarding the venue, supporters began listing other NPSL club venues that wouldn’t meet minimum standards. But, according to Sonny, that isn’t what he’s hoping for. Instead, he wants the league to focus on spreading the game into more cities across the country and facilitating club success. “The design of the NPSL is built to grow the game in local communities.” When Sonny served on the Board of Directors, he made it a point to work with clubs who might be struggling with finding the perfect facility. Now that he is off the board, his own club is getting no such support. “We’ve been fought tooth and nail on an issue they have yet to clearly state where we’re deficient.”

For his part, Sonny was reticent regarding the league’s motivations, but others with experience were much more outspoken. Dan Hoedman, founder of former NPSL club MPLS City (which recently moved to USL League Two), responded to Protagonist Soccer regarding his experiences with the NPSL leadership team. “I’ve had enough experience with league discipline to know that it’s a kangaroo court. Cross the wrong person and you’ll face a never-ending litany of fines and disciplinary procedures, many of which are at the sole discretion of the Managing Director or Executive Board. Support the right person and it doesn’t matter what rules or bylaws you break, enforcement is at the pleasure of the Managing Director or Executive Board. I have five years of examples from personal experience. I don’t know what specifically is happening with Tulsa. I do know that their field hosted an Open Cup game against a USL Championship side, though. It’s clearly of the right standard. That they have to tweet about what is happening to them while they appeal to USSF about NPSL not allowing a home field that is USOC-worthy is a situation that reeks of the type of vexatious litigation that I dealt with constantly when I had a team in the league.” After making the statement, Hoedman joked about the reaction he might get from the league and quipped that “at least now that we’re out of the league they can’t open a disciplinary proceeding to kick us out. Again.”

Considering the success of Tulsa Athletic in this year’s US Open Cup competition, finishing its amateur run furthest (losing to an MLS club in the 3rd round and winning $25,000 in prize money), observers might think the NPSL would be doing everything it could to protect and promote a flagship club. Instead, the league has thrown a massive wrench into Tulsa’s 2023 season and created a host of problems with a very short time frame to fix. Regardless of the reasons why, the league should have supplied a list of correctible issues to the club long ago. If the club is correct in its description of the situation, the NPSL is failing in its stated goal of helping grow its member clubs.

In preparation for this story, a list of questions were sent to the NPSL’s media relations representative:

When did the league decide and when was Tulsa notified that the location did not meet minimum standards?
What part of minimum standards did the location fail to meet?
Does the fact that FC Tulsa (USLC) played a USOC match at the field just a couple of weeks ago have any impact on the league's perspective?
If Tulsa Athletic fails to find a venue, what is the next step by the league?
Is the league holding all clubs accountable on minimum standards?

The NPSL responded that there would be no comment from the league on our questions.

- Dan Vaughn