Jump to content

North American Pro Soccer 2017


Gothamite

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Brave-Bird 08 said:

Either way, Cincinnati showed up. That crowd was 95% Cincy fans. 30,000 people. That's a big-time showing because there are other markets bidding for MLS entry who are playing MLS sides at home and not drawing nearly as many. North Carolina FC hosted Houston Dynamo tonight and I'd be surprised if they had 4,000 people. They are bidding for MLS. 

 

I believe Cincinnati sealed itself as one of the two teams to get the expansion nod. That rivalry with Columbus could become something else.

To add to this they broke the US Open Cup attendance (non final) record set by SKC/STL awhile back. This is non regular season game in the middle of the week. I think playing against CBus helped but still, excellent showing by the MLS wannabes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
3 hours ago, Gothamite said:

 

Thats true, at least for early rounds.  Open Cup games tend to draw smaller crowds than league games, so clubs cap costs.  In return, some clubs give away tickets to season ticket holders or sell them at reduced prices. 

 

The NY/NYC match last night was at Red Bull Arena, but attendance was awful. In no small part because the Red Bulls were charging up to $65 a ticket. 

I'm sure it mostly has to do with whether or not a club runs the stadium themselves. SKC for instance play all of their USOC games at Children's Mercy Park as they do their MLS games. I do wonder if some teams will play elsewhere even if they own their stadium.

 

I remember watching a Sounder USOC game a few years back where it looked like they were playing at a local public park. A far cry from the 40K they average for MLS games. It was a really weird contrast. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like how MLS teams play early Open Cup games at different places. It works especially well for New England, who previously played USOC games at Harvard's soccer stadium in Boston (capacity 4000) and this year did the same thing but at Providence College. It's a good opportunity to spread the team's visibility into different places, in this case the target market when your regular stadium is so far away.

Showcasing fan-made sports apparel by artists and designers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Red Wolf said:

I'm sure it mostly has to do with whether or not a club runs the stadium themselves. SKC for instance play all of their USOC games at Children's Mercy Park as they do their MLS games. I do wonder if some teams will play elsewhere even if they own their stadium.

 

I remember watching a Sounder USOC game a few years back where it looked like they were playing at a local public park. A far cry from the 40K they average for MLS games. It was a really weird contrast. 

 

The Sounders play at Starfire Sports Complex, which is their training facility in Tukwila, WA. I've never been, but yeah, it definitely looks like a nice high school stadium more than a pro sports facility:

 

CupSemi-480x360.jpg

 

Starfire-Stadiun-NWSL-Final.jpg

 

1 hour ago, ShutUpLutz! said:

and the drunken doodoobags jumping off the tops of SUV's/vans/RV's onto tables because, oh yeah, they are drunken drug abusing doodoobags

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Gothamite said:

I don't think anybody doubts that they have the numbers.  It's the ownership group that's in question. 

 

I've no doubts about the ownership group as wealthy people capable of owning a team or even their interest in soccer. They've already put a ton of money into the team and they're running it like an MLS club. They're legitimate capital B billionaires. The only question mark is how much they're willing to pay for the SSS. The stadium's cost is at 200 mill and there's a 150 mil expansion fee so 350 total. They said they'd put in 100 for the stadium plus 150 for the expansion fee, which leaves 100 for the remainder of the stadium.

 

Because I'm not a huge soccer fan I say we call their bluff and test how much they really want an MLS team. A. I do believe they are comfortably capable of footing that extra 100 mil or B. they could easily find 100 million from friends without tapping into the pre-existing stadium tax or scamming Newport, KY on the subsidized sports stadium racket. 

PvO6ZWJ.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Brave-Bird 08 said:

Either way, Cincinnati showed up. That crowd was 95% Cincy fans. 30,000 people. That's a big-time showing because there are other markets bidding for MLS entry who are playing MLS sides at home and not drawing nearly as many. North Carolina FC hosted Houston Dynamo tonight and I'd be surprised if they had 4,000 people. They are bidding for MLS. 

 

I believe Cincinnati sealed itself as one of the two teams to get the expansion nod. That rivalry with Columbus could become something else.

 

Lol, get in line, Cincinnati. Sacramento hosted RSL (AKA, not just down the street from their home stadium) and were at capacity. 

 

Cincinnati has a great thing going, and a TON of potential. But there's still a long road ahead if they wanna make it to MLS. 

spacer.png

On 11/19/2012 at 7:23 PM, oldschoolvikings said:
She’s still half convinced “Chris Creamer” is a porn site.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, McCarthy said:

I've no doubts about the ownership group as wealthy people capable of owning a team or even their interest in soccer. They've already put a ton of money into the team and they're running it like an MLS club. They're legitimate capital B billionaires. The only question mark is how much they're willing to pay for the SSS. The stadium's cost is at 200 mill and there's a 150 mil expansion fee so 350 total. They said they'd put in 100 for the stadium plus 150 for the expansion fee, which leaves 100 for the remainder of the stadium.

 

Because I'm not a huge soccer fan I say we call their bluff and test how much they really want an MLS team. A. I do believe they are comfortably capable of footing that extra 100 mil or B. they could easily find 100 million from friends without tapping into the pre-existing stadium tax or scamming Newport, KY on the subsidized sports stadium racket. 

 

Exactly.  We've already seen what happened in St. Louis, when their ownership group backed by a legitimate capital B billionaire walked away entirely over not getting $60M in taxpayer money.  It remains to be seen what the Cincinnati group will do if they are similarly denied public funds.

 

I hope they choose to reach into their pockets and pony up.   If they do, then I think the club has a good shot at getting into MLS.  If they don't, then they don't deserve it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting that Cincy has done such good numbers while Columbus has struggled with attendance for a while. I realize there are other factors at play (stadium related mostly) but I wonder if MLS picked the wrong Ohio market to begin with -- and also if Cincy can keep it up if they're forced to move outside the city core like Columbus has.

Showcasing fan-made sports apparel by artists and designers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And with today's draw, New England is hosting a second Open Cup game and is putting this one back at Harvard in Boston rather than Providence, so they're practically a barnstorming team through the local urban markets this year. Pretty fortunate.

Showcasing fan-made sports apparel by artists and designers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Digby said:

Interesting that Cincy has done such good numbers while Columbus has struggled with attendance for a while. I realize there are other factors at play (stadium related mostly) but I wonder if MLS picked the wrong Ohio market to begin with -- and also if Cincy can keep it up if they're forced to move outside the city core like Columbus has.

The price of tickets vary vastly between teams, so you shouldn't judge. All area college students can get a FCC season pass for $50. Example, the supporters section for the Crew is 3x what it is in Cincinnati (~$330 to $120).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, dfwabel said:

The price of tickets vary vastly between teams, so you shouldn't judge. All area college students can get a FCC season pass for $50. Example, the supporters section for the Crew is 3x what it is in Cincinnati (~$330 to $120).

Sure, but Cincinnati is playing in the USL which is basically an MLS farm league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Digby said:

Interesting that Cincy has done such good numbers while Columbus has struggled with attendance for a while. I realize there are other factors at play (stadium related mostly) but I wonder if MLS picked the wrong Ohio market to begin with -- and also if Cincy can keep it up if they're forced to move outside the city core like Columbus has.

 

Columbus is MLS 1.0. IF FCC gets into MLS, it's what would be MLS 3.0. And yes, I understand that Columbus Crew Stadium 'technically' kicked off the MLS 2.0 era, it really is the turning point, but it didn't ride the wave like Home Depot Center (StubHub Center now), etc.

 

The fans in Columbus by and large still think of the Crew as the team in 1996 playing at Ohio Stadium. A minor league team. Not 'cool'. It doesn't have prestige. When it did get its own stadium, it was a simply erector set constructed north of the city at the Fairgrounds off I-71. It's lack of amenities is notable. It'd make an amazing high school football stadium. But, for MLS, it's not even suburban but not even urban. It's in that in-between zone that just questions why it is there.

 

It's there because it was a quick construction as Ohio Stadium was undergoing renovations and kicked them out. But it led to MLS 2.0. The glut of new stadiums around the country and moving mostly out of the behemoth NFL venues led the way for MLS to be 'big time'.  But, 2.0 was all suburban stadiums. Far from downtown. Bridgeview, Commerce City, Sandy, Carson, Frisco, Chester, etc.

 

But, as popularity gained steam for new markets, those new markets have come in like gangbusters. Portland, Seattle, Vancouver, Montreal, Orlando, Atlanta, etc. Even Kansas City reinvented itself into MLS 3.0 with their new venue and though straying outside KCMO, it's planted in a good location in KCK by the NASCAR track, a baseball stadium, Cabelas, and easily accessible. For proximity to downtown, it's not bad.

 

But, Atlanta is a perfect example of what MLS 3.0 has become. These new cities untouched by MLS 1.0 or even 2.0 see a new team as 'major league' and their support of it is seen as such. And yes, Minnesota is disappointing, if only because you compare it to Atlanta's impressive sellouts. Every 'new' team MLS gains now is going to be primed for successul the same manner as Atlanta. It will be major league in their eyes. FCC, Sacramento Republic, San Diego, NCFC, Indy, Phoenix Rising, etc. If/when they get teams, they will be met by fans like major league teams joining their cities. Nowhere the way the first MLS teams joined. And not even the SSS wave of 2.0.

 

The problem is, all those 1.0 teams are still meandering about either trying to 'reintroduce themselves' to their home market a second time (making a second first impression is difficult). LA Galaxy, you would think, would be huge. But, you can almost gaurantee that LAFC will be the team of 3.0, while Galaxy will be quite clearly the older, burnout brother sleeping on the couch.

 

MLS 4.0 will be in 10-20 years when some of these MLS 2.0 stadiums are going to be replaced. When you see if they have reached the marketshare where they do get the coveted downtown stadium. Columbus is already looking at stadiums closer to downtown near the Arena District or Huntington Park. Where there will be nightlife around the stadium. Bars and restaurants before games, etc. Where the team will actually mean something instead of that weird yellow building you see driving down I-71 that houses a soccer team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Sykotyk said:

The problem is, all those 1.0 teams are still meandering about either trying to 'reintroduce themselves' to their home market a second time (making a second first impression is difficult). LA Galaxy, you would think, would be huge. But, you can almost gaurantee that LAFC will be the team of 3.0, while Galaxy will be quite clearly the older, burnout brother sleeping on the couch.

 

Is this at all accurate? Now, it's been awhile since I've really watched a Galaxy game, but for a GOOD while there, they were pretty much the MLS standard. I went to David Beckham's first game with the Galaxy vs Chelsea (My first ever soccer game, too), and the excitement was absolutely palpable. Has it really slipped off that much since. If so, how? They're the most successful franchise in the entire league. If the Galaxy has really taken that much of a hit, how in the world do they expect ANOTHER LA team to work long term? 

spacer.png

On 11/19/2012 at 7:23 PM, oldschoolvikings said:
She’s still half convinced “Chris Creamer” is a porn site.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Bucfan56 said:

 

Is this at all accurate? Now, it's been awhile since I've really watched a Galaxy game, but for a GOOD while there, they were pretty much the MLS standard. I went to David Beckham's first game with the Galaxy vs Chelsea (My first ever soccer game, too), and the excitement was absolutely palpable. Has it really slipped off that much since. If so, how? They're the most successful franchise in the entire league. If the Galaxy has really taken that much of a hit, how in the world do they expect ANOTHER LA team to work long term? 

In the sense of fan support and ownership support. Coupled with an amazing stadiums located right near downtown LA at the old Sports Arena site, yes. LAFC will be the standard-bearer for LA. The Galaxy located at the 'training complex' in Carson isn't. And playing Chelsea (in an anticipated matchup against an international team while having Beckham). When LAFC is playing FC Dallas and Galaxy is playing Colorado Rapids on the same night both at home, is where you'll see the difference in support. Most LAG games aren't that full of fans.  LAFC is looking to be a constant sellout for at least a while in their already built from day one, Banc of California Stadium.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's actually kind of tragic. That's like taking the Lakers and relegating them to tier II immediately on the formation of the LABC (or something, it's metaphorical). 

 

I've had a pretty much love hate relationship with the Galaxy over the years, but it'd be really sad to see them relegated to the second spot in favor of some corporate, nameless, entity further north. 

spacer.png

On 11/19/2012 at 7:23 PM, oldschoolvikings said:
She’s still half convinced “Chris Creamer” is a porn site.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bucfan56 said:

That's actually kind of tragic. That's like taking the Lakers and relegating them to tier II immediately on the formation of the LABC (or something, it's metaphorical). 

 

I've had a pretty much love hate relationship with the Galaxy over the years, but it'd be really sad to see them relegated to the second spot in favor of some corporate, nameless, entity further north. 

Well, from a distance, that's what is happening. LAG wound up in MLS 2.0, and rode that wave. But, it's not like their stadium is due to be replaced any time soon. Meanwhile, LAFC is riding the 3.0 wave of modern, urban high-end stadiums near urban cores, and it looks like based on their ownership group and already fan interest, they've already taken over before playing a game. My sister lives across the street from where the new stadium is going. The area may not be the best, but at least on game-days, the security in the area will be high, and it will be a walkable, traversable stadium layout and access.

 

It's where LAG should have wound up. But, call it chance, but Chivas failed, LAFC was formed, and everything around it just exceeded anything LAG had a chance to do. Their diehards may stay, and they'll benefit from fans in that direction further from downtown. But, LAFC will be the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cristiano Ronaldo will be playing for LAFC. Galaxy can't compete with that.

 

EDIT: See?

 

Quote

Real Madrid superstar Cristiano Ronaldo reportedly wishes to leave Spain amid allegations the four-time Ballon d'Or-winner defrauded the Spanish authorities of €14.7 million (£12.8 million) in tax. It's also said a return to Manchester United is thought to be his preferred next move.

 

1 hour ago, ShutUpLutz! said:

and the drunken doodoobags jumping off the tops of SUV's/vans/RV's onto tables because, oh yeah, they are drunken drug abusing doodoobags

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Bucfan56 said:

I've had a pretty much love hate relationship with the Galaxy over the years, but it'd be really sad to see them relegated to the second spot in favor of some corporate, nameless, entity further north

 

:rolleyes: 

 

"Corporate"?

 

And they have a fine name. Heck, if only for its ownership group alone LAFC has more personality than the Galaxy does at the moment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.