Gothamite

North American Pro Soccer 2018

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, McCarthy said:

 

 

I think a non-insignificant factor in FCC's success has been due in part to the fact that they were finally a pro sports option that hasn't let the fans down countless times like the Bengals and Reds. The timing was huge. They show up the spring after one of the most devastating postseason losses in NFL history and during one of the least competitive and uninteresting stretches of Reds baseball ever and people went "hey a team in town that isn't actively trying to make me angry". 

 

I know I've passed up going to Reds games to go watch FCC and I never would've thought that even 5 years ago. 

I pretty much dumped the Reds in favor of my second favorite MLB club, the Cubs, just after they hosted the all star game in 2015. Havent even been to a game since around 2014. Only been to one Bengals game my whole life, a game back in 1998 against the Packers. Both clubs have the same problem in which the ownership has done nothing to solve their problems or listen to their fans. The Reds pretty much live off of their farm system because they pay way to much for Joey Votto and for Homer Bailey to sit on the DL all year. As soon as a player becomes a decent player or a fan favorite they trade him away. Its come to the Reds being the farm club for the rest of MLB basically. They have had horrible managing from Bryan Price and Riggleman wasnt any better. I was hoping they would hire Joe Girardi or John Farell but instead we get David Bell who has zero MLB managerial experience. The ownership doesnt listen to the fans and relies on opening day, bobbleheads, anything Pete Rose, or whenever the Cubs or Cardinals come to get fans in the seats at GABP. As for the Bengals, apparently football knowledge skipped a generation in the Brown family. Marvin should have been gone years ago. When FC Cincinnati came to town, I honestly knew nothing about soccer but I watched a couple of their games and became hooked. The team is a breathe of fresh air to the city and not just because they have been winning. The ownership group listens to their fans and supporter groups.They have given us a product we can get behind without promotional gimmicks. Even when the winning dies down, I still think the fans will heavily support this team compared to the Reds and Bengals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Magic Dynasty said:

That’s a familiar predicament.

 

I just hope that FCC is the one of the two expansion buddies that does good, and Miami or Nashville (whichever one is considered Cincinnati’s “expansion partner”) is the one that does bad. Unless LAFC is counted as their expansion partner. Then, well, my condolences.

 

(Seriously though, the last few expansions have featured a team that instantly dominates - NYCFC, Atlanta, and LAFC - and one that never fails to make fans cringe when they watch/talk about them - Orlando, Minnesota, and [insert whoever is considered LAFC’s partner]. Why is that?)

 

For all intents and purposes, LAFC's expansion partner is... FCC. AUFC and MNUFC came in at the same time to take MLS from 20 to 22 teams. LAFC made it 23, and now FCC's making it 24.

 

The circumstances of MNUFC's entry into MLS were quite different from those of AUFC and LAFC, and pretty much guaranteed that the Loons were going to struggle for their first two years in the league. The short version is that AUFC and LAFC were true expansion franchises, each announced three years in advance of their inaugural seasons, which gave them that much time to plan and build their organizations and rosters; whereas MNUFC's move to MLS for the 2017 season wasn't finalized until deep into their 2016 NASL season, and even then they couldn't begin the transition in earnest until after that season was done - which left them about three months instead of years to blow up and rebuild their coaching staff and most of their roster. (Staying in the NASL until they were ready for a proper MLS debut in a new stadium wasn't really an option, as the NASL had already entered its slow death spiral at that point.)

 

Coming from the USL, and also not being finalized until midway through the previous season, FCC's situation resembles MNUFC's more than the other recent MLS newcomers. Judging from the Loons' experience, FCC's best strategy may be to leave their USL squad mostly intact at first, and just build as they go from there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Viper said:

 

For all intents and purposes, LAFC's expansion partner is... FCC. AUFC and MNUFC came in at the same time to take MLS from 20 to 22 teams. LAFC made it 23, and now FCC's making it 24.

 

The circumstances of MNUFC's entry into MLS were quite different from those of AUFC and LAFC, and pretty much guaranteed that the Loons were going to struggle for their first two years in the league. The short version is that AUFC and LAFC were true expansion franchises, each announced three years in advance of their inaugural seasons, which gave them that much time to plan and build their organizations and rosters; whereas MNUFC's move to MLS for the 2017 season wasn't finalized until deep into their 2016 NASL season, and even then they couldn't begin the transition in earnest until after that season was done - which left them about three months instead of years to blow up and rebuild their coaching staff and most of their roster. (Staying in the NASL until they were ready for a proper MLS debut in a new stadium wasn't really an option, as the NASL had already entered its slow death spiral at that point.)

 

Coming from the USL, and also not being finalized until midway through the previous season, FCC's situation resembles MNUFC's more than the other recent MLS newcomers. Judging from the Loons' experience, FCC's best strategy may be to leave their USL squad mostly intact at first, and just build as they go from there.

FCC jumped aheadvof the curve signing MLS mid-level talent during the year. I think that puts them right behind Atlanta and LAFC as far as expectations entering the league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DC United fans haven't been thrilled to hear that the XFL will be coming to Audi Field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t blame them.

 

They had to play in somebody else’s home for years.   Now they have their own, and they have to share.  The fans won’t get a cut of whatever the XFL is paying, they just see that their ownership doesn’t care enough to make DCU the only priority. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gothamite said:

I don’t blame them.

 

They had to play in somebody else’s home for years.   Now they have their own, and they have to share.  The fans won’t get a cut of whatever the XFL is paying, they just see that their ownership doesn’t care enough to make DCU the only priority. 

The league will own the teams, so DCU is likely just the host of the XFL team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, AstroBull21 said:

The league will own the teams, so DCU is likely just the host of the XFL team.

 

Oh, I know that.  But the DCU fans I know are pretty pissed off that, after all this time, they have to share their shiny new stadium with a third-rate interloper.  And for what?  A couple lousy dollars in rent.

 

Unless that rent money goes directly into the club — a DP salary or improvements to the stadium — they will see it as ownership selling the club short.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

Oh, I know that.  But the DCU fans I know are pretty pissed off that, after all this time, they have to share their shiny new stadium with a third-rate interloper.  And for what?  A couple lousy dollars in rent.

 

Unless that rent money goes directly into the club — a DP salary or improvements to the stadium — they will see it as ownership selling the club short.

 

And they're right. That beautiful field is going to be destroyed for garbage football.

 

I'm annoyed as a Sounders fan too. Hopefully they can flip weeks without issue, but if we see XFL football lines on the field during Sounders matches, I'm going to flip my lid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

Oh, I know that.  But the DCU fans I know are pretty pissed off that, after all this time, they have to share their shiny new stadium with a third-rate interloper.  And for what?  A couple lousy dollars in rent.

 

Unless that rent money goes directly into the club — a DP salary or improvements to the stadium — they will see it as ownership selling the club short.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, 4_tattoos said:

DC United fans haven't been thrilled to hear that the XFL will be coming to Audi Field.

 

3 hours ago, Gothamite said:

I don’t blame them.

 

They had to play in somebody else’s home for years.   Now they have their own, and they have to share. 

 

29 minutes ago, DG_Now said:

And they're right. That beautiful field is going to be destroyed for garbage football.

 

Putting aside the gratuitous and unfounded "garbage football" comment (note that the original XFL had consistently good games by the middle of the season), is there any reason to believe that the new DC United stadium's field will be "destroyed" by the XFL team?  Have the Argonauts destroyed the field at Toronto FC's ground?  Have the Chargers destroyed the field at the Galaxy's ground?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 Have the Argonauts destroyed the field at Toronto FC's ground?  Have the Chargers destroyed the field at the Galaxy's ground?

 

There were a number of complaints that the field was in bad shape after the 2016 Grey Cup game and that effected the 2016 MLS Cup.

 

Sebastian Giovinco continues to complain that there is too much wear on the field and that it is a contributing factor to injuries.Ownership had to lay a completely new field in May last year because it was in bad shape and the new hybrid is being installed now. 

 

It's been a big problem in BMO. 

 

https://www.sportsnet.ca/football/cfl/mlse-upgrade-bmo-field-playing-surface-mounting-complaints/ 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.nbc4i.com/news/local-news/officials-announce-location-of-columbus-crew-sc-s-new-stadium/1643114561

 

5Mb4PMV.jpg

GLohnsh.jpg

 

Quote

Officials announced that the future home of the Columbus Crew SC will be in the Arena District. At a news conference Thursday, officials said the new  $230 million, 20,000-seat capacity soccer stadium will be part of the 33 acre Confluence Village, just west of Huntington Park in the Arena District. 

 

The Columbus Partnership, along with a local ownership group led by Pete Edwards, Jr. and Dee and Jimmy Haslam, in partnership with city, county and state officials, and with the backing of Crew SC supporters, have formed an alliance to meet the year-end deadline set by Major League Soccer to complete the purchase of Crew SC.

Confluence Village also will include 885 residential units with a minimum of 20% affordable units, and 270,000 sq. ft. of private commercial and office space that can accommodate up to 1,300 employees.

 

The City, county and new ownership are working toward a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to solidify the details of the sale of the team, a new soccer stadium and the repurposing of MAPFRE Stadium.

 

Mayor Ginther and Columbus City Council announced on Wednesday that part of plan must include transforming MAPFRE Stadium into the Columbus Community Sports Park after the new stadium is near completion. The shared-use center would include an indoor soccer field and basketball courts, tournament-level outdoor athletic fields and programming spaces for multigenerational activities.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope they get it done and that people show up to the new stadium.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Me too, but I do not like the precedent of abandoning a stadium at 20 years old. At least the original wasn't public funding (I don't think).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Digby said:

Me too, but I do not like the precedent of abandoning a stadium at 20 years old. At least the original wasn't public funding (I don't think).

 

Yes, but MAPFRE is kind of a special case, isn't it? It was built to show that soccer specific stadia in the United States were possible and aged dramatically compared to the other stadiums that followed. MAPFRE is kind of a glorified high school football field, complete with far too many bleacher seats for a professional venue.

 

MAPFRE is an important part of American soccer history, both for club soccer, my hometown Rochester Raging Rhinos, and the US men's team. But it's also garbage. Time to move on.

 

EDIT:

Not nice:

mapfre-stadium-field.jpg

 

Nice:

Audi_Field_DCU_vs._Richmond_Kickers_6.27

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Digby said:

Me too, but I do not like the precedent of abandoning a stadium at 20 years old.

 

Baseball abandons ballparks that are twenty years old.  The NFL abandons stadiums when they get to be 20 years old.  This is Major League Soccer finally taking its place among the great sports leagues of our day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Refusing to keep up basic maintenance speeds up that aging process too. The stadium isn't going away though. It'll still be used by the teams and community so there's a bit more life in it yet to come. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never understood that. You spend all this money to build a stadium, and then a couple decades later spend even more money to demolish it, and then drop even more to build the next stadium to get bored with 20 years later! 

 

Wrigley Field in Chicago stood for over 100 years. I don’t hear anyone from the Cubs crying about a new stadium. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, MJWalker45 said:

Refusing to keep up basic maintenance speeds up that aging process too. The stadium isn't going away though. It'll still be used by the teams and community so there's a bit more life in it yet to come. 

Capital Improvements always takes preference over Deferred Maintenance.

 

Sport venue operators think of the "WOW factor" first and most everything else second. That's a budgeting decision and accounting tool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, BigRed618 said:

I never understood that. You spend all this money to build a stadium, and then a couple decades later spend even more money to demolish it, and then drop even more to build the next stadium to get bored with 20 years later! 

 

Wrigley Field in Chicago stood for over 100 years. I don’t hear anyone from the Cubs crying about a new stadium. 

 

You say "you spend all this money to build a stadium"; but the problem is that the teams aren't spending anything, as the stadiums are being funded by municipalities and county governments.

 

As a result, a team's owner has no hesitation about saying "Our twenty-year-old [publicly-funded] stadium is no longer state-of-the-art, so we're going to need a new [publicly-funded] stadium".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now