Bye Bye Chivas USA, hello nightmare?

[DarthGrumpy]

Well, it's official that Chivas USA is gone. Any chance that MLS realizes what most other US sport leagues refuse to admit that LA is a not a good sports town and 1 team (LA Galaxy) is enough to serve the market? Two teams are not needed. Throwing in Vincent Tan (LA Dragons is the likely name here) into the mix as an owner will not help, either.

http://www.espnfc.us/chivas-usa/sto...chivas-usanew-clubownership-to-return-in-2017

Chivas drew less than 1,000 to some games? Ouch, high school football games in Jersey can easily out-draw that and I won't even mention HS football crowds in Texas.

 

[ZooCougar]

Well, it's official that Chivas USA is gone. Any chance that MLS realizes what most other US sport leagues refuse to admit that LA is a not a good sports town and 1 team (LA Galaxy) is enough to serve the market? Two teams are not needed. Throwing in Vincent Tan (LA Dragons is the likely name here) into the mix as an owner will not help, either.

http://www.espnfc.us/chivas-usa/sto...chivas-usanew-clubownership-to-return-in-2017

Chivas drew less than 1,000 to some games? Ouch, high school football games in Jersey can easily out-draw that and I won't even mention HS football crowds in Texas.

Worst part of this decision is that the soccer side of Chivas wasn't nearly as incomptent as the business side of it. For one, they wouldn't have been the worst team in Canada, and aren't even the worst team in the league. They also have an exceptional youth system with a good staff.

Why didn't MLS just oversee the rebranding when they bought the team back years ago? Also, they should have kept the bed warm and demoted them to USL Pro until 2017.

I guess that the plan is to relaunch in concert with Atlanta in 2017.

The other news is that as expected, Houston and SKC move to west. Making the West a complete murderer's row. Houston and SKC were ragged this year, but they won't be down for long.

With Cascadia, LA, Dallas, KC and Houston the West has most of the biggest fanbases locked up. Also, you have to go all the way back to 2008 to when a eastern team won an MLS Cup now.

 

[DarthGrumpy]

Worst part of this decision is that the soccer side of Chivas wasn't nearly as incomptent as the business side of it. For one, they wouldn't have been the worst team in Canada, and aren't even the worst team in the league. They also have an exceptional youth system with a good staff.

Why didn't MLS just oversee the rebranding when they bought the team back years ago? Also, they should have kept the bed warm and demoted them to USL Pro until 2017.

I guess that the plan is to relaunch in concert with Atlanta in 2017.

The other news is that as expected, Houston and SKC move to west. Making the West a complete murderer's row. Houston and SKC were ragged this year, but they won't be down for long.

With Cascadia, LA, Dallas, KC and Houston the West has most of the biggest fanbases locked up. Also, you have to go all the way back to 2008 to when a eastern team won an MLS Cup now.

Does not help that the East is saddled with 1 disinterred owner (Revolution), a ownership team that appears to be on the way out (Red Bulls), and one team that has spent what seems to be a lifetime trying to find a home (United). Those a major markets not to have a strong team in.

 

[UCFBfan]

My guess is that MLS is going all in on hoping NYCFC and Orlando bring in big markets. Having Man City backing the NYC team should bring some cred to the team but once again, they don't have a home stadium that is soccer specific. I think the issue with may Eastern teams is that they aren't set up in great areas. New England doesn't pull Boston being in a football stadium in Foxboro. Red Bulls never really carried NYC and now with NYCFC, they'll carry even less. DC United is in the center of DC but in a terrible stadium that shouldn't be allowed to host any sporting event. Philly plays in Chester which is south of Philly, Chicago plays 20-30 minutes outside of Chicago, etc....

They should demote Chivas to USL Pro like Zoo said and free up the spot for a USL or NASL team that's proven they can bring fans to the games.

 

[ZooCougar]

Does not help that the East is saddled with 1 disinterred owner (Revolution), a ownership team that appears to be on the way out (Red Bulls), and one team that has spent what seems to be a lifetime trying to find a home (United). Those a major markets not to have a strong team in.

Great points.

The east is like the island of misfit toys.

 

[HuskyHawk]

My guess is that MLS is going all in on hoping NYCFC and Orlando bring in big markets. Having Man City backing the NYC team should bring some cred to the team but once again, they don't have a home stadium that is soccer specific. I think the issue with may Eastern teams is that they aren't set up in great areas. New England doesn't pull Boston being in a football stadium in Foxboro. Red Bulls never really carried NYC and now with NYCFC, they'll carry even less. DC United is in the center of DC but in a terrible stadium that shouldn't be allowed to host any sporting event. Philly plays in Chester which is south of Philly, Chicago plays 20-30 minutes outside of Chicago, etc....

They should demote Chivas to USL Pro like Zoo said and free up the spot for a USL or NASL team that's proven they can bring fans to the games.

The Revs do ok. The team is playing well again and has a solid young core. The team would draw much worse if in Boston. Their core fans are suburban families and contrary to popular belief the immigrant communities that support soccer are not living in Boston. They are in Brockton, Milford (Brazilians), Pawtucket RI (Cape Verdeans), Lowell, Lawrence, etc.

 

[ZooCougar]

The Revs do ok. The team is playing well again and has a solid young core. The team would draw much worse if in Boston. Their core fans are suburban families and contrary to popular belief the immigrant communities that support soccer are not living in Boston. They are in Brockton, Milford (Brazilians), Pawtucket RI (Cape Verdeans), Lowell, Lawrence, etc.

On the field the Revs are pretty good right now, off the field it's basically treated like the New England Patriots' afterbirth. It's a miracle that Kraft signed Jermaine Jones but other than that, they are still the only team that seems to be stuck in 2002.

 

[HuskyHawk]

On the field the Revs are pretty good right now, off the field it's basically treated like the New England Patriots' afterbirth. It's a miracle that Kraft signed Jermaine Jones but other than that, they are still the only team that seems to be stuck in 2002.

Just curious why you say this. They were very competitive for a long time. Produced some great players like Dempsey and Twellman before his injuries, and Charlie Davis before his accident. Attendance has been decent if not among the best. It's up a bunch this year since the team is good. Jon Kraft, not Robert, has always run the Revs.

 

[ZooCougar]

Just curious why you say this. They were very competitive for a long time. Produced some great players like Dempsey and Twellman before his injuries, and Charlie Davis before his accident. Attendance has been decent if not among the best. It's up a bunch this year since the team is good. Jon Kraft, not Robert, has always run the Revs.

Because watching a Revs game, even when the place is "full" it has the atmosphere of a forgotten graveyard. That last game it looked atrocious with all of the football lines that had barely even faded. It's 2014, we shouldn't have to deal with that noise. It's been a long time since they had Dempsey and Twellman. Salgado is pretty good, but even the homer Revs announcers were critical of him last game because he doesn't work both sides of the ball.

And check out these attendance figures:

http://worldsoccertalk.com/2014/10/27/mls-sets-new-attendance-record-in-2014/

Revs are at the bottom third of the league with 74% of the reduced capacity of 22, 500.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Because watching a Revs game, even when the place is "full" it has the atmosphere of a forgotten graveyard. That last game it looked atrocious with all of the football lines that had barely even faded. It's 2014, we shouldn't have to deal with that noise. It's been a long time since they had Dempsey and Twellman. Salgado is pretty good, but even the homer Revs announcers were critical of him last game because he doesn't work both sides of the ball.

And check out these attendance figures:

http://worldsoccertalk.com/2014/10/27/mls-sets-new-attendance-record-in-2014/

Revs are at the bottom third of the league with 74% of the reduced capacity of 22, 500.

Somebody will always be in the bottom third. Attendance up 12%. Everybody would like a soccer only stadium, but I'll say now, if they build it in Boston, or worse, north and east of Boston (Everett for example), I'll never go to a game again. That's the challenge, most of the long time fans live out in the suburbs, not in Boston, and lots of them are from RI, Fall River etc. A new venue on the same property would be good, but I can see why it is hard for the Krafts to justify as revenues wouldn't increase much if at all.

 

[ZooCougar]

Somebody will always be in the bottom third. Attendance up 12%. Everybody would like a soccer only stadium, but I'll say now, if they build it in Boston, or worse, north and east of Boston (Everett for example), I'll never go to a game again. That's the challenge, most of the long time fans live out in the suburbs, not in Boston, and lots of them are from RI, Fall River etc. A new venue on the same property would be good, but I can see why it is hard for the Krafts to justify as revenues wouldn't increase much if at all.

It's up 12% because they improved in form, but it's still well below capacity. I think calling the capacity 20,000 is probably more fair, but even then they are still at like 84%. I think it would be best for all if they sold the club. The team needs break out of that mentality. NE is just bad optics.

Also I agree that putting a stadium in Boston would be a bad idea. That works in some places and in others it doesn't make much sense.

 

[kibblesnbits]

I think it's a miracle the Revs draw as well as they do. I've been to a few games, albeit the last being about 5 years ago, and playing in that giant stadium just sucks the energy out of the game. I enjoyed myself, but not nearly as much as the games I've seen in Columbus, San Jose and Chicago while on business. Even the couple of times that I went to United games at RFK the atmosphere was better - perhaps because it is at least a bowl and the metal stands in the lower level used by the supporters can generate some good foot-stomping noise.

 

[DarthGrumpy]

I think it's a miracle the Revs draw as well as they do. I've been to a few games, albeit the last being about 5 years ago, and playing in that giant stadium just sucks the energy out of the game. I enjoyed myself, but not nearly as much as the games I've seen in Columbus, San Jose and Chicago while on business. Even the couple of times that I went to United games at RFK the atmosphere was better - perhaps because it is at least a bowl and the metal stands in the lower level used by the supporters can generate some good foot-stomping noise.

That hits the nail on the head. Go to a Revs game that is lucky to full 25% of Gillette Stadium (BS to Kraft for 'reducing' the max soccer attended to 20K) and then go to a Red Bulls, Philly, KC, Toronto, Columbus, etc.) and you will see the difference. The only odd-ball is Seattle, who somehow draws 40K to a game (big time props to them), which is double the average MLS per game attendance.

Says the Rev do not need a soccer only stadium is like saying Touch down Pat did not need a new stadium to replace the old Foxborough. One doesn't realize how bad it is until one goes some place else.

 

[ZooCougar]

That hits the nail on the head. Go to a Revs game that is lucky to full 25% of Gillette Stadium (BS to Kraft for 'reducing' the max soccer attended to 20K) and then go to a Red Bulls, Philly, KC, Toronto, Columbus, etc.) and you will see the difference. The only odd-ball is Seattle, who somehow draws 40K to a game (big time props to them), which is double the average MLS per game attendance.

Says the Rev do not need a soccer only stadium is like saying Touch down Pat did not need a new stadium to replace the old Foxborough. One doesn't realize how bad it is until one goes some place else.

My only beef with Seattle is that turf field. Same with Portland and Vancouver.

 

[ZooCougar]

I think it's a miracle the Revs draw as well as they do. I've been to a few games, albeit the last being about 5 years ago, and playing in that giant stadium just sucks the energy out of the game. I enjoyed myself, but not nearly as much as the games I've seen in Columbus, San Jose and Chicago while on business. Even the couple of times that I went to United games at RFK the atmosphere was better - perhaps because it is at least a bowl and the metal stands in the lower level used by the supporters can generate some good foot-stomping noise.

I went to USMNT game at RFK like ten years ago. It was a dump then, I can't imagine what it is like now! I heard it has a raccoon problem. DC fans are pretty amazing for putting up with that for so long.

 

[HuskyHawk]

That hits the nail on the head. Go to a Revs game that is lucky to full 25% of Gillette Stadium (BS to Kraft for 'reducing' the max soccer attended to 20K) and then go to a Red Bulls, Philly, KC, Toronto, Columbus, etc.) and you will see the difference. The only odd-ball is Seattle, who somehow draws 40K to a game (big time props to them), which is double the average MLS per game attendance.

Says the Rev do not need a soccer only stadium is like saying Touch down Pat did not need a new stadium to replace the old Foxborough. One doesn't realize how bad it is until one goes some place else.

They do need one, but the crowd now is better than in was 5 years ago. The area where the core supporters sit is now more enclosed and the team does more to make things fun. But no, you'll never get the right atmosphere there, except for international matches.

But Patriot place changed everything, and really makes it fun for families before and after games (time depending). That's why I think the best solution would be a stadium at the site, but I don't see a place for it.

 

[ZooCougar]

They do need one, but the crowd now is better than in was 5 years ago. The area where the core supporters sit is now more enclosed and the team does more to make things fun. But no, you'll never get the right atmosphere there, except for international matches.

But Patriot place changed everything, and really makes it fun for families before and after games (time depending). That's why I think the best solution would be a stadium at the site, but I don't see a place for it.

Seems like treating the core supporters in any MLS club is a major key to success. The Timbers and the KC seem to do it the best. They are just as much part of the club as the players and the coaching staff. KC even buys tickets for members of the Cauldron for away games. They are almost like student sections in college sports except even more organized.

 

[UCFBfan]

But Patriot place changed everything, and really makes it fun for families before and after games (time depending). That's why I think the best solution would be a stadium at the site, but I don't see a place for it.

Isn't this what it's like at KC? Zoo I believe you said that there is a similar set up where that stadium is. It makes sense to have. It would be nice if all stadiums could survive in urban centers and supporters could walk to games from downtown but it's true that right now most MLS teams are supported by suburban families. It's why Chivas will never thrive as a second LA team. The minority population that they wanted to pull from doesn't have interest right now.

 

[UCFBfan]

My only beef with Seattle is that turf field. Same with Portland and Vancouver.

Was Portland always a turf field? I can't imagine how much it's gotta suck playing on turf. Gotta be rough on the body when taken down or slide tackling, etc...

 

[ZooCougar]

Isn't this what it's like at KC? Zoo I believe you said that there is a similar set up where that stadium is. It makes sense to have. It would be nice if all stadiums could survive in urban centers and supporters could walk to games from downtown but it's true that right now most MLS teams are supported by suburban families. It's why Chivas will never thrive as a second LA team. The minority population that they wanted to pull from doesn't have interest right now.

Sporting Park is in a giant commercial/entertainment area. It's surrounded by the NASCAR track, restaurants, a huge movie theater and an outdoor mall. It's also located in a spot at the junction of 435 and I 70. Very easy to get to from the suburbs of Missouri, Kansas and downtown. It's definitely a younger hipster sort of crowd, and with a heavy dose of suburban families.

 

[ZooCougar]

Was Portland always a turf field? I can't imagine how much it's gotta suck playing on turf. Gotta be rough on the body when taken down or slide tackling, etc...

I think so. Surprised me that it was turf as well. Still probably the most unique stadium anywhere though.

 

[UCFBfan]

I think so. Surprised me that it was turf as well. Still probably the most unique stadium anywhere though.

Was surprised because it used to be a Minor League baseball stadium I believe. Then University of Portland or whatever it's called played their football games there.

It's one stadium that's on my bucket list of places to go. The crowds always look amazing.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Sporting Park is in a giant commercial/entertainment area. It's surrounded by the NASCAR track, restaurants, a huge movie theater and an outdoor mall. It's also located in a spot at the junction of 435 and I 70. Very easy to get to from the suburbs of Missouri, Kansas and downtown. It's definitely a younger hipster sort of crowd, and with a heavy dose of suburban families.

Yeah, I'd love to go. I was born in KC (well Shawnee Mission Hospital) and went back to law school at KU and lived in Lenexa for a stretch after, worked downtown. Haven't been back lately despite the urging of friends and relatives. I really need to make the trip, was waiting for a UConn - KU game at Allen to make it irresistible. Go Royals!

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

Also I agree that putting a stadium in Boston would be a bad idea. That works in some places and in others it doesn't make much sense.

Why? Some of the fan base may/will change, but it's a joke to suggest a stadium closer to Boston (Revere in Boston itself, Somerville, etc.) with MBTA access nearby would not attract fans. Some of the suburban crowd, especially south of the city and around Providence would probably go away. On the other hand, Boston itself as well as neighboring towns have their own soccer fans and strong, large ethnic groups. Unfortunately, the blow hard owner Kraft will dikk around as long as he can get away with it with MLS and probably until someone else builds a stadium. Where? Who the phark knows, but the Revs definitely should not play in Gillette Stadium.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Why? Some of the fan base may/will change, but it's a joke to suggest a stadium closer to Boston (Revere in Boston itself, Somerville, etc.) with MBTA access nearby would not attract fans. Some of the suburban crowd, especially south of the city and around Providence would probably go away. On the other hand, Boston itself as well as neighboring towns have their own soccer fans and strong, large ethnic groups. Unfortunately, the blow hard owner Kraft will dikk around as long as he can get away with it with MLS and probably until someone else builds a stadium. Where? Who the phark knows, but the Revs definitely should not play in Gillette Stadium.

Revere is the single hardest place to get to in all of metro Boston, and Everett would be next on the list. Soccer is not an urban sport in the USA as it is in Europe, that's basketball. It's a suburban sport, and that is the primary fan base. Any new stadium needs to be car friendly from metro-west and the south shore.

If you put it in Boston proper, the only spots that could make any sense are (a) South Boston Waterfront (b) Allston/Brighton or (c) West Roxbury somewhere close to 128.