Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'US Open Cup' started by kenntomasch, Jan 11, 2012.
But you are a fan of the USASA? Whuck?
No, no, no, just the opposite. I've never liked that any of the non-"pro" levels have held up the start of the Cup due to qualifying. The earlier the tournament can start, the more lead time teams have to sell tickets and actually grow this thing into what most of we soccer geeks would like to see.
You'd have more lead time to sell tickets for the first game. Maybe. But if people want blind draws and the host of a given round to be randomly chosen, it can't be chosen until both participants are known, and you can't have a month between games in the tournament.
I would agree with Ken that the teams must be known for a draw, but the recent FA draw puts Chelsea at the winner of the Don's game, so we know the potential venue is either London or Milton-keynes. So we could draw a round ahead but I don't see that gaining time for selling tickets.
This is great for this competition and for soccer in USA in general. Inclusion of all professional teams with amateur teams is step forward. Non-soccer areas could get great nationwide exposure when paired with high level team, especially if they make one big scalp and face another high profile team.
As far as I am concerned, best way for draw would be to have random draw in First Round. 32 teams, 16 ties. Maybe make two "regions" to cut down expenses.
In Second Round, 16 winners would be in one pot, 16 teams that start in this round - NASL and USL teams - would be in other pot. First Round winners would have opportunity to host their match; if they decline, NASL/USL team would host it.
Same goes for Third Round - MLS teams in one pot, Second Round winners in other, and those have chance to host it; if they decline, MLS teams host it - but I do not believe any team would reject hosting Galaxy or Red Bulls or Dynamo or Salt Lake. After all, it is not interesting (for me) in Cup competition to see teams from same division play each other at the start of their campaign (what I don't like in English FA Cup, for example).
From 1/8 finals on total random draw, again with lower teams have opportunity to host match.
Final would be played at team that has bigger stadium.
Also, this fee issue is ridiculous - I don't know for such rule here in Europe. USOC should try to find sponsor(s) to pay competition costs, like travel subsidy and prize money.
Quick! Someone get this to USSF! I'm sure they've never heard of this sponsor thing.
It was just an informal suggestion, there is no need for "insulting".
Charging a fee also keeps five guys who are sitting around stoned one weekend from saying they're going to get a team together and entering the competition and then not showing up. It ensures you have some skin in the game.
As for the notion that playing and beating a higher-level team can do wonders for a lower-level team...four of the 12 D2 teams who have ever beaten an MLS team in the Open Cup no longer exist. Rochester built a reputation beating MLS teams (at home) in the late 1990s, but that reputation was short-lived and didn't keep them from nearly disappearing. It's not the boon some like to make it out to be.
All right, then. Never seen something like this before in several European FAs.
Thanks for clearing this up.
Americans are unreliable that way.
FWIW, the FA Cup has an entry fee, but it doesn't appear to have a hosting fee
Competition Date Fee
The FA Cup 1 April 2012 £75*
The FA Trophy 1 April 2012 £50*
The FA Vase 1 April 2012 £50*
The FA Youth Cup 1 April 2012 £40*
* subject to alteration