Maybe I missed it (you didn't quote anyone you might have been responding to), but I fail to see the relevance.
Yea, yea, yea. Actually I was making fun of the baseball field in the Coliseum. I too thought the drawings looked amateurish until I saw Rossetti did them.
Chivas won't be changing their identity unless they change owners. CUSA are owned by Jorge Vergara - the owner of Chivas Guadalajara. He named the team Chivas on purpose to tap into the Hispanic demographic in the U.S. Obviously that idea isn't panning out too well - but I doubt he would remain the team anyway. That kind of an initiative would have to come from the commissioner and the league. Personally I think that a team trying to appeal specifically to the Hispanic crowd alienates the non-Hispanic crowd and thus the mainstream corporate American crowd. MLS needs to buy out Vergara, get a new owner for the team and move it to a new stadium location.
Oh? Would you care to provide a single example of the commissioner and the league doing any such thing, in any team name change, ever?
I see your point, but I sitll think a team that tries to appeal specifically to th Hispanic crowd could work in certain markets. The real problem with the Chivas name is not only does it alienate non-Hispanics, but also many Hipanics who are fans of clubs that are rivals with Chivas. Basically, the Chivas name appeals only to a subset of the latin american fanbase, and that just does not seem like a path toward any sort of mass appeal.
No, but I've always thought that 2 LA teams, one seen as the "Hispanic team" and the other as the "Anglo team" would make for a hell of a derby. But, as you say, Chivas splits the Mexican fan base, and does nothing for fans of other Latino nationalities.
He can rebrand his team and not get rid of the Chivas part. Chivas USA makes no sense at all. IMO Chivas LA would at least make the name not laughable.
C.D. Independiente Los Angeles Get it? Independiente as in "No longer Chivas de Guad's little brother." I had a talk with some folks at MLSHQ way back in March who've been pushing Vergara in that direction for years. Dude won't budge, unfortunately.
And I'm not sure how much good it would do, with Vergara still the owner. Now, if someone would want to create a new team to put in this new stadium, that might fly. I have little doubt that, if done right, LA could support three teams. The flipside of that coin is that, with Beckham and Donovan, the Galaxy have all but overtly positioned themselves as the "Anglo" team, one that Latinos, particularly Mexicans, can easily hate.
Public-Private financing? LA has had a few really good Central American players on the team, namely Cienfuegos and Ruiz. So while Mexican's can easily hate them (though there are a lot of Mexican Galaxy fans), Central American's have a deeper connection to the Galaxy. Since the Coliseum Commission is involved, it seems doubtful that the Galaxy will have any role in this. Too bad, because for a lot of LA fans, the perfect situation would be to have the Galaxy move into this new downtown stadium (and up the capacity to 27k) and then sell/rent the HDC to Chivas USA.
And wouldn't it make more sense for Chivas to play at the Home Depot Center? Do you think the players stand out front before the game?
I never said it would happen - just that in order that it happen then it would have to come from outside ownership - i.e., the league front office. Which is very unlikely, I agree. So therefore they need to do is buy out Vergara. He is a roadblock to the MLS becoming an "American" sport.
Yes but he also has a lot of political capital in MLS circles for having the cajones to pony up for an MLS franchise back in 2004 when no one else would. If that expansion round had failed, the league would have been on the brink. It's just like Kraft, who also has a lot of political capital because of sticking with the league through it's darkest days. Those two guys especially are holding back some MLS markets but there's not much that can be done about it when the league feels a degree of debt to them.
Business is business though - and you have to be cold about it and demand a re-brand. Chivas USA is almost as bad as "Mexico Galaxy". I understand that they leveraged Vergara before to keep the league afloat but now they have to progress and get rid of him. He is a totally different situation then Kraft who MLS wants to retain. What is the process of getting rid of Vergara? Can the owners just vote to force him to receive a payment for the value of Chivas USA and then assume ownership of the team or take the team out of MLS?
Al Davis just called and wanted me to let you know that that's a successful and embarrassing anti-trust lawsuit waiting to happen.
I don't know that whatever political capital Kraft and/or Vergara possess is enough to block anything that the rest of the BoG wants. Do they have more than one vote each? Can the owners of Seattle or Philly or Kansas City or Toronto or Portland or Vancouver or NYRB really be expected to vote against their own interests because of some gratitude or loyalty to Kraft and Vergara? Somehow, I doubt it. Why do they have to? What legitimate, compelling business reason do you have to stir up this legal hornets' nest? Remember, any assumptions that a rebrand would bring in significantly more revenue is nowhere close to a sure thing, and when you factor in the massive amounts of sponsorship money that CDUSA has brought in, it gets even harder to argue. I think you're confusing your desires for the league's. MLS just doesn't have that much to gain. What makes you think that the league has any more desire to "retain" Kraft than Vergara, even if they could just jettison one of them on a whim? As El Jefe pointed out, no. Nor should they.
Because at least Kraft wants to promote the game in the U.S American market and to corporate America. These are the mainstream Americans and they generally have higher personal income. If you take New England vs. Chivas they are doing about the same financially but the growth potential of NE is much higher than Chivas because it can appeal to Hispanic and non-Hispanic fans. NE's problem is a marketing one - Chivas's is a brand and image one. They have no growth potential. If you have no growth potential then you need to be replaced.
Then, why hasn't he? I think there will be quite a few Revs fans who will have covered their keyboards with Pepsi after reading that.