Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'MLS: News & Analysis' started by edwardgr, Jul 2, 2012.
And the fans in front row at Jeld Wen actually get to see the game instead of the back of my head.
Personally, I'm surprised that the only people that count when one is talking about atmosphere in a stadium are the ones sitting in the front row. There must be a noise canceling field a few rows back? Or maybe those fans just sit on their thumbs the entire game?
Going by your avatar, the back of your head is probably pretty interesting...
I wouldn't necessarily count on that.
People tend to forget that before LSP, the Wizards were selling out CommunityAmerica Ballpark for most home games. In fact, I can remember their exact capacity because of that: 10,385. So the fact that they've managed to do as well as they have in their new stadium wouldn't be the most shocking thing I've heard just morning. OnGoal has done a great job marketing the team and getting the fans out to games every since they took over from HSG.
The Earthquakes don't do that at Buck Shaw Stadium. They usually play to less than capacity, although it's close. So given that, I expect that they'll be more like the Impact in Stade Saputo than SKC in Livestrong Sporting Park. They'll get the nice 50% "new stadium bump" their first year, then once the new stadium smell wears off, they'll get a number that represents the competence of their marketing and outreach efforts.
I've gotten to "enjoy" an entire season of Major League Soccer from seats that were at field level.
They absolutely sucked because you couldn't tell a goddamned thing what was going on in the game except for what was right in front of you.
Well that's dumb too, but Celtic at least is probably getting a fat wodge of cash for it. What did the Rapids get out of playing Swansea? Anything at all except fixture congestion?
Presumably ticket sales, and the possibility of picking up some new fans.
Well not to go around in circles, but as I said in my first post, is there a massive community of Swansea supporters in Denver who are not familiar with the Rapids? Plus... ticket sales? They're cannibalizing their own business, because probably people who are going to that game then might not go to the league games. If it were Real Madrid at Invesco or whatever the big stadium is called, then cool, but Swansea at the Dick? Why not just forget about Swansea and market the league games more intensively? I just don't get it.
Well I already know a handful of people who contacted me about buying tickets to the Swansea game that don't normally go to Rapids game (or go to 1-2 a year, which they still went to this year). Its anecdotal evidence but if this repeats itself even 500 times across the city that's 2500 people who the Rapids would not have gotten money from usually.
I think its less about them being Swansea fans and more about them being European soccer fans. Certainly a Real Madrid or a Chelsea probably would have brought out more fans, but also for a significantly increased expense to the Rapids.
been following this chat...sorry for the intrusion....what were the ticket prices for the Swansea match? Around here, whenever we have friendly, there are one of two complaints....."that is crummy opposition...why can't we do better." or (when it is a big club) "wow those ticket prices are outrageous".
Swansea might have been a compromise.....an EPL club which has some profile from the TV (and got a lot of coverage last year because of its "attractive" play) and yet is not of such a size/celebrity where you have to charge $200 to make the whole thing work.
EDIT....of course there is a third complaint that is irrespective of who the opposition is "why are we playing any mid-season friendlies".
$22 in the corners up to $45 for the West VIP seats (midline, west side, shaded from the sun). These are exactly the same prices as single-game tickets for the Rapids. There's also a package deal starting at $40 where you get a Swansea ticket and a ticket to the Portland match the Wednesday after Labor Day.
Remember also that this is the first time the Rapids have played a European friendly since 2008, and any sort of friendly since 2009 (Club America). So there's a bit of "beggars can't be choosers" in the fan base about the opposition, but there's also genuine interest. I'm not the only one who's said they're more interested in Swansea than a Chelsea (for example).
Also I found out this weekend that former Rapid Terry Cooke is acting as Swansea's "agent" for their American tour (arranging hotels, training fields/facilities, etc.). He's still and adviser to the Rapids youth academies and still lives here in Denver so that probably made it easier for the Rapids to arrange the friendly.
That would be me. It's bad enough when it's Real Madrid or Man Utd., but at least you can justify because the MLS owner is making some good money on his investment and you might win over a bunch of Eurosnobs if the MLS performs well. But interrupting your season to play these mid- to lower-tier Premiership teams just looks completely Bush league as far as I'm concerned. It sends the signal that the league isn't even serious about its own championship. And it's not even real soccer, it's a freaking friendly. Bah humbug!
not to pick a fight....but I have never understood this. Leagues/teams around the world play friendlies...why is it only MLS that has to be worried about how they look doing it? (and I know that most friendlies are not during season but some are and the teams from the old countries don't seem to mind doing it for $$$).
As for the opposition....I think MLS would/could win over more Eurosnobs with a decent match/result against a, say, Swansea than they could getting circles run round them by a Real Madrid. I think we all know already that no MLS club is a Real Madrid or United....but measuring up against a team that plays those sorts regularly...well that is interesting to me.
So what did Kansas City beating United mean for the league?
To the eurosnobs it probably was pushed aside with "well United only played the kids and, even at that, they weren't tyring/match-fit or else we would have shown 'em a proper lesson in football"....you see you can't, really, win (other than financially) when you line up one of the really big clubs.
I think, from a personal perspective, I would rather see the teams that are not on my telly every Saturday or Sunday. Good clubs but lower profile within their leagues and, likely, more of true test/measure.
Even with this in mind, the turnaround at LSP was still quite a pleasant surprise. They drew in more season tickets for the inaugural season at LSP (11k) than the 10,385 capacity they had at CommunityAmerica.
From what I've heard, the people in the absolute front row of the TA just wanna get on TV. With this in mind, the front row kids wouldn't care much about the view; they'd just want the TV time.
At worst, they would work like additional "obstructed view" seats.
I think "ridiculous" is the word you are looking for.
You just answered your own question. They are almost never during the season, and if they are it's usually because of a break in the championship due to international fixtures, to keep the remaining players sharp. I would say it's exceedingly rare for "teams from the old countries" to play in-season friendlies, and when they do they get crucified for it from all sides.
Fine, no problem... but why does it have to be in the middle of the MLS season?
Because when else is a European team going to come to North America?
Is Celtic getting crucified for their game against Real Madrid (on a date when the SPL is playing the 5 other fixtures)? Serious question, I don't know the answer.
Well this is from two years ago (I guess flying around the world to play mid-season friendlies is a common occurence for Celtic), and most of the comments are negative:
Edit: Haha.... http://liverpool.theoffside.com/2011/10/4/3108012/liverpool-schedule-mid-season-friendly-against-rangers
So people overseas are deriding MLS for this practice. Not that I care what people overseas think of MLS, but in this case they are correct.
But for the viewers at home, you looked marvelous on TV.
And remember, the important thing isn't how you feel, but how you look.
And you look marvelous.
I'm not sure I understand the smilie, but taking the question straight.
I'm not sure it meant anything for the league.
For Kansas City, it meant 50,000 people in Kansas City paid money to see a game featuring the hometown side. A record that might never be broken. And they got to see the hometown side, shorthanded for half the game, defeat one of the most famous and popular clubs in the world.
And it happened as the club was ramping up its marketing efforts in the lead up to opening the new stadium the following Spring. If I remember, there was a spike in season ticket deposits the week following the ManU game.
Since it's literally impossible for an MLS team to play a non-Scandinavian (or Irish) European team in a friendly without it being midseason for somebody, what exactly is the alternative, other than never playing friendlies?
Perhaps you should move to England then. Or at least consider posting on some England forum instead of here. Please. What would it take? I'm willing to put $5 into a Kickstarter...