Thank you, this isnt Euro, China, or South America. In the States we only will enter stadium projects that will end up being profitable, no person or taxable community will agree to build a stadium that is going to lose money or only be used part time, which is how it should be. nobody has given a good reason as to why the national team needs one specific stadium.
I guess St. Elizabeths West Campus was not an option for a location. Instead US Coast Guard HQ will be built there
Whats the diff between Gillette and Cent link in Seattle, which provides the best fan experience in the league? A winning team, thats it. Previous poster is correct, the need or want for a new stadium there exists only on msg boards.
Yes, that (and only that) is it. So let's ignore the reality of location and that one stadium is in the (general) center of the city, while the other stadium is some 30 miles down the highway in Foxboro. (What works for the NFL in these markets won't necessarily work for MLS -- in terms of getting fans, and lots of them -- out to the stadium locations.) There are a lot of good reasons why DC United (and a lot of teams everywhere in a lot of sports) want to have their venues in a centralized location for a city's/region's population.
That's great and all, but when one group of fans cries foul about "location" while another group has shown it to "not mean crap" .... that kind of flies out the window as an "excuse." The Giants/Jets don't play in NY .... the Cowboys don't play in Dallas. Going by today, sure it's easy to say that the NFL juggernaut is the reason. However, these teams have always drawn and they've played outside of their respective cities since the 70's and well before the NFL popularity boom. So what gives ? Why is it an obstacle for soccer fan, but not football fan ?
Because the "soccer fan" and the "football fan" are two different groups (in many senses) and approach and overcome obstacles (or not) in their own ways. The NFL teams haven't "always" drawn. Every start-up league struggles for fans early on. Comparisons to the NFL are meaningless. The market for professional American football in the US is clearly deeper, wider and more established than is the market for professional soccer. MLS is a niche product nationally (and in many, many markets) -- and yes that is changing in certain markets where pro-soccer has taken a strong foothold. Generally speaking, location (of a stadium in a market) is important for the business of MLS. And generally speaking, location (of a stadium in a market) is less important for the business of the NFL where fans are long-established and linked to their team and willing to go the extra mile (get it) to follow their team.
Out of curiosity.. Has Foxboro moved further away from Boston since 2000? The Revolution used to be one of the best attended teams in the league.. Granted, it isn't as simple as "they need a winning team", but Foxboro used to be a perfectly fine location for Revolution fans.
Foxboro was never perfectly fine for the long term, imo. (The Revs and their attendance, like many teams early on, benefited from the "newness" factor for the first few years.) MLS has grown and adapted as a league in the past 12 years. More and more appropriate venues have come on line for MLS. And several of those venues are "well-positioned" within their respective markets. NE (if they remain in that "too big" stadium in that less-than ideal and distant location) will continue to fall behind where the league is going, imo. What the Revs "used to be" will be less and less acceptable as MLS matures as a league. (But of course, Kraft will be able to run his franchise, rightly so, as he sees fit, as it is his investment.)
I know it is a popular idea to build a SSS in or near Boston, but those costs will be extraordinary. Wouldn't it be a more realistic option to just build a modest SSS similar to Montreal/San Jose on the land next to Gillette? There seems to be 2 reasons for building a new stadium A) the atmosphere at Gillette is poor and B) you will draw more in Boston. A small 50M facility like San Jose is going to build would take care of the atmosphere issue. At 16,000 it could be filled, New England has averaged near 15.5k or more 9 seasons and its All-Time attendance from last year is 15.6k. I'm sure building a new stadium and having a better atmosphere would cause a bump in attendance itself.
O.K take this argument to the local gov. or to Kraft, it's not going to happen, they will come to the same solution, the stadium is great, the team is crap and/or fan interest is not there.
How is Kraft's NFL stadium "great" for MLS's needs and reality? Which local government, Boston's or Foxborough's, should one take this argument to? Would the fan interest for the Revs "be there" or be "more there" if the stadium were closer to or in Boston? Perhaps Kraft will not always be the I/O of the NE MLS franchise.
Owners in the U.S, do not seem willing to run a franchise or arena/stadium at a loss, so I dont know if Kraft not being owner makes a diff. I'm not an expert on politics in that area, so maybe I'm saying to much, but from my perspective, the stadium looks fine, similar to Cent Link, diff being that the team is not very good, and fans for that reason or some other reason do not show up.
Does it matter? As long as Kraft is the I/O, you've just got another Kroenke situation. There will be an initial bump from the new stadium, then Kraft's policies that killed the NER fanbase in Foxboro will resume and start to kill off the fanbase at the new location as well. Until the underlying policies are changed (similar to the situation in Colorado, again), the new location isn't going to change much, IMHO.
While NER might not be very good right now, from 2002-2007 they made it to the Conference finals every season and to the MLS Cup 4 of those years, including 3 times in a row (2005-2007). During this period, NER had its three worst average attendances in its history. NER has problems deeper than the quality of the team.
I was going to make another post, then I realized it would just be a re-hash of this one from last week so I figured quoting myself was easier.
What is Kraft doing (or not doing) that's so bad anyway? Could someone Explain it to me, I'm not familiar with the situation in NE.
NE fans can probably go into more detail, but my understanding is that the gameday experience for fans at the stadium, especially supporters groups, is pretty poor. I've heard complaints about rude customer service, heavyhanded security and a general hostility towards organized fan groups. As other teams in MLS have tried to embrace SG's, NE has pushed them away.
Which is the typical form response given every time. It isn't a real thing though. Good thing I qualified what I was talking about then. I figured you'd try poo flinging 101 and left the numbers out for a reason. You responded in yet another typical form response while not bothering to read what was posted to you .... "Since the 70's" <-- you know, when the Giants moved out of NY, followed by the Jets in '85: http://history.giants.com/page/Giants+Stadium+Stats http://www.baruch.cuny.edu/nycdata/sports/nyjets-attendance.htm ... we've moved passed the "start up" league part. Really ? Wow, you learn something new every day. Or not. That means nothing when the question is "why is the drive to MetLife not a deal for football fan, but the drive to RBArena is a deal for soccer fan ?" Ditto Foxboro or Cowboys Stadium/FC Dallas Stadium. ... generally speaking it's important business for any sports team, period. What makes soccer fan different from any other sport fan, so that the stadium location is apparently that big of a deal ? Fan of a sport is a fan of a sport, period. Excuses are like assholes, everyone has them and they all stink.
Heck, many NFL teams draw fans from a large geographic area. Packers fans will drive halfway across the upper Midwest to attend games. A lot of hipster soccer fans smirk at fans of other sports, especially NFL fans. But a fanbase that isn't willing to travel 45 minutes to support American soccer but instead prefers to sit in faux-British pubs and cheer on a team from a place they've never been shouldn't be patting itself on the back for its hardcore fan status.
Come on... it may be the same place but the perception has changed drastically since 2000. It's neither a soccer specific stadium, nor grass pitch, nor the right size for MLS attendance, nor anywhere close to downtown Boston. It's 0 for 4. And the team isn't so great these days, to top it off.
How so? The league doesn't (yet) have a full complement of teams. And some teams/markets are still struggling to get into an "appropriate" venue. DC and NE appear to be two of those teams/markets that haven't (yet) moved beyond the initial (and long) "start-up" phase of MLS. Other markets have achieved different things, and many have built great venues and created "better/stronger/larger" local fan bases and/or better business models/reality for their owners. The fact that Kraft owns/controls his NFL stadium (and that that stadium isn't as centrally located as many of the venues newer to MLS) is a challenge for MLS as a whole. Just as the aging facility and crappy rental agreement is a challenge for United in DC, and why their owners are in such a rush to try to finally get something done in DC (note, not out in the suburbs or up in Baltimore).
And 3 of those 4 were true in 2000 (I think it was still grass then) and 3 of those 4 are currently true in Seattle, yet in both cases the average was/is over 20K. The reason the perception has changed isn't because of the stadium, its because Kraft has run the team into the ground both on and off the field. Until that changes building a SSS will just be throwing good money after bad, like it was in Dallas and Colorado.
Has it really? NER was one of the worst, if not the worst team in the league prior to 2000, yet had one of the best average attendances. Additionally, please explain why NER's three worst seasons for average attendance were during the period when their product on the field was one of the best in the league? The problem with NER is not the stadium, it's location, and definitely not the playing surface, the problem is the FO. If a FO that was actually competent were put in place in NER, then you'd see an improvement in the average attendance, but until that happens, you're just slapping lipstick on a pig.
I see a lot of truth in that. But, imo, if the initiative (and investment) is taken by the NE ownership group (whomever that might be in the future) to actually go out and get a soccer stadium built in/near Boston, then that would be the first step on working to update and improve the "underlying policies" that have been in place at the Revs organization that has always played second fiddle to the Patriots in Krafts stadiums primarily designed for NFL use. The Revs (in a new and appropriate sized soccer venue that is one Boston's public transportation network and better serves that urban populace) will very likely be an organization that will have to work to fill that venue. But that "initiative" and "change" will have to be there, similar to what's happened when KC moved out of there NFL stadium (and finally got new owners and LSP) or when SJ/Houston got out of a series of NCAA football stadiums into their primarily MLS venue, and when RSL or Chicago did the same. Teams (and ownership) evolve and or change hands. Stadiums get built. Some of them are in central/downtown-ish locations. It will be interesting to see what will come of the DC and the NE current stadium situations.
The FO is the problem (or certainly one of the leading problems). but the the stadium and its location certainly aren't helping the FO of the Revs do a better job. A downtown Boston stadium for the Revs would not be "slapping lipstick on a pig" -- it would be getting that market a whole new/better pig. Give/get the Revs and their FO a new stadium (appropriately sized for MLS) and in a closer/better location to Boston, then maybe the Revs FO will adapt/improve. (Or maybe it would actually take a change of I/O for the Revs, more than anything. But certainly a new "Rio Tinto-esque or BBVA Compass-type" stadium for the Revs would help the Revs business/perception overall -- regardless of who operates that NE MLS franchise.