I've seen some of the DC mock-ups and they look pretty nice. We have had no mock-ups or anything at all. There were also some actual sites in play for DC, weren't there? Price George County, I remember had a proposal that fell through, and somewhere else in DC itself, I think. I don't think they are going to move, although it seems like something is going to have to happen in the next few years. RFK is more than 50 years old and can't last too much longer. Could they play somewhere else for a year or 2 (Redskins, U Maryland?) and tear down RFK and build a new stadium on the same site? One of the interesting rebuttals from the Revs article came in a tweet from none other than Steve Nicol, saying that a pysical model of the new stadium exists. I'm paraphrasing, but he said something like, "Ah seen it weth mah vary eyes. Ett looks a wee bett lake Haaarts or mebbie Dundee Yin-nate-edd." And then he went on to say that "the environmentalists" were making the project difficult. If that's true, there must be an actual site in mind. Even if that site is the breeding habitiat of a rare, nearly extinct species known as Stadiumus Nonexistimus, for "environmentalists" to get up in arms, there would have been at least some public hearings, etc. Some of the folks on the Revs boards are pretty dilligent about that sort of thing, so we certainly would have heard about it.
DC is about to have a new mayor, she just won the party nomination over the existing mayor and will win the general election in November. She's been openly hostile to a DC United stadium. I'd put the odds and no better than 50/50 that anything happens on the stadium front in/around DC during her tenure.
Just curious but from what I understand, while she was against the move initially, that she's backed down a bit and might be more open to talking about it.
Could be. Politics in DC is insane. There was support from the incumbent, but Bowser has been much more opposed. Our owners have the money to make it happen, just not sure if they'll settle for anything less than a sweetheart deal.
You're correct, most of her opposition was to distinguish herself from Grey, cos they were identical in every other issue Politicians don't have their own opinions.
Who sez Kraft is the worst owner ever? He just had a new turf field put in (it's exactly the way the Patriots wanted it!), new box-style goals and had the door to the Revs locker room painted with "This is New England" and a Revs logo. Woo. Hoo.
You're probably right. And that's the problem. I'm sure the politics are difficult -- so what else is new? -- but at some point the blame lies with MLS and the various ownership groups. The days of sweetheart stadium deals are over. Just ask Lew Wolff. If DC United wants a stadium, it needs to pay for a stadium. But by screwing around, they will likely approach their 20th anniversary without one, which has to be a record for futility. It is inexcusable. I know many people view Chivas USA as one of the league's great failures, but I disagree. Chivas USA didn't work, but MLS will get out of it whole. No shame in that. DC United looms as MLS' greatest failure IMO. This is one of the league's great teams in a major market, and MLS is watching it turn to ash. How much less is this team worth right now because it couldn't get a stadium built? $50 million? More? It's unbelievable it has come to this. In the consummate deal-making town, is there no one at DC United or MLS who can close a friggin' deal?
The thing is, most reports suggest DC United is willing to pay for the stadium as long as the city pays for the infrastructure. The hangup seems to be certain politicians using some of the land/buildings being purchased as a bargaining chip to try and lure something other than a stadium in/to jack up the price and the owners balking at the pricing there. With that said, it's been so long, and the owners purchased Inter Milan in the interim, that I'm starting to not believe the story our owners have tried to feed us. It wouldn't completely shock me if DC had new ownership before having a new stadium, but I'm more negative on it than most I suspect.
DC United and New England need to be sold and almost "re-started" if they are to actually become something significant in this league. Chicago and Columbus need to re-start big time and perhaps look at new stadium options already if they are to become a fixture in their cities.
You do realize that it is impossible for every franchise to be "significant in this league" I'm not saying it's not a good idea to give the Krafts guff, or complain about RFK, but there will always be a "worst". And talking about the Fire getting out of Toyota Park? In what fantasy land do you live in? You realize what it took to get in to Toyota Park, right?
I know every team won't be significant, sell-out every week, super brand sides but if you look at New England, DC United, Columbus, and Chicago (and maybe even Dallas and Colorado) you see sides which could be so much more than they are now and who could all get much more support from their city/state than they are currently getting. As for Chicago, yes, I understand how hard it was to get Toyota Park and years later that has to be all for nothing.
If you mean re-start getting a new owner then you're correct, because as long as Dollar Menu is our owner this is what your going to get from us. TOYOTA Park isn't the problem, it's our owner.......
Like going back to our original red/white stripe primary jersey. We don't need to rebrand, we need a new owner.
Wait, you want to destroy one of the strongest, most iconic brand identities in league history because of a few years of neglect and mismanagement? Your cures do not fit the diseases.
Ya, basically that. Get a new owner who is hopefully ambitious about using the Chicago market to really make this team a part of the city, go back to your roots, maybe a new stadium IDK, and just try increasing the profile. Of course this is all easier said than done but I don't see much else working.
No... when did I say I wanted to do that? Just increase the ********ing profile! Keep the logo, keep the name, nothing wrong with those but just increase your damn profile because right now the Fire play in a 20,000 who supposedly make 16,000 a game (as if it looks anything like that at the actual game) and from the looks of it they are invisible in Chicago... like no one knows who they are. Is that right? I dont think so.
Like I said the stadium isn't the problem, but if we did get a downtown stadium that definitely wouldn't hurt. It's the owner that's the number ONE problem, he's running the team on cheap. He says he willing to sign a "Keane-money" player, but he said that 3 1/2 years ago and we gotten nothing close to "Keane-money" player (Puppo, MacDonald and Anangono). All of them were brought in using allocation money, he just doesn't use any of his (wife's) money to bring in players like Keane, Donovan, Henry, Bradley, Dempsey, Defoe......Hell we had a player wanting to join the team (Mila, not even a DP player 200-300k max), who would of put us over the top in 2013 (at least make the make playoffs and make a run at MLS CUP 2013), but his response was "That's all NONSENSE"....... So until he changes (which no one thanks he will) or he sells the team, what you see is what you get. So he would rank with Kraft at the bottom of the list for sure, at least DC is trying to get a SSS. #HauptmanOut
That does sound miserable and then when you guys do get the high profile players like Freddie Ljungberg and Álvaro Fernández they never play well.
We were happy with Ljungberg, but when it was time to resign him Dollar Menu didn't. All we have done was rent a DP (Castillo, Ljungberg and Rois) or sign third division no names (Puppo, MacDonald and Anangono). #HauptmanOut
And that is supposed to mean? The Red Bulls have since gained a new SSS stadium and have signed probably the best player not to win the World Player of the Year award in Thierry Henry. Of course, they are far from perfect but an ownership change and stadium change is a massive 0% for them and all they can do is market better.