Problems with US Soccer

[Joe Gannon]

9,000 people at a World Cup Qualifier and half of them for the other team that doesn't even have a population of 50? This crap has got to stop - but before I go on, great job to all of you that did show up at the match - our boys played well - although we still can't finish - and the cheering was good.
Also, thanks to all who came by and saw the WCX. The contingent from DC had a great time, loved hanging with you all and look forward to the next one.

Now, two questions are eating at me- 1. Why can't this game catch on and 2. How can I help to get this thing going?

It won't catch on because it doesn't get enough play. For whatever reason, the powers that be don't really want it to succeed. So then, ? 2?
What can we do? Ans. - Every person I have taken to a game is hooked. Period. So, if all of us that love soccer would stop complaing to each other about the problem and jsut bring people to the games we can start filling these venues out and make this thing happen. Commit yourself. Think of anybody and everybody, invite them, encourage them, shoot, give them tickets as a Christmas or birthday present. Whatever, just get them to one game and we can get this thing going. Let's all be ambassadors for our boys.

[Thomas Flannigan]

Good thoughts, Joe. The USMNT is obviously facing an attendance disaster. A big part of the problem is game fatigue. DC and Foxboro, DC and Foxboro, with an occasional Columbus. Those cities have had so many games you can't keep track of them, while the rest of the country is starving for games.
The USWNT has an attendance disaster too, but they have drawn good crowds when they have taken the show on the road, to New Orleans, Salt Lake City and other venues.
TV ratings are hurt by putting so many games in DC and Foxboro too.
The USSF has heard this argument a thousand times, so where do they put the qualifiers in the semi-finals? DC, Foxboro and Columbus.

[geordienation]

Good thoughts, Joe. The USMNT is obviously facing an attendance disaster. A big part of the problem is game fatigue. DC and Foxboro, DC and Foxboro, with an occasional Columbus. Those cities have had so many games you can't keep track of them, while the rest of the country is starving for games.
The USWNT has an attendance disaster too, but they have drawn good crowds when they have taken the show on the road, to New Orleans, Salt Lake City and other venues.
TV ratings are hurt by putting so many games in DC and Foxboro too.
The USSF has heard this argument a thousand times, so where do they put the qualifiers in the semi-finals? DC, Foxboro and Columbus.


Nice try, Tom.

The problem was ticket pricing. The average $25 ticket was just wayyyyyyyy too high for the casual fan in a game that was supposed to be a blowout. If it had been someone the US wasn't supposed to crush, then you'd have seen higher attendence.

The price point was just too high.

England doesn't sell out when they play the Faroe Islands and the US isn't going to sell out against Grenada when the ticket prices are ridiculous. Not a lot of road warriors making the trip for an easy win. They save it for when the games matter.

[gettysburg32]

I wasn't able to get to Columbus for a couple reasons even though I wanted to and tried planning for it for awhile (mainly, the baseball team I'm helping coaching had games this weekend, so I couldn't get away), I was able to watch on TV. So I'm not the best example of doing everything possible to get to a US match. I've been a growing fan of US soccer since 94, but after the 2002 WC I said "I gotta get to some games." Anyway, I've been to three US nat games in the last year and a half. El Salvador in DC, New Zealand in Richmond, and the last U-23 qualifyer vs. St. Kitts in Maryland.

All three matches I took others with me. To the El Salvador match I went with three old high school friends. To the New Zealand match, those three guys went with me again. My girlfriend went with me too. As did my younger brother and three of his friends. We just so happened to run into a couple other friends when we were already in the stadium. We had a group of 11 or 12 people sitting together and had 9 people at the pre and post game tailgate, it was a sh!t load of fun. To the U-23 match, just my girlfriend went with me. It was a spur of the moment decision by me to go. (Frederick, MD is only 35 minutes from Gettysburg) But it was about 45 degrees and pouring for about 2/3rds of the match. We both still had a great time, Rock On David Testo!

Not to be bragging or anything, but I was always the "organizer" or "leader". I headed up the tailgating, got the tickets taken care of, knew about the opponent, told everyone when to be where, etc... Most of my friends (mostly college-age like me) had watched most or all of the 2002 WC. Some had played soccer during grade school and high school. All, my GF included, were fair-to-huge sports fans in general.

Guess what, out of the 8 guys and gals I took to the New Zealand match, 7 have since (numerous times) asked me "when are you going again?" or "when does the US play again?" or "when does WC qual. start?" or "Do you know when the US will play around here again?" or "let me know if you're going to another US game." etc... I'm always surprised. I'm the most devoted of the group, and still am, but practically everyone out of that group wants to go to more matches and knows that US soccer matches are a heck of a lot of fun. Yesterday I, my brother, and a couple of his friends came over and watched the match. I'm hoping to organize a big road trip to the Columbus and/or Foxboro semifinal group match. If I start far enough ahead of time, hopefully work, classes, coaching etc. won't get in the way.

Basically, Joe, IMO you're right on the money with you're answer to "how can I help get this going." I know by posting this on Bigsoccer I'm mostly preaching to the choir. But I thought my "Alleluia!" definitly fit in here.

[Thomas Flannigan]

The terrible crowd yesterday was not an isolated occurrence. Foxboro has had some terrible crowds and keeps getting games. DC has been better but has had some terrible crowds too, such as the El Salvador game. Other sports grew into national sports with barnstorming tours that developed audiences all over the country. The USSF shows no interest in that. Don't be surprised to see terrible crowds and terrible TV ratings with current USSF policies.

[mpruitt]

How again does where the game is being played affect TV ratings? Counselor would you like to use any facts to support that evidence?

[The Magpie]

Tom,

The USMNT is not "facing an attendance disaster," but there is more that could be done to ensure better attendances at these matches, from better promotion and cheaper ticket prices, to the inclusion of new venues that might not, or do not regularly host matches.

Yes, D.C. and Columbus get a large number of matches, as do some other venues. That being said, over the last ten years, U.S. Men's National Team games have played all over the country.

If the rest of the country is starving for games, then have someone with enough $$$ and enough experience put in an official application for a match.

Comparing how the U.S. Women's Team draws as opposed to the men is a poor argument to make, as the fan demographics are different for each, the nature of said interest is different as well, as are the various marketing and promotional schemes tied to it. They're simply, two different animals who share the same color.

I'd love to see your proof confirming that the number of games in DC and Foxboro hurt TV ratings.

The Magpie

[SmittyLax6]

Tom,

The USMNT is not "facing an attendance disaster," but there is more that could be done to ensure better attendances at these matches, from better promotion and cheaper ticket prices, to the inclusion of new venues that might not, or do not regularly host matches.

Yes, D.C. and Columbus get a large number of matches, as do some other venues. That being said, over the last ten years, U.S. Men's National Team games have played all over the country.

If the rest of the country is starving for games, then have someone with enough $$$ and enough experience put in an official application for a match.

Comparing how the U.S. Women's Team draws as opposed to the men is a poor argument to make, as the fan demographics are different for each, the nature of said interest is different as well, as are the various marketing and promotional schemes tied to it. They're simply, two different animals who share the same color.

I'd love to see your proof confirming that the number of games in DC and Foxboro hurt TV ratings.

The Magpie

You guys just don't get it. Columbus and Foxboro get these games because they can control the tickets. You'll notice that you hardly ever get a hostile crowd in C-bus or Foxboro. That's because the Revs and Crew handle the ticket distribution and only sell to their season ticket bases. Everyone knew that this would be a tough sell for the Greneda match because of the opponent. Let's relax. I'd rather have small crowds which support the Nats, than the Guatamala dissaster in DC 5 years ago.

[Thomas Flannigan]

Rock groups hate to tour but they have to tour to sell records. A group from California that has never played on the East Coast will sell fewer records than a rock group that tours there.
It was not so long ago that baseball was a New York City thing and American football was called the "Boston Game" because it was only played in that area. How do you think it came to pass that both sports became wildly popular in California, with TV ratings increasing throughout the fifties, sixties and seventies? Teams barnstormed and finally the sports caught on. They would not have caught on if no one out there got a chance to see the game played in person by quality teams.
You can't expect to build a national fan base for the USMNT by playing in the same places over and over again when big cities elsewhere are dying for a game.
I know the USWNT has a different demographic, but so what? Two years ago the USWNT played in front of 5,800 fans at RFK and they must have been counting the ushers and hot dog vendors. Then they play in New Orleans and Salt Lake City and sell a lot of tickets, and leave behind fans who may switch on the TV when the next game is on TV.
The USSF is digging a very deep grave in Foxboro. The crowds are very bad and you really could do a lot better in 15 other cities.

[SABuffalo786]

I thought that Guat game was one of the better USA crowds of all time.

[mpruitt]

It was not so long ago that baseball was a New York City thing and American football was called the "Boston Game" because it was only played in that area.
I've never heard that the origins of American football was called the 'Boston Game' due to it apparently starting at Dartmouth, but I suppose I'll take your word on it. Furthermore, 'It was not that long ago?' What like over 100 years? Do you think maybe the expansion and relocation of teams to west of the Missippi might have something to do with a population boom on the West Coast? TV ratings increase throughout the fifties? As opposed to when the twenties? C'mon Tom, give me a break.

You have a semi-valid point in that we're a big country with a big audience and it's too bad that the National Team doesn't play all around the country on a more frewuent basis. That might do a better job to build their brand. You're also talking about this in refference to a World Cup Qualifier. I'm completely content with not having the World Cup Qualification process being part of a 'barn storming tour.'

Additionaly I watched a USWNT friendly last weekend from Louisville where the stadium appeared more than half empty and the feild was lined with football markings, endzones and a giant cardinal in the middle of the feild. That doesn't exactly seem to me to be the parimount of marketing.

[monster]

The US plays a lot of qualifiers in Foxboro and D.C. Let's not confuse that with the overall travels of the MNT.

How can you criticize the USSF for being venue-focused when they have played their last 10 games (before this past weekend and not counting the Gold Cup) in Foxboro, Dallas, Miami, Carson, Richmond, San Jose, Houston, Seattle, Miami and Lauderdale?

That's one in Foxboro and none in DC (even though the Richmond game was a replacement for DC). That's two in Texas. What's with all the Florida bias?

Plus, they're returning to Chicago later this year for the first time in ages.

Does the USSF have a boatload of problems? Oh yeah. Do they return to familar haunts for qualifying? Yep. Do they starve the rest of the country from seeing the MNT? Nope. The facts bear that out.

[TheWakeUpBomb]

Do they starve the rest of the country from seeing the MNT? Nope. The facts bear that out.You're right. They only starve the southeast and the midwest.

First person to say south Florida is the southeast loses a testicle.

[ZeekLTK]

Soccer is not catching on, and never will, until it is covered by the MAJOR sports networks on TV. As long as they keep throwing it on 2nd rate channels that not many people watch (and a lot of people don't even have) like Fox Sports World, Telemundo, or ESPN 2, then it is never going to develope a fan base. People want to sit down and actually watch the game, or at the very least turn on Sportscenter to see a recap of it. A lot of the fans from teams in the 4 major sports don't go to a lot of games because well, it gets expensive. But they remain fans because there is always coverage of their team on TV. And coverage by major networks.

I try to go to one Lions game each year, sometimes I don't even make it to that, but I'm still a huge fan. Why? Because I can watch them every Sunday and then always catch NFL Primetime and Sportscenter to hear reactions of the game and what not. You can't do that with Soccer, so therefore, not many people are going to bother trying to follow the sport, because it's so hard to do.

US Soccer got a lot of new fans after the 2002 World Cup... because the World Cup was covered by the major networks! Everyone got to watch it! There will be even more fans after the 2006 World Cup (if we make it there). But unless we want to wait every 4 years to get new fans, the major networks are going to have to start covering the games. It's rediculous that I couldn't even watch the USA vs Honduras matchup a few weeks ago when the game was played IN the United States! I could understand if the game was in Honduras and it was hard to get coverage or whatever, but the game was right here in our country and the only coverage it got was on Fox Sports World, a channel that I don't get and don't know anyone else who gets it either. And they wonder why they aren't getting new fans...

[TheWakeUpBomb]

Why do the major networks "have" to start covering the games? What's in it for them?

And since when is ABC not a major network? They've shown several US qualifiers.

As for the Honduras game, it was shown on two different channels live, and one network via tape-delay. If you honestly didn't see it but wanted to, then you obviously weren't trying that hard.

It's always going to be harder to be a soccer fan in the US than it is to be an NFL fan. The sooner you come to grips with that, the better.

Sweet Fancy Moses, you're in Michigan, yet you didn't go to the game, but the US TV networks are to blame? Spare us.

[Detective40oz]

Well with tickets at $25 they make more money with 9,000 fans then they do if they had 14,000 at $15 tickets. I don't think we can say there would have been anymore than 5,000 more fans if ticket prices were reduced. So USA Soccer thought about the money, and not the atmosphere.

[Bill Archer]

The US plays a lot of qualifiers in Foxboro and D.C. Let's not confuse that with the overall travels of the MNT.

How can you criticize the USSF for being venue-focused when they have played their last 10 games (before this past weekend and not counting the Gold Cup) in Foxboro, Dallas, Miami, Carson, Richmond, San Jose, Houston, Seattle, Miami and Lauderdale?

That's one in Foxboro and none in DC (even though the Richmond game was a replacement for DC). That's two in Texas. What's with all the Florida bias?

Plus, they're returning to Chicago later this year for the first time in ages.

Does the USSF have a boatload of problems? Oh yeah. Do they return to familar haunts for qualifying? Yep. Do they starve the rest of the country from seeing the MNT? Nope. The facts bear that out.

I would add this:

I think CBus was selected for this game on purpose.

This match never figured to be a big draw anyway - minor, basically pushover opponent with no particular US fan base (hell, there are only 90,000 Grenadians in GRENADA), middle of MLS season, very early in the process, etc. etc.

This game would have looked absurd in Foxboro or the Silver Dome or much of anyplace else. Columbus can put 9,000 people at a game and not look like it's being held in an empty building. HDC would have worked too, but the rent is probably higher.

As for "marketing" (which is what the ignorant call "sales") this game was sold the way most USSF games are sold: direct mail. They have lists of soccer fans and they hit them up.

Any other expenditure would have been a waste of money. Now, if all you're interested in is big crowd to make it look better on TV (and I've seen the tape - it doesn't look bad) or to asssuage the raging egos of Big SOccer posters, you could most likely have fluffed the crowd to some extent with a huge TV and radio ad campaign.

Unfortunately, that would have cost a fortune and ended up putting USSF in the hole for the weekend. And they have no desire to lose money.

It's not USSF's fault that, for the average American sports fan, US vs. Grenanda in ANYTHING AT ALL I CAN THINK OF, except maybe live grenade tossing, is of very little interest. I'm sorry this is so. I'm sorry that the ticket windows weren't besieged by hordes of fans enraged at being shut out of this classic contest, but that's the reality.

Of course, having been there and watched it in person, I can only say that as soccer games go, I really enjoyed the tailgate. This was not a great game, it was not great sport and it was not great spectacle.

The only way you can criticise fans for not coming is to suggest that it was their "duty" to do so, and that's the worst possible way to get customers: by making them feel guilty.

This game was about right. We got the win by a margin we're happy with and barring disaster we'll be through to the next round. We had a decent crowd considering the opponent and life goes on.

[geordienation]

Sweet Fancy Moses, you're in Michigan, yet you didn't go to the game, but the US TV networks are to blame? Spare us.


Ex-actly.

[geordienation]

The US plays a lot of qualifiers in Foxboro and D.C. Let's not confuse that with the overall travels of the MNT.

How can you criticize the USSF for being venue-focused when they have played their last 10 games (before this past weekend and not counting the Gold Cup) in Foxboro, Dallas, Miami, Carson, Richmond, San Jose, Houston, Seattle, Miami and Lauderdale?

That's one in Foxboro and none in DC (even though the Richmond game was a replacement for DC). That's two in Texas. What's with all the Florida bias?

Plus, they're returning to Chicago later this year for the first time in ages.

Does the USSF have a boatload of problems? Oh yeah. Do they return to familar haunts for qualifying? Yep. Do they starve the rest of the country from seeing the MNT? Nope. The facts bear that out.


Tom's not getting off of his cross until at least the Poland friendly.

He may stay there until we start playing semi-final qualifiers at that beautiful stadium in Anchorage.

Gold Cup attendence is a great way to compare the Grenada game:
vs. Cuba and Martinique: 15,600 and 8,700.
vs. Brazil and El Salvador: 35K and 32K.

People come out to see quality opponents.

[Cannon]

Tom,

Yes, D.C. and Columbus get a large number of matches, as do some other venues. That being said, over the last ten years, U.S. Men's National Team games have played all over the country.

The Magpie

Is that really true for DC? I think the last USMNT game here was the El Salvador game in 11/2002. You make it sound like DC gets tons of games...

since that game:
Miami/Ft. Lauderdale 5 games (avg attend about 16.5k)
Foxboro 4 (about 17.5k)
Columbus 2 (about 11k including yesterday)

This is not a location issue but rather it is a scheduling, pricing, and advertising issue. Nobody at my office who isn't a diehard soccer fan even knew that their was a game this weekend. If it had been held here I doubt we would have done much better than Columbus and that is probably true for most other cities as well.