The Gold Cup shows a bunch of matches over a week or so. Some starting as late as 9 or 10 at night. And they are all well attended. Then look around and see those crowds, do you see any of those same people at RB matches? A few maybe, but our crowds are mostly cut from the soccer mom and kiddy cloth. They dont come out for Red Bull, most likely, at all. There is no sign of these poeple there and I attend most every match. Ok they can't make it out to all 16, but how about a few? They decide they'd rather take a pass. If you want to make the location the scape goat, feel free, but for me, that seems like more of a convenient excuse than anything else.
Where's the best spot on the train that goes from Harrison to Long Island? Is there a stop within walking of Shea/US Tennis (I seem to recall there is- I think I took the subway there once for US Open). edit: Just read Jamison's post and agree 100%. That area would be great, and psychologically, the fan base is so used to going there already for different activities. Build it there- you could even build it cheap- and it will work. If so, it would be cool to build a stadium there, and make it a true subway series. Building the 2nd stadium on that path would 'solidify' the concept of easy subway access as a marketing concept, and I agree with you that there is a huge untapped market available on Queens/Brooklyn/LI side No 2nd team in Harrison. The wrong way to go, definently.
You still need to go to the city {Grand Central Terminal} and from there you take the Path to Harrison. In Queens the No. 7 train drops you at Shea Stadium. The area is a hotbed of soccer from all over Queens.
I think it's more than the sum of its parts. The people might see a mediocre team if it was cheap and easy to get to. But MetroBulls have traditionally been expensive and inconvenient and mediocre--or worse. And to top it all off, Giants Stadium is a crappy place to watch a soccer game unless there are 50k+ fans there (and even at that there are dozens of places better).
Agree totally with this. Giants Stadium and its location isn't the only reason keeping people away, but it's one contributer. People who think that it doesn't play a factor are being a bit naive IMHO. A more compelling product would have made it easier for people to overlook the hassle of getting there, but as is people are more inclined to make only special trips to watch the most interesting games (like international friendlies) instead of going regularly. I think Harrison being more easily accessable will help, but winning will still be the biggest factor in getting people to care.
so MLS has written off Florida . . . NY/NJ next? any other giant states you'd suggest eliminating? that will help the TV deals
I went to the Rangers v River Plate/Santos matches (2002) -- which were held after the Metros games I was stunned at the lack of turn out from Latin American supporters -- years ago a South American team at the Meadowdump would draw significant crowds (I know because I was there, e.g., the old TACC) I also noticed that a fair amount of the crowd for the MLS match left immediately after or early in the 1st half of the Rangers match -- others (like me) came in late, more interested in the second match were these matches just poorly marketed? (and I'm not just referring to the Irish Echo debacle) shortly after the Rangers+ games, Roma and Real Madrid had a huge (sellout?) crowd at the Dump -- different organization handled the marketing but, I also really wonder what type of support exists currently in the New Jersey market (and obviously the fabuously successful Red Bull Inc believe in Harrison NJ) -- I'm not being critical . . . I just wonder (as apparently do most of RBNY's marketing generals) but, as a Long Islander I know what a hassle the trip to/from the Meadowdump is (and I'm not biased by my 1987-1994 boycott of the Meadowdump after being harassed by Meadowdump Security at a 1987 U2 concert) I've got friends that are long-term Jets season ticket holders that no longer attend all EIGHT of the Jets home games -- not worth the hassle to them AND I just suspect that the 8-9 million people in NYC, plus another 2 million on LI (a hotbed recently tapped by the Liverpool Football Club BTW) would support an MLS team to an extent probably greater than the Jersey suburbs but, if they can't find a place to play in NYC, it's moot and we wait to see . . . if they build Harrison, will they come? and will RBNY suddenly figure out how to market their MLS product?
an interesting old post (8/2002) from MetroFever (and an interesting old thread): https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5944
There are a million reasons people don't go to matches in NY. One of them, is difficulty in getting to the stadium. But that one is WAY over blown here. WAY. I live all the way out in Princeton. On your typical Saturday afternoon I can be in my seat within an hour of leaving the house, and that's even with a quick stop for a Frappachino along the way. Do you know how many people, WITH CARS, live between me and the stadium. MILLIONS. There are just so many people that could get there fairly easily if they wanted to do it. That's not to say it is easy for everyone. Its just saying its doable for hoards and hoards of people. These guys are right, you can't roll out of bed right into a seat, but this isn't like climbing Mt Everest either. People don't go because MLS has a bad reputation. People don't go because the club usually sucks People don't go because the team is marketed to kids People don't go because the the atmosphere and experience are akin to a morgue People don't go because METRO never connected with the area People don't go because what they are selling doesnt interest people. And yes, people also don't go because it isn't especially easy to get to. In short, what RB and METRO are selling isnt worth peoples time. Improve in some of the other areas then all of a sudden getting over to the stadium isn't the biggest deal. Look at the crowds during some of those 2000 matches. They looked pretty decent. Did all those people all of a sudden become homebound? Nah, it wasn't that fun so they stopped coming. Above you mention cost. I am only one person, but I have access to lots of free tickets that several 1000 people I work with know I have and are welcome to, gratis. Freebees. All they have to do is ask. Most weeks they go unasked for and I pass them along here on Big Soccer. The problem runs deeper than the price. You can get in for $5 or $10 bucks if you spent 8 seconds lookin around. Sometimes you can even get in for free. And as far as needing 50,000 fans to make that place hop, no way. The best soccer match atmosphere wise I have ever seen was Honduras V The US. there were 32,000 (or something like that). That game was more lively than any of the matches I have been to in DC. And you know how much I love RFK's fans and atmosphere. This was even BETTER atmosphere than even the United-Revs semi final match. Ask anyone that was there. I also was at a Turkish match there with only 17,000 fans. REAL fans. And even at that paultry number it was quite lively. The Central and South American friendlies usually get 35 or 40 or so and the atmosphere is electric. Numbers are a bit overrated, what the place needs is more real fans. I am not defending Giant Stadium, it's flat out awful for MLS, but I think some of these observations are taking it a bit too far.
I agree with you 100%. The difficulty in gettng to the stadium is not the main reason people stopped going. People went all the time in the beginning of MLS when they played at the same location. I thought people stopped going when Nick made it into romper room hour. I noticed the crowd has shifted big time from a more male oriented crowd to little kiddies and their parents that don't give a fig about the team. I think its part of the reason playoff attendance has dropped so much. The team has few hardcore fans left.
The turning point for the MetroStars was the injury to Clint Mathis during training for a friendly w/Ecuador in the spring of 2001. This is the single most important even to date in the history of this franchise. Before this injury, the team was on the verge of a positive tipping point: there was movement of the media needle in the tri-state area; the 2000 season had shown enough promise both with Mathis and the team that media in the area were paying attention. It was a momentum that despite his injury (and what I think marked the start of his decline his career) he road to the point of still being the face of the USMNT in 2002. From a larger historical point of view, his injury had the similar effect on MetroStars that Pete Maravich's and Bill Walton's injuries had for the New Orleans Jazz and San Diego Clippers: they destabilized teetering franchises to the point that they had to be moved. In short, with that ACL tear Metro suffered a tipping point in the negative direction and has never really recovered. Had he stayed fit IMO, Giants Stadium is a typical NY inconvenience, not a scapegoat for low attendance. I think this point is lost on some people here in this thread. This may sound a bit off topic, but I don't think so because for all the slings and arrows the Metro has taken of the span of MLS (many well deserved and slung by me), people forgot how close this franchise was to turning the corner. I would even go so far to say that to date, his injury is one of the 10-15 signifcant moments in the league's history: in short, it robbed the league of its first American star with both the talent and charisma to sell the league both nationally and in its biggest market. No US player has come close to this to date. Not Adu, not Donovan. Metro made a lot of mistakes, but they also suffered the worst luck at the moment when a real dawn awaited the franchise. This has to be central to any conversation as to why the team is where it is in 2007.
Well said Real Ray. Also, excellent posts by Jamison, Crusio and others. If New York fails MLS will fail. And it looks like New York is going to fail.
there's also Jaime Moreno's rebirth after his dismal stint in New Jersey doubly painful http://dcunited.mlsnet.com/players/...=moreno_j&playerId=mor177981&statType=current
No, the realistic worst case scenario is that NY will continue to drag down the league and be effectively subsidized by the rest of it, until the current investors fail, at which time the league has to bail Red Bull out, and they basically start over from scratch again. But even that worst case scenario is somewhat against the odds. Given the venue that RB will have to play in, the odds favor another investor stepping in if RB wants out (which does mean they have to stay in until the arena gets built, but the odds favor that). With the Youth Development Initiative, the NY market will get a leg up on the competition that it's never had before (there's much less institutional resistance than in markets like LA or Chicago). And with the DP rule, NY will always have the option to spend more money to become a better team.
Agreed -- while the I/O rights were sold, isn't the stadium still a joint venture with AEG? My guess is that they would step back in or help broker a deal. That stadium is important though -- it is a major commitment to the New York area market, and MLS will have some team playing there.
Btw, that is a fascinating post from Real Ray. Some good points there. Mathis and the MetroStars both started off quite strong in 2001. That might well have been the year they produced a real contender with a legit franchise player. I think one of his last pre-injury games was scoring a goal in a victory over Bayern Munich in front of 30k fans.
RBNY is clearly beginning to show more fiscal responsibility they brought Pele and Franz back for last year's home opener this year they are settling for Clint Mathis
Nice post, but I dont think you can say this Ray. Donavon, had he played in NY and led NY to 2 championships....well, things could have been much different. He is certainly exciting, and ok- so he's a boring interview. But so is Tom Brady (although he certainly has gotten more 'exciting' in the last few months) Adu- How can you say (he wouldn't have made a difference?). Had he started in NY, and maybe under a different system...maybe we would see a more advanced Freddy. Regardless, there would have been some spectacular crowds in NY that year- and who knows where that would have led in Adu2, Adu3. I do agree with you that Mathis' emergence was darn exciting, and he had that cocky swagger on the pitch that New Yorkers get. Also- I do agree that he has never been the same player since the first knee (or was that the 2nd one). Regardless, he lost that extra bit of explosion which often meant the difference on important plays.
Interesting post. My only problem with it is the notion that achieving success, at least on the field success, is so rare and fragile, and hinges on the fortunes of one player. Under Frank Yallop the 2001 Quakes went from horrendous (in 2000) to champions. Yes Donovan was part of that, but the turnaround was bigger than just him, and included other key new players on the team like Agoos and Manny Lagos. And then after Donovan left, and after a mediocre 2004 for the team when they nearly missed the playoffs, it happened again. Dominic Kinnear largely rebuilt the team after a number of departures due to retirement, guys asking for trades (Agoos and Mulrooney), aborted tours with European teams followed by defection to rival team (Donovan), trades, etc. Did the loss of Donovan to the rival Gals cause a destabilized franchise to slip down into oblivion? Well in fact the team was moved after that year but for reasons that had nothing to do with the team's on field performance. That 2005 Quakes team won the Supporter's Shield, set a record for least losses in an MLS season (4), and became the first team in MLS history to go undefeated at home. [And that was in spite of a number of injuries to key players, including Ching, out for most of the season, Dayak, career ending injury, Waibel, season ending injury, Mullan, out for several weeks, Davis, in and out due to injury, etc.] Yes the attraction of a star player with charisma can be an important factor in getting people to take notice of the team. But if you are basing your team's success on the welfare of one individual, you are asking for it. You can make a better case for it in basketball, where your star player is one of 5 guys on the court. But in soccer, there are 10 other guys there making up the team on the field. It can't just be all about one guy. So in both 2001 and 2005 the Quakes were largely rebuilt after poor or mediocre seasons, and achieved great success in those turnarounds that happened in the span of one year. Why couldn't the same thing happen in New York? It just seems there's a tendency to look for an excuse in the case of New York: the Mathis injury, or not enough favor was given to New York in order for it to build a "super club", etc. They just haven't gotten it done yet and they've had the same chance all the other teams have had. But who knows, maybe this will be their year.
I don't think people in NY/NJ think that way at all; in fact the majority of fans I think would not rate the Metromedia or AEG ownerships. I don't think fans of the team look at it in terms of making excuses. By and large I think what NY/NJ fans want is a winning team that plays with style. The 2001 Miami Fusion...imagine that club in NY. But that's neither here nor there... Re: Mathis, what I would say to those outside the area who don't follow the team is this: when I walked out of Giants Stadium after game 2 of the 2000 semi vs Chicago, there was a palpable sense that at last, the team had turned the corner. The Valencia goal set up by Mathis, to this day, represents the my single greatest moment of euphoria following this team. And when Mathis went down the next year, I think the air went out of the balloon fast. Throw in the bad apples like Daniel Hernandez and the later OZ/Mathis soap opera...the team basically blew up. Of course, I'm only guessing-it may have gone to hell even with a healthy Mathis, but my gut says otherwise. And I stand by my thoughts re: Clint's star power: Donovan is not a NY guy and Adu...I think not living up to the hype in a market like NY would be a negative. Mathis circa 2000 was the perfect fit for NY: brash with the talent to back it up. I'm sure there will be another player sooner or later who fit the bill, but with Mathis...that was a big fish that got away, and I think it set Metro/Redbull back. They basically tried a rebuild with Bradley's Babes. A noble experiment laced with more bad luck (did Jaime Moreno really play for Metro or was that body double?), but in the end a rebuild that failed. I do hope Arena can turn this around w/Red Bull backing. On the other hand it may be our luck/destiny that Dietrich Mateschitz is German for Donald Sterling.
Well you certainly have a better perspective on what has happened in NY than I have, someone looking in from the outside. But I still have a hard time with the idea that this one event (the Mathis injury) is so critical to the history of the franchise. The Bradley Babes Rebuild or some other rebuild attempt could have just as well succeeded like the Quakes' 2001 and 2005 rebuilds did. And I think those Quakes teams met your criteria (what NY fans want) - "a winning team that plays with style". And with parity the way it is in MLS it can be done in one year. I think that's been shown to be true several times. So while the Mathis injury may have set the team back in 2001 and maybe 2002, I don't think it was the cause of failure in 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006, etc. Yes it was a missed opportunity, but it seems like there were also several missed opportunities after that (and probably before that).
Yes, it certainly could have, if one veteran player had made any effort at all to contribute instead of languidly sheltering from the Ray Hudson storm up in NJ for a season, then dicking over the guy who got him out of there, big time. And it could have, if another had lived up to his reputation as a pure goalscorer in international competition, instead of being simply wrong for the league - and then not taking a deal to transfer out and save himself and the team a lot of aggravation, as well as guaranteed contract money. Things certainly could have succeeded.
In that sense, Reyna might not actually be such a bad idea. Of all players in his tax bracket, local boy Reyna's going to come in near the top in the "I actually give a crap" rankings. And he's probably going to relate well to most of his teammates.