Well at Champions Soccer Radio Network we take the US Open Cup Seriously. Listen to the American Soccer Show this Friday at 2PM EST. I will be discussing the First Round matches with show host Kartik Krishnaiyer. It should be good. If you miss it, don't worry the on demand player is on the left side of the screen. www.csrnusa.com
Wouldn't that be 2PM EDT? I'll listen. I can use stuff to listen to at work. And once Mr. Tony's show goes away at the end of the month, I'll need me some podcast action for the commute.
When you are a fan of pro soccer in a city the size of Houston and do go out to support your local USL club while just prayin' the day arrives when MLS comes to town, I viewed the Open Cup with great seriousness. Our Open Cup tournament was the only way for Houston to get a shot at its future MLS rivals. I think that in a nation that sees soccer fans knocked around for following a sport with no traditions, placing a premium on a trophy that has been continuosly held in the U.S. since World War I and allows for our USSF to crown an all levels National Champion is a good thing. I will tell you a story, when AEG came to town and I first met Dom Kinnear, I asked him how seriously he was going to approach the Open Cup and he responded quickly by asking me which trophy I wanted more, the MLS Cup or the Open Cup? I told him "well...both" and the room full of coaches got a grin. He responded with "that's not what I asked." Some clubs and current MLS coaches see it as a burden and that's not how I grew up looking at competition. If there's grass on the field then lets play ball!
You don't have the same perspective or priorities or pressures on you. You can just be a fan. To paraphrase Brian Billick, coaches coach, owners own, writers write and fans think there's no reason they can't just have everything all the time. The reality is that with our system, our smaller rosters, the fact we don't have "clubs" per se that bring people up through them, the schedule constraints, facility restraints, calendar challenges and the sport's general acceptance by the public (and even by fans of the game in this country), most teams have no choice but to make what can be unpopular choices. Maybe Houston's next coach (whoever, whenever that might be) will take the USOC seriously enough for everybody. But as long as there's a league and there's no real glory for winning the USOC, most are going to take the league over the Cup, no matter that it's been around since 1914. That sucks sometimes. But it is what it is.
I think it cana lso vary from MLS team to MLS team. DC or Houston can take it less seriosuly, knowing they have things like the CONCACF competitions, SuperLiga, etc. to focus on. For teams like New York and Colorado who have never won anything I think its a mistake to prioritize a single league game over a US Open Cup game. They need to take every chance they get to get some serious hardware. And Colorado has proven in the two league games since starting a weakend lineup against KC that it really didn't help them much, so what was there to lose running the big guns out against KC in the play-in?
I'm not sure about how the clubs treat it - but this is a such a great old tournament - it's really a shame that it's buried so deep in the press. I'm sure if it got 1/8th the coverage in the US as the FA Cup gets in England, then it would be a much more interesting prospect for all clubs involved.
So many valid points expressed ... The fact remains that: *most USOC games played by MLS clubs are not played in their "home" stadium. *there is little financial gain and/or status reward for winning the USOC *making the winner of the USOC eligable for other tournaments would be an incentive *US Soccer has done little to protect the value of this competition - allowing the SuperLiga and other tournaments to buy there way past it. Kudos for Chicago and other MLS clubs that expend full support and players to this Cup. check the various MLS club boards to see the already planned weakened side lining up for their USOC matches. re: the Portland Timbers Coach - plan on finding a new job ... always put out a team to win.
You're other points were valid, but I disagree with the above. The winner now qualifies for the CCL. That, in itself, results in quite a bit of financial gain through the additional international games that will be played. And there is a financial prize, and it's not that bad for winning four games, which is what most MLS teams who've won it have played. And it's very large for non-MLS teams if they happen to win.
One thing that really annoys me about the USOC is the way the matchups are drawn. Take the third round for instance: Third Round July 1, 2008 Carolina Railhawks (USL-1) - Kansas City Wizards (MLS) New England Revolution (MLS) - Richmond Kickers (USL-2) Chicago Fire (MLS) - Cleveland City Stars (USL-2) DC United (MLS) - Rochester Rhinos (USL-1) FC Dallas (MLS) - Miami FC Blues (USL-1) Charleston Battery (USL-1) - Houston Dynamo (MLS) Crystal Palace Baltimore (USL-2) - New York Red Bulls (MLS) Seattle Sounders (USL-1) - Chivas USA (MLS) Because of the system they use, no MLS clubs can be drawn against each other which makes it a lot harder for the lower division sides to succeed in this tournament.
I loved watching the games online and loved the commentating. As an American who loves playoffs in other sports and only started watching the MLS last year, I can truly say that the USOC is an incredible tournament that should myabe replace the playoffs. I still enjoy the playoffs a lot, but the open cup gives everyone a chance and has great upsets and drama. It sure is treated seriously by Rochester, and to me is the best representitive of how soccer should be.
Deeper MLS rosters could only mean that the teams may be able to avoid playing more of their first team players. Managers need to make a decision on who can go and how much rest they need. MLS regular season games are at a premium because these are the ones most widely viewed and the ones which determine whether the coach is employed from year to year. Take D.C. United as an example, no MLS side is going to play more games that matter than D.C. United. This club does take this competition very seriously but just played a very tough game against LAG on Sunday and in two days needed play a spirited Rochester team (the only non-MLS side to win the USOC since 1996). Tom Soehn needed to evaluate the opponent and put in a lineup that could win while protecting his team for the remainder of the MLS season, SuperLiga, CONCACAF Champions' League, and MLS Cup tournament. Even though the team played a lot of reserves, the entire first team was there to support them. Many of the USL sides are playing lots of games in a very short time and playing 4 games in 6 days is not that uncommon. Richmond was looking at 5 games in seven days which included back-to-back games on Saturday and Sunday before heading to Connecticut to take on the New England Revolution. The Richmond manager, Leigh Cowlishaw, had important USL games on their schedule against teams that were not competing in the USOC. Their MLS competition was more rested and at home and therefore should perform better, which they did. As fans we want our teams to win them all and have all of our favorites on the field for every game. All I can say is that it is nice to want things; however, if your team takes the field and the reserves do not have the fire to play their best then those guys need to be replaced (RBNY may be such a team). The early rounds of the USOC is the chance for these players to make a statement, if they cannot then the club needs to look elsewhere.
I might understand that a little if the MLS regular season actually meant something. The only advantage you get in three rounds of the playoffs is home field advantage in the middle round. That's it. Or if the team is battling between 8th-9th places. And the U.S. Open Cup is done two full months before the end of the MLS' "home stretch." What really sucks is that the teams themselves barely promote it. Why would the media care when the teams show so little concern with it from a promotion standpoint? I'm even talking about "free" things like promoting it more heavily on the teams' websites, more detailed press releases for the games, things like that. I absolutely love the tournament and, except for MLS teams playing in the CONCACAF Champions Cup/League, I barely follow games involving MLS teams. If it was promoted a little better, I could see it really take off (relatively speaking, of course), especially with how much American sports fans absolutely love seeing underdogs take down the "big dogs."
This seems to be the way to promote it on TV or to get people who are not fans of your team, but I cannot see a MLS side saying "come on out and see if we lose to this underdog." I do think that having the brackets visible when teams promote it gets that message across.
You know, that's a really good point. That's probably why the MLS teams don't promote it - the danger of losing to a lower-level team (average non-soccer fan Joe is not going to put two and two together and realize that the MLS side may have played a second-string squad in its loss to a USL-2 team). Of course, if MLS teams as a whole took the U.S. Open Cup seriously, the issue would solve itself (it's not like Chelsea promotes FA Cup games less, at least not significantly so). I will say that the teams appear to be promoting the tournament more now than they did a couple years ago and the MLS website has a place to click on the U.S. Open Cup scoreboard, so they are moving in the right direction.
Attendance last night for the quarterfinals: CPB v NE 2,590 Chi v 4,118 Charl v Dal 5,911 Sea v KC 4,674 Someone step up here and explain why this tournament is important. No TV, No radio and nobody cares. If any MLS team had this kind of attendance on their worst day, BS would explode in outrage. Why does this badly run and amatuer tournament get a pass?
I cannot say it is important (to MLS teams), but it has awesome potential. Also, there was radio coverage for some of the teams and Internet video coverage for some of the matches (I know Dallas and Seattle home games had video). But, you're right, no TV. As for nobody caring, that's relative and is really hurt by the lack of the teams or MLS or U.S. Soccer (who runs the tournament) promoting it at all or to the level they promote regular-season games. As for the tournament getting a "pass," I think that's because the U.S. Open Cup has always been poorly attended, so it's not like this year's is out of the ordinary.
The other thing we don't know is how many tickets would the DC/Chicago match have sold had they played at RFK. They sold out the venue they were playing in. I'd imagine they would have easily pulled 10k, but that's just a guess, who knows?
The shame of it is is that US Soccer doesn't promote this cup the way that it should. It's only available on high ed cable or satellite. Very few MLS fans or even barely aware of it's existance. Nobody could probably tell you who the last two winners were. Not to knock Fox Soccer Channel, but unless games get covered on at the least ESPN 2 you aren't going to generate much interest outside USL circles. As stated earlier the seatings in the tournament need to be restructured so that lower tier league teams have a shot at making it into the finals. Give them byes, or something! I actually heard it referred to during a hoops game as another tournament. They didn't even name it!
It's barely available even on high end cable/satellite. The only match that is televised is the final.
My idea for making the cup a TV success: Have top 4 MLS teams not already in Champions League qualify. Have 4 other spots be play in spots for all other teams. The 4 MLS teams wait for 4 USL qualifiers. Then a mini tournament is played for the cup all in a one week period. (3 games at most) Winner gets last Champions league spot. A short tourney like this would be more interesting to watch on TV. Also, it would be important because a champions league spot would be at stake. In the past when no champions league spot was at stake I would hope RSL would not play any of their top players. I didn't really care if they won or lost. MLS league play was all that mattered. Having the winner get a champions league spot makes all the difference. However, if we already had a champions league spot I would not care once again. Therefore, don't include MLS teams who already have a spot in CL. There will be no incentive to play.
All of that kind of defeats the purpose of an "Open Cup". I don't think we should trash over one hundred years of history just to appease fickle TV viewers. It's fine the way it is, the only thing it really needs is more money and marketing. March Madness is madly popular in US, and the Open Cup shares a lot of the same aspects of it. It just needs to be promoted better. Also, not including the previous years top three MLS teams would most likely harm the tournament rather than improve it. That, and I don't think a lot of the viewers/fans you're trying to grab know about or understand the Champions League to begin with.
Yes this needs more promotion and some of the clubs are doing that. The problem is that people do not understand the cup concept. I was speaking to folks who when to a USOC game because it was close and were surprised that United was playing a non-MLS team. I had to explain that the game that they attended was part of the USOC, and significant like the regional soccer tournament that their kids were playing in. The USL clubs get it because it is an opportunity to take on the big boys. The Battery had such a great run last year and gave United all they could handle. What is really sad is that even on the US Soccer site the information on the history is out of date. http://www.ussoccer.com/teams/other/lamar/index.jsp.html Without http://usopencup.com there would be no significant place to go for information. Three cheers to the guys at USOPENCUP.COM!
I will say that this past USOC I was promoting the honoring of one of the great USOC performers, Billy Gonsalves. I am happy to say that D.C. United (Thank you Kevin Payne!) and the National Soccer Hall of Fame put together a nice commemoration at the 2008 Final. August 10, 2008 would have been Gonsalves' 100th birthday. I believe that more of this needs to be done to tie the current game to the past. Suggestions for who to commemorate for 2009?