I didn't have a good feeling about that match since it was announced Sporting would host. The Sounders are good on the road, but LiveStrong is a tough place to get a win on the road let alone win a cup final.
it is a little ridiculous we dont take it more seriously, considering its one of the oldest sport traditions in the usa, 100 years next year. the superbowl didn't start until 1967, making this cup 54 years older. i'm happy the sounders took it seriuos from the start and others are starting to now, yes its not the best measure of skill, its a series of 1 off games, but it does represent the history of the sport in this country.
This cliche aside, the Fire took the Cup seriously for a while after joining the league. They even had a final attended by 19k, at that time the second highest US Open Cup attendance ever.
Not just the Fire. Pretty much every MLS team takes the Open Cup seriously - after a certain point. Seattle was just lucky enough not to get tripped up. Seattle's first ever USOC lineup (OCQ vs Real): Seattle's lineup: Chris Eylander, James Riley, Taylor Graham (C), Tyson Wahl, Zach Scott, Sanna Nyassi, Stephen King, Patrick Ianni, Steve Zakuani, Roger Levesque, Sebastien Le Toux. Reserves: Kasey Keller, Osvaldo Alonso, Evan Brown, Brad Evans, Nate Jaqua, Fredy Montero, Jarrod Smith. Seattle's roster from the USOC Final that same season: Starters: Kasey Keller, James Riley, Patrick Ianni, Tyson Wahl, Leonardo Gonzalez, Freddie Ljungberg, Osvaldo Alonso, Peter Vagenas, Steve Zakuani, Sebastien Le Toux, Fredy Montero. Subs: Terry Boss, Nathan Sturgis, Zach Scott, Brad Evans, Lamar Neagle, Nate Jaqua, Roger Levesque. I count five starters from the Final that started the qualifier - and the qualifier was against another MLS team, not some amateur side. Which is pretty normal for MLS teams. The real difference is that Seattle managed to win all of their "throwaway" games before it "got real". Had Seattle tripped up in the first couple of games, the last four years would likely be very, very different. And the USOC would be much less relevant that it is today. Full marks for Seattle from capitalizing on that first championship and keeping the ball rolling. Without the massive crowds and three straight titles, Wednesday's final would likely not have been as high profile as it was.
Its not just who you start, its your mentality and how you approach the games. Look at the lineup from that first game. Look who is on that team that played with the Sounders in the USL.
Pretty much implied. Look, full measure to Seattle. Three in a row is unprecedented against the level of competition they faced. Unbelievable. But there's really nothing unique about Seattle's attention/focus on the USOC. Both Chicago and DC United have emphasized the Cup throughout most of their histories. Other teams it has come and gone. But basically it's a crapshoot. If Seattle hadn't won in 2009, I doubt you'd have seen the same "effort" or "focus" in 2010 and 2011. Winning begats winning. Teams that hold the Cup generally put more effort into retaining it than they did in qualifiers or early round cup play. That's all I was pointing out. Seattle sent a mix of regulars and scrubs in against RSL in 2009. Just like pretty much every other MLS team. The early results went their way, and when they went first team later, they won. Awesome. And then they defended the Cup extremely well the last three seasons. It's awesome. I give Seattle, it's ownership, and it's technical staff and players full marks for execution and knowing a good thing when they've found it. But it's not like they went into that first Open Cup on a mission. Full credit for embracing the Open Cup. Without Seattle's run - and fans - the last three years, the Open Cup wouldn't have become as important as it appears to have become today. Good luck in your efforts to get it back next year.
No, not implied. That's just you making assumptions. And you are wrong. I can't speak for other teams, nor will I. But I know the Sounders. I know they carried over a tradition from the USL days of taking the USOC seriously. They did go into it wanting to win the whole thing. They made it to the semifinals the two previous seasons and with an improved roster they expected to be able to make another deep run. So yeah, those 6 starters in that first game against RSL who were part of the USL Sounders had an impact on how the team approached the USOC. And Alonso, while he didn't start, also wanted another shot at winning a USOC after losing in the finals the previous year. Schmetzer(Sigi's top assistant coach and former head coach of the Sounders) had a large impact on that as well. Adrian Hanauer(GM and owner) had an impact as well. Make no doubt about it. The new ownership was also making a big deal about getting into international competition asap and the USOC at that point was a berth to the CCL preliminary round. That 2009 Sounders team came into that tournament wanting and intending to go far in it. EVERY team has to manage their roster throughout the season. It isn't just about WHO you start. Its about knowing the situation and making a judgement call on who you think you can play and who you can rest while still getting the result to move on. Every team does this regardless of how seriously they take it. What has the greater impact is the team mentality going into those games. The desire of the organization from the top down. Other teams fans can speak to their teams and how they have approached USOC games. I know the Sounders took those early games seriously.
You know this how? Were you in the meetings? Seattle put out the same type of line-up all the MLS teams do at that stage. If they were taking it as seriously as you seem to think they were they would have thrown out their league game starters especially since they were playing another MLS side and not a lower division squad.
So Simon Borg took feedback a little personal on his show today. Starts at 51 minutes. http://www.mlssoccer.com/extratime
Wow you read alot into his statement, and hey maybe he was at the meetings. Roger Levesque is that you?
I didn't have as strong as reaction as the others, Fans wrote in complaining about the way a Kansas City player was interviewed last week. They claimed Andrew Weibe and Borg were constantly questioning him about the PK call and the handball rather than emphasizing the win. The fan felt this put the player on the spot and that the show wanted the Sounders to win, not SKC. Borg responded by calling out the fan saying, paraphrasing here, that he had no right to tell a journalist how to interview, and its not his job to be "nice" or do feel good interviews.