The "Thoughts That Don't Require Their Own Thread" Thread XII

Fair points, you're right on pats and Sox. It just seemed like 10k! The Sox tickets were never hard to get even during the height of Clemens. I went to sox-yankees in the 90s and it wasnt anywhere near the spectacle it is now. But digress.

In terms of the revs, one point I should have made was the GM makes all the difference. From the pats under Pete Carroll/Bobby Grier to Belichick. The Bruins under Chiarelli started to turn it around. Celtics under Ainge. Sox under Henry/Theo. You get the idea - smart owners surround themselves with smart people, who hire other smart people. The weak link with the revs? Mike Burns as GM. Yes the owners could be more forthcoming but with a better GM who can close deals and restore some faith in the org among agents and (to a lesser degree) players, things will start to change.

 

Yeah, even at their worst, the Pats, unlike the Chargers, could have sold out the local soccer stadium! Considering the Pats history since Kraft has owned the team, they had 3 coaches. Bill Parcells, Peter Carroll and Bill Bellichick. 2 out of those 3 had a lot of success, and they were paired with GMs/Personnel Directors who were also equally up to the task.

They have tried to run the Revs in a similar way, but when you have Mike Burns as the main lynchpin, the guy who you are pinning your hopes on, well, as Doctor Phil would say, "how's that working out for you?"

 

Interesting, but there is a lot of data here - I've tried to draw some conclusions, only to discard and rethink. A few times now...

 

Yeah, I'm trying to figure out what that all means. It looks like Columbus has a stack of money they can use for paying down a future signing or maybe to trade for a player. We traded a little bit away and have a small amount (maybe 100k?) to spend. Not a lot, but maybe enough to keep someone from being counted as a DP

 

From the article:
one that is being driven by a largely new front office and coaching staff hell-bent on proving to their fans that what they’re doing is going to work.

 

Confusing article name for Revs fans. We could use a Rapid Revolution here...


----------------------------------------------------------------
Some other quotes of interest -

 

Revs version:

“Listen, the supporters are the inconvenience of any soccer organization. It’s really important that [the fans] not feel a part of what we’re doing here and that they understand how profitable that we want to be. It’s something that were very cognizant of from the start – we’re very frightened by putting ourselves out there and saying what we want to do and what we want to achieve,” New England Revolution General Manager Michael Burns.

 

There's really very little correlations either way.

 

More than a jersey. @MenInBlazers review the #NERevs’ 2018 @MLS primary kit, which will debut this Saturday!#HereToCreate // @adidassoccer https://t.co/cnZtOZX0Mc

— New England Revolution (@NERevolution) March 7, 2018

 

They barely seem to know the Revs exist (like many of my neighbors).

Beyond #SaveTheCrew, fans of some #MLS teams should take note. @SonofBen, I hear you have an attendance problem - MLS isn't helping you. #VWFC, your market was compared to Columbus by Garber - MLS's marketing reflects that attitude. And #NERevs, who did you piss off at MLS?

— Adam Smith (@asmith2729) March 7, 2018

 

I dunno what makes some 18th century Scottish economist an expert on MLS, but rest assured, the Revs don't have to piss anyone off at MLS HQ to not get any national coverage.Let's face it, there are a few good story lines going around in the early MLS season, lots of interesting things to talk about.

But the Revs aren't one of them.

If you weren't a Revs fan, would you be interested in reading about us? Didn't think so.

 

Yeah but I don't care about Atlanta and the league news feed may as well be the Atlanta fan news feed.

 

I agree, I get tired of whoever the League decides is the team of the moment. It's been a long time since I could justify this "I'm a fan of the league as a whole" attitude, now that no one is going to cause the whole league to fold.

 

971388822876499968 is not a valid tweet id

 

BostonSportsJournal.com is looking for someone to cover the Revs, though they're not doing it enthusiastically.

New England Revolution: The Revolution have started their season, but we’re still going over our options on them. No, this isn’t ideal, but it’s a very long season and we’re not going to rush anything to cover soccer in March. If you’re interested in covering them for us, send me an email with your resume, clips and ideas for coverage to greg@bostonsportsjournal.com.

 

Sounds like they've embraced the revs' strategy for signing players. No rush

 

I wonder what BSJ offers its writers. We know who the soccer writers are out there, do they offer something better than what people like FDA or Kyle McCarthy or getting now?

 

I don't think this is a long-term thing, I think Friedel is going back to training-camp mode, since they have a 2 week gap with the season barely begun.

With no games for 2 weeks, it's hard to maintain fitness when they haven't had enough games yet to get up to mid-season shape.

My point is that cities with no/few big-4 pro teams have a built-up hunger for local pro sports and we've seen that enthusiasm explode in places like Seattle, Portland, Orlando, etc.

The NHL is seeing it in Vegas.

 

That may be a factor in some places, but let's face it, the NFL has 32 teams, MLB and the NBA have 29 in the US, and the NHL has 24. MLS is comparable with 20 US-based teams. Without counting, probably 2/3 of those cities have 3 or more teams in those leagues, and most of them are doing quite well.

The real difference is that places like Seattle, Portland, Atlanta and Toronto have thriving MLS teams because they have ownerships who are committed. It has no bearing that Portland only has the Blazers, Seattle has the Seahawks and Mariners, and Toronto and Atlanta have teams in 3 of the 4 major leagues.

 

From an article on the Guardian:

Does MLS really promote flashier clubs over less glamorous ones?

"It showed Los Angeles FC to be the most mentioned MLS team over the past two months, with the Portland Timbers somewhat surprisingly the least mentioned. The New York Red Bulls were the most retweeted, with the New England Revolution the least."
"Combining both posts and retweets, Atlanta United and Toronto FC come out above all else. The Revolution, again, don’t come out so well."

Gee, what a surprise; the league puts in as much of an effort on the Revs as the ownership does.