The morning of March 1, 2001, I turned on my computer and posted, with typical Flannigan hyperbole: “Columbus was like Woodstock; anyone who was there will not be the same again.” In keeping with the Crosby, Stills and Nash motif, I should have said: “It was a long time coming. It will be a long time gone.” We all thought Columbus would be the beginning of a new era in national team support. I am afraid it might have been the end of an era. At the Barn Burners tailgate before the Poland game, I talked with an old friend about this. He posts on these boards and I think you all know him. I told him that I thought we were in worse shape in terms of fan support than before the 2001 qualifiers. He said: “Tom what are you talking about? We are in worse shape than before the1997 Qualifiers!!” We have 99 days to go before a critical game in Azteca. There seems to be very little interest in going there for the game. I know it is in March, it is expensive and so on. But compare this to March 10, 2001, roughly 99 days before the game in 2001. There was a groundswell of interest and we ended up with what, 105-150 Americans there. I think there will be a lot fewer this time. The attendance at home qualifiers this time has been disappointing. The Grenada, Jamaica, Panama and El Salvador qualifiers all had disappointing attendance. Local fans groups did the best they could but they are not in a growth mode either. Meanwhile, the fan bases for the teams we have to beat to get to the World Cup are flowering. Immigrants from these nations are pouring into this country at record numbers and many are doing well financially. They support the old country. What really surprised me was being outnumbered in Foxboro for the Gold Cup game. Five years ago, there were enclaves of the US, like Columbus, without large populations from CONCACAF nations. I think those days are just about over. No matter where we have games it will get harder and harder to have a patriotic crowd unless we grow our numbers. National fan support is also at a standstill. Sam’s Army has not been very active for almost 3 years but at least the website is still alive and well. The US Supporters website was down for a long time. It is back but does not seem to be current. http://www.ussupporters.com/. Am I being too pessimistic? The reason I write now is we have barely qualified the last 3 times. (I don’t count 1994). Fan support might have gotten us a point or 2 or 3. Will we have even that small edge this time? Or is the adage true? Soccer is the sport of the future in the US. It will always be the sport of the future.
See Thomas, I completely agree and I attribute most of what you said to the 'On-Demand' culture that runs rampant throughout the US. If its to burdensome or requires an extra amount of time/patience/reource then people tend not to do it. Be it for whatever reason you want, Economics, Logistics, Social, the warm-weather fan syndrome is more then just for last place teams in NFL. I constantly hear, "I don't want to drive down to the stadium, pay 10$ for parking to sit in traffic, $30 for each ticket, $10 for each beer, another $6 for each hot dog, for a family of four just to come back home 4 hours later." We can draw many lines of conlcusion from this (Americans are Lazy, we're too effiicient, we work too much, technology hampers us, the country is to big)...none of which I want to go down the road in discussing, but if we started a grass roots campaign where we could get even the mildest of supporters to attend at least 1 game over the next 10, we can incrementally grow our numbers when we turn the fringe supporters into full time supporters.
I, disappointingly, think you are right. With 150ish supporters at Azteca last time, a lot of people, myself included, were predicting 500 this campaign based on the trend at the time. That trend line has flatlined if not gone into decline and I'm guessing from the lukewarm response to the opportunity of seeing the US have their best ever chance of beating the Mexicans on Mexican soil for the first time in a WC campaign, that we'll see less numbers than last time. Hopefully I'm wrong. Unfortunately in the good ol U S of A, when it comes to the art of footy, a lot of people still "don't get it".
Tom, It is still too early in the qualifying cycle to make that conclusion. The first round of qualifying games four years ago weren't that well attended. The US/CR qualifying game in Columbus I was at wasn't so great as I recall, and that game meant something! The Mexico/US match in Azteca was also later in the year last time, and it followed an impressive string of US victories which really pumped up the interest. I think there are a lot of folks out there waiting for the "real" action of the hexagonal to begin. Having said all that, it doesn't help that there isn't as much central fan organization this cycle. The local groups are doing what they can, but it would really help to have the visibility and energy of an organized nationwide effort. Where are the leaders from four years ago? It won't help that the USSF and the players are squabbling in such a high profile way either. It's unfortunate that the Azteca match is so early in the year. I'm going this time (wasn't able to last time), but I'm willing to do what it takes to make sure we have some numbers!
Can we wait for more than two or three weeks after the games are announced to cast aspersions on fellow fans, please?
I'm going to blame the USSF. Their lack of apparent marketing ability to promote these home matches borders on the frightening... Seems to me that the only people who show up at these matches to support the US are local area people who have season tickets to the club and us hardcore fans out here (and the people we bring with us). I don't know what kind of budget they have, but this ought to be so easy. Do you have season tickets to an MLS or USL side? Then you ought to be on the USSF mailing list. Are you a youth soccer coach or referee? Then you ought to be on the USSF mailing list. Have you been to a US match anytime in the last 10 years? Then you definitely ought to be on the USSF mailing list. This should be a no brainer. Since I went to the Panama match in DC, I've received three different mailings from the DC United front office, including information on playoff tickets and ordering season tickets for 2005. Now, look at the sidebar <-------- and see where I live. The clubs get this. Why can't the Fed?
Now if you're honest to god willing to do what it takes to have numbers, have I got a deal for you!! Buy my airfare and ticket into the stadium. I'll wear a USMNT kit, fly a U.S. flag and all. I promise.
Perhaps we should wait for the home Hex venues to be announced before proclaiming the death of fan support. I think the labor issue has a bit to do with it: with a January camp and Korea and Sweden dates to discuss, the buzz machine could get going. Without them, there's little to talk about. If the issue isn't settled - and fast - next year could be really ugly. However, I suppose the Fed could send an email announcing the Hex dates, but without venues, it'd be an announcement about an announcement (cue Nick S., he's good at that). As for the decline of Sam's Army, I think it's sad, but people move on to other interests. I'd love to see a return to 1997 or 2001 glory, but let's wait until after the new year for things to get going.
I am also saddened by what appears to be the decline of the Sam's Army organization, but certainly the spirit of Sam's Army is alive and well. There needs to be a re-dedication of the Sam's Army organization to galvanizing the US soccer fan base, and get back to it's core, without the copiorate gimmicks (Phillips anyone).
I frankly don't know about the fan support details, but I'd venture to guess that support might be affected by the political events in the world today. Many soccer mom types (and others, realistically) might not feel safe traveling. It's true that Americans had a certain sympathy from many sides after 9/11, but a lot of that has eroded since the war in Iraq has been so unpopular on a worldwide basis. Of course, a soccer team has nothing to do with politics, but it is a representation of our country - and even some Americans, me for one, aren't very proud of our country right now, and perhaps disinclined to cheer for it so publically. I plan on going to Azteca - or wherever exactly that qualifier ends up, but that's my take on a possible reason for others to not want to go. Recall, for example, the sparse attendance at many Olympic events in Greece. Terrorist fears - plus, the protests against Bush kept many Americans away.
That's not it mate. The grass roots efforts of organizations like Sam's Army have worn off. They need to get back to basics!
Yeah, I'll put some blame on USSF. I made it to all but the final qualifier this year (excuse: I was at my first Sooner football game since '98). Of course, it helps that I'm in a good location (DC). Since moving here in Jan '03, I've at least made an attempt to attend every match within 8 hours drive. I'll be at the Mexico (home) match if it's not west of Texas. To some folks, I guess it's just too much to travel outside their local area. That's not really USSF's fault. The major area USSF could improve on is local advertising, obviously. It seems that the player contract problems and the lack of promotion are signs that some real changes need to be made in that organization. They've definitely done a great job of getting things going in the right direction ('90 to '02), but maybe the administrative system is just not enough to take the next step. I think Sam's Army has (gladly) carried much of the load over the past years, also, but there may be some burnout there. What USSF has to do is step up and realize that the supporters groups can't always carry the weight. Why is Sam's Army slipping (if that is the case)? Is it a lack of "passing the torch" to the next generation of supporters? Is anything being done to build the ranks? Lastly, we may have to look at MLS. The league has surely improved the USMNT product on the field, but has it lessened the appeal to the fans? If a family is able to attend a match every other week, perhaps there is no urge to pay higher prices to see a team of half MLS players against a lowly CONCACAF opponent. I definitely wouldn't use that rationale, but somebody might. Is there a connection between the decline (wether actual or imagined) of USMNT interest and the debut of MLS?
I too was wrong in talking about 500 fans in Azteca. I think there are major reasons for the decline (no USSF marketing, fear of violence at games) and micro reasons (same places getting games, fans being hounded away by other fans). I think the USSF does a terrible job of marketing, but it is not just that. The MLS is holding its own, even thriving. The NCAA soccer final drew a pretty good crowd this year, like last year's. I think both were better than a lot of national team games. If MLS soccer and NCAA soccer are doing better, what is the problem with the national team? Around 4 or 5 years ago, the USSF seemed to make a big change in game venues, placing most games in cities that would draw fans for the opposing side. This is the way to make the most money you can this week, but long term it is suicidal. Not that many people are so dedicated they will go to a game in their own country where they are a small minority, and often harassed and taunted by the opposing fans. I think if suddenly 25,000 Ohio State fans came into the horseshoe and found 60,000 Michigan fans there, you might not get 20,000 Buckeyes next time. It isn't any fun to be a stranger in your own land. But it is not just the USSF. It is deeper than that.
I think you and everyone make great points. However, your point about pride and politics is a bit contradictory. You say that a soccer team "has nothing to do with politics" yet you're "disinclined to cheer for it so publicly" due to our GOVERNMENT'S political choices. However, I do commend you for planning on going to the Azteca. That's a great way to show other nations that people from the US are not all war mongering xenophobes. Cheering for a sports team doesn't make you a supporter of our foreign policy. Pride in your country and those that represent it athletically has little if anything to do with tanks rolling around Iraq and I think you agree. I have tremendous pride in the Nats and our boys in Iraq even though I disagree with our reasoning for war. People are allowed to make distinctions between politics, athletics and pride--- and idiots in Mexico City, Panama City, San Jose or freaking Mazatanango w/ Osama signs are just as bad as Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld or Cheney. The fan support has worried me a bit as well, but I think the USSF needs to schedule games where we actually get support: Seattle, Portland, Kansas City, Denver (as long as it's not against Mexico), Alabama, Columbus. Enough with the East Coast bias. Much respect to all Nats fans. Much respect to the Nats. Efff the USSF. Replacement players??? We're not the NFL...
I am hardly an expert in business but I have learned that marketing is a key element to any business. Have you ever called the USSF and asked about getting tickets? I haven't called in over 18 months but it was usually the same thing. You got the feeling that everything was going along just fine until this customer showed up and bothered them. I had hoped it would improve when Brad Sherman, formerly of the Columbus Crew, joined the USSF, but he does not make policy. Plus is is just one person, albeit a dedicated one. The are many problems in Sam's Army. Many of the most dedicated "Sammers" of 3 or 4 years ago are not activists at the present time. There have been some new ones, but not enough. US Supporters promised to fill the void, but that seems dead in the water. Many of the people who used to post on Big Soccer trying to stir up fan support are long gone, never to return. Sure, they watch the games on TV, but they always did that. We need larger crowds and passion in the stadium, not a growing cadre of former, bitter fans.
I too have noticed a decline in support since 1997. (There are exceptions of course) I attribute it to the following: 1. Scheduling. Qualifying for the last WC was the first time CONCACAF conformed to the FIFA calander. That meant mid-week matches. In 96/97 all the qualifiers were played on weekends. 2. Scheduling (Part II). The same old venues. I can't tell you how many times I've made the 14 hour drive to Foxboro. Sure I'll make the trip agian, but I'm one the hard core supporters. Most people are not. When matches are played in the same three or four places all the time, the novelty wears off. I see this as major reason for the decline in support in Columbus. USSF should spread things around more. 3. MLS. Fans in MLS cities are already supporting soccer on a regular basis. In some cases the markets are tapped out. I know that the USSF wants to pay back the MLS for its investment in the game, but if Crew Stadium or the Razor can't be filled, then try someplace else. I would love to see games in none MLS cities as a way of growing the market. I am optomistic for this coming year though. I only hope that the USSF chooses wisely when it come to the venues for qualifying.
perfect example. The game vs Grenada has no business being played in C-bus. That game should have been played somewhere on the west coast where they haven't had a game in a few years.
Very interesting idea. I think that would have been a very good idea. But I wouldn't say that it had "no business being played at C-Bus". I wouldn't go that far. I do like the idea though. Very good point.
Look. We all know that C-bus has been a very good place for MLS and US Soccer. But C-Bus ain't exactly the richest town in America. There is only so much money that can be spent. There was no logical reason to hold the Grenada game in C-bus, knowing that C-bus would get a semi final game, and a final round game. They essentially tapped out the market. It would have made logical sense to put that grenada game in a place that does not get USMNT games on a regular basis. This was the PERFECT game to hold somewhere west of the Mississippi. These World Cup Qualifyers need to be treated as an event, not just another game, and that's what it became by hosting Grenada in Columbus. As for the US hosting Jamaica in C-bus...... I would not disagree with that move. It was the last game of the semi-finals, and JUST IN CASE the USMNT was in trouble and needed a true home field advantage, C-bus would have been it. It just so happened the game was meaningless and the weather was foul. So I'll let that game slide.
On the contrary, it looks pretty well attended to me. This was the 0-0 game with the disallowed goal, and the bottle throwing from USA fans behind the goal. Not that dull.
1) USSF marketing sucks. Unless it is for the WNT. With the men, in many cities, the federation knows that many of the visiting fans will show up just to support their team. So they let the games sell themselves. 2) Again. It's economics. Supply and demand. Especially for native born US soccer fans, the busy sports calendar is always sreaming for our dollar. Many of us also love football (college/NFL), baseball, basketball, hockey, etc. Don't forget about theme parks, concerts, etc. And when you factor in all the "soccersnobs" that follow Euro leagues (especially), when you factor in all of the immigrant and second generation and other fans that support the teams of their heritage have no interest in supporting our team, the base is very, very small. 3) For the MNT, I do think that fact that some people feel intimidated to go see the Nats play against many of our neighbors, particularly for WCQ and Gold Cup games. It can be a very threatening enviroment. It seems like A lot of people say why pay and go to the stadium when I can stay at home and watch for free without the hassles. It's all too simple to dismiss it as "xenophobia". A lot of fans won't go to some rival NFL/MLB/NBA or NHL cities. I won't. I go see the Nats because it is my country. So I try to get my seats nears the Sammers but several times I have sat with my wife and my brother in the middle of the opposing teams fans. It was very stressful. Now I ask my wife to stay home. I worry less if she's not with me. Then she stays at home and worries. That sort of enviroment is not very family friendly. Many people don't want to pay and go through all of that sort of grief. When the Natettes (WNT) play, I never have to worry about that. 4) There is no significant ongoing "buzz" about the MNT. But let's face it. The same can be said about the NHL in a lot of its markets. It just gets more coverage. And that exposure makes it seem "cooler". The MNT is like below average MLB or NBA franchise. A core group care about the team and go to see them. A lot of fans that support other teams go to see their team when they come to town. They mark the dates on their calendars. It becomes an "event". Unless Sam's Army (in the general sense of US supporters) can get it's momentum back or some major celebrities start jocking the MNT consistently, the team will not get the sort of coverage that it needs. I hate to say it but maybe it needs to attract some stars ike that arrogant, fat bastard Jack Nicholson or Ben Affleck or President Bush actually shows up at a game of talks about the team, it will never get out of it's "niche" appeal. It will never cross over. But even that, is no guarantee of success. Example: like the NASL back in the late 70's). It became "sexy' to be seen at NASL games. You were considered "worldly" or "cool" in many circles to actually care or pretend to care. Without the starf*ing, bandwagon jumpers, the team will not get exposure. Look at what happened with the WNT back in 99 during the WWC. I had follwed that team for five years, all of the sudden people wanted to talk to me about them and find out what time they were going to be on, if there were still tickets available, would they be coming to their area... I don't know what the answer is. Just some thoughts.