Very good point. Some people like being a part of an organization. Some don't really care about it. I happen to be registered with Sam Army. I call myself a "Sammer" but for me it is a more general concept. For DCU, I have been a dues paying memeber of the Screaming Eagles at times. Other times at not. Never been a memeber of the Barra Brava, so I never identified myself as that way. Same goes for the other clubs that I support. I do happen to care about Sam's Army and US supporters, just like I care about supporters of DCU, the Baltimore O's, Ravens, etc. Because we share a common interest. It's a fraternal sort of thing. It really doesn't have so much to do with paying dues or having a membership card. In the end, the label thing isn't the end all be all for many of us. We are fans and can define ourselves or associate as we see choose.
First of all I'd like to point out that you (probably purposefully to boost your average) left out the qualifier with the lowest attendance from the 1998 cycle. For starters this doesn't help your credibility. 8/30/96 El Salvador Los Angeles 18,661 This means the average for the semis in 1998 is: (18,661+30,082+19,312)/3=22,685. Certainly not the 30,000 you estimated. The average for the semis in 2006 is: (25,266+19,793+9,088)/3=18049. Considering the last game was basically a lame duck game it kind of makes you logic look...stupid. No? Again, the fact that you are completley blind to the idea that opponents and situations might have an effect on attendance is insane to me. Put the pieces of the puzzle together. US fans EXPECTED the USMNT to breeze through the pre-Hex qualifying phase for probably the first time in this cycle, and with very good reason. Sure, the away games against Jamaica and Panama weren't artistic, but we took Panama to the woodshed and dominated El Salvador. In the 1998 cycle we had only once qualified (no, being the host country doesn't count Thomas) for the WC in what, the past 40 years? And even that had been far less than convincing, but we all know the story from that day. The economy is tight, I go to school @ Ohio University and I just couldn't justify the $60+ (when you factor in parking and gas) to go to the US-Jamaica game (well, and it was during finals week) to watch a pre-qualified US team take on Jamaica with Ramiro Corrales as LM. I watched the game on TV, and was happy with my decision. If the game had meant anything, and I mean ANYTHING whatsoever, or if we had turned out a squad that didn't have Ramiro Corrales @ LM it might have been justifiable, but I'm on a tight budget. I guarantee I'll be up there with a car full of people for whatever Hex qualifier Columbus gets. Your comparisons are absolutley meaningless right now. You have the audacity to compare Hex games with Canada, Mexico, CR, Jamaica, and El Salvador with Pre-qualifying and Semi-final games against Grenada (where qualification was insured by the first leg), El Salvador (which was really the only meaningful Hex game and drew well), Panama (an absolutley poor opponent that still drew relatively well, and it was on a school/work night I believe), and Jamaica (a game on a work/school night where qualification had long been assured and a less then full strength team was playing). Why people are angry with your posts is that you are insulting our intellegence. You don't expect us to see the inconsistencies in your posts and your broadbased assumptions based on anecdotal evidence? Get back to me if the Hex games against CR and Mexico don't draw huge crowds. But until then, please take your self-righteous attitude where you make yourself out to be a "super supporter" elsewhere. Thanks.
Travis, I cut and pasted the figures from an earlier post in this thread that someone pasted. I did not edit that data. Attendance this time around has dramatically declined. The numbers speak for themselves and no matter how many insults you throw you are stuck with the cold, hard numbers. We drew 51,000 for a semi game in DC in 1997. We drew 19,700 for the Panama game in DC this time. Both games were roughly the same importance. Compare El Salvador games in Foxboro. We drew 53,000 in 1997 for the last Hex game where we had already qualified. A meaningless game. This time we drew 25,266 for the El Salvador game in Foxboro and that game counted big time. I am glad everyone thought we were assured of winning against Grenada. Wasn't it 0-0 with 2 minutes to go in the first half until Beasley saved us? The Grenadians didn't think the result was assured. They showed up in large numbers. Support for the national team is declining. Interest was growing in 96-98 after hosting the World Cup and starting MLS. We are now driving in reverse. I have not claimed to be a super supporter in this thread or any others. I went to 1 national team game in 2003. I would not call that a super supporter. I do encourage people to travel to games and start threads about travel, hotels, visas and so on. If that makes me "self absorbed jackass" or a "**********ing Moron" as others have called me in this thread we really do have problems with the fan base.
That was a friendly, not a qualifier. If you don't believe me, check the link. http://www.ussoccer.com/teams/stats_results.sps?iType=265&icustompageid=340
This is just BS. The fact is that non World Cup games against minor league opponents are simply not all that interesting. In 1998 we might have been concerned about whether we could qualify, but after 2002 people are just waiting for us to qualify. Games are never day trips for me until the new stadium in Dallas attracts one so frankly I am not going to go. I had planned on making the trip to Jamaica for the Hex if they qualified, but they did not. Mexico City? No thanks. Am I going to Germany in 06 and taking 4 (possibly 6) people with me? Absolutely. That is where the real show is and that is where I will be. The reason attendance is down, or a reason, is that the saturation level + the excitement of the games + the cost of the games + the advertisement campaigns aren't meriting more people come. My last US game I paid $80 a ticket for a scrimmage. Its not my fault that the US team has played within 12 hours of my house only three times that I know of in my LIFETIME. If you think support for the US national team is down though you are on crack. There is more mainstream support and coverage for the team than there was in 1998. The fact that most people don't take concacaf seriously has a lot to do with fan support in qualifiers though. At one time we did and were lucky to squeek by T&T, but now we are coasting. Its just the way it is...
Mm Hmm. Tom - There are pretty logical reasons why USMNT attendence has not been where it should be - The two Wednesday games, Jamiaca being meaningless, Grenada being well Grenada. But wait until after the Hex. Wait until you see how many Yanks are going to go to Germany (it's gonna be more than went to France lemme tellya) - if we make it. I don't think USMNT support is declining at all. In fact, I'd guess it's slowly upturning. That said, I really think the USSF needs to do a much better job - Grenada in Columbus at those prices was inexcusable. Lower prices, move the game - one or the other would have gotten another 5k. Better advertising would help. But the USSF is still an amateur organization well behind the times - and it shows.
Is it possible that our opponents' fans no longer perceive a game against the US as a gimme and are not coming out in numbers to support their teams anymore? For example, the El Salvadorans, from what I could tell, are fairly disgusted with their team these days and don't want to travel to see them. Otherwise, the numbers for that Foxboro game this cycle would have been much higher.
This does not make sense. A struggling team is going to sell more tickets than a winning team? If that were true the Montreal Expos would sell more tickets than the New York Yankees. Winning teams usually do better at the box office than marginal teams. Now we are coasting? I would not be so sure about that. Last time Trinidad tied us 0-0 in Port of Spain and we beat them 2-0 at home. Don't be surprised if we tie or lose in Trinidad. I think nancyb is right about the guanacos. I think other ethnic groups from CONCACAF are growing in numbers and have more money to spend on thing slikje air tickets and football games.
I think he meant that Qualifying for 98 was much more of a challenge than it is now, and therefore the increased interest. What would you rather go see? A do or die game against the Ticos in Portland, or watching us kick the Sallies around for 90 minutes in Boro? You do remember we sent an all MLS squad to that meaningless game in Port Au Spain?
Cherundolo, O'Brien, Stewart, Moore, and Kirovski started in that game -- none in MLS at the time. Donovan, Beasley, Pope, Agoos, Vanney, and Thornton were the other starters. Not our best, but 8 of the starters were on our World Cup squad.
It was Beasley's first ever WCQ. We also played Jesse Marsch in that game! But then Tom has once again successfully scuttled the original point with some completely unrelated fact taken completely out of context. Well done, councillor.
At least people have abandoned the untenable argument that attendance has stayed the same or is increasing. It is in long term decline, same as the viabillity of national supporters' groups.
If we field a first choice team AND lose in Trinidad I will be very surprised. Barring a barrage of red cards or phantom PKs and imaginary offside calls I should qualify. I saw Paul Caliguiri (sp?) hit than looping shot in 89 with his other nonprofessional friends. Is T&T better now than then? Sure. Is the US 10 times better now than then? Yeah. T&T will need a miracle to reach 7 points in the Hex and no more than 1 will come off the US and that would be the US tying on the road. Replace T&T with the US in the semifinal round and they probably finish 4th in the group.
In a close game one lousy call can give the game to the other side. Our A team could tie or lose in Trinidad. Remember, we scored in the final couple of minutes to scratch out ties against Poland's B team, Jamaica, Panama, and a Haitian team that was practicing in a local park and staying with friends. We have the longest winning streak in the world and it can't last forever. Dont' assume a win in that hell-hole Queen's Park Oval (if that is where they are going to play) is a given. Mexico thought that last time and got beaten in Trinidad.
Hell hole? It looked quite pleasant last go around. And when did Mexico lose in TNT? I really want to know, I don't remember.
I thought they beat Mexico but it may have been a tie (during the semis). Our game was not played in Queen's Park Oval. It was played in the much nicer Hasely Crawford Stadium.
23-JUL-00 PORT OF SPAIN Trinidad and Tobago:Mexico 1:0 (0:0) Hasely Crawford Stadium http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com/06/en/p/pwc/q/rslt.html?tr=WC2002PRLCTCNCCF&stg=WC2002PRLCTCNCCFSmFNLR T&T won a semifinal group with Mexico, Canada, and Panama.
Mexico lost 1-0 in the semifinal round in 2000. Since then they tied 1-1 in the 2001 hex and won 3-1 in this year's semifinal round.
The first home site has been announced. It's time to stop bickering and start planning. Get thee to Birmingham! http://www.ussoccer.com/news/fullstory.sps?iNewsid=135315
I only comment here about Haiti. That match was not quite simply the US vs. Haiti - it was the US playing a regularly scheduled friendly vs an impassioned Haiti with nothing to lose. I spoke with a Haitian soccer official (an American guy) before the match and he could hardly contain his excitement over the players' passion. He was pretty confident they would win. Add to that 6000 loud and proud Haitian fans and the escalating political situation in the Port at the time and you have ripe conditions for a paper upset. The result was so predicatble. Other than that, Tom's right - no game is guaranteed - and with our players facing this labor dispute - they might fail to muster up enough passion to win in TNT.
Soccer On The Map In The Us? YOU WANT TO PUT SOCCER ON THE MAP IN THE US? Then play Mexico in LA, Houston, or The Bay Area. Quit half-a**ing it and playing them in the frigid NorthEast. Sure El Tri will have their fans, but we will too. I GUARANTEE 101,000 at the ROSE BOWL without a doubt! The game will get picked up by ESPN or ABC if played on a Saturday Afternoon in May or whenever they play. ESPN will show all the highlights. WHY? Because we are a NUMBERS nation! 101,000 says something to the sports media---20,000 or 30,000 says it is small potatoes. It doesn't matter if half the crowd are El Tri supporters. YOU WILL NOT GROW SOCCER IN THE MAINSTREAM IF YOU DON'T PROVE IT TO BE A MAJOR SPORT! This is fact, not fiction. Play the big games in front of big crowds and the sport will grow. The fanbase, more importantly for this discussion, will grow as well. While you might be impressed that Crew stadium sold out for this game a few years ago--the majority of sports fans were not impressed. Sometimes looking the part is as important as acting the part. KEEP POLITICS OUT OF SOCCER! For those of you who think people are afraid to travel to Mexico City to see the US team play Mexico because of Iraq, or terrorism, or any political reason--that is dead wrong. Try safety, try crime, try movies and news reports about people being kidnapped there and held for ransom. If I don't go there, it is because I like the idea of my wallet staying in my back pocket. Sure, it isn't that bad there, but crime is on the rise in Mexico City and americans/foreigners tend to be easy targets. What does our being in Iraq have to do with flying to Mexico City? Or flying to Germany? NOTHING.
Re: Soccer On The Map In The Us? I'm not sure it's physically possible to disagree with something more than I disagree with this.
Re: Soccer On The Map In The Us? It's the coverage the sport gets that determines whether or not it's a major sport, not the fans.