Rivalry

Wow, I was actually thinking during the Revs-RSL July 4th game that it would be most fitting to have the Revolution play the Union every July 4th. The two club names are pretty much all American (Revolutionary war, Union representing the Unionizing of the 13 colonies and Philly being the first capital of that Union).

I also agree on having some sort of Atlantic Cup, never understood why this hasn't come about with all the other regions having miniature cup that teams play for (Cascadia, Brimstone, El Capitán, Super Classico, ect)

Also, just to pollute the league with even more cups, I want to see a 96er's cup, with San Jose still being allowed in. I just think it would be fun to have something that promotes which of the original teams is the best today.

 

I never understood why we could never do something like this before. Some kind of northeast cup with Philly, NY, and DC would be awesome.

 

I don't thing that the 4th works in New England... too many traditionally entrenched family events...

 

Wait... so your saying a Revolution home game, isn't the single biggest family event in all of New England!

 

Seconded.

And maybe add Montreal.

 

And if they added in a Fireworks display..they could get the town of Foxboro involved and get a ton more people at the game...A yearly event to rival any local town's fireworks displays.

Wait! why would I want Kraft to do something to make him favorable with fans and the town??? Why would we want a huge crowd at Gillette to bolster Kraft's handling of this team?? To make him more money??

Tailgate, BBQ, Revs-Philly and Fireworks...should be good for at least 40k...

 

To crystalize my posts on the other thread and add some New England specific things:
*DC/NY would probably be unwilling to participate, due to it lessening the effectiveness of the Atlantic Cup.
*PU and the Revs, both taking upon themselves Independence themes, would be fitting to hold a Colonial Cup, in the same idiom as the Brimstone Cup.
*Right now, a lot of our Supporters are looking for something positive out of the team or the SGs, and this could be a huge way to engage them.
*As one of the 2 (maybe DC makes 3) road-tripable away games, it's not at all a bad idea to make this a bigger deal than just 3 points. The Philly away game is a Sunday night, a little too late to be home for work on Sunday. But if the Colonial Cup was being handed out, I'm sure I wouldn't be the only one taking work off on Monday
*The League will not schedule us on the 4th. Bob Kraft will not participate. We will not get a sponsor. This needs to be us and the Sons of Ben and private donations.

 

Were you at the last event with fireworks? The operations folks did such a great job managing that event that the team had to send a letter of apology to the STH list the next day.

BTW, is a "planned rivalry" really a rivalry (don't think supporters had to get together to plan a Celtic-Rangers or a Red Sox-Yankees rivalry).

 

No..wasn't there!

I'd never go to a closed stadium with explosives and rockets in the vicinity!!
I was just mentioning it for the sheeple who like that sort of thing!!

 

We don't have the benefit of a hundred years of tradition, nor close enough proximity to another team to have a Derby. We play each team only twice, so there will never be a Yankees-Sox level of build up.

This idea of a two-team trophy isn't exclusive to MLS, or even invented by it. It comes from College Football, and specifically the Big 10, IIRC. A team you play every year, you trade a trinket for bragging rights. The 'rivalry' is already there, I'm saying we should buy a hunk of metal to demonstrate that

 

The only real rivalry the Revs have had that has not been manufactured is Revs/Fire.

 

Is a rivalry based on proximity 'manufactured'?

 

Artificially manufactured "cups" serve no purpose whatsoever. Who won the last “Atlantic” Cup between NY and DC? Or the Brimstone Cup between the Fire and the club formerly known as the Burn? Who cares? The only reason they matter is for whatever points that are at stake as a league game.

We used to have a heated rivalry with Chicago because we met several years in a row in the playoffs and the drama of the particular games. Who doesn’t still hate Dave Sarah-can’t because he whined to the league and got Shalrie suspended, even though the ref didn’t even think the challenge was even foul-worthy? Lot of good it did him!

That was a rivalry because it mattered. If we develop a heated rivalry with Philadelphia or any other team it will be due to the circumstances surrounding the games, the drama and significance of each, not because some tool in the league office looked at a map and made a connection that certain teams “should” be rivals. Toronto and Columbus have nothing in common, other than having a lot of Tim Horton’s. But let’s have a cup anyway. There is a reason no one here has any feelings one way or another for the Rapids, Topeka Benfica, Chivas or any other random opponent. But once their version of Ante Razov starts pulling hair or their manager decides to sic the small-time Ludlow cops on our supporters because we were “bothering” his keeper, well, then that’s a different story.

 

Yes it is. Just because a team is close to you does not make a rivalry. It needs to happen on the field in big games. Just because 2 cities have a rivalry in another sport does not mean that automatically it becomes one in another.

 

Sports are a social construction. What matters is what we decide matters. And I can tell you that the Screaming Eagles know they lost the Cup last year on GD. Just as I'm sure the folks screaming at Section 8 know that the Brimstone Cup is going to the winner of the game in Dallas.

It's about the Supporters. It gives us something to be excited about when a large contingent of away fans are likely to show up. It's fun. And who really gives a damn about anything else?

 

Besides what else have we got to get excited about? LETS DO IT!!!!!!

 

Speaking from experience you might have more luck than you think. The 4th may be tricky, but C10 (the group that organizes the Rocky Mountain Cup) sent letter to the Colorado, Salt Lake, and league FO's asking that they consider scheduling the rivalry as the final game of the season and it has been all but one time. Twice after this year, but it will be the final home game for the Rapids before they finish the season in Vancouver.

And despite what some may think, the RMC is a "real" rivalry. you only need to look at Bekcerman's yellow card 2 seconds into his first game against the Rapids as a Salt Lake player to see that.

 

And let's not forget that players react to the crowd. If there's a Cup on the line, I'm going to care more, sing harder, and mark it on my calander as a 'must see' game, (the kind of game that I wouldn't miss for a Stanley Cup Finals game or a wedding of anyone but my closest family). The players will feed off that, I'm sure

 

I am just not a fan of forced rivalries. To me it needs to happen on the field. A Cup should be started after a rivalry is established. That is just my opinion.

 

Rivalries are developed over years of stiff competition, particularly in a playoff situations. The fans create it with the assistance of the players, FO and some media outlets. It cannot be just a marketing campaign or promo.

To try and force a meaningless trophy on seasoned NE sports fans is not the right direction IMO. It will lack credibility from the beginning.

Focus on the foundations of the rivalry. Field a competitive team and let the battles on the pitch speak for themselves.

When I see these other forced rivalries due to geography only I cringe. It just screams "Cheesy" all over it. 90% of the fans at the match don't even have a clue.

 

Agreed...

As of right now...We have more of a rivalry with LA than with Philly..!! But, you never know what can occur if say Carlos "the fishy catcher" decides to clock someone then he falls on the ground pretending he's more hurt than the guy who's got blood gushing from a massive head wound!!

 

I guess the jump from "I don't like it when people tell me I'm in a rivalry" to "having a trophy to denote the winner of a series between these two teams" is just a bridge too far for me.

We don't need to hate these people, we don't need bloodshed, we don't even need a 'rivalry' like you'd say the Sox/Yanks, Pats/Colts, C's/Lakers, B's/Habs have.

In fact, while being the front-runners in the Support the Fort campaign, I've forgiven the SOB for a lot (not all, but a lot) of how our fans were treated at MLS Cup '07. I don't hate those guys, they seem decent enough.

So, not a 'Rivalry Trophy' like you see in the Midwest Colleges that was used to diffuse a political or social conflict in the 40s between two governors who both threatened to use their National Guards against the other over a football game, but a 'Two-Team Trophy', a nice piece of metal to determine which of us was better that year. Something to hoist and be proud of. And nothing else