Would a New York City team make the Red Bulls "Chivas 2?"

I can't remove a name from where they voted, but I can change the vote total. So while your name is listed one place, the vote is accounted for where you wanted it to be.

 

LOL u need to rebrand. Talk to anyone outside of the US about MLS and they will tell you LA Galaxy and New York Red Bull without thinking about the soft drink and the stupid name.

Of course they don't know that the Red Bulls have never won anything but the branding worked.

 

Your post and a previous one explain the problem with Chivas USA. They did not target the Latin American community at large, but a subset of the Latin American community with a name that is rather polarizing.

If I ran Chivas I would completely re-brand and market the team as the blue collar alternative to the LA Galaxy.

 

Why try to get another NYC team when Red bulls can't even sell out their own stadium? The message I get from this, is that they should have done a better job with the first NYC team and are now trying to make up.

And if they do get another NYC team, then they need to get things right. Give the team a professional sounding name. Something New Yorkers can be proud of. When your team is named after an energy drink, it's hard to take them seriously. The greatest city in the world has a soccer team named Red bull. I don't know how big of a problem that is, but for me it's an issue.


Of course, Chivas USA needs to go. I don't know what MLS was thinking when Chivas came into the picture. They aren't a successful club and probably never will be. Just get rid of them. Don't move them either (because I am not a fan of moving teams, in any sport). Just completely get rid of them, and add a brand new team (new owner) in a new city that actually cares. Chivas vs LA Galaxy is not a rivalry. Have you seen the tv ratings for that match-up on ESPN? They are horrible. No one cares about Chivas.

Point being.......1 team per 1 city. If you want another NYC team, then Red bulls should be associated with another city. New Jersey Red Bulls is more okay than New York Red bulls. Plus, since there are now 2 cities involved, you might end up with a real rivalry.

 

Well, except for the one named Chivas USA you mean.

 

Seriously - the most Caucasian person in league history, Jim Curtin, played for Chivas USA. If he could play for a team called Chivas, so can your children.

 

If you have to get rid of Chivas USA because of Attendance, then you have to get rid of about 5 other clubs that average less Attendance and a couple other clubs that are at about the same number.

CUSA v LAG is growing into a rivalry. A couple years playing each other, a rivalry does not make. You can't just force a rivalry. It is flawed, idiotic thinking.

If you are going to base your arguments on Ratings, then the entire league should fold. Especially since the Final got a rating of 1.4 or something pathetic. MLS Teams and the MLS as a whole will not be able to brag about ratings until the league gets bigger. It's behind the NHL in popularity, but rising. Look, until the MLS gets big play on SportsCenter, no one really cares. Right now the MLS doesn't move the needle. So your Ratings argument is silly.

Especially since Regional, and more specifically City rivalries don't play well nationally. Ratings for the World Series between the Giants and Angels were awful despite having the second biggest market and another top 10 market involved. It has been proven that the only model that has successfully beaten this is the Super Bowl.

And throwing out a rivalry like Duke v Carolina or Ohio St. v Michigan to disprove my theory is faulty. Those rivalrys have been going for over a century, so they have had 100 years of kicking each other in the face.

The BEST rivalries evolve from teams being in each others way, not just proximity.

You may hate the name, as i do, but your ignorance on the topic is astounding.

 

I appreciate that.

 

It really depends when that time period comes which market they choose to represent. If they are still Red Bulls New York, then their relevance will diminish and they will struggle for attendance and attention matching that of their NYC2 counterparts. Their numbers might end up similar to Chivas USA this season.

If they decide at that time to become Red Bulls New Jersey and REALLY push the Newark and state market to back them, they will have a new relevance, will have a better chance at engaging in their marketplace, and New York vs. New Jersey could end up being a heated rivalry especially seeing the proximity between the two stadiums no matter where built in NYC.

No matter what RBNY does or what happens with NYC2, they need to have either the NYC or NJ market back them on a Seattle/Portland level. It's impossible for them to be able to do that with the New York City market with their location.

 

There is no rivalry between NY and NJ, see the Nets and the Devils as an example. Also Red Bull cares about the "New York" part of the name more than anything else. It's a great marketing gimmick for them. You replace New York with New Jersey and the name completely loses whatever appeal it has right now. Keep in mind that Red Bull is not in MLS to make money off of soccer but sees it as another marketing tool in its multiplatform sports marketing strategy.

 

If Red Bull NY were to change it's name, would Red Bull GmbH still want it? I doubt it, as IMO the only reason they own it is because it fits their marketing model.

I also find the idea that a second team in NY would somehow force Red Bull to switch it's name to New Jersey and become less of a brand. I can't imagine Red Bull GmbH would switch without a fight. And as how NY Red Bull have the regional rights I would wager that legally MLS wouldn't be able to force anything.

What I find interesting about all this is I have read that Red Bull GmbH had wanted an expansion franchise and to build a new stadium in NY proper, but MLS pointed them towards the metrostars instead. Now MLS is trying to find a site in NY for NY2. If this story is true and I was Red Bull I would be pissed at the league.

 

DING, DING, DING!

 

That makes just way too much sense to ever become a reality.

 

Being named after a junk food product sort of bothers me, yes, but the fact of the matter is Red Bull, and nobody else, is the one that built a most beautiful stadium the whole of MLS can be proud of, and it's located in an accessible location that nobody in their right mind could complain about--so what, it's in New Jersey, it's a 20 minute ride on the PATH train.

Would Revs fans give their right arm to have someone like Red Bull do the same for their town? Or are they so married to the name being the all important issue, that they're willing to give Kraft a pass, because at least they have a cool-sounding name?

For years and years, everybody else was all talk and no action--"we're gonna do this, and we're gonna do that". Everybody remembers the horrors of the "60-to-90 days" talk. Some people are probably still in therapy about it. Everybody and their mother has plans, but nobody wants to commit any hard cash to anything.

And then comes along Red Bull with their boatload of resources, and what do they do, but actually put words to action, and they built the damn stadium when nobody else would. On top of that, they weren't chintsy about it, either. And so for that I must feel a sense of gratitude and thus look past whatever misgivings I have about the name.

 

The part that I bolded completely reminded me of Chivas USA.

 

The whole idea of having a team called Cosmos whether it is the renaming of the current team or NY2 solving all MLS interest in NY is a big gamble. There would be an initial bump in interest but it would return to normality as it is now.

Fact is there is a current team with a fine stadium that is easily accessible for most people in the area and there is still hardly any interest in NY. I really think a "Cosmos" team would NOT change any of that long term. I shlep down from Connecticut 5-6 times per season and it's no problem. If you really WANT live footie, it's right here, already.

Also, for all the bashing Red Bull gets, as NebraskaAddick reminded us, they built a very nice stadium. I firmly believe that if there was no Red Bull, there would be no new stadium and the team would still be tenants at the Meadowlands. They ponied up the money and got it done. No one else did.

 

But why would the name have to change?

 

Thank you for that.

Having a team called the Cosmos would not automatically equal success.

if the team is succesful on any front it would be done by marketing their squad.

I really hate when people honestly think that the Red Buls would become a second class citizen in the NY market if the Cosmos came to town.


I feel like NY2 fans are assuming that every NY sports fan feels the exact same way about the Red Bulls and Cosmos as they do. Namely that they don't tolerate the ownership, and can't fathom rooting for a team thats not in the 5 boros, and that the Cosmos are a nostalgic trip that will do everything. While the Red Bulls marketing strategy could be better, especially given the amount of resources they have available, I don't think the probelm nessecarily lies in location or brand.

You could make a supporters group out of the people that want to be fans of a NY team thats not the Red Bulls, but it won't be enough to fill that 40k stadium people swear the Cosmos might have. That and the name might not mean the same thing to NY mosern NY fans as most might think.

I mean the team lost a majority of its fans after Pele left. It seemed to be more of a fad than anything to most people. Mind you it was the fad that launched a generation of intrest in soccer, and one that holds nostalgia for many, (I'm not gonna seel the orignal clubs impact short) but a fad non-the less.

Even with a marketing push thay says "the Cosmos are back! That might not be enough. How many NYers remember this club? It seems that MLS's target audience in their 20's and 30's wouldn't remember the team when they first arrived. How many that do rememeber are so fond of the club that seeing their return would make them instantly want to see a game? How many soccer fans that are looking for somebody to root for in the area haven't already found one in the Red Bulls?

I think the pint I'm getting at is that the Cosmos aren't a magical thing that will wash away all the wrong things done by the Red Bulls in the NY market. The Red Bulls will not become Chivas 2. If anything a cosmos team that over-estimated the impact of its name or the viability of its market, might under perform its predicted impact on NY soccer. The Cosmos might be closer to Chivas than RB would be. (Which isn't a very fair comparison since I do think the Cosmos can do avergely in NY, maybe with about as high attendance as the Red Bulls, just not Seattle big)

 

Would a rebirth of the "Cosmos" name really mean instant success, once they find out the modern version can't be full of star players because of the salary cap rules? People have this romantic vision that isn't supported by modern MLS facts. You can't exactly carry on the Cosmos legacy if you can't fill out your roster with all the best players money can buy.

And then, are there perhaps a lot of New York area soccer fans who are a little too familiar with the quality of the game played overseas, and so tend to get stuck up about the "inferior" quality of MLS teams? There are a lot of first-generation immigrants in NY, right? A lot of them tend to be tied to clubs back home and are more reluctant to give the new team a chance, especially if they are perceived as not as good.

Maybe other cities like Seattle and Portland have more native-born residents, and plus both their teams have been around a while in the community before they joined MLS, so there's a history there.

The Red Bulls just need more history and trophies, and generations raised on rooting for them. That wouldn't be anything a new Cosmos could take away, because a new Cosmos wouldn't have any history either, except for the branding, but it all ends there. If it takes a while for the new Cosmos to win a trophy, they'll be as popular as the Red Bulls.

 

redbull averages over 18000 per game, and the attendance has room to grow. what failure? a cup would get more bandwagon hipsters in the seats, some of whom would become sth's after the experience. so, i think redbull is doing fine. socccer is a hard sell in the city, because the summer sport is baseball! can a second ny team be successful? yes, but not because rbny is named after a soft drink.

 

the attendance number is padded.

definitely wasn't 18k tonite.

 

suggestion to any ny2 investors: watch the nets attendance over the next few seasons. this is not because of the rivalry of the knicks, but, rather, would the city support a team without the history of the other ny franchises.

 

i am assuming sold tickets, and i am guesstimating total purse per game, given concessions. redbulls take would be close to a clean $800,000.

 

rbny average about 13000 at giants stadium. rba: over 17000. good job redbull! padded or not, tickets sold! if half the tickets show up, an additional 40% of ticket sales are sold in concessions. red bull is making money this year. they have a good team, and , hopefully, henry isnt seriously injured. im drunk, and ill speak no more