According to the New York Time print edition: "At next month's championship match in Foxboro MASS., the league is expected to announce a new schedule, which will run from mid-april to mid-november. Teams will still play 28 regular season matches, but play will be suspended in July so clubs can particapate in international exhibitions."
If I was the league I'd be pushing very hard with the Nats for double headers next year involving the Nats vs. well known Euro type opposition. See if Italy, England, France, etc. might not want a summertime match here in the States. Not sure how this would play into such plans.
I love my Fire but I not sitting outside in the cold. I've never been to a Bears game for the same reason. If this is true, they just lost 2 season tickets. Kevin
brilliant...mid-november night games in Chicago ! Definitely gonna get the casual fan to show up...uh, not. Even if the Cup is mid November, late October night games can be brutal. Maybe all the teams can winter in Florida, and we can play a year round schedule !
*shrug* I guess I don't have near the problem with this others do. My only question is why they aren't adding more games if they're extending the season? Maybe that's what the break is for...whatever international competitions MLS said they'd get behind or whatever.
This move has to be made. Copa America is in July, and Gold Cup might move to summer also. During World Cup years, MLS can have the break earlier, in June. MLS players will be in top form for international competition, but not be drained by an entire season. Soccer is a very draining sport to play in the US in July.
No attribution provided for that part of the story. Methinks the NYT reporter got lazy and cribbed Jamie Trecker's story to fill out that part of the column.
I'd rather sit in 45 degree weather than 95 degree weather. And I'd much rather see a soccer game played in cool weather than hot weather. Those summer day games, watching exhausted players dragging themselves around for the second half in the blazing sun, are some of the worst in MLS.
Except the details are different from Trecker's story. If it's just a break in the middle of a single season, it's really a non-story. It's just a scheduling decision that doesn't make the nature of the competition any different.
Mid April through Mid November...does that mean MLS Cup in December??? Is the beginning of March not good to play soccer??? Whats would it be like in November, which would be better, more preferable, March or November??? Can't wait til the New Clean Sheet and the new Inisider columns come out, they will shed some light onto this topic... I say run the season from the beginning of april instead of mid-april to the middle of November.... We need more teams...
Mid March to mid April is a lot colder in the Midwest than October. But I can live with it and 95 degree games in July are no fun. At least The field at Naperville won't be 150 in April.
The Gold Cup has allready been moved to the summer of 2003. I think the break is for the Confederations cup. Copa America is going to be held in 2004 not 2003.
This is not too mention those of us who would give about anything to get to support their own team in the first place, no matter the weather. So you give up your tickets 800port911, you make me proud.
The only problem is that we'll see more football lines in our games... The 2003 MLS cup will be play in LA anyway, so there won't be any problem.
To me, this has the fingerprints of SUM all over it. If there's a break for the next Copa America, SUM might buy up English rights, and use it to promote the MLS stars. Look at what happened to San Jose attendance after the World Cup.
Is Barca an A-League side? Anyway, I wonder what a schedule like this will do to attendence? Hurt, help, stay the same? Sachin
Way to support MLS, you are exactly what the league needs. Big baby. Put a scarf and cap on, drink some hot cocoa and support your team. Does the cold get into your bones or something?