I was originally from Ohio so I of course was a Crew fan from the beginning. I only started to support RSL too because I moved to SLC
^ that .... FCD as I'm Texan, but follow and supported DCU as I was in Silver Spring, MD for 3 1/2 years.
more skilled players Relative, subjective and mostly irrelevant…skilled players come and go, and sometime stay away for long patches of time…besides there is always better players or a better team. Most, and I usually avoid this term like the plague, “real” fans stick with their teams through thick and thin…besides skill level has very little to with entertainment value, which will be touched on below… more fans The hallmark of the bandwagon fan…I am supporting this team because everyone else is supporting this team…but little question, many fans pick their teams based on this qualification... more tradition Past tradition is great and all…but if you didn’t personally live thought it, it’s pretty disingenuous to claim it as your own… better stadium Better stadium? You really think the majority of people take the quality of the stadium in to account when “picking” their team? I find that absurd on face value… a city I actually have been to and like Ok, personal connection…now you’re talking. As someone who lived a time in Liverpool and now lives in SD, you should appreciate, as well as anyone, how mobile modern society has become…in all your hypothetical wondering why this guy in SD would want to be watch a Crew game, did is ever cross your mind he might, you know, be from Ohio? Or would that reasoning interfere too with your apparent need to be a snarky, condescending douchebag … hypothetical speaking, of course… more entertaining Utterly subjective, yet all important! Yes, we all enjoy/follow/support the sports, leagues and teams we do because we find entertainment, joy, happiness, pleasure, etc. in them…and how or why we get there is largely immaterial in the end…we all have a reasons and stories...we ALL “pick” somehow. Who are you to judge somewhat some else finds entertaining?
In all fairness the facilities are a good indication of either the state of, or approach the club. Shit facilities can say quite a bit. There are several people here in SA that I've slowly helped make the transition to MLS fandom, and the facilities (stadium) played a decent part in the decision as it showed the purpose, drive, backing, etc of the club.
Fair enough…but sounds like a bit of gray area or a crossover with regard to personal connection…if you are actually going to the games and enjoying the experience, I question how much the facilities themselves play into that enjoyment…it might enhance or decrease the experience slightly…but not enough to override their enjoyment, either good or bad, from what they are watching on the field…I question how many people would say, hey I had a crap time, watching a crap team, but hey it was a lovely stadium, I am in! Whereas I could see the opposite being true quite a bit…great time, crap stadium, still becomes a fan... And course it should have no bearing on someone who will likely never step foot in a stadium a whole ocean away…
There were people that wouldn't go to DCU matches with me because RFK is a shit hole and certainly didn't feel the team was worth the effort seeing as that's where they played rather than playing at FedEx with the 'Skins. Here in SA I've taken several people to Scorpions matches that were highly impressed with stadium and first class feel to the point that they'd "give this soccer thing another go" .... One of those things kept the fans from even seeing the fact that the DCU supporters provide a wonderful environment, and the team wasn't too bad. The other glossed over the fact that the Scorpions were actually fighting to not be the worst team in the league this year.
Lots of popular and well-supported teams, regardless of sport, play in or have played, or will again someday play in shitholes…but yes, I get how it could make it slightly more difficult to get some people through the door initially… But they didn’t have a horrible time either right? They didn’t spend 2 hours in abject misery and boredom in first class surrounding…had they, I really doubt they’d be back…I hear most opera houses are really first class…I only hear it, because I am unlikely to ever go to one (willingly)…
If it is between choosing between a team that plays in a high school football stadium or a team that plays in a $100 million professional soccer soccer stadium sure. Picking between a $100 million professional soccer stadiums and a $80 million professional soccer stadium not so much.
First, RFK is a horrible, horrible place to watch a game these days. And I will totally disagree, the stadium has an enormous impact on the experience, especially for a first timer. I've taken first time soccer watchers to games at Reading's truly fun Madejski stadium, Union Berlin's amazing Alte Forsterei, Sporting KC's wonderful new Sporting Park. None were soccer fans beforehand, all returned on their own for the experience and learned to like the game. I've also taken first timers to Hertha's appallingly boring Olympic Stadium (where I also took a first timer to a WCup match. horrible venue) and the old KC Wiz' Arrowhead, and RFK. The experience is so bad that they really can't get past it to consider the game without a negative slant. It's not about the cost of the stadium, or even the overall quality of the stadium, it's about suitability to a soccer game. When it's too big for the possible crowd, or the field isn't quite wide-enough, or you are too far away from the field (who puts a track around a field at a professional venue these days?), or all of these things, it detracts from the experience. If you've attended hundreds of games, it's just another way to watch a game. If it's a first time, it's a definition of what the game is like live.
Indeed, and in part, you get the situation you have with the Milan clubs because of it. It's also a reason as to why Italy couldn't keep its leg up on England. Well, there's a massive difference between Toyota Stadium (80m) and BBVA (95m) Toyota Park (98m), Rio Tinto (110m), DSGP (131m) and Sporting Park (200m)/RBA (200m) or the stadium Orlando is building for 155m.
Done with you because of this. You are just an arsehole who doesn't have the first clue on how to support a team. This criteria you listed is just pathetic. Better stadium ? Why on earth would you mention this? Why would this be a criteria on who to support? You might as well just admit you are a gloryhunter but being a Liverpool fan you are missing the glory part. Good lord.
As do I ... but to pretend that the stadium/facility you're watching it in doesn't play a big part in the experience is a bit disingenuous. Of course, what you quoted was merely pointing out that there can be quite a bit of difference in stadiums that aren't that far off in construction cost, as he was trying to say there wasn't.
I thought we were talking about fans who did not have a local team, meaning they did not have the ability to go and watch their team at the stadium more than maybe once or twice a year.
I think it's not the amenities themselves that are the issue here. It's what the amenities say about the willingness of the owners to spend money, which is reflected in the quality of the team.
Not subjective the Premier league has better players on average than MLS. Now that may be irrelevant to you and that's fine, everyone has their own hierarchy of importance. But it does matter to me. Also creates a better atmosphere to watch on TV, and the rare occasions I get to attend a match in person. Also increases the chances of meeting other fans and developing a community. So you have to have lived the tradition to celebrate it? So I can't wear my powder blue Chargers Jersey based on the 1963 team? I can't complain about the NFL not canceling the 1979 AFC Championship because it was to cold? So you can only embrace history and traditions you were only following the team for? Think 95% of sports fans would disagree with you on that one better stadium A stadium, and the crowd at the stadium is part of the team. You can find it absurd I guess but it matters to me. a city I actually have been to and like For the record I didn't live in Liverpool, I lived an hour and a half west in Wales. But Liverpool was the closest big city. I also attended Bangor City matches but it's kind of hard to follow the Welsh Prem from the states. As for the Ohio thing, it appears you're not paying attention. I understand why someone from Ohio would support the Crew and have said so many times upthread, and if San Diego gets an MLS team I get season tickets. more entertaining Sure it's subjective. But I have watched MLS and the Premier League, and I find the prem much more entertaining. Based on the ratings I am not the only one.
Darlington had a terrific stadium. Team, not so much. Your statement really makes no sense. You can have a good team in a poor stadium. You can have a poor team in a good stadium.
I think there's little doubt that a stadium can enhance/detract from the experience of watching a game. When the Germans went on their stadium building binge not so long ago, it's no coincidence that they went away from the municipal sports stadium concept, and went for what they viewed as the "English" model, of having stands very close to the touchlines, and nearly always covered too. It's also clear that in nearly every case, a move to a new stadium has seen a large boost in support. Very few people would decide which team to support based on their stadium though, although one that's good to go to is more likely to sway the uncommitted than a place that's a bit dull, or a bit lacking. Nobody, for example, is going to decide whether to support a club or not because they've got a nice toilet block, but they might be a bit put off if they go somewhere like Southend circa 1989, and far that due to a couple of inches of flooding, the only way to relieve yourself was to piss through the open doorway.
I did go a bit too far. Instead of "It's what the amenities say about the willingness of the owners to spend money, which is reflected in the quality of the team," I should have said "It's what the amenities say about the willingness of the owners to spend money, which can be reflected in the quality of the team." Of course you can have a good team in a bad stadium, or a bad team in a good one. There will always be exceptions to general rules. Maybe the team doesn't control the condition of the stadium. And maybe the owner has limited finances and must choose priorities. But if, in a particular case, the condition of the stadium is an indication that the owner is a tightwad, I don't see how that can be viewed as a good sign, or even a neutral one.
Their's not much point having a Stadium that holds 25000 if the local council will only give you a licence to let in 10000 and you average under 2000 and can't afford to run the place.
What you quoted in post #133 and how you responded indicates making a point about there not being a difference if money was spent on the stadium. Even if you're only going to 2 games a year .... the difference in traveling to BBVA vs Toyota Stadium is quite substantial. Being an FCD fan, I get an extra FCD game that I normally would because of the game @ BBVA in Houston (choosing to go to that match than another in Frisco because it'll be more enjoyable than sitting up in the generic setting out there). There's some new Houston fans here in SA because of this very thing ...
Agreed, but I wasn’t really making that specific argument… Exactly, and if you would just apply that same logic across the board, you wouldn’t be coming across as such a condescending arrogant jackwagon… As I said, its great and all…sure, complain all about it[1979 AFC Championship] all you like, if doing so beings you joy, just don’t make it out like you lost 2 toes to frostbite if your weren’t here… Great it matters to YOU…if this list is just about things that matter to you, then no problem…but that’s not want your originally claimed…you claimed a majority of fans… Your self-delusion continues to run rampant…had you repeated your understanding of why someone currently outside Ohio might be a Crew fan so many times this wouldn’t be an issue…at best, only once do you reference the slightest hint of understanding… As do I, yet I’ve never wondered why someone might be a Crew or an MLS fan…
Do Australians also have to put up with this soccer v. football terminology nonsense? Wake me when the Footballeroos take the field. Maybe it's just growing up in Iowa, but I'm used to the idea of people just kind of picking their teams for whatever reason if there's nobody local. I wonder what the correlations are between who you support, and the first team you ever saw live or on television.