I'm not going to register over there just to post this, but this statement in the Original post you linked is in error: The HDC is built to accomodate a pitch of 120x80 yards. They haven't actually used a pitch that large since the first match, but the ground can hold it.
Here is the way I believe it breaks down today: 13500 seats + up to 3500 temp bleachers in open end for 17000 total for Phase I. If the funding from NYS comes through for Phases II & III the 2nd upper deck will add another 3500 permanent seats that could put the total seating up to 20500.
Building a field that large is stupid in my opinion. The worst thing about HDC is that the field is that big.
Here's the whole post from the Rhinos web-boards so people don't have to pull a muscle clicking on the link:
There was an article in the Democrat & Chronicle today that was about Rochester being an option for MLS. It stated how this years expansion teams pretty much sucked. And they felt Rochester could bring at least 13,000 fans to each game. I know this doesn't mean Rochester has a big chance for getting into the MLS, but they're still in consideration... hopefully. Here is the link to read the full article: http://www.democratandchronicle.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050707/SPORTS0101/507070364/1007/SPORTS
The guy who wrote that article is an idiot. Does he really think a Rochester expansion team would be better than Chivas and RSL in its first couple of years? Not under the current expansion rules, that's for sure. And wait until the fans see the difference between A League and MLS ticket prices.
The Rhinos would definitely better than Chivas on the scoreboard, the record, and at the turnstiles. First of all, the Rhinos know their local and regional market--that makes a big difference in getting the turnstiles to turn. Rochesterians will show up to see US Nats play even if they have a slow start out of the gate. Chivas made a terrible error in hiring that boob to coach its team. Rongen drove Tampa AND DCU into the ground. Why do we think it would be any better for Chivas? Westhofer doesn't appear to have a the magic formula, either. The Rhinos would never hire such a pair of retreads, that in itself would allow Rochester to muster more than one win in 18 tries. I have no doubt. As far as RSL goes, it is a regional center and people don't realize how international the LDS church makes Salt Lake City. That demographic and civic pride have certainly helped RSL exceed expectations at the turnstile. I also think that Rochester would have a better record than RSL. Keep in mind we've played .500 ball with MLS sides. It will only get better once our roster is stronger. Face it, Chivas has fallen way short of expectations and RSL has exceeded expectations in many areas. I expect the Rhinos will have a successful first year campaign. And yes, Rochesterians will absorb the higher ticket prices because they know that the overall quality of the league is better.
You sure you want to stand by that number? (Don't mind me -- I'm just annoyed by the continuing delays/screwups with my team's new stadium.)
The Rhinos are 8-5-1 against MLS opponents in the US Open Cup tournament. We've lost a few exhibition games. But we've also won a couple and tied a couple. Yeah, very close to .500. Now that I look at it, I don't know where the heck the one tie came from during USOC. But those are the numbers on the team website.
Perhaps you are bitter because Rochester has a better fan base and maybe also a better team than Colorado. There is no reason why Rochester would need to jack up ticket prices. RSL's are low. This is a management decision for most MLS clubs, not a necessity. I'm pretty comfortable that Rochester would do dramatically better than Chivas, RSL and Colorado if they entered the league next year.
That's not what he said at all. Bob Matthews was suggesting that an obtaining an existing team would be better for attendance figures. Actually. He said that a good team would draw more fans than a bad team. That's a shocker.
I think the only way we could be worse than Chivas is if we decided to pick only players from NY in the expansion draft. Even then if we bent the rules so that it was anyone who might have visited NY in the past we'd be much better. Bob the Ugly American is only trying to point out to local fans just how difficult the times might be if we got an expansion team.
Good point. I never looked at all the aspects of the ticket price issue that every MLS anti-Rochester person tries to rub our noses in. IF we own our own stadium and can operate the team at lower costs it makes sense that our tickets could be cheaper. I think it'll be easier for us to operate at lower costs because the standard of living in WNY is simply cheaper than the nationwide average. In fact our real estate prices are about 30% lower than the national average as compared to Denver, LA, NY-Metro, Boston, Chicago and even Columbus which are probably 20%-30% higher than the national average. I can make $60k here and have the same standard of living as someone making $120k-$150k in NYC or someone making $90k-$100k in Boston.
You will also be paying reasonable rent for the facility and capturing the ancilary parking/concessions revenues that many MLS teams do not capture. This makes maximizing ticket revenue less critical for Rochester because your fixed costs are lower and you get the parking/hotdog money.
We will definetely be paying "reasonable rent for the facility"....I think the rent is $1 per year (land lease)!!! There will be no other rental payments for the facility The Rhinos will own the stadium. Revenue from parking, concessions, corporate suites...etc. will go directly to the Rhinos. The Rhinos are in excellent financial position to enter the MLS. There is also a very large untapped fan base (casual fan)...that refuse to watch soccer in a baseball stadium with terrible site lines and a 1950's vintage type video screen.
Unfortunately, all of those eight wins came before 2000. Since the 2000 Open Cup, the Rhinos record against MLS hasn't been so stellar: 2000: DC United 3, Rhinos 0 2002: Kansas City 3, Rhinos 2 (OT) 2003: New England 2, Rhinos 1 2004: New England 1, Rhinos 1 (Rhinos advance on PKs) Games that go to penalties are officially recorded as draws. The 2004 game against New England was that draw. The Rhinos roster as it is currently constituted would have one of the worst records in MLS history over the course of a 32-game season. As bad as Real Salt Lake and Chivas USA allegedly are, either team would still be USL Division 1 champs.
I'm not anti-Rochester. I certainly think a MLS team in the new park would do great. But if you guys get a MLS team. you're going to have to deal with MLS realities and that involves things like cash calls to support the team in New Jersey with the bad stadium situation. Players are not going to take any less money to play in upstate New York so there's no way the team is going to save money on the $2 million or so that MLS teams spend on salaries. I doubt there's more than 5 or 6 players on the current roster who would be kept if the team moved up and they're going to want more money since MLS doesn't allow their players to go indoor in the winter. The current Rochester squad might win a few games in MLS, but once the other clubs figured them out, they'd get slammed week after week. That's not great for attendance. And unless you want to be the next Chivas, you'd better plan on trying to find some decent foreign players. They're not cheap. Travel might be bit more than most MLS sides since Buffalo isn't an airline hub. I see absolutely no way that you guys could avoid a drastic rise in ticket prices. It's just the reality of the situation. So in some ways, you might be better off now having a somewhat dominant USL rather than an expansion MLS club.
I struggle with this argument. Sure, the Rhinos, or any MLS team could in theory make more money in USL. So why do it? Perhaps everyone should quit on MLS. Imagine the roster savings. Utah doesn't have a ton of summer competition, they'd still get coverage. Why not drop down and dominate USL DI? The Rhinos are darn close or over the average ticket prices of some MLS cities as it is. I have no concerns regarding whether a superior product (even with a worse record) will draw more fans. Especially with a far superior stadium to what we're used to. On travel, that's no concern. Buffalo is actually pretty competitive on flying and Rochester is getting better. With that said, look at the geography of USL division 1. Atlanta, Seattle, Portland, Vancouver, Charleston, Richmond. At least in MLS the Rhinos would have two fairly close opponents. Aside from there being more games, travel won't be a big increase on a per game basis. I've said this before, and I'll say it again. I have no idea why everyone can look at a Seattle or Atlanta and assume they can move to MLS and see attendance increase five or ten fold with an inferior team. Yet Rochester is for some reason the anomaly to some people and may not see an increase at all. The Rhinos will be the focus (even with a bad team) in Rochester in MLS. Not many other teams can say that. Will Rochester get a MLS team? I have no clue. My main point is that if Rochester gets one, I have no doubt about its success. If a team can draw around 10,000 fans a game in a baseball stadium in DII with tickets averaging in the mid to upper teens, I can't think if a more sure bet in a soccer stadium at a higher level. Even when the Rhinos tanked in 1997, the crowds were still solid.
Just a quick reminder...the Rhinos have not lost to lower division opponent in USOC, nor have they lost to a opponent two divisions lower in USOC. Can you think of a team that fits that criteria? I can. I appreciate your concern for the Rhinos' record and the self-image of Rochesterians if we have to bear the brunt of having a team that is not always within striking distance of the top of the table or makes deep playoffs runs each year. I think we'll be fine in MLS if we get there.
They haven't lost to an Open Cup opponent three divisions lower, either. My team has, and it was nothing but mirth and merry-making when it happened, I assure you. Well, as much mirth and merry-making as one could expect from a fanbase that was supporting a team that would finish 6-19-5 and was watching home games at Dragon Stadium. Well, I would enjoy seeing Laurie Calloway's triumphant return to Major League Soccer. I can already imagine Eric Wynalda's comments on the ESPN2 broadcasts already. They would probably have to use the seven-second delay for Rhinos games on ESPN2.
El Jefe, the Burn lost to the Wilmington Hammerheads (PSL) in 2003 and to the Seattle Sounders Select in 2001j in the USOC. At the time, Dallas was two divisions above the Hammerheads and at least two divisions above Seattle Sounders Select (a local yokel team for Chrissakes).
I think that the Seattle Sounders Select were a PDL team. But that was in 2001 and the Burn were only mediocre that year and not outright bad, like in 2003. Anyway, I'm blaming Mike Jeffries for both of those losses. The Burn under Dave Dir only lost one game to a lower-division team in the Open Cup (the Rhinos in 1999) and the Burn/FCD under Colin Clarke has yet to lose to a lower-division team in the Open Cup.
Oh God, that game.....THAT GAME...!!!! Those bastards....that Ref! (who still does Rhino games) I need a beer.......
That's all an unimportant distraction to an important question: how will Rochester react to regressing to the mean in terms of winning games? This league's structure virtually guarantees that will happen in the long term--you might have some winning seasons out there, but you're bound to string together a couple of truly crappy seasons now and again, and both will probably be outnumbered by seasons near .500. (And believe me, once they pile up they can be pretty uninspiring). I don't know that there's any good way to answer that question, but it's worth asking.