2003 Brimstone Cup

Discussion in 'Chicago Fire' started by Iceblink, Oct 20, 2003.

  1. Iceblink

    Iceblink Member

    Oct 11, 1999
    Chicago
    Club:
    Ipswich Town FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    So is this resolved?

    I haven't seen anything about it lately, but if the Burn fans are still claiming that we didn't win it fair and square by goal differential, then the cup will have lost one of its biggest supporters.

    The 2003 Brimstone Cup belongs in Chicago.

    Ok.. just checked the Brimstone cup website.

    It's dead in my mind. I will never acknowledge its existence again.
     
  2. JeffGMc

    JeffGMc Member

    Oct 14, 2000
    New York City
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    I'm also a bit miffed, especially after I brought up the point of "what happens if there is a tie" at the top of last season when they moved out of our division and nothing was done.

    To be honest, sometimes it's like there's no point in hating Dallas since they're not even in the same division, we need to get the central division back, hating the Metros is too easy.
     
  3. HalaMadrid

    HalaMadrid Member

    Apr 9, 1999
    Those were the agreed upon rules. We did not win it fair and square because there was no established tiebreaker aside from the holder retains. Once the season started, you can't just change the rules midstream.

    However, the competition is probably going to change next year at least with regard to that. Disowning the cup is a bit of an overreaction.

    With regard to the rivalry, as far as there being little between us and Dallas this year, well this is the whole reaosn the cup exists, folks: so we don't forget years like 99 when Dallashate ruled the land, and that we keep a part of it even this year when Dallas is the doormat of North America. The cup is there to fight over, even when for a brief time nothing else is. That's why it's around, that's why it was created.
     
  4. Jambon

    Jambon Member

    Mar 3, 2000
    Austin, TX
    The "rules" portion of this cup was definitely a trainwreck.

    Last year, you had the confusion of everyone celebrating the "winning" of the cup at the end of the regular season series, only to be told that the "rules" said it was decided at the end of the season. Never mind that the cup had been handed over at the end of the regular season series.

    This year, you have Dallas "winning" it with a 1-1 record and 3-4 goal differential. A complete joke.

    The management of this competition has been an utter failure, mainly because of the sad excuse for "rules." The too predictable result is that fans now see this cup as a joke. Who can blame them?
     
  5. HalaMadrid

    HalaMadrid Member

    Apr 9, 1999
    That was the fault of your own fans and team. Specific instructions were given before the game about presentation.

    They retained it because there was no outright winner. Hardly the sole example of this in the world of professional sports.

    Easy for you to complain, since few, if any, have stepped up to put actions behind their words.

    Trying to mothball the cup because of a year or two of these issues is moronic and shortsighted on everyone's part.
     
  6. Iceblink

    Iceblink Member

    Oct 11, 1999
    Chicago
    Club:
    Ipswich Town FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    So you're telling me that, since you can't change the rules midstream.... that, when Dallas won their last match v. the Fire, all of the people of Chicago said, "Darn... the Burn retain the Brimstone" and all of the people in Dallas said, "Yay! We not only beat the the Fire, but we also retain the Brimstone!"

    I don't think so. I think people assumed that if committee wasn't smart enough to establish rules in the very possible case of a tied season, that they would default to an intelligent tiebreaker system.

    How were we, the non-organizing committeeless fans, to know about the lack of tiebreaker rules. No one consulted me, and I'm one of the six or seven people in Chicago that cared about the cup.

    No, it seems to me that the webmaster of the brimstone site was forced to write an explanation of why in the world Chicago doesn't have the cup for the benefit of the people of both sides that went, "huh?"

    Really, the only indication that we had not won the cup was the Dallas fan who said, "Not so fast..."

    If these rules are to stand, then Dallas needs to send the Cup somewhere else. It is currently tarnishing at the hands of the Great Satan.

    If there is no winner, then the cup needs to be in someone else's possession. There can be no retention. If you don't want the winner to have it... the loser certainly can't.

    Send it to the supporters shield winner for the next season... send it to the nearest team in between the two cities (KC?)... but this "... retains the cup for another year" is beyond awful.

    Someone from Dallas needs to acknowledge that there was no winner whatsoever and hand the thing off at the supporters summit to an uninvolved party.

    ... and for those who say there is no rivalry... Dallas may suck... but as long as they have that old hack Pareja... and that psycho-looking crazed maniac Deering... nothing has changed. Kreis is still with the team... It should be obvious, after Saturday, that Lubos Kubik was and always was Chicago's own... and just because Brandon Pollard now bakes fruitcake instead of just being one... well, you get the point.

    There are a few teams that I don't feel are worthy of a rivalry with us... but my own memory tells me that Dallas still SUCKS hairy donkey balls.

    You burning bushes don't get to "retain" it. Hand it off to someone else at the supporters summit and acknowledge that either... A. the Fire won it as a result of beating you by goal differential... or B. no one won the thing, so it needs to be kept in mothballs outside of your city of beers, steers, and kreis. Either would satisfy me... but it must leave Dallas NOW!!! (well, soon)

    VOTE NO TO RETENTION!!!
     
  7. redzin

    redzin New Member

    Jan 6, 2000
  8. jdm2662

    jdm2662 New Member

    Aug 6, 2002
    Hillside, IL
    The Brimstone Cup means about as much to me as the SS without winning the MLS Cup, which is the eqivalent to nothing. Playing Dallas this year wasn't even close to being the same as it once was. Dallas will probably never surpass LA as my most hated team in the MLS. Let's focus on getting much more precious hardware. It's just the way I see it.
     
  9. heybeerman

    heybeerman Member

    Aug 2, 2001
    Chicago Burbs
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    let 'em have it.

    We are having a very successful year and Dallas is just to pitiful to worry about.
     
  10. skinut

    skinut Moderator
    Staff Member

    Jun 25, 2000
    Prospect Hgts IL (or often elsewhere on earth)
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Dallas sucks.
     
  11. ElJefe

    ElJefe Moderator
    Staff Member

    Feb 16, 1999
    Colorful Colorado
    Club:
    FC Dallas
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    A little bit of overreaction, don't you think?

    Since you brought up two issues, I'll address them in order:

    Which games count: The reason for the "all games count in a calendar year toward the Brimstone Cup" rule is because frankly, a big part of the rivalry has been built by Open Cup and playoff games between the two teams. However, I personally am more amenable to the idea of only counting regular season games than I once was, especially since Dallas and Chicago are now in different divisions for the foreseeable future and would likely only meet in the playoffs in MLS Cup.

    Tiebreakers, or the lack thereof: Personally, I'm of a mind to keep the current "tie goes to the holder" rule. Here's why:

    Brimstone Cup games mean a little more to the players on the field than other games. Chicago players are a little more hyped to beat Dallas than they are with other teams, and vice versa. However, because most Brimstone Cup games are regular season games, one thing and only one thing counts to the players: Getting the three points. How many goals they scored and how many they allowed are pretty much secondary. In the minds of the players, a 1-0 win is the same as a 4-0 win. They're both three points in the books and you go back and do it again next week.

    Assigning more importance to aggregate goals implies that the players do care or could be motivated to care about such things, when their only goal in regular season games is just to get the three points. Say if Dallas had scored another goal in the dying seconds of the match in Chicago. The game ends 4-2. It would've been all the same to both teams' players, even though it would've ultimately changed Chicago's 4-3 aggregate advantage into a 4-4 tie.

    It's not like the playoffs where both teams know going in that aggregate goals are all that matter and play accordingly.

    So that's why I'm disinclined to use aggregate goals as a tiebreaker. Also, I am more than a bit attracted to the whole concept of "to take the Brimstone Cup away from the holders, you have to WIN it." FWIW, other sporting competitions also use that philosophy.

    However, mine is not the only voice on the Brimstone Cup committee, and if the committee agrees to go with aggregate goals as a tiebreaker, then so be it.

    BTW, away goals are a complete non-starter for me for one very simple reason which can be illustrated thusly: If MLS keeps the same scheduling algorithm for 2004 that they had for 2003, then Chicago and Dallas will be playing three times, meaning of course that one team will have two away games versus the other.

    Lastly, lemme just say that all of this is still relatively new and very much a work in progress.
     
  12. ElJefe

    ElJefe Moderator
    Staff Member

    Feb 16, 1999
    Colorful Colorado
    Club:
    FC Dallas
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    By the way, the Brimstone Cup is safe and sound at its rightful home of 14800 Quorum Drive, Suite 300, Dallas, Texas.
     
  13. Stogey23

    Stogey23 Member+

    Dec 12, 1998
    San Diego, CA
    Did you see the game at Dallas this year?

    Anyway, let Dallas keep it. It's like letting the pathetic poor kid on your block play with a GoBot while you're one piece away from having the complete Voltron set.
     
  14. ElJefe

    ElJefe Moderator
    Staff Member

    Feb 16, 1999
    Colorful Colorado
    Club:
    FC Dallas
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    OK, they're usually a bit more hyped to beat Dallas. Obviously, they're not as amped when they're playing one of the worst teams in league history.
     
  15. Stogey23

    Stogey23 Member+

    Dec 12, 1998
    San Diego, CA
    Darn it Jefe, it's just not as fun when you guys openly admit how awful your soccer team is.


    It's like when the pathetic poor kid on your block...OH NEVERMIND!
     
  16. ElJefe

    ElJefe Moderator
    Staff Member

    Feb 16, 1999
    Colorful Colorado
    Club:
    FC Dallas
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Sorry. Would it help if I told you that I'm hoping for either DC or Columbus to pistolwhip you schmucks out of the playoffs?
     
  17. JeffGMc

    JeffGMc Member

    Oct 14, 2000
    New York City
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    What, you don't think the Metros have a chance?

    Frankly, neither do we.
     
  18. Iceblink

    Iceblink Member

    Oct 11, 1999
    Chicago
    Club:
    Ipswich Town FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Moderator... could you please delete this thread. It is not Fire-related and does not belong in this forum.
     
  19. Now you're just being pushy.

    Baby!
     

Share This Page