I would like to hope that the Open Cup Committiee will spread out the schedule for the US Open Cup games. Can't have all the round 1 thru 3 proper matches jammed up in June. At least what they should do is seperate rounds 1 & 2 in June. Round 3 can be in July, Quarters in August, Semis in September & the final in October. Need to make these Open Cup matches really mean something even more and to allow visiting supporters a chance to make plans for travel.
So you think the reason more supporters don't travel for US Open Cup games is because they don't have time to do so?
Honestly Mr Tomasch If there are those who want to travel to say Charleston, S.C. and see their side face the Battery either against a PDL or MLS team it would be nice to give these supporters a chance to make plans and use some of their vacation time to come out and see such a beautiful city like Charleston. This past season I was able to head over to Harrisburg, PA for the Red Bulls road match. Now I don't want to say losing my job was the reason I was able to go, but in part it was. Yet if I still had a job a week is not long for me to make definete travel plans to spend more than a day to go to that location. Took Amtrak to Harrisburg on the day of the match, took Amtrak back the next day. If the location is not too far, then yes it's not so bad. But if the Red Bulls did play at Charleston, then I need a good three to four days to arrive, enjoy the sightes and get ready for the match. At the same time shouldn't there be a good feeling to seperate the games and get pumped for them as a supporter. I understand the reality is that the Open Cup Committiee is not interested in what the US Soccer supporter thinks, but still it would be nice for a change from them to see that.
See, that's the thing...almost nobody wants to do that. That's nothing against Charleston, I'm sure it's lovely. Especially in the summertime. It's that nobody except us few hardcores gives a rat's ass about the Open Cup. They could play it with a month between games or a week or an hour and a half - it's not going to appreciably change the traveling support as long as it's a half-assed tournament played during the week that, despite what my man Josh likes to say, has not been "saved" by Seattle's crowd for the final. If you can't get people to go to the home US Open Cup matches - and Charleston (just as an example) has averaged 2,224 for its most recent ten US Open Cup home matches (< half of capacity), what on Earth makes you think a significant amount of people are going to plan a trip to a US Open Cup match? Honestly? No, they're not interested in what a handful of people who claim to represent a significant number of people think or want.
"I understand the reality is that the Open Cup Committiee is not interested in what the US Soccer supporter thinks" says, to me, that he's making a case for more than just himself. And if the number is not significant, that proves my point. The number isn't significant. I don't know why people can't get this through their freaking heads. Almost nobody gives a ******** about the US Open Cup.
Let me take this from a different direction. I completely agree with you. Almost nobody cares about the Open Cup. So, if it's going to be a money loser and a low draw no matter which way you go, then what would be the problem of spreading out the scheduling a little more so that it allows the few of us that do care the opportunity to go to the games?
Kenn, since you're the go-to guy for attendance, what was the variation in Charleston's Open Cup home figures between playing a DII team and an MLS team?
That's assuming there was a variation My feeling has been that when the draw pits teams from different divisions against each other, the lower division should have home advantage. This increases the likelihood of a "giant killing" upset, which is the only justification for Open Cup competitions anyway, and should boost attendance. If Charleston don't have any bump in attendance playing, say, Columbus as opposed to the Kickers, then there's no point.
Why should you be more than 1% of the thinking if you're not 1% of the potential ticket-buyers? I have no problem with spreading out the schedule to aid with fixture congestion. I have no problem with the tournament taking however long they want it to take. I just think the notion that it should be done so that eight people can go to a game is effing ludicrous. Because they won't. So, really, you're going to fly from Austin* to Wilmington, North Carolina on a weeknight, take two or two and a half days off work to go see an early-round US Open Cup game? Seriously? Whuck? *This presumes you had a team. Sorry about that one.
Since 1999, hosting: An MLS team: 11 games averaged 3,410 A D2 team: 5 games averaged 2,144 A D3 team: Only 2 games, I don't have a figure for one, the other was 1,255 A PDL team: 2 games averaged 1,645 A USASA team: 4 games averaged 1,205 And before you get geeked about the MLS figure, keep in mind Charleston averaged, in the second division, 3,350 for its league matches between 1997 and 2009.
Here's the problem: if you're Accrington and you draw Manchester United, you want that game at home, not only for the home advantage, but because it's incredibly lucrative. Even if it's not Accrington, let's say it's Ipswitch. You know you're going to sell tickets and if you can even eke out a draw and get a replay, it's a feather in your cap. You want that chance. Lots of teams don't even want to host an Open Cup game. It's a pain in the ass. And when a lower-level team does host an MLS team, it's rarely as cool as you might think. And it normally doesn't draw a big crowd. The 97 USOC matches for which I have figures where a lower-level team hosted an MLS team averaged 5,111. But half the crowds were 4,125 or under. The dozen biggest: 07/01/09..Seattle @ Portland (Portland, OR)....................16,382 06/30/10..Seattle @ Portland (Portland, OR)....................15,422 09/03/97..DC United @ San Francisco Bay Seals (Stockton, CA)...13,470 09/07/96..Tampa Bay Mutiny @ Rochester (Rochester, NY).........12,428 07/12/99..Tampa Bay Mutiny @ Mid Michigan Bucks (Saginaw, MI)..12,428 10/12/96..Colorado Rapids @ Rochester (Rochester, NY)..........12,179 08/24/05..Chicago Fire @ Rochester (Rochester, NY).............11,121 08/11/99..Dallas Burn @ Rochester (Rochester, NY)..............10,730 07/14/04..San Jose Earthquakes @ Portland (Portland, OR).......10,622 08/03/05..MetroStars @ Rochester (Rochester, NY)...............10,547 09/04/07..FC Dallas @ Seattle (Seattle, WA)....................10,385 07/14/99..Chicago Fire @ Rochester (Rochester, NY).............10,107 You'll notice: Half of the top 12 happened last century Half of the top 12 happened in Rochester, with two more in Portland and one in Seattle, teams that could (or can now) draw a crowd anyway MLS teams won seven of the 12 anyway.
Traveling fans are not going to exist in enough numbers to be a worthwhile consideration in scheduling decisions. If the convenience of fans is an element of the scheduling decisions, it's going to be the convenience of the home fans. In reality, it's difficult to find enough dates with Superliga and CCL taking up a good number of the midweek dates, so they're going to squeeze in USOC where they can.
I see Kenn side of the arguement here. Travling fan aren't going to make enough difference to chance anything as thing stand. But on GIO side, I think most teams would like more than one week to publicize the matches. it doenst give a club much time to advertise, do any group sales and those type things. It is also hard, as a fan, to adjust and deconflict personal things that might come up with short notice. The USOC ain't perfect but having more than one week between matches should be workable.
Oh, no question. I'm sure the compression of this year's tournament had something to do with it being the lowest-attended tournament of the modern era up until the final. If you say "Teams need more time to market these games," I'm with you. If you say "Traveling fans need time to plan," then I say, "You can give them all the time you want, they're not coming."
Add in the fact that the two in Portland were against Seattle - about as close to a derby as you can get in America outside NY or LA teams drawing each other - and the Open Cup as a "giant killer" shot for lower-division teams idea is moot. Nice on paper, but won't work in reality until America "becomes a true soccer nation" to use your phrase. Even then, it's questionable: the FA Cup is still a big deal in the UK (used to be HUGE) and important enough in some countries, e.g. Holland and Germany; in other countries, Spain for one, it's not even on the same level as the League Cup until the (top) La Liga teams face off. Many thanks for the analysis.
I think it was one of the Portland TV guys who called it "The Great American Soccer Rivalry" or some other ridiculousness, as if anyone outside of those two states cares.
Spreading the games out a bit might make it easier for home fans to attend. Some people need a week or two to be able to arrange their schedule for a game. Actually, not really. In the FA Cup, gate receipts are split evenly between the two teams. So, if you're going to draw Manchester United, a team you'll lose to 99% of the time, you want the game at their place if they're going to draw 50K-70K. Generally, you want to draw either the easiest team in the pot at home, or be away to the "biggest" team left. Now, maybe TV changes this a bit, as TV would be more likely to cover the game if it's in Accrington.
But...they're not...going to do it...no matter what. That's my entire point. Making something easier does not mean people will do it. The Open Cup has been spread out before (moreso than this year) and there haven't been droves of people traveling midweek to some place in the hinterlands to watch their team take on the Wilmington Hammerheads. I did not know that. Good point.
Some might. I have a few friends I can get to come out to a Red Bulls game if I ask them a couple weeks in advance, who I would have little chance of getting if I ask a couple days in advance. It's hard to ask someone to clear their schedule on the off chance that the Bulls might be hosting a USOC game that night, but we won't know until six days before. Sure, there are people I can get on a couple hours notice, but that's not everyone. Surely, the more time you can give notice for, the better your attendance will be, all other factors being equal.
The better your home attendance will be. We're not talking about that. We're talking about "If they'd had two weeks' notice, would an appreciable number of Arizona Sahauros fans have gone to Austin for their 2nd round match?" Unlikely. If they'd had two weeks' notice, would an appreciable number of AC St. Louis fans have flown to Los Angeles for a Tuesday night match in the third round? Unlikely. My entire point is that traveling support in the US Open Cup is negligible and it's going to be negligible no matter how much space you give between matches, and I can't believe this discussion has been going on this long. We have enough trouble getting people to go to US Open Cup matches in the stadiums they go to all the time, much less getting people to travel halfway across the country for a weeknight game.
Given the distances that have to be covered in the US, even for a derby like a Seattle-Portland or Dallas-Houston tie, maybe the better comparison isn't (Eurosnob alert) the F.A. Cup but the Europa League qualifying rounds. Even for the more attractive ties (say Newcastle v Bilbao), the number of fans traveling is miniscule, regardless of the amount of notice given. No matter how you slice it and dice it, the Europa League is a lesser competition to the Champions' League and the traveling fan isn't going to start looking for gaps in his diary before the quarter-finals. Also, there are cultural differences between countries. Some fans, like England, Poland and Germany have a culture of traveling long distances "to support the boys" in away games. Others, especially Spain, don't, whether that is domestic league or even national team away games. The real question isn't how to make the Open Cup schedule more traveling-fan-friendly, but how to make the Open Cup itself - never mind its schedule - interesting to fans, period
Exactly. We have enough trouble (or have had, until recently) making our league competition relevant, much less the kind of poorly-designed-and-administered tournament among teams of vastly different organizational abilities that we have had in the USOC.