So I'm watching the Colorado-New England game, and enjoying it greatly I might add, mostly due to a bicycle kick by Wolde Harris that would have ranked right up there if not surpassed Balboa's had it not hit the crossbar and bounced out. Replay did show it was in by about a foot and a half. Anyway, the weather was sunny, the field looked great, the play was entertaining to say the least, and the crowd looked to be a good size. Then a replay from field level showed that half of the stadium was blocked off with nobody sitting in the seats that could not be seen by the cameras. At first I was shocked, then a little miffed thinking that I had been tricked into thinking the entire stadium was as full as the side you can see on TV. Then it all made sense, you know we bitch and moan about playing in football stadiums and the damn things look empty even with 15k or more and this just makes it look better on TV. It wouldn't make sense to do this in some stadiums but maybe at Mile High stadium, Arrowhead, Giants stadium and maybe even RFK. San Jose should do it too perhaps. Anyone opposed?
Tarping off part of a large stadium makes sense, but I think the Revs chose the wrong sections to block off. A smarter strategy would be to tarp off the endzones and have people sit along both sidelines. From what I've read on the Revs boards, many New England fans think they're getting poor value for the money at Gillette Stadium. Walkup tickets along much of the sideline go for $32, corner seats $23, and general admission behind the goals, $16. A better policy would be to sell seats along both sidelines, with midfield seats at $32, sideline seats closer to the goals (between the 35 and 15 yd lines) for $23, and have general admission in the corners for $16. The Burn implented a seating change at the Cotton Bowl similar to what I'm proposing, and saw their attendance increase from about 11,000/game to 13,000/game; mainly from increased GA attendance. I'd expect New England could see similar benefits if they did the same.
God bless the Cotton Bowl. One whole side of the stadium being GA. Great TV... Too bad that ONE sound-tower was the whole PA. Still... nothing better than staggering over to Bar Of Soap and drinking too much afterwards... tm
NE closed one side of the stadium NOT to increase attendance but to decrease costs. Nearly every move the Kraft's have made in the past two years have been to decrease costs. People on the Revs board say having one side of the stadium closed sucks the life out of what little atmosphere there could be. I could imagine staring across at blank seats would seem minor league at best. As VW mentioned, closing one side of the stadium not only leads to horrible atmosphere but you end up hurting the audiance because you are providing so many less "quality" seats. I agree that both end zones should be closed and both end lines opened but unless something dramatically changes, I can't see the Kraft's taking on the supposedly extra costs. Andy
At Arrowhead. They tarp off the corners, and one end-zone. If a big crowd is expected the remove a tarp form the endzone.
Unless the "tarp" in question says "FIRE" on it. Then it's a safety hazard that can lead to arrest if not removed.
FWIW, I believe the Krafts have an agreement with McDonald's to have both endzone sections open for every Pats/Revs game so that their restaurants in each end of the stadium get regular business.
Probably the fans that actually go to the game. VW is right. What is going on in Foxoboro is a downright shame. And what is going on with the cafe tables and chairs at one end of the field? Its like a wedding reception for invisible people only.
who cares its NE!!!!! lol on a serious not. How is scarsity of quality seats a factor!? i mean its not like every single sideline seat is sold. There is still plenty of space for people to buy those seats. I think its a good idea. Atmohphere shmatmosphere...NE's atmosphere consists of dombasses somewhere yelling YOU SUCK when ever the opposing keeper takes a goal kick.
What this really points out is that the sooner all MLS clubs get out of NFL sized stadiums, the better. No matter what they try to do, having 15-16,000 fans rattling around in a 65,000 seat stadium, whether they are all on the same side or spread around, the hope for any sort of atmosphere is nill. The Revs, and all the clubs, need to get into their own homes, and leave the NFL stadiums behind as an unpleasant memory.
I've been following what's going on in NE over the last few years and it's just sad. They had a huge core of fans that they are slowly turning off. I would not want to go to a game where the other side of the stadium was totally closed off -- It must totally kill the atmosphere. Those ticket prices (and parking $15) are very steep. I only hope that DCU doesn't begin to do the same thing (which they are hinting at under the guise of "family friendly environment").
See the thread in the Revs forum called "Where have all the Revs fans gone?" for an earful on this, and a lot of other related topics. Tom
The Krafts are Bastards Aren't they the same jokers that have abandoned one of the best soccer surfaces in the country to have the Burn play on Purple Plastic. And before all the "hey, it's just temporary" crybabies start responding, they did this to cut costs, and they did it BEFORE the Frisco deal was arranged. The Krafts don't care about presenting attractive soccer. They want to squeeze what little revenue they can from the sport for as little cost as possible. NE will be the last team in the league to get a soccer only facility, and it won't happen until the team is bought by someone for whom it will be a top priority.
Re: The Krafts are Bastards And you're kind of ignorant. The Krafts have nothing to do with the Burn. Thats Mr. Lamar Hunt, ya know as in the Lamar Hunt Open Cup, as in build Columbus Crew Stadium, as in helping to finance the Frisco stadium. Say what you want about the Krafts, just get your basic facts a little more straight.
As far as atmosphere in Foxboro goes, I was there last September for the DCU-NE game,and for an MLS stand-alone match, it can get pretty damn loud sometimes. NE won 3-0 on a Twellman hattrick () and everytime they scored, everyone jumped up and cheered. Honestly, when they scored, the noise levels gave me flashbacks of USA-Honduras WCQ in DC. It's not like hockey games where only half of the crowd gets up to celebrate. Really having everyone squeezed in on one side of the ground actually increases noise level and atmosphere. I mean it makes sense, right? Being smooshed together with 15,000 other people gives you a more pack-like mentality. Instead of having 15,000 rattling around the lower bowl that can seat 40,000, where you have several rows between you and the next group of people. It's hard to get involved. This is the reason that terraces used to generate so much noise. The closer the fans are to each other, the better the atmosphere. I actually support New England only opening that quarter of the ground. Think about it. Lower operating costs, better atmosphere, it will definitley look better on TV, etc. The only other club I would think should do this is San Jose, simply due to their 10,000 a game average. And as far as your fears for DC go, Eastern Bear. Don't worry, I really can't see this happening. If they closed the west end of the stadium and grouped all those families and quiet-siders with the Barra, it would be just plain counterproductive. I mean why promote a family atmosphere if your just going to stick them in with DC's hardcore support?
they tarp off the sections to make it look like there are more fans there then there really are....they block off the sections that aren't shown on tv as much so the fans all sit together in sections that are on tv....it's basically the MLS's effort to make the MLS games look as packed as games in Europe....it's all mental games my friends
Re: Re: The Krafts are Bastards Well, I'm sittin' down to a nice ol' bowl of Crow. Perhaps I'll have it with some Kraft Macaroni and Cheese as a form of penance. Still, Lamar Hunt put one of his teams on that plastic High School pitch? Dang if the Burn aren't the Oliver of that Brady Bunch!
Re: Re: Re: The Krafts are Bastards twice actually. i'm pretty sure the Kraft family has or had nothing to do with Kraft foods, which are owned by the good people at Phillip Morris. J.L. Kraft is where the Kraft name comes from http://www.kraft.com/100/founders/JLKraft.html Robert Kraft deals in paper manufacturing and cutting down forests, that's where he made his money. to my knowledge he's not related to the other Kraft but I certainly don't believe has any buisness dealings with the foods company. http://www.columbia.edu/cu/secretary/trustees/bios/Kraft.html so you're a teacher ha?
This is a side affect and has nothing to do with the main decision to close one side of the stadium. The decision to close one side of the stadium started and ended with cutting costs. According to the Pats/Revs front office, it is simply cheaper to open and operate one side of the stadium than it is to open both sides. Andy
Last game I went to at Gillette (last summer against the Metrostars), it was about 95 degrees and humid, and not only are you all packed in there on one side of the stadium staring over at a sea of empty seats, you're also sitting there sweating in the blinding sun. The seats they don't sell are in the shade. So that's kind of a WTF experience too. And it is definitely a bit disorienting staring over at all those empty seats. Plus the Revs lost that game, so that atmosphere was not good. Paying that kind of money for parking is parking-lot robbery.
I only watch Rev home-games on TV. I've never been to a game at Gillette or Foxboro. But from my perspective, New England's current seating policy is bad policy. It hurts the atmosphere. The section that the Revs close is big and is in the midfield, where most of the play is. So, the atmosphere on one whole part of the stadium, and one entire side of the field, is pretty flat. From the perspective of a TV-viewer, the atmosphere was, in general, better at old Foxboro. There was more buzz, more camaraderie. And more noise. Relative to the entire field of play and to the stadium as a whole, the current policy is probably bad for the noise-level. The sound waves are sequestered in just one area. So the area that is closed off has no waves coming from it. As a result, that area is pretty quite. There is also something about the notion of being free to sit where you want. For example, I struggle with the hot sun in my face. If I were able to do so, I would be inclined to sit in the section that is now closed off. Maybe the Revs could open part of the lower bowl, at least on an experimental-basis. It’s hard to know for sure what the overall affect would be until you do it.
San Jose should play in a high school or comunnity college with a capacity of 7,000. This way, they will be able to sold out most games