Re: Re: Re: Re: I don't buy it... And yet you don't bother to correct any misunderstandings. I'm still waiting for the backup on those OB attendance claims. I'll make you a deal. When they put in adequate parking and renovate the Orange Bowl so it's, I don't know, safe, then I'll be glad to go back. Ironic that none of those Miami-Dade soccer fanatics thought it worthwhile to suport a MLS squad at Lockhart. But there's no double standard for you, is there?!?
They're nowhere near each other actually. The Panthers arena is out west. Lockhart is in Northeast Ft. Lauderdale. Lockhart may actually be closer to Pro Player than it is the NCRC
The take of some of you S. Floridians is "that if you don't live here, you can't possibly understand the situation here" and refer to St. Hudson as Mr. Knowitall. Well, possibly you are correct, but let's analyze a few topics first: 1)Lauderdale as "rinky dink". Crew Stadium is a bare bones venue much like a high school stadium, but looks dandy to me full of fans. If that's "rinky dink", I'll take it. 2)No one attended Fusion games. Maybe so, but nobody attended Earthquake games either; however AEG has taken charge and is willing to pay the price long-term. Last year they drew 26,000 against LA and that is cause for hope. Spartan Stadium is no gem as well. You can't see the game well and the field is far too narrow and short for flowing play. Mulrooney and Dononvan's skills are lost there. Lauderdale would be welcomed in San Jose. 3)The weather. Sorry, in the past the Strikers averaged 14,239 per game under Florida weather conditions. This is not something to casually dismiss. Compare that with other MLS teams from last year. If Lauderdale can attract those numbers twenty years ago, then why can't this be done again regardless of the weather? 4)The Orange Bowl. MLS has been trying for years to get into smaller, cozy SSS's so necessary for fan involvement and atmosphere. MLS doesn't need another 80,000 seat behemoth to become lost in. Lauderdale fits the bill nicely. 5)MLS is a bad league. Sorry guys, MLS is only seven years old! Compare that with any other startup league in the world and it seems to me that it is finding its way quite nicely. Let's not be too harsh on America's only major soccer league. Professional soccer needs support, not a bunch of critics focussed on picayune "conditions". That's my take on South Florida, but of course I don't live there and maybe I don't understand the unusual and destructive conditions so harmful to professional soccer. Make your case S. Floridians, but you'll have to do better than you've shown me so far.
Look, Miami will never get a team again. Period. Despite getting more fans than San Jose, and in fewer years, they were the ones who got contracted. HorrorBitch just doesn't have the money necessary to support the team over a long haul. It was never going to work. When the two games at the Orange Bowl averaged over 18,000 Garbage and WhoreMan said it was "disappointing". It would boggle the mind to imagine what they must have been expecting. With that level of reality, it is never going to happen, folks. Switch on Fox Sports World and watch the great internationals we have. It's time to move on...
Amen, and good night. let them pillage and blunder somewhere else, is disgusting the way they handled this area ... http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/soccer/sfl-rusnak09mar09,0,2280142.column?coll=sfla-sports-soccer http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/soccer/sfl-rusnak09feb09,0,4644020.column?coll=sfla-sports-soccer
SoFl Metro, I'm trying to be reasonable. I answer your questions but you just turn around and make it another arguement or just focus on a small aspect of my response... its getting a little frustrating trying to comunicate with you. You actually want me to prove that Miami has supported crowds of 20-30k or more on a regular basis(and 22k/15k for the two lone Fusion matches)??? Do you actually think I'm lying about this?!!! No, if you can't believe that then you must living in another planet and I'm not waisting my time for you. You see if you don't believe that then you will never understand my point that Miami has proven itself as better supporter for soccer and thus should be prefered over Ft.Lauderdale. So if I'm going to even begin to answer your questions you must answer ONE simple question for me. Do you believe that Miami and the OB has supported crowds of 20-30+k(including the average of two Fusion matches of nearly 19k) regularly for international club and national team games without giving you presice numbers from these games over the last 10 years? Period. Once you answer that I can proceed.
Fair enough I'm focusing on the parts I find worth debating. I'm sorry if that frustrates you. Yes. It's a claim you made. If you have that number, either it's a) verifiable or b) made up. Since that was a part of your argument that the Orange Bowl was a viable MLS venue, it deserves to be verified. I was unable to verify it independently. You must have a better source than me. If so, I'd like to see it. But not a good enough supporter to go where the soccer is (by your estimation, I believe, a mere 28 miles to the north). And how exactly have you proven it? Two doubleheaders in the Orange Bowl? Sorry if I'm a tough guy to convince, but sit down with Don Garber one day and see if he's easier or harder than me. I have no reason to believe it. I couldn't find any evidence to support it. Someone once said that the truth is what is still there when you stop believing it.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/soccer/us/news/2002/01/22/gold_cup_tues_ap/ Jeff Bradley disagrees with you, for what it's worth http://espn.go.com/magazine/bootroom_20010614.html
I dont know??? I dont follow...!! I seem to remeber plenty of Fusion articles by Jeff related to the Fusion. I know they are friends, and they keep in touch. My seat was 3 rows behind, where Jeff liked to sit, and then run into the booth, for the instant replay. Ah ...!!!! the good old days ...
None of them were during Ray's tenure And his paper deemed it a conflict of interest. The amount of ink he's wasted lamenting the Fusion demise since then justifies it in my opinion I miss going to the games as well.
What does it matter, folks? Even if the Fusion had drawn 40,000 at the OB for both of their games, people would have found a reason to either not believe it or say that it "doesn't count". HorrorBitch wanted out and GarbageMan wanted our players. End of story. All the MLS markets are bad, with attendance pitiful throughout the league. No market deserves a team, and we had one of the worst. I imagine the diabolical promotion and media support is as bad everywhere else (although it is hard to believe!) Washington only got 18K for a US game and that was okay; Miami gets 27K, but that was "disappointing". There is no answer. I find it amusing to listen to fans of teams who averaged just a few thousand more (and often less than the OB average) on their soapbox about how bad Miami's attendance was. One would think that their team averaged 30K – the only time they do that is with double-headers. Those same double-headers are legitimate when they do them but “misleading” when Miami do them.
Regarding the Fusion stories in the media. I was always frustrated by how little there was. The most I ever saw the Herald print about the Fusion was lamenting its parting. A pity they never supported them when they were going, to let people aware of them. To paraphrase Oscar Wilde, "An artist's job is to educate the critic. It is the critic's job to educate the people." It is the same now. Before Saturday's kick-around, there was practically nothing (there was a small paragraph near the back, in the last column at the bottom, in smaller type than the rest of the page). Yet, after the game, they had a huge half-page devoted to the MLS having been here. Can't they get their act together to let people know it was here, *before* it went? Perhaps the Spanish version is more complete (they always seem to have fans turnout to the matches that don't have any promotion -- at least to the gringos like me). The USA vs Argentina game was invisible to the fans who don't already follow very closely. I wonder if other markets are as bad?
Isn't this the S. Florida situation: One Orange Bowl useful for an occassional soccer friendly and one Lauderdale Stadium perfect for MLS. There are no plans for a SSS anywhere in the area, consequently if MLS were to return to the Miami environs (doesn't seem terribly likely at this point), wouldn't Lauderdale seem like the best choice considering the horrible size and rent conditions involved with the OB? All other arguments seem rather pointless when you have a nice cozy stadium and the possibility of a favorable lease waiting for a MLS team. Bring on the Fusion/Strikers/Terrapins, put them in Lauderdale and make an effort to BUILD A FRANCHISE. This of course takes a lot of bucks from an O/I and fan dedication. Grow a franchise and grow MLS. Isn't that the objective folks? Judging by some of these posts', I wonder just what are your expectations in Miami? Do you want a Serie A franchise to come to the Orange Bowl? I really believe that part of being an American soccer fan is to help to grow American soccer and its professional and amateur leagues. I don't see that dedication from some of you S. Florida posters' and I wonder why?
In theory, yes that's correct, but the sad truth is, unless your team name is the Dolphins and you play in the NFL, the sports fan in South Florida is very fickle. The Fusion saw an huge surge in attendance in their final year, which can (I believe) largely be attributed to their on-field success. Unfortunately, and especially in a league like MLS, it's unlikely that the team would have remained good indefinitely. If there is a correlation between success and attendance, and if there is a correlation between attendance and survival, that's a pretty dangerous game to play. There was no commitment to do that in South Florida. Or at least (from the fan side) not from enough people. See above. There were some very dedicated Fusion fans. There just weren't enough of them.
Joe, we always wanted to build a franchise in Ft Lauderdale. I have stated many times in the past that 11.5K in only four years was very good. Not a great absolute number, but a great relative number that would be built upon. Remember, the Fusion had less time than the rest to build a fanbase. Consider, too, that our "average" wasn't inflated by 50K firework displays as we only had a small "perfect stadium" The problem was HorrorBitch/GarbageMan who thought that number was unacceptably low. Wanting to get an immediate larger audience they played two games at the Orange Bowl. The first had a crowd of between 14 and 15K, which was the bigger than any Ft Lauderdale game that season. The second game at the OB, a double-header, had (I can't remember exactly) about 25K. Both these crowds were the highest of the Fusion's season. Fusion fans were ecstatic that we had shown that the area was capable of attracting more fans. Astonishingly, Garber said he was disappointed. You ask what we expected? I ask you what *they* expected? I much prefer Lockhart and if they would have given it more time, I'm sure it would have been a success. Certainly, Lockhart with >10K rocked. But, if they really needed to bolster attendance immediately, then the Orange Bowl seems the only choice as it had shown in the two games along with the many other soccer matches that drew much bigger crowds. What seems so odd is that Garber thought that the Orange Bowl figures were disappointing. This seems to show quite clearly that the Fusion franchise had no chance as its expectations--by the league--were unrealistically high. I would love there to be a MLS team here again, but it isn’t going to happen in my life. If MLS did come back, then I would go whether it was at Ft Lauderdale or the Orange Bowl, or hopefully somewhere in between. Garber dismisses Miami’s cosmopolitan fanbase as not being potential MLS fans as they aren’t American. The mix isn’t going to change, and unless Garber changes his attitude, we’ll never have a team (remember, he says that Florida did itself no favors with the Argentinean game as most fans were Argentinian – so what? He doesn’t think Argentineans would watch MLS?)
MLS disagreed with you. Except Chicago, which seemed to be doing fine. Have any figures to show how other teams' attendance was inflated by fireworks, doubleheaders, etc.? Except that isn't true, because they drew 18,247 for a game against the Metrostars at Lockhart that season (Sat. August 25 - facts are your friend) 22,370 to be exact Except of course, that this isn't true, since the first Orange Bowl game drew 14856 and we already know the Metros-Fusion game at Lockhart drew better than that. Well, if you take two games with doubleheaders and get 14+ and 22+ and you yourself said other cities had 50+ games with those extras, yeah I guess you could say it was disapointing, especially since that was going to "prove" that the Fusion were the right team in the wrong South Florida location. Already disproven I was kinda disappointed too, FWIW Or that you're living in a fantasy world. Good to know. Bring some friends, and have them bring friends, and that's how these things are successful. Show me one single quote from Don Garber that even remotely suggested this. The only attitude that Garber had was that teams needed to be successful in the stands and have a committed I/O. The Fusion had neither Where were they for all those years when the Fusion were around?
Well, there was that Dave Barry article where he talked about being beaten up while in the mascot's uniform...
"Except Chicago, which seemed to be doing fine." by SoFla Metro Although it appears to be doing "fine" with better attendance than the Fusion, their losses are in the millions, compared with the Fusion2001 and they play on plastic grass, with football markings on the field ???? So, I would not call that fine... "fine" maybe in the upside down MLS book of BS. It is revenue, SSS, and growth potential, that should be given first consideration.. I'd rather have the Fusion at LockhartSSS with 12-13K in attendance, and make money, than have teams in NY, Chicago, DC, loosing millions,, ....which did not help us either LockhartSSS averaged almost 11K in 11 years, and could of been easily taken to better attendance numbers, with a competant I/O Yes, we all could of done better, (I only missed 4-5 games in 4 years) as fans, but trully MLS/Horrorbitch mismanaged this place from day one.
Source? Irrelevant to the discussion at hand. So buy a team The Fusion had 1 out of 3 They never averaged that. If the Fusion were truly ooly a money-printing machine as so many Fusion fans want to believe, we'd be gearing up for another season of Fusion soccer. They weren't, we're not. The rest about having no teams in major markets (all of which had better attendance than the Fusion, two of which have actual titles under their belts, and really? No NY team? Worked for arenafootball2) 11 years? What 11 years exactly? The Fusion averaged 11,177 in their final year. Much less before that. The only way they could have easily increased those numbers would be to always win. That's not going to happen in a league like MLS. Horowitz' tight fists didn't help, but they weren't the sole cause. See, you weren't the problem if you went to that many games. There just weren't enough people like you.
It's sad to see so many miss the point for so long. MLS didn't fold the Fusion...Horowitz did. If Horowitz had been willing to ante up to pay the league's operating losses there wouldn't have been any problem keeping the Fusion around...even if there attendance had been as bad as San Jose. This lack of sponsorship is also the ONLY thing keeping a team out of virtually any decent sized city in the United States. And so we can rank potential sites all we want...but what matters is your would be sugar daddy. And sugar daddies, with very few exception, DON'T run sport franchises outside of their hometowns. So Seattle, no matter how good a location in theory, will never attract Mark Cuban, and Tulsa, no matter the numbers, will never attract Paul Allen. If I own a team, it plays in Miami. Not because Miami is better then Fort Lauderdale or Tulsa or Philadelphia...but because I prefer a 15 minute drive. What this means is that there is no competition between Philadelphia, Seattle, Miami, Tulsa, Houston, Rochester Detroit, Charlotte or Cleveland. If ANY ONE of these teams had a billionaire investor willing to put 25 down and spend 5 a year for 15 years, they'd have a team. Perhaps MLS would require an average minimum attendance of 12,000. Perhaps MLS would require that putative venues be in the top 100 metropolitan markets. But MLS won't even ask those questions until said investor flashes cash. A Guarantee: The next city to get an MLS team WON'T town with the best stadium. Nor will it be the town with the longest soccer history. And it won't be the town with the biggest tv market. Nope, the next city to get an MLS team will be the city with the most financially committed backer.
Ding! Ding! Ding! to snorklefish. A most telling post. Unfortunately this is exactly what MLS will do and we'll likely see recently-built 70,000 seat NFL stadiums with 15,000 people rattling around them lost, without much enthusiam. Seattle, Houston and Philly fit that mold exactly, and I rue the day when that happens.
It has apparently slipped under your radar screen, but Horrorwitz is still an investor in MLS, and as such shares any gains/losses that the league accrues/endures. He bailed out of Florida, not MLS. So, if the league is loosing money, so is Horrorwitz. That should kind of tell you where the major part of his losses were coming from.