Galaxy will play first 2 months on the road

snowfx2 · Nov 2, 2002

http://espn.go.com/soccer/news/2002/1101/1454415.html

slarvn21 · Nov 2, 2002

how long were the fire on the road to start the season this year? it was a bit, but was it that long... i can't remember

DigitalTron · Nov 2, 2002

I certainly see the reasoning, but I'm not sure it's a good idea. The Galaxy can capitalize on their MLS Cup victory with big attendances, but if the team is 2-5-1 with 7 points and low in the standings by the time they get their first home game, I doubt they'll pack the stadium. Even if they do end up winning a lot towards the end and taking the Supporters Shield again, they will likely be low in the standings for much of the year and lose much of this season's momentum.

I guess it's a necessary evil. I'm not a big Galaxy fan, but I do hope they at least do mediocre in these first two months of away games, because I'd love for them to establish a strong tradition of great attendance (hopefully sellouts) at the Home Depot NTC.

-Tron

Rocket · Nov 2, 2002

Originally posted by slarvn21
how long were the fire on the road to start the season this year? it was a bit, but was it that long... i can't remember
Click to expand...

The Fire played their first home game on 4/27, the 5th weekend of the season. The Revs, however, played their first home game even later, on 5/11, the 7th weekend of the season.

Back in 1999 when Crew Stadium opened, the Crew didn't play their first home game until 5/15, the 9th weekend of the season.

CrewDust · Nov 2, 2002

Originally posted by vw

The Fire played their first home game on 4/27, the 5th weekend of the season. The Revs, however, played their first home game even later, on 5/11, the 7th weekend of the season.

Back in 1999 when Crew Stadium opened, the Crew didn't play their first home game until 5/15, the 9th weekend of the season.
Click to expand...

The Crew played their first 7 on the road that year. They went 4-3.

O'Dubhghaill Rules! · Nov 2, 2002

Where would the Galaxy have played if there were to be a home game prior to the opening of the new stadium? The Rose Bowl? Titan? Was the Rose Bowl looking for more money if they were only to play a couple of games there? Either way waiting for the opening of the NTC makes more sense financially (I would guess) even if it means the Galaxy are slow out of the box.

Northside Rovers · Nov 3, 2002

Originally posted by DigitalTron
I certainly see the reasoning, but I'm not sure it's a good idea. The Galaxy can capitalize on their MLS Cup victory with big attendances, but if the team is 2-5-1 with 7 points and low in the standings by the time they get their first home game, I doubt they'll pack the stadium. Even if they do end up winning a lot towards the end and taking the Supporters Shield again, they will likely be low in the standings for much of the year and lose much of this season's momentum.

I guess it's a necessary evil. I'm not a big Galaxy fan, but I do hope they at least do mediocre in these first two months of away games, because I'd love for them to establish a strong tradition of great attendance (hopefully sellouts) at the Home Depot NTC. -Tron
Click to expand...

I'm sure they'll do fine - I hear they have on okay team. Its a long road trip at the beginning of the season rather than the end, so thats another reason why it may have less effect.

Even so, I imagine when that place opens up it will be packed for weeks no matter what the Galaxy record was.

If this maximizes MLS revenue by not pouring rent money into the Rose Bowl, so be it.

CrazyMLSfan · Nov 3, 2002

What is wrong with signing a short lease with the Rose Bowl or another LA stadium? We LA Galaxy fans should sacrifice themselves and wait two months to see their boys play at home. I prefer they play even at Spartan Stadium as a home club. I dont know, maybe I'm asking for too much.