Well this is really sad but the HDC is just another stadium in the US because how in the hell can they have a Mexican Federations Flag on the stadium that is suppose to be the US Nats home? They do have a US flag which is the highest one and a US Soccer Flag but still what the hell is the Mexico one doing there. I think it should come down and if your with me start writing emails to the people at the HDC. I am not trying to offend the Mex fans but you would not see a permenant US flag at Estadio Azteca. Express yourself here. http://www.homedepotcenter.com/feedback/default.sps?feedbacktype=contactus other pics i took http://www.angelfire.com/art2/lagalaxyfan/newhdcpics.html
AEG is the promoter of the Mexican National Team when they play games in the US until 2006 so i think thats why they have it up there. I think they should only have it up if the tri-color plays there not during galaxy or US Soccer events.
Home of the USNT my ass. Only hang that bandera when Mexico actually plays there, which should be never. Let them continue to play at the Coliseum when they want to play in LA.
It's not home, it's the fort in the neighborhood we have all been helping build for years now. The reason is simply size. We can't host a huge game at a small stadium like that. No world cup final can be there. But it is still an amazing acomplishment, because it is just our fort, no parents or older kids can come in and take it away. A 150 million dollar fort.
Thanks for the link. I will make sure to thank them for raising the flag as a kind gesture to angelino futbol fans. 1st international at the Home Depot Center: Mexico vs El Salvador June 6, 2003. Be there!
There are a couple things I don't understand about HDC. First of all would be the Mexican flag, but secondly why is our training facility on the west coast? So many of our Nats play in Europe, doesn't it make more sense to have them stay on the east coast, as close to Europe as possible? I'm sure this question has been asked before but I'm just curious.
For one of many reasons, the weather in that location is incredibly nice. You will only have heavy rain a few days a year and rarely any humidity that you would ever notice. More national team members are from that area than any other. Four or five hours extra commute time once in a while for a few players on the senior squad and a very few on the junior squads is not really that much of a deal when everything else is considered.
Lets not forget the LA is also the biggest media market in the world(I guess New York has a strong case too). The NFL is begining to come around. That should tell you something.
You don't have to guess. New York IS, period. I don't believe the U.S. National Team should have a home. They should make sure they play all over the country and not show favoritism. They may primarily train in one or two facilities, but they should refrain from referring to those places as a "home." Unlike other countries, the U.S. does not have a center to its soccer universe. If Los Angeles had four or five major clubs in its vicinity (a la Buenos Aires or Ciudad de Mexico), then they would have a case. Their new "cathedral" to American soccer, while I'm sure gorgeous, is a whopping 27,000 seats. Gee, a mere 80,000 less than Mexico's "cathdral" to futbol. As usual, in its continuing quest for cultural relevance, Southern California now tries to hijack the Nationals by claiming to be more aminable to soccer than other areas of the country. In a word: bull****. The club belongs to all Americans and don't ever think for a second that it doesn't. You people, insanely, have far more electoral votes than anyplace else in this great country. Isn't that enough for you? You now need to claim the American soccer world revolves around you?
As said before AEG has the rights to Mexican NT matches in the US. As long as they are putting money in Uncle Phil's pockets which goes to MLS he can fly whatever flags he wants at the HDC. I don't see the US playing Mexico there anyway for World Cup qualifiers. Only maybe the occasional fundraiser that the USSF likes to have every year.
All or any US Mexico matches of any importance have to be played in the northeast. No that does not include Washington. Make them come to the big razor or estadio de gigantes en nueva york.
All you pissers and moaners are pathetic. A privately built complex that Beckham and Pele have basically said is one of the finest pitches they have ever seen, and Phil, who makes some money on Mexico playing in the US gives props to that fact and you bitch and moan. You guys come up with $150 million and then try to pay it off if you can do better. It was a religious experience for me and 27,000 others yesterday. Have fun wallowing in your sour grapes.
Amen brother. I thought no one would care after June 7th and the opening of the HDC. Can we close this thread now.
maybe they made a deal with the mexican fed because if mls folds the galaxy will join the mfl you guys are getting angry for a good reason but then again the stadium cost a lot to build, and like i have said before it should host tons of friendlies each year and squeeze as much money from it as possible. the mexican nt vs el salvador is a guaranteed sell out
It would sell a hell of a lot more tikets at the Colisuem. But I say the Mexican team and its fans should be welcome to our home any time. If not for them, we'd never have made it to the quarterfinals. So, repeat after me: "Thanks, el tri. And if you guys want to help us finance our dominance by paying bucks that benefit US Soccer, come back and come often."
Why should the Mexico-USA matches be played in the Northeast? I think Columbus owns the rights to that after what happened in 2001. We lose Reyna, and McHead, and we still win, 2-0, while the Mexican Nats freeze their cojones off. There has only been one more perfect result for us against Mexico, and I doubt we can schedule qualifyers against Mexico in South Korea.
Location, location, location The stadium looks great. What I thought was more telling about the state of soccer in this country comes from a conversation I had with my wife (who, to say the least, was not raised on soccer, but has accepted me anyway). After watching the coverage on game day and MLS Wrap, she kept asking me why a new stadium is such a big deal -- since new stadiums are built for big sports franchises all the time. To her, it was perfectly normal and expected. To me, her questioning the significance of this event is an indication of the inroads soccer has and is making on mainstream America. On another note: Despite the stadium's greatness, the idea of the national team playing qualifiers there is insane. No way you can hope for anything resembling home field. It would be like sending the team back to the 1980s (Here you go guys, watch out for those flying batteries). After watching national team games in California on television, I'm really not convinced any Americans reside in California. And it doesn't matter who the opponent is--any nation from Latin America, Iran, Korea, etc.--all seem to be present in MUCH larger numbers than any American fans. (Please note the above comment is sarcasm, and is not intended to be offensive to anyone. Thank you).
But it does. US soccer revolves around southern california. One of a FEW places to ever host 2 world cup finals. Probably going to be the ONLY ever to host 3. One men's and two women's for those picky freaks out there. on the current senior men's roster the following players call California home: Carlos Bocanegra Aidin Brown Danny Califf Joe Cannon Steve Cherundulo Landon Donovan Eric Denton Brian Dunseth Joe Franchino Kelly Gray Kevin Hartman Frankie Hedjuk Cobi Jones Jovan Kirovski Eddie Lewis Chad McCarty Joe Max-Moore John O'Brien Ante Razov Nick Rimando Ryan Suarez John Thorington Peter Vagenas Sasha Victorine 24 guys from California - 70 players on the 2003 roster. That's exactly 34% of the team from California. Of course we're the home dilrod.
Sour Grapes. And please, no smoking once you enter California. As for qualifiers, we'll get the first one. Netherland Antilles better be ready for a butt kicking!
Re: Re: HDC not a real home for the US Nats. The question isn't which state produces the most players. The question is where to play meaningful games (read: qualifiers). That place, without question, is NOT California. Actually, you could maybe play Canada there. That would be the one game we might have a home-field advantage. We could argue other locations all day long. California, however, due to past experience, shouldn't come close to making a list for qualifying games. Can you imagine playing Mexico there? It would be worse than Mexico City.