How many times has the arguement been made FOR and AGAINST having the MLS CUP held in one of the participants stadium? Plenty. The arguement that has always been made for a neutral site was that the logistics would be too complicated with too many stadium conflicts for the MLS to even consider it. Well, if I was made commissioner back in January I would have issued the following edict: the highest seeded team would host the Cup game, and if they couldn't arrange for their stadium to be made available for the game, the host site would go to the other team. Simple. How would that play out now that the playoff seedings are set? What would each team need to do to insure that they could host the game on October 20th should they make it that far? Here is how it breaks down: Top Playoff Bracket: Dallas - No problem. Last football game is Oct 12th Colorado - Broncos are on the road at Kansas City LA - UCLA at Cal that weekend KC - 8th seed, no chance of hosting Bottom Bracket: Columbus - That's why we built the stadium, baby! SJ - San Jose St @ Nevada that weekend Chicago - NCC at Ill Weslyan NE - Pats are off that weekend In every instance, there would be a full week for each stadium to be prepared to host the title game! We wouldn't even have to turn around a stadium in 18 hours from football on Saturday to soccer on Sunday! Each team would need to get it written in to their lease that if some ancillary event is scheduled at their stadium, such as a flea market, high school football, or whatever, the MLS team (as a major tenat) should have the right to the date of the MLS Cup. Am I missing anything?
Yep. The full year MLS has had to sell tickets to the game because they knew where it was going to be held.
Yes. MLS uses MLS Cup as a showcase event, ala the NFL Super Bowl. Part of the showcase are a weeklong series of events involving the media, corporate sponsors, investors, and other folks with money. Neither of the alternatives (booking convention space, hotel rooms, catering, buying local advertising at the last minute - or - holding events like the awards gala in a vacuum) are very palatable.
Re: Re: Home Field for MLS Cup Would be Easy!! That helped create the raucous atmosphere in Columbus last year, didn't it?
This forum is for analyzing current MLS news. If you'd like to share ideas of your own, please do so in the MLS General Discussion forum. I'm going to move this thread there. If you have any questions, please PM me. Thanks,
Re: Re: Re: Home Field for MLS Cup Would be Easy!! Can you say, extenuating circumstances? The fact is, September 11th really scrambled things last fall. Beside reducing room availability in Columbus (the Ohio State game from 9/15 was moved to MLS Cup weekend), and the compression of the playoffs (only three days after the semis ended), there were plenty of other no-shows and not-willing-to-shows because of those events. We can't go back and run it again without 9/11 to prove it, but I would have expected a sellout in Columbus if the tragic events had not occurred.
Re: Re: Home Field for MLS Cup Would be Easy!! Being a common man myself, I haven't made it to an MLS Cup and all the gala functions. What do you people with money do at these events? Are they REALLY that well attended?
I totally agree with Poose. I was at the game last year and expected a capacity crowd. Needless to say I was thoroughly disappointed. MLS can have greater attendance numbers for MLS Cup if they can find a way to have a home field advantage for one of the teams. Short of having a USA vs MEX double header, two teams playing at a neutral site will NOT have as big a pay out. Look at the following numbers... 2001: 21,626 @ Columbus... LA vs SJ 2000: 39,159 @ RFK... CHI vs KC (looked like a LOT less on TV). 1999: 44,910 @ Foxboro... DC vs LA 1998: 51,350 @ Rose Bowl... CHI vs DC 1997: 57,431 @ DC... DC vs Colorado 1996: 34,643 @ Foxboro... DC vs LA The biggest attendance was when DC played at home in '97. The numbers between '97 and '00 are great but imagine what they'd be like if one of the finalists was playing at home! To truly appreciate my argument I think you would have had to attend MLS Cup 2001. Words can't begin to describe my disappointment and September 11 is overused as a scapegoat. 22,000 in Columbus, for the Cup, at the only SSS, is NOT a lot to ask for, especially considering past attendances such as 34,000+ in the driving rain storm of '96.
Re: Re: Home Field for MLS Cup Would be Easy!! I wonder how the NBA, NHL, and MLB, all leagues without a SuperBowl type event, organize their annual corporate schmoozing, annual award presentations, etc. Personally, I'd prefer it if MLS gave up on trying to mimic the NFL and let the champion be decided via a playoff series rather than a one-off match.
I know this horse has been beaten many times before. But, I have to agree with the above sentiment. I also was at Columbus-and I was thoroughly disappointed in the final game. The game was between two California teams in Columbus Ohio. I also want to know what the "other ancillary events" are, and why they are so important? I think that a higher seeded team's venue can do as better, if not better, with two weeks of lead time than a neutral site venue with a whole year of lead time. Soccer games should be for the fans. Besides the logistic arguments, why would you want to reward the fans of a team not even playing in the final[/] with MLSCup? You end up with what you saw in Columbus last year--a completely uninspiring fanbase, loads of empty seats, and supporters who were cheering for a team that wasn't even there! (Fire fans cheered the Fire the whole game...) Although I am a fire fan, the atmosphere was SERIOUSLY lame. Bottom line is I think two weeks is enough time to sell loads of tickets to a game where at least one of the teams is in the game. Of course, the NFL has superbowl--but I also want to know, how can the other leagues (like the NBA and MLB) get away with having this system? And don't tell me because they are bigger leagues. Biggest attendance in MLSCUp? DC at home in 97. And while I realize that DC had the good fortune of being able to sell the final for a year before, and was in it, I don't think it is a coincidence that DC was there. If you give two weeks between the semis and the finals, I think you could easily sell the tix.
The super bowl is a single game. MLB, NBA, & NHL all have final series. Unless we create a home and home final, it's sorta riduculously unfair to put the final at the higher seed's stadium. Especially without a single table. A single game final should be at a neutral site. I bet a consolation game for the home team against the US WNT would draw nicely--and Billy Jean King could perform at halftime. Or, if the league can get its expansion act together, subsequent years' expansion cities could host. It might really jump start their fan base and future season ticket sales. Someone shoulda chartered a plane from CA to CLB last year to drag all those fans out to the stadium.
Why not have the MLS champion determined by the same type of playoff series used earlier in the post season, be it first-to-five, best of 3, or whatever. You don't see other pro leagues in the U.S. switch playoff formats midstream in their postseason. They either stick with one-off competition the whole way (NFL), or play series the entire way (NBA, NHL, MLB).
I ate my 2 tickets to the Cup last year....9/11 had 99% to do with it too.... It was a great match. Sorry if you didn't have any fun being there. Did anyone else eat $160 worth of tickets?
1. You have a one-off MLS Cup, for one, because it's a guaranteed showing on network television (one of only two) 2. Doesn't the NBA start out with best of 5, then go to best of 7?
Everyone is quick to jump on the empty seats at MLS Cup last year, but they refuse to acknowledge the impact of 9/11. I contend that we have to throw out last year until we get another relative stinker. Other than last season, MLS Cups have all been over 30k. What's the problem?
For those of you that say that 9/11 had an impact on the attendance last year at MLS Cup, what exactly are you saying? Do you mean that it cut down on travel, so that the participant teams fans were less likely to travel? Well, having one city host the game solves that problem. Fans are already in the city! No travel! Are you saying that the average Columbus citizen just lost interest because of the post 9/11 malaise? Problem solved! Local fans would be less likely to eat tickets, since their home town team is in the game. Andymead, you stated. "What's the problem?" The problem is that I have been a season ticket holder of the Dallas Burn for 6 seasons. Should I live long enough to see them make the championship game, I would feel cheated if I didn't have a 50-50 shot of having the game played in the Cotton Bowl. After all, I am paying the freight for MLS. I am a ticket buyer. I am the guy who the league should be catering to.
Considering the Burn have never made it to MLS Cup, I guess that's more or less of a moot point for you. Eh? Seriously. MLS Cup has great attendance. Last year was affected directly and indirectly by the events of 9/11. As far as you "paying" for it. Well what about all the folks in Green Bay, Chicago, Kansas City, Denver, Foxboro, etc... that will never have the chance to see a Super Bowl in their fair cities? I don't hear a bunch of NFL season ticket holders (and we're talking huge bucks in some cases) whining about it.
I would love for the MLS to some day be as popular as the NFL. I would love to see dozens of cities throwing bags of money at the MLS, begging them to bring their showcase event to their city. I would love to see corporations all across the land fighting for precious ad time on the broadcast. I just don't see that happening for a while. In the interim, it is the ticket buying fan who pays the bills for MLS. In the NFL, it is the advertisers who pay the bills. Apples and oranges.
How about sitting in a large stadium with 30,000+ people after 9/11. For a lot of people, that wasn't a stadium anymore, that was a target, and they didn't want to be sitting in a target.
The MLS cup format as it is, punishes the real fans, who has the time and money to travel?. If you are a season ticket holder, you are ok, because it means you have extra money to spare, and can make the trip. But what about the rests of us, who can only afford to go to betweem 2-4 games a year, live and die for the team watching on TV, and on these boards, buying the jerseys. They should wait 2 weeks after the semifinals, and have a home and home final. The stadiums can't be busy all 7 days, I'll take a Sat-Wed or Sun-Th MLS Final.