DC will probably get a big audience if they get a WCQ against a Central American team or a caribbean team. I was at the Honduras game. if we have a couple of big crowds like that we will not qualify for the 2006 World Cup. We need a home field advantage more than ever. I don't know who you are but I am glad I had the pleasure of meeting you in Korea, so you could insult me in a public forum for my efforts. There were only a couple of US fans I didn't like in Korea but they were there and trying so I would not insult them (none of them were from DC). I wish I could have met more fans but everyone was so busy getting to the games, trying to organize, plotting out the stadiums and so on. We had work to do and everyone seemed to pull together. It was a great group of people. Bis Soccer is a pretty nasty place but the fans over there seemed to put all that aside. If it was a meaningless friendly why not put it in a different place? It helps develop interest in the provinces. It also helps TV ratings. It also makes money.
if you don't go to the game, don't bitch about it later. it was a friendly in crappy weather conditions. the result of the game did not really matter to either team.. the "meaningfulness" of the result could be debated, though. The camera only shows one small part of the stadium. There could have been many more under the stands away from the camera's view. IIRC, Bruce Arena did say something to the point of "wanting the game in a relatively hostile terrority to test the younger players". Even the announcers said that RFK's status as a stadium to hold meaningful games (ie WCQ's) is up in the air.
Yeah, let's put a game in Naperville's Cardinal Stadium on that wonderful turf i've heard so much about.
There's no point in bringing Chicago into this. As Tom rightfully pointed out, that is an entirely different situation. The point is that the pitch was in very good shape, given the amount of rain we have had here over the past few days. There weren't any puddles on the field and neither team's passing games were disrupted by the conditions. A look at the YCJ pictures show that the field did become marked up as the game progressed, but that is to be expected. http://www.ibiblio.org/footy/2002/1117_usa_slv_ml.php?page=1
I have repeatedly praised the fans who did show up, and constructed an alibi for those who could have driven to the game or taken the subway there. DC fans had all kinds of horror stories about how the Guanacos behaved during some kind of Hispanic Appreciation Night last year. My concern is with the USSF and folks who think Foxboro and DC should get most of the games. It is the easiest thing to say you can't open your mouth if you weren't at the game. Did it ever occur to you that fans willing to travel are put off by this East Coast thing? Coach Arena is normally very savvy in talking to the press (NOT when he told Dallas fans last week they had to build a soccer specific stadium if they wanted the USMNT to darken their door). It was perfectly reasonable to ask him why on earth was an El Salvador game being played in DC, the heart of Guanaco America. His answer was politic. But if he likes exposing young players to hostile audiences why not play some friendlies abroad? The overwhelming number of friendlies have been on quasi-American soil. I don't think that was the reason that the USSF put the game there. If they wanted that, schedule Mexico in the LA area for the umpteenth time. That will get you a hostile crowd! The TV ratings for the USMNT have not really gone anywhere. If we could just raise them by a consistent 30 per cent, you would see more games televised and better placement. One way to keep them stuck on 1 is to play game after game in the Same Old Places, on beat up pitches where anti American fans hold sway. I think the fans who showed up did their best and I was proud to see them. That doesn't mean DC and Foxboro should get all the games.
There were 12 games this year in the U.S. (not counting the ASG where the venue was chosen before the opponent, IIRC. Foxboro had one, DC has 2. The Rose Bowl had FIVE, all from the Gold Cup. There were nine games in 2001. DC got one, Foxboro two. There were 12 games in 2000. DC got 2, Foxboro got 2. LA/Pasadena had 2 and Miami had 3 (Gold Cup, IIRC). There were 5 games at home in 1999. DC had one. Foxboro 0. So, in the past four years, there were 38 home matches. The DC/Foxboro axis (axis of evil to you?) got less than a third (11 of 38). I don't see that as "most." That's a lot, since the Gold Cup generally gives the Miami and LA areas more than enough to choose from. But I wouldn't count a third as most. There is a problem. That has been beaten to death. But you constantly overstate and hype the problem as if it's such a black and white issue. But, once again, you will ignore a post with facts.
I agree with Monster on the match placement issue. To say that Foxboro and DC are the only places to get games ignores a couple of facts. First is that the teams are successful there (like us being undefeated at the old boro, and we've had a good run recently at RFK). Second is a reputation for good ticket sales, be they from Yanks or foreigners (doesn't matter who the fans root for, they all pay with green; we all know that USSF would take 25,000 mixed fans in RFK over 13,000 Yanks in St. Louis). Third is that there have been 2 world cup finals in the history of our country, both in California, so we should all lay off the "your city gets too many b team friendlies against U-22 teams." Look honestly at some of the venues over the last 2 years. Seattle and Birmingham saw games this year for the first time in many years. Denver hosted Mexico. I think the USSF is spreading out as best they can while trying to deal with their competing goal of making money. Yes DC and Boro get a bunch of games, but so does LA. All 3 get way more than NYC does. Putting yesterday's game in Chicago isn't a reality until Soldier field is done. Putting it in Dallas does nothing for El Sal fans or ticket sales, and Dallas averaged 7k for home MLS playoff games. You want to reward them for that? As a Metrostar fan, I won't pick on another team for having a bad stadium (ours is quite un-soccer friendly, with no transportation). Nor can I pick on DC for having a bad pitch, as GS had the worst pitch in the league this year. In their defense, RFK does normally look good to me, and they did cover the field with tarp the day before the game to keep the field dry. I can say one thing about RFK that I can't about a lot of other stadiums in the country: they care about soccer. They are still limited by the governing body of DC politics, but from what I have seen the RFK and DCU people do a good job of helping out their fans. I watched Sachin go to find a guy to open the ticket booth for La Norte sales, and 10 minutes later the booth was open with a phat lot of extra tickets in case we needed them for walk ups. An ESC member couldn't get attention from Giants Stadium or Metro Front office folk if they set the booth on fire and threw children into it. Sad but true. My experiences at Foxboro have given me the same general soccer friendly feeling. Much as my rivalry instincts make me dislike DCU, I can't complain about RFK. It is one block from a train station, is only about 1.5 miles (if that) from the heart of downtown, and has a reasonable amount of parking on site. I have been to Soldier field, which has 1 of those 3 attributes (proximity). (I will grant that Soldier field is in a nicer area of town). I agree with Tom that we should spread games out for all fans, but I think we already do that. To a degree. We don't play games in Hawaii or Alaska, but I think we play games where there is a balance between making the game accessible and making money. It's not a perfect balance, but we could have got 80,000 in LA for the Feb 01 qualifyer against Mexico, but only 5,000 would have been Yanks. Did you want that game in Dallas, too? Bruce mentioned a friendly in February, one in March, then one a month leading on the confed cup in June. Let's see where they put them.
A thoughtful post by Jamison. I disagree about Soldier Field. There is a Metra Train Station (Illinois Central) that is an 8 minute walk from the gate and shuttle busses that are about 3 minutes from the gate. The Red Line on the subway system is about 10 or 12 minutes' walk. The parking lots at Soldier Field are huge. Of course this is moot because they started "renovating" the place in January and the USSF has ignored the city for years. DC has drawn very poor crowds of late This game had a terrible advance sale and 13,500 sold. They must have counted the ushers and the parking lot people to get to this figure. During a corner kick you could see the wide angle panorama of the stadium. It looked empty. Remember, the casual fan is flipping back and forth and sees packed houses at NFL games to compare. The MLS All Star game with a quasi USMNT opponent also drew poorly. So did the Uruguay friendly. Honduras drew a big crowd but it nearly cost us a place in Korea. If the USSF puts Caribbean or Central American qualifiers in DC expect a sellout and another patriotic spanking on TV. I agree that putting the game in Dallas (or perhaps 12 other viable cities) "does nothing for El Sal fans". I guess that is my point. Don't you think we could have sold 13,500 tickets in Dallas or Phoenix? Why reward Guanacos? They hate us. By the way, I have never advocated putting a Mexico WCQ in Dallas or Chicago. Columbus, Portland, Grand Forks and a few other places are the only real alternatives. Most of the people relentlessly hounding me on this are from the DC area or on the East Coast within easy driving distance. I know it is more convenient for you if the games stay in the DC Foxboro axis. But is the kiss of death for a national soccer culture. One small reason El Tri has excellent TV ratings in the US is they take their show on the road. They have played in Chicago, Dallas, and other cities many times. Foxboro is not soccer-friendly. If you recall the discussions here before a couple of the Foxboro games locals did little to help potential visitors from outside. I don't recall a single person offering a ride. Their words of wisdom were: "Rent a car." That's great. Unless you are too young or poor to do that. Is the USSF wants to cater to Jamaicans and Guanacos, I have to commend them. They are doing a good job. Just don't be surprised if ESPN drops our games or cuts them back.
Thomas are you ever going to address the reality that the Los Angeles area has had almost as many games as DC/Foxboro from 1990-2002 or are you going to continue to ignore the facts?
Add games in DC/Foxboro to the list of "kiss of death" items. For those of you keeping score at home, that would join Title IX Radical Feminists Keeping Ante Razov off the World Cup Team US Flags being torn down in Korean subway stations I am sure there are others I am forgetting.
I do want to correct you on this: The MLS All-Star game drew 40,000 people, nearly all of whom braved two thunderstorms hitting RFK at the same time. The stands were just as full after the storm as before. The Uruguay match drew 30,000 on Mothers Day. Sachin
What do you call helping people? Listing the local youth hostles? Foxboro is quite soccer friendly and that it why we will be hosting the US national team for the Gold Cup this summer. BTW...Do you really not understand that ESPN matches are time buys? The USSF wanted an away atmosphere in DC. They've made the mistake for qualifiers in the past, but don't expect it to happen again in 2004/05. More sour grapes from Tom in Chicago. You sir, are a troll.