Rumor: Kraft to Build Soccer Specific Stadium in Foxborough?

Funny! This should make the replies even more interesting!

 

As long as you buy cars for the overwhelming number of soccer fans in Boston without them, you go right ahead.

 

From what i read on this board it appears the Krafts run the Revolution in a way to minimize losses rather than to maximize profits.

Saying that, from the MLS business model its an ideal situation where the owner of the team also pays no rent in the stadium it uses.

I mentioned this before, i think the krafts will see how Red Bull arena pans out in NY and make a decision then.

Also:

Here is an article by an australian soccer writer who was at a recent revs game and he seemed to enjoy the experience. He talks about it in the context of the World cup bids.

http://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/jess...tadiums-could-cruel-Australia’s-World-Cup-bid

Gillette was also easy to get to and parking was free. You could park your vehicle outside and partake in the grand American tradition of a tailgate barbecue and drink all the beer you could fit in your car trunk without being hassled by cops or security.



This part sort of surprised me as most people complain about getting to gillette stadium.

 

I don't even know where to start with that blog. Wow.

First of all it is the regular, not sometime, home of the Revs. Its easy to get to if you have a car (as a great many urban dwellers do not). And then only when a Patriots game (or concert or other major event) is going on. If so, then Route 1 (the only highway that services the area) is a nightmare. Revs games are not major events. Capacity is 68,756 not 74,000. Parking is free for Revs stand alone matches, not for the aforementioned major events. Pats parking is $40, other event parking I'm unsure of.

He pays no rent because he built the stadium. Which is why he has no incentive to build a new one, considering as he uses it to bring people to his privately-funded stadium when his main business concern (the Patriots) are in their offseason. Oh, and now also to bring people to his struggling outdoor mall.

 

Interesting.

I've watched 2 of the Breakers games on TV so far this season and I have been very disappointed by the quality of play - just in terms of making good decisions and completing the passes that should be completed.

I'm disappointed because I am a big supporter and want them to do well and play attractive soccer. But, if the missed passes that guys like Phelan and Niouky make bug you, the women are doing it 2/3 of the time.

 

So tired of this conversation. Bottom line? Second home game of the season, and a paltry 8k people showed up. Why invest more money into something that isn't MAKING money? Red Bull Arena is a perfect example. Now that it's MLS season matches, it's right back to small crowds. SSS aren't the cure all, it's the product on the field. You want more people to show up? Try putting a product out there that people actually give a damn about. I love this team. Probably more than I should, and it kills me to see it all come down this way. The Krafts are frugal with this team, as we see in the offseason where we lose Rally and Heaps, and try to replace them by trading away arguably our second best player in JL. It's maddening. Who wants to support a club that refuses to improve and is mired in mediocrity?

 

u think they'll ever get a DP? im so hopeful with the new rule that they will, but i swear the revs are the most boring club in MLS. all the new players are guys we never seen before. aside from gibbs and burpo we never transfer within the league. i think if we got decent players within the league it would stir up some intrest because we already know who they are and what they can do instead of trying to figure out what kind of player they are. either an MLS player or a DP but they gotta give us something we can get excited about

 

Football lines and women's soccer. An amazing combination. For me personally it's a very difficult product to watch due to the quality and pace of the game. Actually I can't watch it. I commend the true supporters of the women's league and am glad it got back on its' feet. I do feel that women's pro soccer is an important factor to the development of the sport overall in this country.

We want the attendance #s to go up at Gillette. Why the Revs haven't booked at least 2-3 doubleheaders at Gillette so far is beyond me. It's a no brainer for both teams to get more exposure. I know there's been bad blood between the leagues in the past, but it's time to put differences aside and at least experiment with the idea again.

 

I like that one. In fact, I'm proud to call myself an urbansnob. I like spending time in places with a variety of things to do.

 

I haven't watched the Breakers yet this season, but last year I thought they played with much better flow than the Revs. That may have changed without Hucles in the middle. Still, I don't think it's possible to complete passes at a lower percentage than this current Revs team.

My daughter's rec team is connecting at a higher percentage.

 

It really isn't just one thing that explains our pathetic, embarrassing attendence.

Years of neglect leading to a damaged public image. (how did we not capitalize on those great teams of the early 2000s?)

a horrible game day experience - I think our supporters section attendence is average to above average but the black hole of a stadium leaves all our effort for naught. The morgue has been shrinking considerably the last few seasons. It's very empty these days.

A long trip to gillette for most soccer mad areas in new England. If the breakers can draw 5200 on a shoestring budget for a womens soccer match you have to admit a city stadium would make a difference. Now the question is if they ever move to the stadium has too much damage been done to make it worthwhile.

We have 8 (potentially 9) games in May. Without shalrie. But with a game versus Benfica. We are not going to win many of those matches. This could get ugly. Wednesday night vs Chivas USA could be an all time low in attendance.

 

Going from 9,000 a match to 16,000 isn't good enough?

Last I checked, 16,000 isn't considered a small crowd by MLS standards. In fact, its almost exactly the average. Considering they were the worst team in the league last year, and the experience at giants stadium was worse than Gillette....they've done amazing.

Spin time!

"The drew a playoff-sized crowd for their wednesday night game!'

 

Don't encourage them...

 

Congratulations. You have just been offered the job as new Director of Marketing for the Revs.

 

Love this and agree with it.

 

Ditto

 

5/29 v Red Bull

 

I'm afraid I gotta disagree with this. Maybe I'm easy to please, maybe I'm still in the 'honeymoon phase' with MLS, or maybe it's because I lived through the demise of the NASL and am just glad we have pro soccer again; but my enjoyment of MLS games does not increase with every goal. I live eight hours from the nearest team, so most of my viewing is done on MLS DK pkge. Still, without a favorite team, I enjoy watching most games with, or without, goals.

I know this is off-topic, but I just couldn't let it go. Sorry.

 

Cities suck. The Pilgrims would go into the woods to battle their inner demons and defeat Satan. The Pilgrims also founded the basis of our public school system so their children could learn to read The Bible and defeat Satan.

Ergo i.e. to wit, city folk hate the children and love Satan.

 

I love the city and worship Satan!

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCqgY0aMDLs"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCqgY0aMDLs[/ame]

(sorry, couldn't resist myself)

 

The Metrostars regularly drew a solid 18+ to weekend home games at Giants Stadium.

 

Tell that to Atlanta. Lincoln quite approved of Sherman's tactics.

The South DID attempt talks with the Union, including offering to pay for federal property in southern states. Lincoln refused to even meet with them.

It should also be noted that Lincoln intentionally provoked the South to fire on Sumter. In his own letters he discusses that resupplying the fort, even if it failed, could serve the country's interests better. He wanted the world to view the South as "standing before the world" as having fired on supply ships.

As for Sumter, the South had no choice. Their offers to pay for federal property were rebuffed. If they fired on the fort and supply ships, they could be painted as the aggressor. If they let the fort be resupplied, they look weak, as they would be allowing a "foreign" military presence to persist in their borders.

As for root causes....as with all wars it was ECONOMIC. A primary reason was Lincoln's economic program, culled straight from the Whigs, and Hamilton's Federalists before that. High tariffs, central banking, corporate welfare (bounties to Hamilton...subsidies to Clay/Lincoln), and internal improvements (infrastructure). Lincoln needed the South to pay for the tariff and his ambitious public works projects, and thus the need to enforce the "preservation" of the Union.

The tariff was especially contentious, because as the South had to import a majority of goods, ended up paying most of it. They viewed the tariff as a tool for the North to plunder the South, in favor of Northern manufacturers. In fact, the notorious "Tariff of Abominations" nearly caused secession over 30 years before, and only Jackson backing down prevented a conflict at that time.

You are correct that slavery was not a root cause of the war. The Emancipation Proclamation was just a tactic, and which had the effect of freeing not one slave. Lincoln said time and again that he had no desire to abolish slavery, and even supported a Constitutional amendment making southern slavery permanent.

 

I hope Kraft isn't planning on using slave labor to build a SSS.

 

maybe we could have an epic gettysburg battle to decide whether it gets built or not