"LAFC"...LA2...whatever

Goats, goatsuckers, goatshit... It's all the same. They must die.

 

So instead of an original kit, they will be the LA version of AC Milan's red and black stripes?

 

The Los Angeles/San Fernando Valley MetroStars?

 

If Chevy sponsors them, they might be the Hollywood Red Devils.

 

I think Klein's article is a great starting point and actually brings up some good points:

http://www.lagalaxy.com/news/2014/1...says-addition-lafc-mls-changes-nothing-galaxy

I will post my thoughts later.

 

I pretty much agree. Nor do I see downtown as the panacea some of you wish it to be.

 

I live north of the 10 and I don't think it's that big of a deal to get to Carson except on weekdays, when it would be equally painful to get downtown (not a lot of UCLA fans went to basketball games the year they held it in the Sports Arena while Pauley was being remodeled). Public transit might change that, but that's not clearly a better option given the lack of express trains.

 

Sorry guys, long time LAG supporter and long time STH. Gotta be real. The LAG should be VERY afraid of LAFC moving into the scene. Certainly it's still aways off, but the new club has some heavy hitters behind it and the smarts to effectively turn LAG into the defacto "Chivas" of the league.

The front office should be extremely worried in my book.

• Donovan is the face of the franchise and is done after this season
• Keane is running on his last bit of gas in the tank, maybe 1 or 2 seasons left
• Omar is really deadweight as a DP. Good player, but not DP salary worthy
• Herbalife is skating on thin ice and it's fairly clear they're going to have some legal issues ahead.
• The "Stub Hub" Home Depot Center (whatever you want to call it) is a mediocre facility at best. Improvements aside, it was cutting edge for its day. But it will pale in comparison to any new modern stadium in an ideal location TBD.
• "Los Angeles" as a whole is a much more attractive magnet for big sponsorship dollars. I've preached this all along. The silly "Galaxy" moniker should have gone away a LONG time ago with names like the Fusion, Metrostars, and Wizards.

The Galaxy front office has rested on their laurels and now the new club has the benefit to leapfrog them into relevance. Will be sad to watch as a fan, being completely honest. I see the franchise dwindling to a cut rate entity in the next decade.

 

You make some good points (I, too am worried about the competition), but I would argue that Omar will be a solid DP player for us - not spectacular, but with the likely new money coming to player salaries with the CBA changing, his money will be right in line with what we should pay a defensive anchor. JMHO.

Also, you're wrong about the Galaxy name. It is the most recognizable in US soccer and around the world there is no comparison to any team in MLS, and changing it would be ludicrous. You don't pay David Beckham to wear your colors for 5 years, and then jettison the name recognition right afterwards.

 

Omar is a great defender. Arguably one of the best (if not the) in the league. I do think though that the LAG gave him a DP contract with the expectation he would play more of a pivotal role in the USMNT / World Cup than he did. Regardless of what you think of him as a player, he does not put fans in seats. Ultimately, whether us fans want to think of it or not, the LAG are a business. Their #1 priority is revenue from either TV or ticket sales. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that both of those metrics are suffering. Why else do you think season ticket prices are going down next year? When does that ever happen in any sport?

I agree it is the most recognizable in MLS (at present). And I agree in principle that it's too late to scuttle it now. Especially now that LAFC is now in the works. The time to have done it would have been 2007 when Beckham arrived. Now we're stuck with it, I'm afraid. That said, I still don't think it's as "sellable" to a big agnostic sponsor who purely sees dollar signs. Partnering with "The Los Angeles Football Club" sounds a lot bigger than the "Galaxy" - but obviously I know I'm the minority here and will likely get roasted (again) from forum members who think I'm incorrect.

I hear what you're saying, but constantly touting the fact that Beckham played with the squad is ultimately going to wear thin at some point. He's been gone for nearly 2 years now. At some point the team will have to carve out a new chapter in its legacy or face being "that team that was really good when the league first started."

 

I agree with some of the things you said in your post but could you please elaborate on this. You said that Galaxy will be relegated to basically Chivas over the next decade? So you see us devolving into a team that: 1. fires its managers all the time, 2. has racial undertones, 3. constantly reshuffling our roster and coaching staff, 4. has a meddling owner who can't just let people do the job he hired them for, and 5. eventually gets bought by the league and sold to new owners? I'm sorry, but there is no way the Galaxy turn out like that. Maybe they do eventually get eclipsed by LAFC (that still is at least a decade away, maybe even more) but there is no way we are going out like that. We will continue to push the envelope on the MLS side and if Phil gets bored of us he can just sell us to a new owner that can give us another boost. The competition will be a good thing and will bring out the best in the Galaxy FO.

 

Actually you make a good point. I should clarify... I do not mean the politics, scandals, and off field drama. I meant more as the perennial mid level team that has occasional signs of brilliance (versus the dominant powerhouse it is today). Think a Chicago Fire or a DC United. Good but not great anymore. Mind you this is all speculation and conjecture... But I predict what you'll likely see is a classism division between the two teams. Very much like the Lakers and Clippers. Whether fair or not, the elitist and wealthy fair-weather fans and high net worth demographic will likely flock to the new and pristine stadium or desire to be seen among the "in crowd "– especially if they land a downtown location.

Magic Johnson? Tony Robbins? Mia Hamm? I mean from the inception, this is being groomed as a PR darling. You can't think they're going to assemble that kind of talent pool to move a team to Santa Ana or Downey. Sure, they'll do the song and dance... but there's zero doubt in my mind they're going to wind up not too far from the city proper.

In a perfect world, I think you'd get two marquee teams that have an intense rivalry (e.g. Angels vs. Dodgers) but more often that not, when you have two teams in a relatively close proximity *over the long run* typically one emerges as the dominant figure. Take Lakers/Clippers or Kings/Ducks, etc.

Sure you could say that now the Clippers are better than the Lakers and the power ebbs and flows... but over the long run, the Lakers will always be the city's number one team and any flash in the pan the Clippers have will likely waned. I think soccer is still relatively unsupported here in Los Angeles. When you think of a finite marketplace for consumer and sponsorship dollars, I just can't see LAG commanding the big dollars it once did. TV revenue and airtime? You have to think LAFC will have Magic working that to his benefit. Look at what he did with the Dodgers. Even out of the gate (depending on LAFC's final location) you have to think there is a tremendous demand to simply just be associated with the investor group on a B2B level.

I actually feel bad for the Galaxy in that way. Home Depot Center (Stub Hub, whatever) was really ahead of its time as a true and dedicated soccer stadium. But now, it shows its age and feels rather primitive compared to some of the others throughout the league. It's unlikely the LAG will ever play anywhere else for the foreseeable future, leaving LAFC to attract the big guns with ultra modern facilities, luxury suites, and the whole ball of wax.

Given Carson's location and demographic (and the likely trend downward for demand and tickets) the LAG will have to cut corners both on the field and off to sustain a lucrative fan base. They'll become the "economy" team in the marketplace (much the way, again, the Clippers are to the Lakers in relative price). The Galaxy could and would serve a lower income demographic presumably. They'd become (in effect) the working man's soccer team. The blue collar squad to take on the deep pockets of wealthy investors.

Mind you, I'm not saying it wouldn't be a great story for sports in general. There's satisfaction when the underdog beats the superstar squad.

There's a great saying that pioneers get the arrows, and the settlers get the land. As I said, I do feel bad for the Galaxy front office. The team has been the benchmark for the first chapter in MLS. But with NYFC. Orlando. and now LAFC... Sure you can trade on your championships and the Beckham connection for the short term. Perhaps they'll even add another star this year (I hope!) ... but they're going to be pedaling up hill here pretty soon once LAFC (and other squads) gets a foothold.

David Villa? Kaka? I mean these are marquee names!

As much as I like the signing of Alan Gordon, Bruce and company need a BIG DP acquisition in the off season to really spark more casual interest. You'd think wining a title would be enough, but the numbers will tell you: it isn't. I am near certain the Galaxy grossed more revenue with Beckham on the team not winning a cup, than they did the year he left (having won it).

They're not lowering ticket prices to be nice, I assure you.

The city culture is such that the money follows prestige and popularity more so than hard work and results. In closing, my fear (and my hunch) is that if LAFC plays their cards right... they can really put the hurting on LAG financially in the next 10-15 years.

 

Ohhhh. The sky is falling. The sky is falling.

 

Phil Anschutz was overheard saying this very thing at a board meeting on Friday. It's that roll over and die attitude that made him a billionaire and the most dedicated and ambitious owner in MLS. Remember how he basically checked out when another billionaire decided to start an MLS team in LA and let them play at the stadium he built for the Galaxy? It's been so depressing watching the rest of MLS flourish and pioneer things like designated players, USL teams, homegrown players. That Phil is only spending 10% of the budget LAFC has for their stadium to upgrade SHC shows just how little he cares about the Galaxy.

 

A couple of other facts to throw into the mixer here:

The Lakers (arguably) never "owned" this town more than when they were playing in the Forum, in Inglewood, not exactly downtown.

The Clippers do play in downtown, and don't own the town.

I'm not saying location can't help. But it is not the be all and end all of the discussion.

And anyone who downgrades SHC as outmoded hasn't attended games at very many MLS venues. I have. We have nothing to be ashamed of in that regard. Admittedly I have not been to SKC or RBNY's new parks, but at worst SHC has to be in the upper quartile of league venues. Before the videoscreen upgrades. Before the tailgating changes.

I am not worried about the trend chasers who will turn out (perhaps) at an LAFC early match. Those people are fans of trends, not soccer. They will melt away the same way the Beckham-followers did in large numbers. A team can only be the "next big thing" for a short window - and then reality sets in. And something new comes along.

The only real cloud on the horizon for LAG has to do with the fact that Uncle Phil is even older than I am. He could lose interest, or for that matter pass away at any time. I do not know of any succession plans - are there any nephews or nieces? That is one huge question mark.

One last thought: WHY do the Lakers (arguably) still own this town when they are playing like doggy doo? HISTORY. And that's something the LA Johnny-come-latelies can't buy.

 

Meh. I get that this is LA and we love our celebrities, but what are they actually going to do for the team. Everyone seems to be projecting their vision for an ideal soccer club onto LA2 but the visions are not consistent. LA2 will be for soccer purists and not have soccermoms and kids! But then what's Mia Hamm for? LA2 will be the people's team while the Galaxy represent the elite west side! So why have all the celebrities? And Magic Johnson? I'm not sure he actually does anything.

 

Comments in the quote, but I think you're too worried about things that will change.

 

The galaxy need a three part strategy to compete:

1) Competition

We need to beat them on the field, that's the most important thing. Here we have the lead. We have a stable situation. We have a good academy. We have a USL team. IMO, LA2 screwed up when they let the Chivas academy go. I think this reflects the fact that the actual ownership are high-level money people who intend to hire others to run things on the ground, which may or may not be a good thing. Most of the successes in MLS have owners who were directly involved with the teams.

2) Stadium Experience

We need to sell out stub hub. We need lower ticket prices, better concessions, official tailgating. We also need a large supporters group to get more of a "traditional" soccer experience. This goes against the culture of the Galaxy, which has been to treat the fans as customers to be sheared, and so I think LA 2 will actually be good for us as it will force management to change.

3) Hearts and Minds

After the stadium is full, the team is competing over TV and sponsorship revenue, which is a different game. LA2 is going to be the shiny new thing for a while and that's probably going to hurt our pride, but we have two years where we actually exist and they don't and we need to push that advantage.

 

True. I do not attribute the Lakers' success to location. As you said later in your post, they have a legacy that spans decades. The Clippers would have to do something truly extraordinary (over a sustained period) to ever topple perception that they're the "other" team that plays at Staples Center. It's like the Mets vs. Yankees.

I don't necessarily mean the physical location of stadium. I meant more so the macro / micro differentiation of sponsoring a city versus a team. The Galaxy moniker is limiting in that way (in my opinion) in that it puts the emphasis on the moniker and not the city. The model has proven worldwide the largest clubs in the world have the city as the club name. I don't think this is by accident. Even a stuffy guy in a suit can get behind sponsoring "Los Angeles" even if they know nothing of the league, sport, or team as a whole.

I've been to Seattle and Portland for matches. But I meant more specifically the SHC versus (a presumed) new ultra modern facility to be built. Unless LAFC are complete buffoons, you have to think they'll have something that makes CSUDH look like, well, just a college campus.

Not sure I agree. Players come and go. A team on the rise could have lasting impact in the hearts and minds of a city. Again LAFC have the benefit of building on TOP of the hard work LAG have already put in. They're starting from a much better place in MLS history. So for that, I feel bad for LAG.

The LAG leadership is weak in the front office. As much as Chris Klein is a cheeky fellow, he just isn't getting it done business wise. Some of the crap that comes out of there is downright deplorable. Especially with respects to creative items. See: http://forums.bigsoccer.com/threads...-crayons-the-marketing-and-pr-thread.2009307/

You're right. They can't make it out of the thin air. But I would disagree they can't buy it. They can buy it by association. If I were Magic Johnson and company I would be making calls immediately to sign Landon Donovan to an advisory role. Anything to steal him away from LAG. Poaching talent would be a smart business move and a fan base could gravitate to former heroes. Just look at how Magic galvanized Dodger fans by his accomplishments in a totally different sport.

I'm not saying any of this will happen. But to simply ignore the threat would be foolish. If I were Chris Klein or Philip Anschutz, I would be very very worried.

 

Does LAFC go out and hire Lieweicke?

 

Or if the Miami deal falls apart for Beckham?