ok so i was perusing the league attendace stats and i noticed something quite vexing... http://www.mlsnet.com/statistics/league.html how is that kansas city leads the league in road attendance by an average of over 2,400/game?!? so i wondered hmmm maybe they have an edge by playing home leaders LA more than most... but then again they also play dallas and san jose a lot so that should way more than even out... so no they do have preki... but LD and the quakes draw over 2,000 less per game, mathis (and formerly howard) drew over 3,000 less per game... so it's not about stars then i noticed that chicago and LA, perhaps the MLS' two most hated teams, were dead last in road attendance - besides... who has a bigtime, hardcore rivalry with KC? nobody that i could think of - and for instance, chicago (with DMB btw, another headliner,) has dallas, the metros, the crew, etc... so no then i checked 2002's numbers http://www.mlsnet.com/statistics/archive/2002_league.html these were much more like i would expect with chicago and san jose well above the pack and KC near the bottom this one has me really scratching my head - can anyone forward a theory to explain why the wizards are easily the biggest draw? or is this just one of those wild 'just so happens'?
perhaps, instead of asking such a ridiculous question, you should have actually looked at the KC schedule this year I'll give you a hint. Look at their games in July.
Here's my only theory as to why KC is a bigger draw on the road... http://www.mlsnet.com/games/03/tracker.php?gamename=07042003_KCCOL&version=recap KC played in Colorado on the July 4th weekend. The attendance that game was 60,142. Perhaps that could have brought the average up a bit. When checking into last year, Chicago played Colorado also during the July 4th weekend. That game had an attendance of 61,213. It doesn't explain San Jose though... http://www.coloradorapids.com/site/goal.asp?cid=75
Re: Re: MLS attendance: very perplexing indeed! C'mon Bethany. Figure it out. The attendance on the 4th was 60K plus. Assuming KC's average road attendance is 20k (a generous estimate), then there was an extra 40K at that match. Spread that 40k out over 15 road matches and what do you get? Almost 2700 per match more than without. Which begs the question, why wasn't KC's road average better than it was? (Maybe it was because people didn't want to see Meola and his big butt.)
KC's road average with the 7.4.03 game: Attendance= 269,478 (with today's game) Divided by # of games =15 Average= 17,965 per game KC's road average without the 7.4.03 game: Attendance= 209,336 Divided by # of game =14 Average= 14,953 per game 2002 Chicago's road average with 7.4.02 game: Attendance= 291,078 Divided by # of games =14 Average= 20,791 per game 2002 Chicago's average without the 7.4.02 game: Attendance= 229,856 Divided by # of games= 13 Average= 17,682 per game
It's just a case of being in the right place at the right time. I'm serious about that, just take a look at their schedule this season; who they played, and when.
cleazer and bethany have it right, it is one of those 'just so happens' - i didn't bother to check the schedule
It also works for DC United. They played 2001 that weekend. There attendance is about 2,000 over everyone elses.
Re: Re: Re: MLS attendance: very perplexing indeed! Kansas City was disappointing on the road, MOVE THEM and make them play somewhere else on the road!
The big problem to me seems to be San Jose. Average home attendance second worst in the league, behind only Dallas: 10,466. Dallas not only stunk on the pitch, that gawd-awful pitch stunk too. But the Quakes are a superb team, and with Donovan et al, top of the table in the West almost from the word go, and only two points shy of winning the Supporters Shield, they certainly should have done far, far better at the gate. What gives?
In September I started a thread about "what is the best team for road attendance" that I can't find now. Basically, you have to subtract the Rapids/KC July 4 game from any analysis. And, although SJ has pretty poor road attendance numbers, they played more weekday road games than anyone else. So really, they did pretty good considering they played so many away Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday games. If you just compare Saturday night games they look decent.
Because they play in a crappy stadium far away from the population center of the Bay Area. Also, Spartan stadium is very inconvenient when it comes to transportation. Taking Caltrain to a game, which would be preferable for me, is nigh impossible. Because there has been no consistency in front office personnel for the last 4 years. Every year, there's some management change, which means that relationships need to be rebuilt, and some things fall through the cracks. Because, and fellow Quakes fans will disagree with me on this one, no one else in the Bay Area gives a *#*#*#*# about San Jose. It's not like Oakland or SF where regional loyalty is strong. Most people in between San Jose and the sister cities to the north identify more strongly with the sister cities to the north. Which is why any team that calls itself San Jose anything doesn't really attract Northern snobs to come down south. The Sharks still sell out regularly, but not as much as before, because the shine is beginning to wear off of the multi-purpose arena knows as the HP Pavilion. The stadium situation will not be rectified for many years, but the issue with front office personnel hopefully will. With a bit of front office consistency over 3 years, I think attendance will be much more respectable.
Do you feel if they keep a similar front office for the offseason, that the Quakes can average more then 12 or 13k? I personally feel that the constant churn of the front office management, has been ridiculous. That for me has been the main cause. We can see what happens when you have a horrible front office as in the case of the Revs and the Metros. Loyal fan bases start to become more and more apathetic, and what occurs when you have an energetic front office, like in KC.