OK, I'm going to go off on a little bit of hypothetical rant here. This is going to be long. What are some of the problems with the tournament? Small crowd sizes. MLS teams using more bench scrubs and reserve team players when they play in the early rounds against lower level teams. Not much juice and often weaker lineups used in the middle rounds when MLS teams start to play each other because they may not be far enough into the tournament to care yet. Fixture congestion. I believe I can solve all of that right now. MLS devises an NBA In-Season Tournament-esque format to whittle down MLS participation in the Open Cup to a smaller number of teams that enter the main competition at say the quarterfinal stage. This compels them to play their strong lineups because the games matter for regular season standings (attacking the scrubs issue and the attendance issue because it is still an MLS regular season game). If a game is tied after 90 minutes, it counts as a tie for the league and goes straight to penalties for Open Cup group stage purposes in the same way that Leagues Cup group stage ties went straight to pens. Groups are based off previous year regular season standings. Example: East Group A - Cincy, Philly, Revs, Nash, NYCFC, Chicago East Group B - Orlando, CBus, Atlanta, NYRB, Charlotte, DC, Miami West Group A - STL, Hou, RSL, SJ, Minn, Colo. West Group B - LAFC, Seattle, FCD, SKC, Port, Aus, LAG The group winners advance to the quarterfinal stage of the Open Cup, which was scheduled last year for early June. Last year, the Revs played 15 league games between late Feb and the end of May. That should give more than enough of a window for MLS schedule makers to sort out these group matchups into the regular season schedule. They'd just have to play their fellow Group A teams once within that time frame. Supporting this concept, the schedule that was just released has the Revs playing all of their opponents in their hypothetical Group A at least once between the start of the season and June 1st. Meanwhile, the US Open Cup proper is taking place with all the lower level teams whittling their way down to the final four. Presumably, those last four will all be USLC teams. They might not be, but most likely and most often they will be. In the quarterfinal round, each MLS Group Winner is matched with a USL team and the MLS team is the AWAY team (again, attacking the attendance issue). If the MLS team wants to field a less than top lineup, fine, but at this point you are only three games from a trophy, so there is some motivation. If nothing but MLS teams advance to the semifinals, that addresses the middle round MLS vs MLS malaise issue because you don't see another MLS team until the semifinals at the earliest. And now you are adding at most three games to your schedule (fixture congestion addressed). Additionally, the semifinals and finals no matter the two teams involved or the location are more likely to be well attended because of the stakes (attacking the attendance issue again). MLS, USSF - I have given you one possible pathway to solve your problems. You are welcome. Knock off the shit and respect the oldest soccer competition in the country and global soccer traditions, uphold the legacy of the teams in this league, and support the growth of the game.
Maybe… …but maybe not. (that excuse doesn’t go away simply from eliminating only the Open Cup fixtures (seems like only 1 or 2 games each year). I bet Revs are keeping that excuse in their back pocket.)
Also work out a TV deal for the QF to finals. It's only a few weeks of games for the network, and any USL teams that make it that far get a nice TV payday
I personally believe that the open cup is a way to grow the game. It's a sporting event that affects a much larger fan base than just the 29 cities with MLS teams. I despise the argument that our star player can get hurt, and then there goes our championship. You can get hurt walking down a sidewalk after dinner, fall, and break your wrist, you don't have to be playing a game. Besides, all professional athletes are (over) paid to play a kids' game, so play the game.
It's a good, creative idea, but it also feels like a big concession to MLS for trying to take their ball and go home. USOC already gives concessions to MLS by letting them enter at later rounds; the less that MLS participates, the less prestige the tournament has IMO. To be fair, I don't really think that the Revs used that excuse - it was more about discussions here with explanations being equated with excuses. Now, whether previous coaches have cited fixture congestion as a reason for rotating the squad, I never saw that as an excuse - just a reality about priorities and resources. Well, in the past, MLS rosters really weren't deep enough/quality enough for multiple competitions and may still not be. They are much deeper now with all teams having 2nd teams and better benches then there used to be, but I'm pretty sure that most of the teams that had early season non-MLS competitions last year struggled through much of the first half (as we did in 2022). I also wonder how much Apple influenced the decision to walk away from USOC?
Oh, I completely agree with that premise. But at the same time, the size of the tournament has gotten huge in terms of the number of teams. And MLS obviously has grown tremendously. The 1996 US Open Cup had 17 teams. By 2007, that was up to 40 teams. By 2013, 68. 2022 had 103 and last year had 99 teams. MLS hasn't always had full participation in the US Open Cup proper. The Revs didn't enter in 96, 98 or 02. In 2010 and 2011, they failed to qualify. So something like what I described wouldn't be entirely unprecedented. I'd rather they just fully embrace it, but if they are not going to do that and do things like create a month long tournament between MLS and LigaMX, there are ways to go about doing things other than just blowing it off.
Signs that the Open Cup might be saved: Source: 2024 U.S. Open Cup gets go-ahead under proposed new format Jeff Carlisle, U.S. soccer correspondent Feb 19, 2024, 06:46 PM ET espn.com
MLS having anything less than full participation in the USOC is disgusting and fans should not stand for it
I'm still of the mind that my NBA In-Season tournament style US Open Cup qualification process outlined several posts above is an imperfect compromise that could work.
They used to count some of the regular season games as "qualifiers" for the Open Cup back in the day. The Leagues Cup really did in MLS participation. At the end of the day, they believe they can make more money hosting a Mexican team than sending an MLS team on the road to play the Pittsburgh Riverhounds. Even though at the lower levels, hosting an MLS club would likely be their biggest gate of the year. Sure, Chivas or Club America or any "big" Mexican club would be a draw, but that crap outfit that we beat 5-1 last year is like sending the Oakland A's on a tour of Japan instead of a "name" team like the Yankees, Dodgers or Red Sox.
There were reports that only some MLS clubs will be in the USOC this year. Sounds like the Revs won't be one of them: Report: Revolution "Unlikely" To Participate In 2024 U.S. Open Cup theblazingmusket.com I assume that the teams in the CCC will be exempt, at a minimum.
New England Revolution Want to Win Trophies, But U.S. Open Cup Unlikely To Be One Of Them According to Reports Sam Minton theblazingmusket.com Feb 28, 2024
19 MLS & MLS NEXT Pro clubs to compete in 2024 US Open Cup MLSsoccer staff Friday, Mar 1, 2024, 01:01 PM Neither Revs nor R2 will participate.
Every team in MLS (including MLS-NP) is represented in either CCC, USOC or Voyagers Cup, except for DCU (who has no MLS-NP team).