I like the way they scheduled the first round. Clearly, it wasn't a random draw, but in a country as big as the US, with clubs as small as those that are playing, it shouldn't be random at this point (it should be in the third round and beyond, but I disgress). Last season, in the first round proper, we had matches with teams from: - Harrisburg City (USL-2, PA) v. Yakima Reds (PDL, WA) - Los Angeles Legends (PDL, CA), v. Crystal Palace Baltimore (USL-2, MD) - Rochester Rhinos (USL-1, NY) v. RWB Adria (USASA, WI) - AAC Eagles (USASA, IL) v. Pittsburgh Riverhounds (USL-2, PA) Among quite a few others. The draw that was made had a lot of teams going really far distances, notably a PDL club travelling from Yakima to Harrisburg. This year, however, the draw is a lot more regional. The '08 edition had a lot of clubs, in addition to those I listed above, travelling over multiple states to get to their match. This year, all but a select few are in-state matches, or, at the very least, are in a state bordering. At first glance, the matches requiring the furthest travel in the first round are: - Cleveland City Stars (USL-1, OH) v. St. Louis Lions (PDL, MO) - Minnesota Thunder (USL-1, MN) v. 402 FC (USASA, NE) - Austin Aztex FC (USL-1, TX) v. Mississippi Brilla (PDL, MS) The travelling distances for the first round, and thus, the overall costs of the tournament, have been cut drastically. Even in the second round, the furthest possible trips are from New York to Missouri or Arizona to Mississippi, but neither of those are particularly likely. So, with all the **** that the USSF often gets, I think they did this one right. We have some regional matchups, which may lead to some travelling support, and I think we'll see a slightly better tournament as a result.
The Cleveland City Stars are in the USOC? I thought the USL qualified their teams based on the first "x" games of the current season. I guess not, 'cuz there's no way in hades our club would make this competition otherwise. (For those who don't follow USL, Cleveland was gutted in the off-season, losing key players and their coach, and then moved up a division. Right now, they are at 1W, 1D, 4L, and have yet to score at home. But we should be able to beat an amateur side, right? Right? Please say right...) ------RM
Yeah, there's only 8 US-based teams in both USL-1 and USL-2 this season, so all American teams qualified automatically. The PDL did the qualification based on the first 4 or 5 games. That said, best of luck to Cleveland. You guys could use some sporting success.
ArsenalMetro, you do know that St. Louis and Mississippi are PDL teams, right? Not exactly "amateur" in the typical sense.
Nope, had no idea. I was going entirely on the Wiki classifications of them on the USOC page. My fault.
Agreed. It will be cool to go heckle the Portland Timbers when they come up to to play Kitsap Pumas. Also it sets up a likely 3rd round meeting between the Timbers and Sounders FC. If they stick with this next year then FC New York could face the New York Red Bulls for the first time.
The way this year's tournament is organized is actually closer to how the cup used to be laid out. Going back to the beginning in 1914, the early rounds were organized on a regional basis. This was done for the exact same reason it is this year, travel. Of course, traveling long distances took a bit longer back then. Teams were eliminated until only one was left from each "district". For example, a typical setup for the Western teams in the 50's and 60's would work like this: The survivor from Chicago would play the winner in Milwaukee, who in turn would play whoever came out of St. Louis. That team would play the survivor between Los Angeles and San Francisco in the Western final. When the USASA took over the cup in the late 70's, they moved towards the format they have now for their qualifying. It wasn't until the professional teams got involved in 1995 that the cup moved away from the practice of making the early rounds as regional as possible, as well as the fact that there were limits put on how many teams from each league would compete in the cup. If the PDL didn't have to worry about NCAA regulations, they could stretch their season from April to August, and have time for proper qualifying tournaments. As for the teams from the top league needing qualifying to enter the cup, it's actually been done before. In 1931 and 1933, the ASL split it's teams into two groups (New York and New England), and they played round robin schedules to determine which team from each would advance to the Eastern Semifinals, along with two teams from outside the ASL.
I think the Open Cup should be organized and seeded like the NCAA Basketball tourney is done. Divide 64 clubs into four geographical regions. Seed the MLS clubs and then the USL 1 clubs into the brackets (some clubs may have to play out of their region due to the large number of west coast MLS clubs and east coast USL clubs). Divide the remaining USL 2, PDL, and amateur clubs up geographically. This would let more clubs into the tourney and give us a predictable format. The other crazy idea I have is to have the Open Cup final be part of a doubleheader with MLS Cup final. If a club ends up in both, then the Open Cup would be held a week later. Would give more exposure to the game (might even get it on TV).
And if you think 1-16 matchups in the NCAA tournament are predictable, wait until you see the 1-16 matchups in a seeded US Open Cup. Good luck with that. Not to mention that a 64-club USOC would have to have....let's see...all the US MLS teams + all the US USL-1 teams + all the US USL-2 teams + 32 freaking amateur teams. No thanks.
So what you are saying is you would like a US Closed Cup, not an Open Cup? I know we are fighting an uphill battle in this country with Cup competitions, but including all MLS and USL clubs would help.
No, I'm saying be a little realistic. Holy shit. All the USL pro clubs are already in and only 6 of the MLS teams are not in. And those six had a chance to win the US Open Cup, they just had to play their way in. What's the difference? But 64 teams, top-heavy with amateur clubs? Again, holy shit. I don't know WTF to make of that.
I agree with Kenn. There is a reason the big league teams enter in the latter rounds, just as there is a reason for preliminary qualifying. Heck, in 1925 the ASL and St. Louis teams boycotted the Open Cup because of the fact that they were forced to play preliminary round games against overmatched amateur clubs, and it was costing them too much money. Everyone needs to just accept that our cup competition is not going to be exactly like the FA Cup. One reason for this is that our domestic soccer calendar is dependant on the weather, and because of that MLS is squeezing 8 1/2 months of play into 7. They could play games in January back in the "old days" because they were not depending on a huge crowd to show up and offset the cost of using the stadium. Try playing a match in Kansas City in December and see how many show up. This is why the leagues are limited to how many teams enter. Since the season is so squeezed, they cannot just take a weekend off from league play for a round of the cup. Another reason a 64-team field won’t fly is the size of our country. If a lower division teams makes it to the latter rounds of the FA Cup and draws an away match to a Premiership side, their season is paid for, because the travel is minimal. The guy that runs Dallas Roma needed the USSF prize money just to play off the credit cards that he used to fund the two trips his team took to LA. Booking a team for a train trip back in the day was a lot less expensive then loading the same team on an airplane today. If the PDL teams were given a choice to participate in Open Cup qualifying, I'd be shocked if more than 25% of them accepted. At first, the four qualifying games were separate from the season, and teams that didn't want anything to do with the cup would "try not to win". That is the reason they switched the PDL qualifying games to regular season matches. For every Des Moines Menace and Fresno Fuego drawing 3,000 a game, there are five PDL clubs brining in 50 and are just happy to put a team on the field, and are not looking for the added expense of more travel. I’m sure all of those 16 seed schools have a budget that dwarfs any PDL or USASA team. The number of USASA teams entering has also dropped. Chicago used to have at least 4-6 teams enter. This year, only one bothered. It’s not that teams don’t care, they just can’t afford to.
Kenn, you crack me up. Why don't you tell me how you really feel? The cup should be OPEN to the clubs that want to participate. chn71, no clubs (PDL on up to MLS) should be forced to play in the cup, they should just all get an equal shot. You don't think it is rediculous that the champion, DC United, had to play two qualifiers to get into the tournament? As for the financial burden, two things. The USSF should be able to figure out a way to make sure travel costs are covered by all traveling teams. Second, if it is so burdensome then why do local amateur sides (not even in the PDL) bother to enter. It is the OPEN cup, some will want to compete, others won't.
I love "figure out a way." It's like "if marketed properly." You figure out a way. You're the one advocating it. No, I don't think it's ridiculous at a defending champ had to qualify. Who cares? And you do know that if given a choice, a lot of MLS teams would just say "No freaking thanks" like they used to do, right? Until MLS mandated that they had to participate, teams just said, "Nope. Sorry." Now they keep adding teams, but make some play off to get to 8 - same as the other divisions. And the problem with that is.....? It's no more dumb than the NCAA, when faced with an additional automatic bid, adding the play-in game instead of reducing the number of at-large teams to their basketball tournament. Maybe as dumb. But certainly not dumber. If fans were clamoring for this, that would be one thing. But nobody but us gives a rat's ass. These MLS play-in games are still better attended than a lot of MLS/MLS matchups in the tournament proper. That tells me it's not about the competition, but about getting them on the schedule as early as possible (among other things). This tournament's a great idea that may simply not be workable the way a very few people seem to insist that it has to be just because....well, just because they think it would be cool that way. Be realistic, holy shit.
1. The USSF leaves it up to each league to determine it's cup entrants. If D.C. United, or any other MLS club that has hopes of winning the cup, has a problem, they need to talk to the people who handle the Open Cup details for MLS. Besides, if the current speculation that the cup champs will not get a berth in the CONCACAF Champions League, that takes away some incentive for teams to want to get involved. 2. The number of USASA teams entering the Open Cup has declined year after year. Florida only had three teams enter their qualifying tournament, and the Region III Finals were in Florida this year! Out of the three USASA regions, only Region I (east) has any kind of realy state qualifying tournaments. Most other states only have two or three teams enter, if that. I remember in 2007 that Reg. III Cup Commish Kim Bowens was pretty much BEGGING teams from the Carolinas (tourney was in Fayetteville, NC) just to get a field of six. Teams simply cannot afford the possibility of paying to travel to an Open Cup fixture, and are not entering the cup like they used to. Also please remember, some teams need to submit their cup entries in November, when they have NO IDEA which USL-1 & 2 willbe in the cup come next spring. There is no gaurantee thay could get a first round game that is within a few undred miles of them. As Kenn said, anyone who says "just figure it out" to the travel cost issue is in a fantasy land. Renting vans/busses, paying for gas/food/lodging adds up. Thats just the first round, what are the costs for the second and third, when airline tickets come into play? Perhaps the USSF can win the next Powerball that goes past $100 million and put it towards the cup!
I agree that my wish for the Open cup to be operated as a proper tournament is complete fantasy without money. That I will give you, but throw me a bone for crying out loud. It makes no sense to make the holder go through the play in process.
Maybe if (or when) we host the World Cup again the USSF could take some of the profits and invest it in this tournament. Quadruple (at least) the prize amounts. Offer travel expense help at a certain round. It seems the USSF is in much better shape than before the 94 WC. Invest an amount in an account that would properly fund participation and prize $$ in the USOC.
i actually don't think that 64 teams would be all that bad, but i think dividing it into 8 regions would be better. take the top 8 teams from each region based on what league they play in and their position from the previous season or something. this would really limit the number of amateur teams, but im sure something could be figured out where a certain number of amateur team must qualify. then just do a random draw for each of the groups. with the first 3 rounds regionalized, i think you would see some potentially more interesting in-state games, and would make away games more accessible to any supporters. of course as already mentioned, it would limit travel costs as well. anything to create some more interest.
Whenever ideas are thrown around for "fixing" the USOC, the most popular one is always "give the winner a million dollars". I think it's pretty clear that fixing the tournament needs to start with "cover all travel expenses for amateur and PDL teams". ------RM
I guess it all boils down to whether an indifferent MLS play-in 1000 miles from home on a Tuesday night in May is better/more interesting than a game against a local opponent within driving distance. A choose the latter from both a sporting and economical standpoint.
Already being done, the USSF does cover travel expenses taken from the US Open Cup Handbook this is from 2007 but cant imagine it has gone down. the PDF is attached if you want to download it and look at the Travel reimbursment in starts on page 31 next step: increase the prize money and get a major sponsorship
And yet...MLS play-in matches still outdraw those local opponent matches. Partially because they're on the schedule from early on. 2009 MLS Play-in average: 4,724 MLS vs. lower-level "local and interesting" games in USOC, 1996-2008: 4,467