Finally read through all the posts and the result is the same: DC has had more international and league success than any other team in the league. The fact that this question only occurs because Chicago is going for the treble means that if Chicago had not won at least one of those titles, nobody would be asking this question. A good year does not make you the best club in the league's history. Consistency and numerous titles on multiple platforms do. Yes, Chicago has had success over the last few years, but it doesn't come close to what DC accomplished in its first 4 years. Chicago is competing for its 2nd league title in five years. By this time, DC had already won three. That alone speaks volumes about what each team has accomplished. However, it is far too early to say that any team in MLS is a dynasty. The League simply hasn't been around long enough to make such a conclusion. Yet, to say that DC is the best in the League's history is a fact. They are the only club to win 3 titles, much less two (though that changes on Sunday). However, the rest of the League has some catching up to do if the want to challenge DC's legacy.
Knave you got my argument w/Greddy exactly right. vivaelbolivar did get off track w/the argument, but I hope he keeps posting anyways. Now that I posted that, I may as well respond to Greddy's post. Chicago's home field advantage this year has been gigantic. They are 10-1-4 at home, better than ANY other team. To say the plastic small field isn't an advantage to them is just being ignorant. It's not the whole reason for their success this year, but it is A reason. San Jose's small field allowed them tremendous success last year, and it was on grass. Even Dallas had a respectable .400 record on their s plastic field. Chicago's record in away games is UNDER! .500 at 5-6-4, which puts them FOURTH in the league in away games. NOT impressive. Contrast the great DC United teams. The first team, '96, started out slow had an under .500 record. Their whole season ended up at .500. Look at the following AWAY records for these DC United teams though: 97, 10-6, 1st in league 98, 10-6, 2nd in league 99, 13-3, 1st in league (13 and 3!) Chicago's wins at Soldier Field lately have been against DC, NE, and Columbus. Not exactly impressive. And they barely squeaked by NE 1-0 to make MLS Cup, scoring in overtime. Chicago beat the Metros for the US Open Cup this year at the Metros. Big f deal. You know why? Metros were imploding w/the Mathis debacle. Metros are ALWAYS bad at home-they were 2nd worst in the league this year, UNDER .500, only Dallas was worse. Add it all up, that small plastic home advantage for Chicago IS a huge advantage, but is NOT the entire reason for their success. And until Chicago starts winning away w/international championships, I find it hard to believe you can make a legitimate case for Chicago being better than DC in history. Contact me when Chicago beats a team like Vasco de Gama in an away game. Chances are it won't be any time soon. And w/the Open Cup win my guess is Chicago will get a shot at an international game next year. I just wasted 20 minutes on this post-great now it's time to go out!!
ok i guess i missed the point. anyway what you said about the vasco thing was totally on target in fact i think i made that point earlier.
If you're gonna slight Chicago for the problems of its opposition when the Fire won a final, it's totally wrong to fail to mention that Vasco had played (and lost) in the Intercontinental Cup against Real Madrid in Tokyo on December 1, and flew halfway around the world to play in Miami four days later. And it's misleading to portray the game in Miami as truly an "away" game, as though DC beat Vasco at its stadium in Rio. It was a truly great win for DC. But the circumstances were as optimal as you could imagine: DC trained for over a month with only the RFK and Lockhart games against Vasco in mind, and the away leg was played in a neutral site in the "away" team's country. Moreover, the fact that the Interamerican Cup has not been contested a single time since DC's victory makes that particular trophy a very poor choice to provide a basis for comparison between the two teams. If you want to say something meaningful about who is the better team, you have to provide some sort of achievable standard, and to argue that a trophy that was basically a one-time-only deal should show who is the better team diachronically is just nonsense. What I'm not saying is that DC fluked its way to a win. The win was deserved, and convincing. But winning all three domestic trophies in a single season is something that can conceivably be done in any year, and that provides a ceteris paribus measure of comparison. DC never managed that. If Chicago wins the triple, and can win CONCACAF next year, then they've set the new standard.
i agree i did not mean just the interamerican cup. if the fire win any international competion than i believe they can really build a good case for this.
I agree with you on that. The triple ("treble," spare me) would make a strong case, but winning CONCACAF next year would cinch it.
I wanted to correct the record by providing facts. The list of InterAmerican Cup Winners: 1968 Estudiantes (Argentina) [played in 1969] 1969 not held 1970 not held 1971 Nacional (Uruguay) [played in 1972] 1972 Independiente (Uruguay) [played in 1973] 1973 not held 1974 Independiente (Uruguay) 1975 not held 1976 Independiente (Uruguay) 1977 América (Mexico) [played in 1978] 1978 not held 1979 Olimpia Asunción (Colombia) [played in 1980] 1980 UNAM (Mexico) [played in 1981] 1981 not held 1982 not held 1983 not held 1984 not held 1985 Argentinos Juniors (Argentina) [played in 1986] 1986 River Plate (Argentina) [played in 1987] 1987 not held 1988 Nacional (Uruguay) [played in 1989] 1989 Atlético Nacional (Medellín) (Colombia)[played in 1990] 1990 América (Mexico) [played in 1991] 1991 Colo Colo (Chile) [played in 1992] 1992 not held 1993 Universidad Católica (Chile) [played in 1994] 1994 Vélez Sarsfield (Argentina) [played in 1996] 1995 Atlético Nacional (Medellín)(Colombia)[played in 1997] 1996 not held 1997 not held 1998 DC United (USA)
OK. While I think Chicago is good enough to beat any team on any field, I respect your opinion. The small field in Naperville has been an advantage, but the Fire have shown in their recent form that they can adapt to a larger field and get results. One of those fields being the HDC (site of the final). Also, I never said the Fire where better than DC in history, so i'll assume that that statement was not directed at me personally. Though, I will say that beating Vasco De Gama in Miami, four days after they played the best team in the world in Japan, is an accomplishment. It just may not be as much as what you guys are making out to be.
Jose, I know you're trying hard here, but you really, really missed the point. We are comparing MLS teams, right? In the entire history of MLS, the Interamerican Cup has been contested once. So it's absurd to cite the Interamerican Cup as the ultimate measure of the relative quality of MLS champions from 1996 to the present. Is "one-off" semantically precise? No. But I'll stand with it, thank you very much, and thank you very much for presenting a list of cup champions that proves my point.
I think Jose was pointing out DC was in good company w/the clubs winning the Interamerican Cup. Anyways great arguments on all sides. Glad to be a part of it. I learned and now pretty much agree w/the latest consensus here. I'll call this year's Chicago team a very good team IF they win MLS Cup, a great team IF they win CONCACAF. Regardless, a great showing by the Chicago team this year, no doubt.
DC is in good company, Bud, you're right on that. But that's not why he posted the list. He quoted my "one time only" line before attempting to "correct the record by providing facts"-- i.e., demonstrate that the competition had been played more than once. No *#*#*#*#, Jose. But it still doesn't work as a basis for comparison among MLS teams. Chicago gets a big chance to stake their claim tomorrow. If they lose, this is moot.
Re: Re: Re: Per Jeff Bradley: If Chicago Wins Do They Take the "Best Club" Title from DCU? I had no idea Zach Thorton was Swiss...
I wouldn't have agreed with you even if they had won yesterday. But they didn't. All Chicago proved by losing yesterday is that they are the LA Galaxy of the midwest. And I am happy to say that when I made that point to the tubesteak Chicago fans sitting to my right at the HDC yesterday, they got very, very pissed off. They also didn't like being reminded that Etch was hacked in the box in 98, and that their second goal that year was offsides. I wasn't being bitter, and I wouldn't have brought it up under normal circumstances. But they wouldn't shut up yesterday about how they felt they were being jobbed by the refs. They should have been moaning about being jobbed by Ante Razov. Chicago's losing yesterday was very enjoyable for this DC United fan, and made for a pleasant red eye back East. AQ