Volume in TRE

I am against GA, think it would turn TRE into one big clusterf&^ck. My section of 136 is pretty awesome. I know everyone within 6 seats and three rows. That makes about 20 people that I watch every game with. No chance we are all sitting in the same area if it is made GA. If you don't like your area you can always talk to others and move your seats accordingly.

 

We don't need to start on this again.

I never questioned what Jim has done or whether he is a "better" SOB than me. I take issue with his idea that if he doesn't know who you are, then you should shut the ******** up.

 

GA: great for away, not for TRE. Variety of reasons why it won't work (logistics, people actually wanting seats they selected, etc.), and it doesn't do anything to increase participation. What you'll end up with is an island of noise in a sea of silence. At least now you're more likely to get some casually interested people to join in just from being around other noisy regulars.

 

I agree completely, just because someone does more or less for the SOB's does not mean you can or can't treat them like a piece of feces. Obviously the SOB wants and needs more people to get involved if they want to grow and improve. Telling people they are irrelavant, insulting them or calling them names isn't going to make people want to get involved. You will have a lot more success treating people with respect and letting them become more involved at their own pace as they become more comfortable.

I don't think the majority of SOBs are this way and definitly don't think the real leadership is that way in the least.

 

Alright I'm gonna lose my cool right quick, but it's a seat people. You can have a good time without it, I assure you. There's always space to move around. Most people are very accomodating. I'm going to drop that point though because the two arguments are irreconcilable pretty much. I could care less where I stand, as long as I'm as close to the center as I can get.


Just poking your argument a little bit. 1.) What do you mean when you refer to logistics?

2.) It may not do anything to increase participation among those who don't currently participate. But I haven't seen anything effective being proposed to right that wrong. What it does do is consolidate the participation and make it stronger. It'll be a very coordinated, very loud island. And there won't be a well defined barrier between the sea and the island either. Participation will probably get less and less intense the farther you move away from the island, and will get stronger in the entire RE during the more exciting moments of the game. I went to a lot of River Plate games during their 2008 season, sat in their supporter's section (called La Popular. it's entirely terraced and GA), and that sort of scenario I just described is exactly what I observed. I imagine it happens in stadiums all over the world, the US included.


With regards to casually interested people getting into it, from what I've seen that's the exception more than it is the rule. The social pressure obviously isn't strong enough to get people to do that on a consistent basis.

 

Hardcore fans aren't born, they are cultivated.

 

Sober Tom yes I have front row seats in 136 next to Lorenzo and the launch pad. . I got the call 25 minutes in on day one of seat selection, and half of 137 was full I was the first seat outside of 137. I picked those seats for two reasons, one I'm not super tall and I have nothing in my view, and two I have alot of knee problems, I haven't had to sit down yet at a match but if I did have to I have a seat that I can still watch the game from.

I hate the GA idea for home matches I like seeing the same faces evry week and getting to know the people in my section. And I still think the front rows would get filled up with the tourists that everyone hates.

Tis is going to take time to work out, but we are already one of the best in year 2, doing something like Ga I think would be a giant step backwards. This isn't a concert it's a sporting event where the best sight lines matter and it would cause issues.

 

So you don't care where you stand, as long as it's where you want to stand?
It's a seat. You can have a good time.......nevermind.

By logistics I guess I was addressing an earlier pro-GA comment suggesting that SoB take over seat sales for TRE, etc., which would be a total mess. If that's not part of your plan, just disregard that comment. It would however make identifying and dealing with trouble-makers in TRE more difficult than it already is.

Some people cited RB away as an example of why GA would be successful. RB away was amazing because it was RB away. DC away this year was nothing to get excited about, and it was GA just like every other away game. Conversely, RB at home has always been fantastic, and most people had the same seats they (don't) use for every other home game. Going GA isn't like flicking a switch or turning a knob all the way up. The same problems are there, but you've managed to concentrate them into certain areas instead of spreading them out (and how that really affects overall volume/participation is just a matter of opinion).

As mentioned, we have an unofficial semi-GA thing going in TRE already. If someone wants to stand somewhere else, go for it, and don't worry about where celt, jess, riverrat, etc. decide to stand (take advantage of the seat relocation event, too, if your section is that bad). Worry more about getting TRE into a STH-only section, weeding out STHs that are just flipping tickets to non-participant tourists, getting people that can actually play a drum to do the drumming (if we're going to have them at all), and developing a better collection of chants. Those types of changes will do way more to improve things than GA ever could.

 

It's not about "better", and it's not about silencing anyone. What I am trying to get you to see is that an expressed opinion will carry more weight and is more likely to be seen as credible when the person expressing it has also demonstrated that they are there to share the burden of getting things done.

Big Soccer, Facebook, and Twitter are filled with folks expressing their views on the Sons of Ben and the atmosphere in the River End. They don't all agree on what should be done. Believe it or not the SoB Elders pay attention, and they know what people are saying.

But just because an idea is expressed does not mean it will be adopted. They have to sort through all manner of feedback and use their best judgement to improve the way we operate.

I know that you and Jim had a bit of a dust up, and that neither of you feel it was civil enough. I am not trying to pile on. I am trying to get you to see that the best way to have your voice heard, and to truly effect the way the SoBs work is to roll up your sleeves and help out. That will do more than any post on Big Soccer - no matter how sound your ideas may be.

You are spot on. But we also need to remember that the reverse is true. If you want the SoB leadership, or its volunteers, to listen then folks need to approach them with the same respect that you would expect in return.

It's all about the golden rule.

 

Unfortunately 137 seems to suffer from the same problem as the rest of the River End - dead zones. When I stand in 137 it is usually just behind the launch pad, and that area does rock. But when I stand in my regular spot in 136 (just next to the back corner of 137) I can see a huge chunk of 137 standing dead quiet. If it were GA then I would bet most of those folks would not get in to the section because people like me would take their spot.

I am still not convinced GA would work but something needs to be done to minimize the tourist factor and eliminate the dead zones.

 

Hell I had to sit down for a bit in the 65th minute because I got seasick from the whole upper deck flexing. RFK in general is nothing to get excited about.

 

^ Wilmington BlueRocks beer cups make it worth it.

 

I don't disagree with anything you said. I know that the opinions of friends are valued more than those of randos on the internet. That's not what I was taking issue with.

I expressed my opinion that I think our chants need work. There was NOTHING in my post that was out of line, whether you agree or disagree. I just gave an honest opinion. I didn't insult anyone or anything, and that holds true throughout this thread. Feel free to go back and check.

Jim told me my opinion was "stupid, arrogant, and nihilistic" and later called me a "worthless bum" and "whiny bitch."

I recognize that an opinion on the internet doesn't hold much water. But just because people don't know me doesn't mean we shouldn't be able to have a civilized discussion.

 

I re-read the exchange to see if I had missed something. Both of you had a high percentage of snark that escalated to a shouting match. Both of you have some valid points. Both of you had your positions diminished by the tone of your posts.

 

Like I said, we don't need to go over this again.

 

We can't even wave flags during game play for fear of blocking someones view.... how the hell are we going to get GA to work?

 

The only caveat with this is that when we eventually have CCL games the River End would be closed because CONCACAF does not allow terrace style sections during CCL play. Colorado had to close their SS during CCL play, and SKC will have to as well when they host CCL games in the future.

That's actually one of the brilliant aspects of the design of our SS. The fact that it has seats, yet they are made to be uncomfortable for most people to actually sit in them, would allow TRE to be utilized during CCL games!

 

Sorry to go off topic, but I think the SKC SS might be OK for CCL because they have basically bleacher benches similar Crew Stadium. I don't think they would have been able to utilize the SS during the Gold Cup matches they had this summer if it was a true terrace like Colorado has.

 

truth.