What's the animosity towards Chivas about?

I have nothing against Chivas. It is a Mexican club with a proud history. Well deserved. But I don't think it is wise to borrow its reputation in order to market a new team in MLS. Mexican and Chicano fans have already seen through this, and have expressed resentment.

I welcome Mr. V. to the fold, I think he will bring a welcome breath of competition to the League. But I would prefer the team have its own name: El Camino Real or something else that is part of San Diego's past or present -- or both.

We don't realy expect the migrant workers to come streaming out of their camps around San Diego to support a Chivas USA, do we? They only make $5 a day picking strawberries on a 10 hour shift. Not much time for sleep, let alone soccer.

Hard-working people, too; agribusiness in CA would wilt without them. All in all, a soccer team is a pretty small thing to worry about.

 

Well, my hostility to Chivas USA is along Sachin's lines, truth be told: They aren't the Revs!

But, there's something to be said for this argument. It's fine having a foreign presence in the investor pool, and perhaps even a foreign flavor to a team here or there, but a MEXICAN team? If Vegara were Colombian and wanted to start a Millionarios or America de Cali squad, that would be VASTLY better.

Can you imagine the scorn MLS will receive if Chivas USA wins the league (as they eventually will)? No amount of "they play by the same rules" is going to stop that.

What uclacarlos and other are missing is that the US/MLS soccer fan makes their living repelling foreign 'invaders' who want to have MLS play a single table because the "international" (i.e. European) leagues play that way, or have MLS play matches in December in Chicago just to match the English schedule, or force MLS to change uniforms to the limited variety of stripes or solid uniforms used by European squads, or go to an absolutely meaningless and stupid home and away playoff schedule, when the best of three (or five or seven) is the TRADITIONAL American playoff format, or....

need I go on? MLS fans have to fight hard against the colonial (mostly European) forces to maintain their own identity, so having a foreign LEAGUE involved is bound to be met with suspicion. If Vegara wanted to invest in a garden variety MLS squad, I don't think it would be met with so much resistance, but the implicit attempt to "Mexicanize" MLS isn't going to go over well.

Let me ask you this: how would it be if Mark Cuban bought Necaxa and tried to rename them the "Mexico City Cowboys", complete with silver star, or bought Toluca and renamed them the "Toluca Yankees" and outfitted them in pinstripes? Imagine the outcry!

Mostly, we'll hate McChivas USA for their stupid name and the fact that they will, in fact, represent our biggest rival. Homerism? Sure, but that's what leagues are built of.

G.

 

Are you serious? Europe's leagues could care less about MLS. Ahhh, the vast conspiracty to "non-Americanize" American soccer.

How can one man "Mexicanize" the league? What does that even mean? There won't be a foreign league involved, there will be an owner, who also owns clubs in other non-MFL, MLS leagues. He owns Saprissa, one of the best team in Costa Rica. He doesn't seem to be a threat to Costa Rican soccer considering Costa Rica is the only team to knock off Mexico in Mexico in several decades. Ease up on the paranoia.

As a businessman, Vergara is going to push the limits to see what he can get away with. That isn't his "Mexican conspiracy" that's good business. MLS has said he has to play by the rules, and he's going to.

 

I haven't decided whether or not I like the idea of Chivas USA (though I do think it's a horrible name).

I just wonder who the fans will be. In my mind, pandering to an ethnic community won't work. Why would Chivas fans in the U.S. support some sort of affiliated team here in MLS? Why would they go to MLS games to watch some weak sister play? Whatever varied reasons Chivas fans have now to support their team in the MFL (tradition, rivalries, etc.) wouldn't seem to exist for the MLS version.

If you're going to throw in some well-known Mexicans on the team, that's proven to have very little long-term effect on attendance (see Luis Hernandez, among others).

I'm curious to see what the long-term marketing strategy will be. I'm certainly not against the move so long as it is good for MLS. I'm just not convinced yet.

 

When MLS is prepared to grow up and enter the true league of soccer nations, most of these things will come to pass.

Don't be different simply for the sake of being different and consider it a badge of honor. And this is not a case of doing things because the Europeans or the South Americans do them. They've been at it a lot longer and know the systems and designs which work best. Why reject that logic out of hand?

Don't think MLS must be like other domestic American sports leagues. It is better off being on the same page as the great soccer leagues of the world. Get with the program!

 

I'm not going to go on an on like some will. Its pretty simple for me.

The club, Chivas USA (or whatever club name they take on), will come to represent a vast majority of the Hispanic MLS followers. These are the same soccer "fans" that come to friendlies between MLS sides and Mexican sides and chant "Mexico, Mexico, Mexico..." as if it were a national team match. If Mexican want to support a Mexican team, go to a live match and see that Mexican team, stay in MEXICO. I for one don't feel that these fans deserve to be catered to as this club will undoubtedly do. It doesn't matter that they'll play by the rules, they'll still manage (I believe) to be mostly Hispanic heritage players.

I really wish that the investors and managers of MLS would realize what they are doing. MLS was created and designed to help American soccer grow. Other than the money our league gains from this guy, I'm not seeing the benefit for the American aspect of this team. This team will become a farm team for Chivas Mexico. Their transitional SIs will be from the Chivas youth systems, sent here to gain valuable playing time, and then shipped back to play for the "big boys". Their SIs will be used on fringe players from Chivas Mexico. I for one do not wish to see my league used to train the young players for a nation that is our biggest rival. Maybe some of the Hispanic MLS fans, who still root for Mexico when the US and Mexico play, don't see a problem with this. But I sure do, and I totally disagree with Chivas USA.

 

Well, since I didn't say jack about European leagues, we can chalk that one up to your poor reading comprehension. No, it's mostly the smug superiority of folks like nicodemus and riverplate, who assume that the rather stupid systems used elsewhere are perfect and that MLS isn't in the in the "true league of soccer nations" that makes me hostile to crap like this boneheaded goatdongsuckers USA thing. Dear Riverplate, didn't you notice that the US got a lot further with MLSers than most other "true soccer nations" including, ahem, Argentina?

If you like your European and South American leagues, fine, stay there!

G.

 

Brilliant post. Probably the most relevent one in the whole thread.

I think everyone would, or at least should, have a problem with Chivas USA if and only if they received special priveliges that other MLS clubs do not enjoy. Beyond that, if the playing field is level, I say bring 'em on. Besides, we need another Dallas to whup up on.

 

Let me refresh your memory about what you said:

Perhaps you need to learn to express yourself better. "MLS soccer fan makes their living repelling foreign invaders....(i.e. European)." What are you talking about then...defending themselves from other fans, the so-called Eurosnobs? Also, I'd like to know how many fans make a living defending the league.

I don't even follow soccer in other countries. I'm solely an MLS guy, so maybe you need to check your reading comprehension. All I said is that you have no reason to fear a foreign investor that owns teams in two leagues already, one of which clearly isn't "Mexicanized."

Just for the record, I think single table and many of the other things you suggested (December games, etc.) are the worst idea possible for MLS. The teams and the league are not strong enough to sustain those things.

 

It's a metaphor, silly! But yeah, that's pretty much what I meant: fending off the eurosnobs. but I do think the defensiveness in the face of eurosnobbery plays into the hostility to the whole Chivas USA notion.

A good point, to be sure, and I'm not sure I disagree, truth be told. I think that the dislike of the Chivas USA does originate in the fact that by it's very name it's going to try to straddle the two leagues, rather than place itself firmly in MLS, culturally. Notice that Saprissa is, AFAIK, still Saprissa, not "Chivas Costa Rica." Atletico Madrid probably won't be changing it's name either, I suspect. I'd be willing to bet that if it weren't for the name, people wouldn't be hostile at all (any more than they would be to any other team). I can see a big Mexican investor investing in the San Diego Tiburones or whatever and marketing heavily to the hispanic/Mexican population locally, etc., etc. would be welcomed whole heartedly. It's this notion that it's going to have such heavy links to Mexico (i.e. archrival) that people don't like. See BenC's post for an example (which, since I suspect the league will own the player's contracts just like with every other MLS team, they won't be a feeder to Chivas, Guadalajara any more than we could call the Metrostars a feeder to Man U .

Nice to know I'm not alone in thinking that! Although I don't even think they'd be so great even with a 20 team league that sits perennially in the black.

G.

 

I'm against Chivas getting a franchise simply from what happened at the MLS Allstar game. Let us not forget that it was Chivas fans that were hurling objects on to the pitch. I can still vividly see Kevin Hartman ducking and throwing stuff off to the side. My fear is that will be the type of fan that Chivas would continue to draw.

We take great pride in self-control here. Chivas fans at the Allstar game proved that they aren't the type of paying customers I'd want in my league. Most American families wouldn't stand for that behavior and we don't need a bunch of outsiders giving MLS, and soccer in general, a bad name.

If MLS would drop to that level just to bring money into the league then I'd suggest inviting Galatasaray from Turkey into the league, too. Their fans could have a great fight with Chivas's.

 

There's so much self control at some MLS matches I've attended that I thought I was at a cemetary.

Oh, aren't we so full of righteous indignation today. Won't stand for what? Having real futbol fans in the stadium? People who have loved the sport since popping out of the womb, instead of "suburban soccer moms and dads" who only pay attention for a few years because their brats are on a school team. Yeah, soccer's the world's greatest sport because of their life-long support.

And what do you mean "a bunch of outsiders?" The people who cook your bacon and eggs in the morning and then wash the dishes. God forbid you and your "American families" rub shoulders will "them." You've got some hell of a nerve!

 

What?!?! Are you keeping an open mind or something?!? Goodness! What is BS coming to?



G.

 

I was thinking about this last night. You're right that their mascot is a goat, but they're called the Mid-shipmen. Given San Diego's large Navy population maybe MLS could work something into the name of the team relating to that and still keep the Chivas goats. Either way I think MLS would be very smart to try to market very hard to the Armed Services population in SD.

 

I see, so the main economic base of MLS happens to want to watch a match rather than crack someone's skull open or disrupt the match, so they're automatically bigots? Lovely. He's got some nerve to suggest that the main base of support might stop coming if a small number of hooligans disrupt things? Heaven forbid MLS consider catering to its base rather than a bunch of folks who would never come anyway. Yes, the's prenatal "futbol" fans are outsiders when it comes to MLS because they've stayed away in droves. Why should MLS bend over backward for them, when the bread and butter comes from a different group. Just because we don't get our jollies thrashing a place and practice this thing called sportsmanship doesn't mean we're not fans. In fact, we're just fans of the sport, not of being a nuisance.

Of course, both of you ought to go take a cold shower because in the event the folks who will show up for the San Diego squad are probably going to be pretty much a similar crowd to those who come to Galaxy matches. I think we've demonstrated that the prenatal types aren't going to switch allegiances to MLS when they can have so much more fun looking down their noses at it. These folks couldn't possibly be more irrelevant.

 

Let's knock off this talk of "hooligans" right now. It isn't even remotely close to that, and I'm not aware of any altercations outside of the stadiums, which is where much of that behavior tends to occur in Europe and South America.

Beside the Manchester United tour match this season, the two best I went to were Peru-Ecuador and Peru-Mexico. The crowds were lively and we all had fun. Much more than at any of the MetroStars matches I attended this year at Giants Stadium. Yes, there was a fist fight or two. Big deal. And I don't think a roll of toilet paper landing on the field or a little shower in the corners is the end of the world. I don't see the players complaining and refusing to come to play in the United States anymore.

And don't act as if that never happens at NFL games. I seem to remember a vicious snowball incident at an NFL game a few years ago. And I'm sure stuff happens at these collegiate football games you're all so crazy about that never makes the papers. Haven't you ever seen goal-posts being torn down at those events? So get off your high-horses and come down to earth.

Most of the anomosity I read on these boards comes from people upset and outraged at the thought of a Chivas USA or Club Houston America. The reason a Chivas board is necessary on Big Soccer is to accomodate all of you hurling bile and vindictive at those of us who support these new proposed franchises which can ultimately only make MLS better.

If you count up the individuals posting, you will find there's more of "them" than those of "us" who support Chivas or any other foreign owner interested in investing in the league.

Come up for air. Get a pulse. Learn to live a little and let it hang out at a soccer match. It's supposed to be thrilling and a crowd really getting into it is part of the fun.

You want some mind-numbing glorified picnic. Why don't you go build your next SSS in the hometown of the Stepford wives and Stepford children if that's the atmosphere you crave.

 

Stayed away in droves?! I think you're confused. That WAS called the WUSA. You'll noticed that it folded, hence the usage of the past tense...

MLS is bending over backwards for this group b/c it realizes that it is BY FAR AND AWAY THE LARGEST CONSUMER GROUP OF SOCCER IN THIS COUNTRY.

You see, we actually WATCH soccer and our newspapers and broadcast t.v. dedicate more time to it than any other sport. Go figure...

 

I'm not so sure that Chivas is going to be the ethnic marketing pancea that you think it is. However, you're right to draw comparisson to the WUSA. For all the people who think 'those people' or 'that element' will ruin the wholesome family expierence at games... They might want to check out how the WUSA is doing nowadays, and what they felt about their marketing in retrospect. Beyond that type of attitude bieng essentially jingoistic, some of these Suburban Soccer Family types should maybe go to another proffessional sporting event to see a passionate environment that makes it enjoyable for all people, not just a relaxing rated G expierence for their 9 year old.

 

I hate the name Chivas USA. What the hell is a Chivas anyway? In US sports culture its important to have the city and nickname. It's also very important for marketing reasons. If most teams are named by the city + nickname, then ALL the teams need to be named after the city + nickname.

I'm thrilled that a hispanic investor is lined up and eager to roll with MLS. Hispanic players and fans have played such a huge part in the league that there's no way the league is here today without them. When I go to see the Metrostars, easily half of the people in attendance are hispanic, and they are great fans, as well as great people to be around.

My personal greatest MLS moment came in the first season when 53,000 showed up to see Carlos Valderrama (Columbian) and the TB Mutiny take on the Metro. Care to guess how many of that 53,000 were hispanic? This was not a doubleheader as I recall. The Metro came back from a 3 nil deficit to score 3 in the last 20 minutes of the match including a bike from Gio Savarese (Venezuelan).

Our American brothers, who's ancestors have been here longer than the english, deserve to have hispanic investors and teams that share their heritage and culture. They have been left out long enough.

 

Does anyone here already know which official name will Chivas USA have? Chivas isn't the official name for the Mexican Chivas, what make you think that it will be for the MLS team?

 

Carlo, first and foremost, Uncapable means unable to cap as an international, not to be confused with Incapable. Second, it seems to me Mr. Vegara's intentions are quite clear, to field a team of mexicans or mexican-americans, he is an individual whom has already porven his intentions by attempting to cooerse MLS in to bending its player rules, to me this signals an intention to base the core of his team on mexicans or their loset eqivilient. The NASL failed as a result of rampant over expansion, and investment in expensive foriegn talent which inflated wage bills over manageable limits, all of which contributed to the dearth of American talent during the 70's, and 80's. My point is, that MLS should act in stark contrast to this model, and never a team dominated by foriegn players or influene to exist in an AMERICAN league. Anshutz may be Austrain, but he doesnt insist upon fielding a team of Austrians in the league, and thats the point. I am not against foriegn investment, when they operate within the same philosophy of the league's current investors. Vegara is in essence, creating a feeder club to Chivas Mexico, which defeats it's purpose as a team to develop american talent in the American first division. I have nothing against Mexicans or foriegn investment, I do have a problem a foriegn element attempting to gain access in our league with the goal of developing foriegn talent. It isnt right, and it would not be tolerated anywhere else in the world. You notice Vegara has mentioned nothing of attempting to transform Atletico Madrid, to Chivas Madrid for instance, because he realises he cannot and bears some respet for the struture of the Spanish league. I just know from what I have observed of the man and his actions', that Vegara's intentions are in his own interest, rather than those of MLS.

 

Re: Re: What's the animosity towards Chivas about?

Negotiation is not coercion.

What is the closest equivalent? Mexican-Americans? Why is that a problem?

Well you got your facts right, but you don't know what to do with them:

And in what relevant way will CHivas disrupt the stark contrast to the NASL that MLS represents?

Sure, there will be foreign players, but they won't be high priced. There will be expansion, but I don't think anyone will argue that MLS is "over-expanding" if it goes into markets like San Diego.

And the fact that Ajax has in the past been a feeder club to Barcelona certainly has harmed Ajax's ability to produce great Dutch talent.

In your above comparison between MLS and the NASL, if MLS isn't overprised, if MLS isn't overexpanding, then what is your fear of the NASL's legacy? About the only thing left is the "foreign" aspect...

Why do people have to turn marketing, pure and simple, into a question of philosophy?

If MLS has any club of Atleti's stature, you might have a point (and no, DC United winning the Inter-American Cup doesn't count).

As are the intentions of all investors in the league, ultimately. Otherwise, you have to realize that single entity forcefully aligns those intentions, so Vergara's intentions, in the short term, are largely irrelevant.

 

So is FIFA also going to make Russia, Finland, Sweden, Norway, Ireland, Iceland, etc. go to a Fall to Spring schedule, too?

MLS isn't the only league that plays from Spring into Fall. And unless the planet decides to develop a uniform climate, it won't be.