Will Seattle be the only team in our region?

Both Portland and Vancouver (although not necessarily in that order) should be eventual MLS cities. Vancouver seem to have the leg up with a rich owner with ambition to build a stadium... just sucks that the Gastown NIMBYs have thrown wrench after wrench into his plans.

Vancouver was historically the better footy town between the two, both on the pitch and attendance-wise. At the top level, I think they do better than Portland does... and perhaps even better than T.O. has, at least numbers-wise. Not sure about the hardcore, but given enough time it would come around.

San Jose will never be a rival to the extent that either Portland or Vancouver has been in the past. They're more intent on the Cali derbies with LA and Chivas than us, I would think.

 

Snail's sprint faster than the civic and provincial governments in Vancouver, so I would not hold my breath.

This is the first I've heard of Montreal rising up to an MLS level caliber bid, I'd be really, really pleased to see that personally.

Rivalries have never been that huge in Seattle. In fact, I'd go so far to say that the biggest rivalry in this town, believe it or not is the Hawks/T-Birds rivalary. I say that because the noise and emotion in those games, far outweigh what is generated at a Blazers/Sonics game.

The NFL never produced great rivalries for the Seahawks, since the AFC West had rivalries of their own established from the old AFL days, and the Hawks were always a secondary rival to all the teams. In the NFC, we're so damn new there, that the rivalries haven't really seeded yet. The Niners are the closest, but really, the Niners/Rams rivalry will always be bigger, even more so, when the Rams inevitably move back to L.A. now that Georgia has passed.

Baseball has no natural rivals for the Mariners in the incredibly sleepy AL West. The Mariners need to move to the NL anyway, our park and our team are much more suited to NL ball anyway.

The old NASL days had intense rivalries here of course, but those days are gone, and whatever bad blood brewed in the USL, never hit the radar beyond the 5K of faithful USL fans here. Still I wager a T-Birds game vs. Portland was still more intense. I once watched a brawl ensure in one of those rivalry games, 2 seconds after the puck was dropped, and the crowd went ape.

I know it goes against the grain here, but I'd really like to see Seattle enter the MLS alone in 2009. It will help our draft situation, and personally I don't see any other bids really ready yet. MLS has done well to curb its growth to manageable levels, I'd hate to see it expand just for the sake of expanding.

Seattle sports tends to thrives without natural rivals, and while a Whitecaps vs. Seattle MLS match will be a thrill, I can wait until it happens, and enjoy MLS in the mean time.

 

Comparing an NBA rivalry to those in ANY sport is an apples and oranges comparison, since NBA crowds are probably the most sedate of any pro sports fans. Also, it's obvious that you haven't attended a T-birds/winterchickens game in about two decades. As someone who has attended Seattle/pdx hockey games since the Totems/Buckaroo's days, I can tell you that that rivalry is one based on mutual respect between the fans, and 90+ years of playing hockey against each other. If you want to see anger/resentment/animosity between fans, go to ANY western conference game involving the sliverlips. Their fans are the most reviled in the 'dub, and when they lose to the Tbirds, the Seattle fans reaction isn't because they just beat Everett, it's because they just made the sliverlip fans STFU!

I also disagree with your assessment that we're better off without rivals. Will Seattle do well without rivals? Yes. Would we do even better with Vancouver, and/or pdx as MLS rivals. Yes. Will the energy in the stadium come anywhere near as high as it could be, without either of them in the league? Hell no!

I agree with Eric; eventually one, or both, of the cities will have an MLS franchise. And it will be a great move by MLS to include them.

 

The Silvertips "rivalry" has always come across to me as fake, as it has no history, and it seems heavilty weighted on the Everett side, just my observation there.

The Portland/Seattle rivalry in hockey is a whole other level in my mind, and I've seen it from both sides, in both rinks. Portland in particular is a thrilling rivalry because of that club's ties to history. I still maintain its the best rivalry we have in all of Seattle currently. Again, I've seen fights develop on the ice, at the drop of the puck, and usually the games against Portland are the most violent. Any hockey player can tell you, that a violent hockey game comes from emotion, and emotions comes from an intense dislike of the other team.

I admit a lot of T-Bird fans are warming up to the Everett rivalry, but primarily because the Everett fans are rather annoying. It does not compare to a Portland match, and the clubs respond to the rivalry better to, in my eyes. There are games that are exceptions, but the blood-feud of Portland vs. Seattle in hockey is the best I've seen this city produce.

Yeah sure a Whitecaps vs. Seattle game will be special in MLS, but the lack of it won't detract much from Seattle MLS' overall enthusiasm or atmosphere. Again, Seattle traditionally has never had many deep-rooted rivalries, since we're so physically isolated from so many other clubs.

I like Ken Dryden's take on rivalries in his book "The Game", where he writes that often a rivalry can often be a manufactured thing, if the two teams are so disparate in quality. He wrote that the Leafs never felt like a rivalry at all during his era, simply because the Leafs were inept, useless and unequal to the task. He argued the games against the Flyers and Bruins in his era were far more meaningful. There is a lot of truth in this, and when Seattle MLS rise in caliber, the lack of a physical rival won't detract much at all.

Even the Cougar/Husky thing here can at times seem very manufactured, and indeed there are years when a game against the Ducks seemed to have more emotional weight to them. I am biased here though, I consider the Husky fan-base here to be one of the most annoying I've ever encountered. They are not as bad as Leafs fans, or Red Sox fans, but they are right up there.

I do like rivalries, but Seattle traditionally has always had a soft connection to them, and what really symbolizes our sports teams here, is our isolation, our downright pariah-like identity, due to our isolation. Rivalries have existed here, but they do not define us, as say other franchises. Even in the so-called "storied rivalries", the emotional weight of them can sometimes be overplayed.

If the Seahawks have any identity at all, it is as a team so localized, so provincial, that the national media regards the franchise with contempt. A fun little riff - that the “12th Man” marketing boost really taps into. Even the NFL Film packages around the Seahawks add to that myth, if you’ve watched them recently. I love that aspect to the Seahawks, and argue its a far more unique and special an identity than any rivalry that would develop if Vancouver were to somehow adopt an expansion team.

The main point here, is while I'd love to see Portland or Vancouver come along, it won't matter much that they are not there, simply because Seattle sports thrives without natural rivals already.

One thing we do agree on though, is that NBA crowds are soft.

 

I think that the Sounders/Cinders rivalry will be missed once we go to MLS.

Nothing compares to beating up on "little brother" year after year

 

Solution?

The US Open Cup.

The USSF needs to structure the US Open Cup to preserve the Cascadia rivalry and make it highly likely that either Portland or Vancouver would meet Seattle MLS at some point.

 

I actually do like what Canada has done to open up a tourney for their Champions League qualifier. However, since MLS gets four teams (excluding Toronto), it would seem a bit of a stretch to create a tournament to qualify just four teams.

Still, the top 6 teams in MLS, and the top 2 teams in USL competing for the four bids, might not be such a terrible idea, but I doubt MLS would agree to it.

I am going to not quibble about the alleged rivalries in MLB, NFL and other sports, I spoke my mind on them, but don't want to derail too much on a discussion about other sports. I mentioned them only to support the idea that Seattle thrives without natural rivals, and that as a whole, rivalries can be a tad overrated at times. I respect the fact others disagree.

 

Whatttt, are you a duck or somethin?
















Dont worry, I know we are annoying.

 

But approaching Red Sox annoying, that I doubt.

 

Boston Red Sox fans are easily the most annoying fans on Earth.

Toronto Maple Leafs fans are second.

Manchester United fans, a comfortable third.

Oakland Raider fans come in fourth, I'd rank them higher, but I feel sorry for them because they seldom rise above the poverty line, and because I hear if you lick enough food stamps you get brain damage.

In MLS, the answer is pretty clearly Houston, for the sheer simple reason, that we're talking about Houston; America's armpit.

I kid all fans of these teams of course, and to direct it back to the primary topic, I saw today that Atlanta is coalescing an MLS bid, and that might just put another city ahead of Vancouver and Portland in the queue.

 

First, I don't know how you can compare something when you have no experience with it. If you didn't experience the NASL rivalry and you haven't experienced the USL rivalry, then what is the point of commenting on it? Second, comparing hockey to soccer is apples to oranges. I'm sure that there are players from the Sounders, Timbers and Whitecaps that would get into it if they could. It's just a completely different game and comparing a fight breaking out just doesn't make sense.

To the middle graph - I can't see anything but Seattle entering alone in 2009. Neither Philly - who is rumored to be right on the cusp - nor St. Louis could get their SSS done in time for 2009. The soonest they could enter would be 2010.

I agree with the last graph but soccer isn't like other Seattle sports. There are very few sports out there that can inspire passion in the same manner and same level of involvement as soccer. Part of this includes being able to go to away games in order to urge your team on to victory. Without the rivalries I don't see MLS cracking the top four sports. Honestly, without Portland or Vancouver you might even see a massive slump - in tickets and merch - if this team were to not get results for a few years. I see the natural rivalries as helping soccer to realize it's goals and dreams here in the States.

 

First, I don't know how you can compare something when you have no experience with it. If you didn't experience the NASL rivalry and you haven't experienced the USL rivalry, then what is the point of commenting on it?

Well I watched NASL games for years, and I've supported every Seattle team in the city for 13 years. Its not like my comments are coming completely from left field. While I never witnessed a Whitecaps vs. Sounders game, I have met, interacted with, and even scuffled with Whitecap fans, and believe me, the Toronto/Vancouver rift was even deeper in my view.

I believe the rift was deeper, because sports in Canada has deep political subterfuge, particularly for those on the west coast. It would make a bigger splash in the press, when these clubs met as well.

For what its worth, I've attended a Spurs/Arsenal match in the 80's, and attended a Pumas/Aguilas match in Mexico City. So, I've seen ancient rivalry matches, I know what they are like. So, while I respect the fact we disagree, don't suggest I don't have some knowledge to draw on, from which I formulate my opinion.

Also for what its worth, I've attended matches of some of the most well-known rivalries on this continent, I saw the Dodgers throw a no-hitter against the Giants, I've seen Montreal/Toronto feud over several sports, and I've seen a Red Sox/Yankees game in Fenway. Sorry that comes across as being a braggart, but I did want to establish that I have some experience with "rivalries".

That doesn't make me more right than you, because lord help us, if we all thought like I did, but I do have some experience here, I am not a total newb.

Admittedly, my only experience with Portland/Seattle rifts come from the NBA and WHL, but I disagree that soccer fans and hockey fans are vastly different in this city. Indeed, probably the most similar fan profile you can find in Seattle to the soccer fan, is the hockey fan. I'd give you my reasons why, but I'd derail the thread. So I am not sure its apples to oranges, but perhaps more like a Red Macintosh to a Yellow Fuji.

Also, as someone who has played and followed soccer since the early 70's, and consider it my favorite sport to play, and the greatest sport invented by mankind, I am not so enthralled with soccer to believe they are the only fans that travel to other cities, or that they represent the most fanatical fan in Seattle, or this continent. That level of fanaticism exists in many sports, and indeed because the other sports are often more pervasive in North American culture, it can in fact, breed an even higher degree of rivalry.

To be truthful, the most fanatical fans I've ever encountered in my lifetime are the cricket fans of India and Pakistan, truly all other rivalries pale in comparison.

I do agree, Seattle will likely go alone, all things considered, but that has not yet been made official. Philly's bid got a big boost when public money was pledged for a stadium, but I agree no city appears to be ready for 2009, a good thing for Seattle MLS in my view.

Real passion from soccer fans, isn't predicated on physical proximity of a club, and in some cases what is considered to be a primary rival can change, even in the most established clubs. Rivalries truly seed themselves in competion, and not always proximity. Now, to be fair, Vancouver/Seattle clashed a lot, at the high-end of NASL, so of course this intensifies the rivalry.

Still, if Seattle MLS rises to the top of the league, and clashes frequently from another team at the high echelon, or if we stumble into consecutive pairings with a Mexican team during a Champions League run, rivalries will develop, and they will foster a history and a mythology of their own.

I don't want to come across as dimissive of the NASL, and the rivlaries embedded within it. The truth to my mind is, Seattle hasn't required physical rivals to thrive in other sports, and won't need it to thrive in MLS. I also maintain that rivlaries don't require physical proximity to develop, Argentina/England proves that beyond question.

I am an opionated ass, as you can see, my apologies for that. I do recognize, others feel differently than I do, and concede the possibility that I am wrong on all accounts, so please take my rebuttal as just a discussion on sport, a passionate hobby of mine, and not some rude academic game of "I'm more right than you are". Really on a topic like this, I am not sure there is a "right" answer, just subjective opinion on what is, and what is not a rivalry, and how much they matter in the overall appreciation of a sport.

 

You don't. You keep talking about professional soccer in Seattle as if you've been there all along, but you have admitted numerous times that you ignored the Sounders and USL. You don't have the knowledge nor the experience. Why do you feel the need to opine endlessly about things you know nothing about?

Admittedly, you don't know what you are talking about.

For what it's worth, I think we need Portland and Vancouver in the league with us. It's not a do-or-die need, but I don't think the spectacle part of soccer will succeed if we don't bring these historical rivalries up with us. I agree with Keith. If we have a bunch of losing seasons, and we WILL, people like WestSeattle will decide that "MLS isn't worth their time" and go watch EPL on TV. The rivalries will keep people coming back for the spectacle despite the losing seasons.

- Paul

 

Trust me, Roger was not saying nice things to Scot "softy" Thompson in this pic.



The Sounders/Cinders rivalry is one of the best in the USA, in my opinion.

 

I claim to be a witness to the NASL, because I was. I also claim to be a witness to a great deal of Seattle sports lore, but not the USL.

I also have witnessed rivalry games involving Vancouver, both in Vancouver and elsewhere. I lived in Vancouver, have family in Vancouver, and know a great deal of people who live there, so I can speak on behalf of Vancouver a little bit. I've met Whitecaps fans from the "day", and believe me, they were just as keen to beat their national rivals, as they were Seattle, if they weren't then they were lying to me at the time. Again because the matches often had a poltical subterfuge to them, they carried an awful lot of emotional weight to them.

So again, I do know a little about what I speak. While I do not have any interest in the USL, that does not discount my opinion, on sports rivalries as a whole, or their importance to the history of Seattle sports.

It's subjective anyway, no matter how much "experience" you derive from watching the Sounders in the 80's, and no matter how much "experience" I claim from watching internation matches, and matches all over the world, often featuring great rivalries, in the end, the importance of rivalries and their significance is a subjective opinion.

You know, I like discussing alternate points of view, but when the rebuttal boils down to: "you suck because you don't folllow USL", it doesn't get us very far in the dialog. Admittedly, my experience as a sports fan is different than your own, but it's not the weakest resume around. I'm a passionate sports fan, a passionate soccer fan, and witnessed matches in four different countries. I have some experience as a fan, and feel entitled to share my views formulated from that experience, without being chastized or marginalized, simply because I chose not to adopt the USL.

I'd really hate to see lines drawn in the sand, where soccer fans with an alternate view of how "glorious" NASL was, and an alternate view of how acceptable USL was to pay money to go see, are somehow disregarded as "unpure" fans of Seattle MLS.

We belong here, and we should be able to broadcast our viewpoints here, without being marginalized. My view stands, and I believe I am just as capable and equal to voice that opinion of mine, as anyone on this forum. Again, I've sat in rivalry games that feature 100,000 fans, this opinion of mine does not derive from left field.

As far as sticking around for losing seasons, I have to scoff at that a little. You don't know me well enough to make such an accusation, a hurtful one at that. I know a few people that enjoy sports as much as I do, but not many, and I've endured a lot of grief as a fan, and can point to clubs I've rooted for and followed for decades. So you can dismiss me as "fair weather", but I am not the one advocating boycott over a nickname and a logo am I?

 

I'm not trying to invalidate your experience as I've only seen the Sounders in USL-1. What I am getting at is that it is impossible to accurately project the future without the past. You certainly didn't need to go to the games to experience it, but I am saying that it certainly has helped open my eyes. If you think that we're fine with a created rivalry rather than a natural one you are certainly entitled to think that. I just believe that these two teams will add a dynamic that you don't have in any other Seattle professional sport.

If you've seen those huge natural rivalries then how could you not want to see Vancouver and PDX in MLS?

I am not talking about how hockey fans are different from soccer fans until the last paragraph where I seperate out soccer fans from the mass of sports fans. In this graph I was talking about how fighting is part of hockey and thusly not as severely punished. In soccer the team would go shorthanded and it would be clearly detrimental. If the fight broke out in the stands we'd be talking about something completely different.

True, soccer fans are not the only ones who travel (college football). But for the most part you don't get NFL, NBA, MLB or even NHL fans following their teams as much as you do with soccer. That's why I brought up the point. There is a unique fanatacism to footy fans.

True. English footy fans come to mind as well.

You are right, but I would rather have a rivalry with clubs I could get on a bus and go see. Mexico and New York/New England would be pretty far away to travel for a game on a Wednesday night, no?

Word. However, I am right.

 

If you've seen those huge natural rivalries then how could you not want to see Vancouver and PDX in MLS?

I miscommunicated clearly, my apologies. I'd love to see Vancouver in the league - believe me. I'd rather see Montreal first, for personal reasons, but I love the fact the MLS has crossed into Canada. I have an awful lot of Canadian friends I can tease with Seattle MLS (and they can in turn tease me).

Richful humiliation amongst good friends, over sports teams, is part of manhood, after all.

I was saying rivalries in Seattle traditionally don't define Seattle sports, and I believe that will be true of soccer. I believe Seattle MLS will thrive without a proxmity rival, and I even go so far to say, that rivalries can develop without physical proximity, and that rivalries change in time with even some of the oldest, most established clubs.

Now, I know you disagree with some of that opinion, but I would welcome Vancouver in the league. Portland would be fine too, but given the fact they both seem to be lower in the queue than a number of other cities, the situation does not worry me. I think Seattle MLS will be glorious without them.

You know sometimes personal emotions and experience is involved in how we perceive a league's structure. I recognize many a Seattle fan here would foam at the mouth at Portland entering the league. Vancouver has more weight for me, but I've seen Portland/Seattle in other sports here (hockey in particular is a real thrill), and definitely see the intensity.

But for the most part you don't get NFL, NBA, MLB or even NHL fans following their teams as much as you do with soccer.

I am going to politely disagree with much of that. With the NBA, I think the argument is valid, the NBA is a weird dynamic, and is the only sport I know where the annoucers/arena make twice the noise the crowd does. Noise in NBA games is *heavily* manufactured, even in some NBA playoff games I've been to.

However, in other sports, I see all kinds of fanaticism, the Seahawks fan club has chapters everywhere, and organizes all kinds of "road trips", and I ran into an awful lot of DC natives at the last playoff game at QWest. Baseball fans are famous for going on the road - I recognize with baseball fans though, its often an "odyssey" tour, not always based on rivalries. Still, baseball games in the Northeast, are often split 50-50. Mets/Phillies. Red Sox/Yankees and Orioles/Yankees and Toronto/Several Teams, I've all witnessed first hand, with a healthy represenation of both sides at the games.

There's a vocal aspect to soccer fans, not represented in baseball fans. Soccer fans sing - and while this goes on in the NHL, it's a very rare thing in other North American sports. That unique aspect, is one of the great things about soccer, nobody can deny that.

Also what makes soccer fans unique in North America, is it has an "indie" flavor to it. It is not unlike being a fan of music, that gravitates to bands that are not on the mainstream radar. There are less soccer fans in the cities, so they naturally tend to coalesce into tight groups, and the "bond" within those groups can strengthen and galvanize out of a unique spirit of kinship. I get that, I've seen that, and I revel in that aspect of being a soccer fan in North America.

This is why I think hockey is not to unfamiliar a fan dynamic in North America, especially North America beyond the "hockey corridor". The T-Birds community here is involved with the team at uncanny levels of participantion, literally where some of the fans have the players room and board with them in their homes. This develops a fan community, that is smaller than the other sports in this town, but massively enthusiastic, and tightly bonded. Also one similarity to soccer and hockey fans in this town, very often they play the sport, and part of their identity to the sport, is their own participation in it.

As you examine clusters of fans at a hockey match in Seattle, they very often play together, as well as watch together, something NASL had when I watched it as well, and seems to be apparent amongst Seattle fans too. I cite the close ties to all levels of soccer in the community, at the G-S site, as how important soccer's interaction with the community matters almost as much as what the high-level club is up to.

I could be off on that comparison, but that's why I believe the two fan groups in this town share similarities.