DC needs to build that stadium, RFK is a relic left over from the past that needs to be demolished ASAP!

ah, if only it was that simple :lol:

DC needs a new stadium, but i would hate to see RFK demolished as a result

ah, if only it was that simple :lol:

DC needs a new stadium, but i would hate to see RFK demolished as a result

Hate? what else would you use it for? RFK would serve no purpose other then sitting there and rotting.

Hate? what else would you use it for? RFK would serve no purpose other then sitting there and rotting.

its true, i know it has to go, it would just be a sad day in DC. Kinda like Yankee Stadium...a piece of crap but has so much history

its true, i know it has to go, it would just be a sad day in DC. Kinda like Yankee Stadium...a piece of crap but has so much history

I know how it is, the same thing will happen in Dallas next year when the Cowboys move from Texas Stadium to The New Stadium. It will be demolished. :(

I'll show you how one is absolutely true and the other is at least generally true.

MLS attendance figures:

Read this article here: http://www.signonsandiego.com/sports/soccer/20060927-9999-lz1s27goal.html

Paid tickets + comps in every case < announced attendance, so not only is MLS counting all tickets distributed (paid and free), they're actually counting more than all tickets distributed toward attendance.

In general, other nations use gate attendance rather than paid attendance when recording crowds. For example, the EPL here: http://stats.football365.com/dom/ENG/PR/attend.html

The top of this list had 100% complete sellouts for all games in terms of paid attendance. Yet for example, Old Trafford's attendance was 500 less than capacity. This was due to the fact that official attendance figures count those who show up rather than those who purchase tickets. For every league match played there, there were 500 unused tickets per match. In leagues where crowd aren't as well controlled, i.e., no turnstiles, ticket scanning, this can't hold true.

It looks like to me that attendance exaggeration is not limited to MLS only in American pro sports. Last year an argument about the problem in MLB as well was reported by Korean medias. 375 VS 10,121. About the attendance of an MLB game Florida Marlins VS Washington Nationals played at Dolphins Stadium, Miami on 13th Sep 2007, the former is the figure which was counted one by one by a journalist and the latter is, surprisingly, official attendance figure published by the club! Incidently the game was broadcast live to Korean audiences including me because a Korean pitcher was to start the game. I remember the attendance then was so small that even I could count it on TV!

Of course I know that's because Florida Marlins count in unattended ticket buyers as other American professional clubs do and that fact was also explained in the article but one thing is certain. We cannot say that the American way of counting spectators is compliant with global standard and in conclusion the published attendance figures of American pro sports are somewhat overstated from the point of view of European football.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3176/2588765957_d44545a642_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3164/2589630314_6af6ec4d54_o.jpg

I'll show you how one is absolutely true and the other is at least generally true.

MLS attendance figures:

Read this article here: http://www.signonsandiego.com/sports/soccer/20060927-9999-lz1s27goal.html

Paid tickets + comps in every case < announced attendance, so not only is MLS counting all tickets distributed (paid and free), they're actually counting more than all tickets distributed toward attendance.

In general, other nations use gate attendance rather than paid attendance when recording crowds. For example, the EPL here: http://stats.football365.com/dom/ENG/PR/attend.html

The top of this list had 100% complete sellouts for all games in terms of paid attendance. Yet for example, Old Trafford's attendance was 500 less than capacity. This was due to the fact that official attendance figures count those who show up rather than those who purchase tickets. For every league match played there, there were 500 unused tickets per match. In leagues where crowd aren't as well controlled, i.e., no turnstiles, ticket scanning, this can't hold true.

Ill use FedEx Field as an example of how its not necessarily true. Last year the home game against the Cowboys was the highest attended Redskins game in the history of FedEx Field with 90,910 people there. FedEx field seats 91,704 people and has been sold out every year it has been open. Since it was sold out, shouldnt the attendance have been 91,704?

Ill use FedEx Field as an example of how its not necessarily true. Last year the home game against the Cowboys was the highest attended Redskins game in the history of FedEx Field with 90,910 people there. FedEx field seats 91,704 people and has been sold out every year it has been open. Since it was sold out, shouldnt the attendance have been 91,704?
Depends on the capacity used by the team. They might not sell tickets to seats with poor sightlines (and from what I read here and there FedEx has quite some of those) or something like that. Of course that doesn't have to be the thing, but I think the numbers you've given don't proove much.

Depends on the capacity used by the team. They might not sell tickets to seats with poor sightlines (and from what I read here and there FedEx has quite some of those) or something like that. Of course that doesn't have to be the thing, but I think the numbers you've given don't proove much.

no, every seat is available, good and bad. The game i used is a good example as it was one of the biggest games in the teams history. More people actually showed up. It shows that it necessarily go by tickets distributed because the stadium would have been at capacity if it were the case

nice thread. Metrostars stadium will blow everything away. If it ever gets built.

It looks like to me that attendance exaggeration is not limited to MLS only in American pro sports. Last year an argument about the problem in MLB as well was reported by Korean medias. 375 VS 10,121. About the attendance of an MLB game Florida Marlins VS Washington Nationals played at Dolphins Stadium, Miami on 13th Sep 2007, the former is the figure which was counted one by one by a journalist and the latter is, surprisingly, official attendance figure published by the club! Incidently the game was broadcast live to Korean audiences including me because a Korean pitcher was to start the game. I remember the attendance then was so small that even I could count it on TV!
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3164/2589630314_6af6ec4d54_o.jpg

I would say that this applies mainly to MLB and NBA. Rarely will you ever see empy seats at NFL and NCAA games. Its much more obvious in places like Miami where you can literally count the pathetic crowds.

I would say that this applies mainly to MLB and NBA. Rarely will you ever see empy seats at NFL and NCAA games. Its much more obvious in places like Miami where you can literally count the pathetic crowds.

I also know American football sells out almost every game in USA. So, even if they don't count in unattended ticket holders it would practically make no difference in announced attendance because it would almost equals attendace in seats. As you said this would apply mainly to MLB and NBA ^^

We need some photo updates from some MLS games.

Ill use FedEx Field as an example of how its not necessarily true. Last year the home game against the Cowboys was the highest attended Redskins game in the history of FedEx Field with 90,910 people there. FedEx field seats 91,704 people and has been sold out every year it has been open. Since it was sold out, shouldnt the attendance have been 91,704?

I don't disagree it happens, but I was talking specifically about soccer here vs. the rest of the world. American football doesn't have much to gain in terms of publicity if a game has 91,704 vs. 90,910 or 68,000 vs. 66,000. As a result, they generally do count the people who get their tickets scanned.

That doesn't mean it doesn't happen in the major sports here when there is something to be gained in terms of avoiding bad PR. The Pacers attendance has been horrible post-brawl with Detroit. One night, the announcer stated 15,000 in attendance and it couldn't have been more than 9,000. With soccer here, the attendance manipulation can be even worse in an attempt to give the league more legitimacy in the eyes of Joe Six Pack. People might actually believe the league gets crowds that aren't that far from average NBA games.

Yeah, that brawl was horrible. A lot of people blamed the fans for that, but I have to blame the pacers (with the exception of the guy who threw the beer at artest). Several pacers players when in to the stands and started hitting completely innocent people. We're talking about 6'6" - 6'8" pro athletes hitting normal people. I would have started throwing things at them as well. I think the pacers have showed their true colors after the brawl. How many of them have been in legal trouble?

What teams started with the MLS that are not around anymore besides the Mutiny?

What teams started with the MLS that are not around anymore besides the Mutiny?
The Miami Fusion began two years after the start of the league but folded after the sixth season. The Earthquakes, a charter member, had been gone from 2005-2008 but are now back (thankfully).

The Miami Fusion began two years after the start of the league but folded after the sixth season. The Earthquakes, a charter member, had been gone from 2005-2008 but are now back (thankfully).

The Earthquakes are now the Houston Dynamo

The Earthquakes are now the Houston Dynamo

Odd to see a US team with such an East European type name. Actually works though.

The Earthquakes are now the Houston Dynamo

Well to be technical, the Earthquakes "suspended" operations in 2005, the same time an expansion team was "awarded" to Houston, then the Earthquakes "resumed" operations in 2008.

And yes, Dynamo works for Houston since it's in a way the energy capital of the US.

The Earthquakes are now the Houston Dynamo
So then who are these Earthquakes with two stars above their crest?

So then who are these Earthquakes with two stars above their crest?

City of San Jose kept all the teams records when the team moved to Houston, thus the "new" Earthquakes have technically won 2 MLS Cups.

It's amazing how quickly the MLS has gone from a punchline to a legitimate league. A while back, some head said that it would rival MLB and NFL by 2010. That's obviously not going to happen, but it's definitely becoming successful.

It's amazing how quickly the MLS has gone from a punchline to a legitimate league. A while back, some head said that it would rival MLB and NFL by 2010. That's obviously not going to happen, but it's definitely becoming successful.

It is growing. They are doing it the right way and just putting a good product on the field for the games and not going out and trying to compete with the NFL or NBA for ratings. I give them till 2015 to be considered in talks of the nations top 4 sports.

Any recent pics on the New York stadium??

Chicago Fire / Toyota Park
http://chicago.fire.mlsnet.com/t100/imgs/stadium/2008/main.jpg

I'm watching a game of rugby at Toyota Park on TV at the moment - England 'A' are playing Scotland 'A' in the final of the Churchill Cup. Looks like a pretty decent stadium.

If you look up the 'average crowds' from the big leagues around the world you'll find that MLS isn't exactly being disgraced.

I agree about the over-inflation of crowd numbers, but even if we knock 1/3 off then MLS is still pulling in respectable numbers compared to the likes of Brazil, Holland, Russia where there is essentially no competition.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_attendance_figures_at_domestic_professional_sports_leagues

It's also interesting to note the Indian 20Twenty League in such a high position. Have we had a thread on Indian stadiums yet?

1. What is up with the whitecaps stadium? I've already heard versions of 15k, 20k+ and 30k+ capacity for their proposed stadium. I know they are struggling with the city, but which of these sizes is the most probable or most recent?

The Whitecaps FC stadium last rendering, which is totally preliminary in design, has two tiers on 3 sides. I think the first renders had a single tier on 3 sides for 15k so I reckon the newest rendering posted at the link below would be around 25k to 30k. To see the newest render(it's high res) click the top one and then you can see a close up of the stands.

http://www.whitecapsfc.com/stadium/waterfront/renderings/

Also, it's not the city that's the problem it's the Vancouver port, which is federal land. The city has already approved it. I'm confident it will be sorted out. In the meantime - 2011 - they will play at BC Place Olympic Stadium -

http://img131.imageshack.us/img131/9857/50436235bi5np9.jpg

^^ isn't the roof going to be placed AFTER the games?

is that new render reliant upon vancouver getting an mls expansion team?
for me that stadium looks around 30,000+ and its also a copy of the Frankfurt Commerzbank-Arena and i really dont like stadiums that are just a copy of another :ohno:

Ye, pure copy of Frankfurt stadium

is that new render reliant upon vancouver getting an mls expansion team?
for me that stadium looks around 30,000+ and its also a copy of the Frankfurt Commerzbank-Arena and i really dont like stadiums that are just a copy of another :ohno:

that stadium is actually over 25 years old and the roof is part of its renovation... it seats 60 000 and is the home to the opening and closing ceremonies of the 2010 winter olympics however the roof will be added after the olympics

If you look up the 'average crowds' from the big leagues around the world you'll find that MLS isn't exactly being disgraced.

I agree about the over-inflation of crowd numbers, but even if we knock 1/3 off then MLS is still pulling in respectable numbers compared to the likes of Brazil, Holland, Russia where there is essentially no competition.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_attendance_figures_at_domestic_professional_sports_leagues

It's also interesting to note the Indian 20Twenty League in such a high position. Have we had a thread on Indian stadiums yet?

You made a mistake in your arguments by judging popularity of a certain sport in a country solely by attendance. For example, wikipedia says attendance of MLS(16,770) is much larger than that of Portuguese Liga(10,636). Given the MLS tendancy of exaggerating attendance figure a bit, being knocked 1/3 off the original figure, as you suggested, the revised attendance of MLS is 11,180 and still larger than that of Portuguese Liga.

But nobody in the world would think association football is more popular in USA than in Portugal. Hey comrade, what do you know you made a mistake in your arguments? Attendance figure is just one of many popularity indicators not the only popularity indicator. Besides attendance there are many indicators such as broadcast right revenue, TV viewing figures, sponsorship, the size of mercato market and in modern football, these factors are more important than attendance in terms of club's finance.

portugal is small country of around 10 million

That looks much larger than 25,000.

It won't be. The fans of the team are talking with the team about having a terraced section with seats that can fold up and down, like in Germany. That would be incredible.

You say St.Louis is likely to be a MLS franchise in the future after Seattle(2009) and Philadelphia(2010), but what does 2009 in the crest mean? The year the club is likely to be founded or the year the club is likely to join the league?

The team will be incepted a year before, just like the Seattle Sounders have already been added and allowed to go after players and coaches.

It was in the article of St. Louis under sports.

Is expansion limited to 1 team per year?

Not limited to 1 per year, but they want to have a balanced schedule, so that needs to be taken into consideration. Plus, 1 expansion per year gives more focus and energy on that 1 team.

Giants Stadium is NOT a soccer stadium. The playing field is not wide enough. For the 1994 World Cup FIFA had to make an exception to the width regulation so that the stadium could be used, since there was no other suitable venue in the NYC area.

i think its wide enough

Giants Stadium is NOT a soccer stadium. The playing field is not wide enough. For the 1994 World Cup FIFA had to make an exception to the width regulation so that the stadium could be used, since there was no other suitable venue in the NYC area.

lol, what the hell? Giants Stadium is one of the main arenas of the MSL.

http://msn.foxsports.com/id/7134744_7_1.jpg

Giants Stadium is NOT a soccer stadium. The playing field is not wide enough. For the 1994 World Cup FIFA had to make an exception to the width regulation so that the stadium could be used, since there was no other suitable venue in the NYC area.

if they play soccer in it then is BECOMES a soccer stadium...besides, its not wide enough for international play, it is wide enough for MLS

i also read in quite a few places that giants stadium does not meet the fifa requirements width wise

if they play soccer in it then is BECOMES a soccer stadium...besides, its not wide enough for international play, it is wide enough for MLS

CONCACAF stages the GOLD Cup at Giants Stadium frequently. The Gold Cup is a fully sanctioned FIFA event. Giants stadium is wide enough for international play. It's just not ideal.

That's true, but I don't understand how can people only root for clubs far away and not for your own club in your own city. If all football fans decided to watch MLS in America, the average attendance would probably have been among the highest in the world, if not THE highest.

Thank you for a great posting !!

MLS is OUR league. These are OUR teams in OUR cities. End of story.

The decision lies with both the team, the city, and building code inspectors.
The fans want it, and we are applying pressure to the team to make it happen.

Really hope it happens, I would definitely go. :cheers:

Does anyone have a picture of the construction progress on the Red Bull Park NY arena? Couldn't find anything anywhere...

and how about opening a separate thread for it? It's a great arena to watch getting built

I think there's a confusion on what's meant by "L.A.". You seem to be saying "L.A." as meaning Latin America, whereas the previous poster assumed you meant "Los Angeles" (and since this thread is about soccer in the United States, that makes sense). I agree with Uncle Phil, baseball and football are way more popular in Los Angeles than soccer. Soccer may be popular in pockets, but there are two baseball teams that average over 40,000 over 81 home games a year, and the college teams pull in 80-90,000 every weekend during football season. And when then NFL comes back, it will dominate the scene like it does in almost every other NFL city.

just caught this after my post in regards to his post. When did people start calling Latin America, "L.A." anyway? Whats especially suprising is that guy is supposedly from San Diego!

yes back on topic

RFK Stadium

LA vs. DC

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1307/1076163568_e8ce412488_b.jpg

^^^ That was a Beckham game right? Sort of a temporary spike in attendance. DC has a nice little supporter group though. They bounce around all match.

I cant watch FC Dallas v Houston Dynamo because of womans basketball......WTF ESPN2!!!! NO ONE WATCHES OR CARES ABOUT WNBA!

I was having the same problem, missed the entire first half, triple overtime WNBA game was some shit to have happen.

Great game between DC and LA, but it looked like there were alllot of DC fans there, place was packed, and this stadium does have a kind of soccer feel to it but DC needs a soccer specific stadium.

the best part about about RFK is the bouncing stands, something i wish they could bring to the new stadium

bouncing stands


whats that?

whats that?

rfk's stand that moves into left field to form a soccer field (and football field) isnt really attached to the ground, so the stands can bounce up and down. It was pretty common at Redskins games.

spIuA1GgfDE

We have something similar :) Except ours are solid concrete and steel, but still bounce with the fans when the whole stand starts jumping :) There was also a clip about Eintracht fans doing that in Broendby with yet another solid stand. That's one reason why I wouldn't support any kind of "bouncing stands".

Guys, if you want to discuss the actual football, there is an MLS thread over at the north american skybar: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=189113&page=18

This thread is for discussing stadiums.

yes back on topic

RFK Stadium

LA vs. DC

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1307/1076163568_e8ce412488_b.jpg

great pic!

any pics from the July 4th MLS celebrations?
Supposedly Colombus Crew stadium was rocking last night.

I heard Giants Stadium will be torn down in order to make way to parking lot. It's really waste of money to demolish a just-30-year-old stadia with 80K capacity only for parking. Why doesn't Red Bulls keep using the stadia?

its usually cheaper to tear down a stadium than to maintain it if you want it to remain first class. Especially when its too large for their attendance. Plus they are getting their own stadium

I heard Giants Stadium will be torn down in order to make way to parking lot. It's really waste of money to demolish a just-30-year-old stadia with 80K capacity only for parking. Why doesn't Red Bulls keep using the stadia?

Why would the Red Bulls use an old outdated stadium that is too big for them...and as you are so eager to say, too small for international games? Its kind of dumb to have two 80,000 seat stadiums right next to each other...parking is too important.

I heard Giants Stadium will be torn down in order to make way to parking lot. It's really waste of money to demolish a just-30-year-old stadia with 80K capacity only for parking. Why doesn't Red Bulls keep using the stadia?

The Red Bulls aren't the primary tenants of Giants Stadium - the Giants and Jets are. They're building a new stadium that holds around 82,500 in the parking lot of Giants Stadium as a replacement for Giants Stadium, so the old stadium has to come down.

Parking is too important? :lol::lol::lol: New York Giants and New York Jets altogether have only 16 home games a year. In 349 non match days, what are they going to do with the additional parking lot which used to be GS Stadium? Do you think it will be always full in non match days? Why don't you see the neighborhood of the new meadowlands stadium through Google Earth? I doubt the stadium's owner has even the least common sense :ohno:

Parking is too important? :lol::lol::lol: New York Giants and New York Jets altogether have only 16 home games a year. In 349 non match days, what are they going to do with the additional parking lot which used to be GS Stadium? Do you think it will be always full in non match days? Why don't you see the neighborhood of the new meadowlands stadium through Google Earth? I doubt the stadium's owner has even the least common sense :ohno:

You're being too harsh here, transport by car has always been an integral part of U.S. society, due to the country being so large. It's understandable in the context of a European, or Asian stadium design when there is not as much land available. In my opinion, the majority of people here (England) who attend football matches are within relative walking distance or use public transport, whereas in America the primary form of transport is the car. And in doing so requires parking spaces. It's just the way it is there, learn to understand it.

For your understanding, these are the photos taken at different dates, as you can guess from the construction status of the new stadium. Even when the land is taken up by two stadiums - one is already built and the other is u/c - at the same time, there is more empty space than full one in parking lot and this is very likely to be common scene in non match days in the area.

In this situation, they are planning to demolish a 82.5K stadia just for parking. Do you think that makes sense? I really doubt they did even the lowest level of feasibility study for the demolition.

http://img2.dcinside.com/viewimage.php?id=football_new&no=29bcc427b48777a16fb3dab004c86b6f0cb660735f048824203bcd86b4a05744845544db2788b1f7bf6d937d21e0a2d33f7bac524b1ac007be5f892d65695010&f_no=7cf3da36e2

http://img2.dcinside.com/viewimage.php?id=football_new&no=29bcc427b48777a16fb3dab004c86b6f0cb660735f048824203bcd86b4a05744845544db2788b1f7bf6d937d21e0a2d33f7bff574a4d9100ec09892e783512447b174af20cf16e91f8dedba936015f7e1e109b02844f&f_no=7fee8674b6856ff038ede9b31280766c23d01ed3e24c4afe7ee83c

Does no one use public transport to get to the games in USA? :) :)

The parking lots aren't meant to be filled on non-game days though. They're there simply to fit all the cars that come in when there are events at the stadium. Other than to go to events at the arena, the stadium, or the racetrack, nobody really goes to the Meadowlands, nor is there any reason to. And generally, all three of those have basically seperate parking lots (with some overlap), so they don't interfere with each other on days where multiple venues there are operating.

There's no reason to have an old 80,000 seat stadium right next to a new 82,500 seat stadium. Plus, that new stadium will require slightly more parking than the old stadium had before construction began, so to fit that extra parking, Giants Stadium needs to come down.

Does no one uses public transport to get to the games in USA? :) :)

For ballparks and arenas in cities, you'll see some people using public transportation to get to games, especially in New York, Boston, Chicago, Washington, and Philadelphia (and probably San Francisco). But for football games, generally no. These venues still require large amounts of parking, though, since cars are the primary means of getting to almost every sports venue in the US. However, most football stadiums are on the outskirts of cities, without good public transportation, and tailgating is a central feature of football culture - people would rather drive to a football game even if they could take a train in, just so they could tailgate and hang out with fellow fans.

As for Giants Stadium, there is zero public transportation to it, really, so everyone has to drive for the most part. That's somewhat of a problem in Metro NYC, considering 70% of people living in NYC don't have cars, but everyone outside of the city does, so the Giants and the Jets often have a hard time attracting people from the City to their games (it doesn't help that Giants Stadium is in New Jersey), but they still sell-out just about every game (except for a few recent Jets games, since the Jets have been absolutely terrible).

They are linking the new Stadium up with some public transportation that runs into NYC, but even after that happens, the overwhelming majority of people will drive there.

Heh, interesting.. In Europe usually main reason to pick some location is easy access with public transport. Different culture i guess :)

the last year or two I have usually taken the train to the dome for Vikings games, but downtown Minneapolis has limited parking, and the train stops right at the stadium, so for some of us it's pretty slick to use mass transit to get to football games. I understand the new stadium will have direct access to a rail system before long. But for a lot of people tailgating is hugely important, I know it sounds weird to a lot of people, but barbequeing in freezing cold parking lot and tossing a football around is a lot fun with a great festive atmosphere. In Kansas City and Buffalo it's an art form, just all kinds of great, something I wish we had a little more of in Minneapolis.

For your understanding, these are the photos taken at different dates, as you can guess from the construction status of the new stadium. Even when the land is taken up by two stadiums - one is already built and the other is u/c - at the same time, there is more empty space than full one in parking lot and this is very likely to be common scene in non match days in the area.

In this situation, they are planning to demolish a 82.5K stadia just for parking. Do you think that makes sense? I really doubt they did even the lowest level of feasibility study for the demolition.

http://img2.dcinside.com/viewimage.php?id=football_new&no=29bcc427b48777a16fb3dab004c86b6f0cb660735f048824203bcd86b4a05744845544db2788b1f7bf6d937d21e0a2d33f7bac524b1ac007be5f892d65695010&f_no=7cf3da36e2

http://img2.dcinside.com/viewimage.php?id=football_new&no=29bcc427b48777a16fb3dab004c86b6f0cb660735f048824203bcd86b4a05744845544db2788b1f7bf6d937d21e0a2d33f7bff574a4d9100ec09892e783512447b174af20cf16e91f8dedba936015f7e1e109b02844f&f_no=7fee8674b6856ff038ede9b31280766c23d01ed3e24c4afe7ee83c

Do you even think about what you say? Why would you leave a stadium just sitting around collecting dust. When the New Meadowlands opens, old Giants stadium will have no tenants. It would be cheaper to just demolish it. As the other posters said, if you dont live here then you dont understand.

I heard Giants Stadium will be torn down in order to make way to parking lot. It's really waste of money to demolish a just-30-year-old stadia with 80K capacity only for parking. Why doesn't Red Bulls keep using the stadia?

NJSEA owns the stadium. Metrostars and NJSEA and Metrostars fans HATE the NJSEA. No deal. Plus in Harrison we can take a subway to the game !! And drink in the 30 bars in Harrison!

Does no one use public transport to get to the games in USA? :) :)

This country hates public transportation. The oil and car barrons snuffed out the railroad barrons. :( Only cities built in the early 1900's gave a damn about public transit.

Some cities are really starting to come around, Portland, Seattle, Minneapolis, Phoenix, Denver, Houston, Charlotte all have and/or are putting in light rail. Most of the cities in California have some form of local/commuter rail (BART, Caltrain, San Diego Trolley, LA metro). And this is not mentioning all of the east coast cities with major subway systems and the L in Chicago. Portland and Seattle have commuter systems, Minneapolis will have one opening next year, and should have 3 LRT lines (one more by 2014) and 2 commuter lines operating by 2020. California has a major high speed rail plan that could get under way in the next couple of years. This isn't to say that we are anywhere near European standards, but we do have a few well thought out, effective mass transit systems.
And with $5 gallon gas it's a good thing more people are starting to see the light.

NJSEA owns the stadium. Metrostars and NJSEA and Metrostars fans HATE the NJSEA. No deal. Plus in Harrison we can take a subway to the game !! And drink in the 30 bars in Harrison!

Metrostars? I think you missed it when the team was sold to Red Bull corporation :lol:

Or he is bitter and can't stand the fact they are named for an energy drink, it's kind of a new low in sports to have teams named directly after corporations.

Parking is too important? :lol::lol::lol: New York Giants and New York Jets altogether have only 16 home games a year. In 349 non match days, what are they going to do with the additional parking lot which used to be GS Stadium? Do you think it will be always full in non match days? Why don't you see the neighborhood of the new meadowlands stadium through Google Earth? I doubt the stadium's owner has even the least common sense :ohno:

Like you said, there are only 16 home games, why would they need two stadiums? They're not going to use the old stadium for anything, so it's just going to collect dust, not to mention the fact that it costs a couple million dollars to keep it in good condition. Now if they turn it into a parking lot, they can at least get a couple of thousands of dollars from the extra parking.

As for why the "Metrostars" wouldn't use the stadium, it's just too big for them. It's not good for atmosphere when a stadium is half-full. Their new, 30k stadium will be a lot better for atmosphere. There's also the fact that they wouldn't own the old giants stadium and so they would have to lease it as well as share a portion of the gate/concessions money. There's a reason why MLS is encouraging every team to build their own stadium, so they can be more profitable.

Metrostars? I think you missed it when the team was sold to Red Bull corporation :lol:

Oh, believe me, I missed nothing. :ohno:

Atmosphere is lost in a 80, 000 seat morgue.

http://www.vimeo.com/866714

http://www.vimeo.com/871989

Atmosphere is lost in a 80, 000 seat morgue.

http://www.vimeo.com/866714

http://www.vimeo.com/871989

When the Red Bulls move into their intimate new home, that house will be a rockin.

I wonder if a NCAA DIvision 1 (American) Fooball Championship Subdivision (FCS, formerly I-AA, like Appalacian State) could use these MLS stadiums as ideas for a new facility.

^^ I doubt they would let those teams tear up the field...(MLS season runs through 10/26).

Heh, interesting.. In Europe usually main reason to pick some location is easy access with public transport. Different culture i guess :)

In Texas there is no such thing as public transport.

so any new pics of Red Bull Park?

In Texas there is no such thing as public transport.

Houston and Dallas both do have some light rail (Metrorail, DART) and every American city has a bus system. DART's Red and Blue lines get about 60,000 riders a day and Houston gets about 40,000. Now there may not be anything good to get you to the game, but to say there is no public transit would be a lie.

In Texas there is no such thing as public transport.

DART's Light rail line in Dallas has been the model light rail system in the country, if not the world due to the increase in ridership and profits year to year since its opening. Think before talk

Ok maybe I was speaking in hyperbole, but I went to the Pats-Cowboys game at Texas Stadium this past year and the only way to get to out of the stadium after the the game was to either wait in the taxi line for two hours or take your own vehicle, which probably would've been faster (we waited for a taxi for two hours) but not by much considering the traffic.

Thats why you wear a good pair of shoes to a Cowboys game and park a mile out. But that is also why a new stadium is being built.

DART's Light rail line in Dallas has been the model light rail system in the country, if not the world due to the increase in ridership and profits year to year since its opening. Think before talk



Thats why you wear a good pair of shoes to a Cowboys game and park a mile out. But that is also why a new stadium is being built.

Saying DART is a world wide model is a bit of an overstatement, it's good, but isn't usually regarded as the model system in the US, let alone Europe. Systems like Portland's MAX are usually considered the model for US light rail (especially in the urban planning courses I've taken), with substantially higher ridership. Minneapolis' Hiawatha line is very well planned, connecting the mall of america, both terminals of the airport through to downtown with stops directly at the Metrodome, the new ballpark and within two blocks of the Target Center right in the entertainment district. it has already well exceeded it's 2020 ridership goals, with about 26,000 riders/day.

By the way is there any talk of linking Jerryworld into DART, because the could really help alleviate parking issues (I don't really know if DART gets anywhere near Arlington).

Portland's line is a model for nothing as most American cities are nothing like Portland.

What’s the latest news on MLS expansion does anyone expect there to be any confirmed news sooner or later?
Also I was wondering why Major League sports never expand into smaller cities or towns as far as i know only Green Bay has a major league team with a population below 200,00. You would think that if the MLS had an expansion team in for example Fort Wayne or Charleston that they would get a decent following as there isn't any major league competition.

What’s the latest news on MLS expansion does anyone expect there to be any confirmed news sooner or later?
Also I was wondering why Major League sports never expand into smaller cities or towns as far as i know only Green Bay has a major league team with a population below 200,00. You would think that if the MLS had an expansion team in for example Fort Wayne or Charleston that they would get a decent following as there isn't any major league competition.

Maybe eventually there will be expansion into somewhat smaller cities but for now the league is just too young. The NFL can exist in Green Bay because it is one of the original teams from an era when football teams existed in small cities before moving to bigger cities. The fans there have grown up loving the team in a way completely different than anywhere else. The MLS cant take any chances right now, they need to stick with their current plan-it seems to be working.

Based on the varying levels of success seen in minor league soccer in the US, MLS had to seek out major metro areas in order to ensure the volume of fans who'd financially support the clubs and, more importantly, lure the most viable TV contracts. If MLS is trying to become financially strong they need millionaire owners and they are more likely to be found in urban areas. There's also a cultural thing, wherein most smaller towns and rural portions of the US are all the more likely to be culturally tied to baseball, football or basketball. Metropolitan regions at least have the generations of people who played as a child, probably have children playing, and now regularly see soccer as part of the culture.

Columbus was MLS' most bold move in this regard, feeling that city could capture most of Ohio without venturing into the larger cities of Cincinnati and Cleveland where they would have to compete directly with MLB teams. I appreciated this move and adopted the team in part for this reason.

For now MLS still needs teams that bring in new market and positively impact the national contracts. Should MLS succeed with about 20 teams and be perceived as a true national league, then they'll have the power to take on teams that are strong locally but may not lure fans across the country. Better still, then the appeal of minor league soccer will grow and more communities like Rochester will have viable options to MLS.

For ballparks and arenas in cities, you'll see some people using public transportation to get to games, especially in New York, Boston, Chicago, Washington, and Philadelphia (and probably San Francisco). But for football games, generally no. These venues still require large amounts of parking, though, since cars are the primary means of getting to almost every sports venue in the US. However, most football stadiums are on the outskirts of cities, without good public transportation, and tailgating is a central feature of football culture - people would rather drive to a football game even if they could take a train in, just so they could tailgate and hang out with fellow fans.


In Atlanta, most people use MARTA when going to Falcons, Braves, Hawks, and Thrashers games. The Georgia Dome and Phillips Arena have a designated stop downtown that is just beside the venues, and Turner Field has a quick and easy shuttle from the Five Points station that is very well used.

... and Turner Field has a quick and easy shuttle from the Five Points station that is very well used.Uh, I wouldn't go THAT far. Having lived around Atlanta since '74 I can vouch that, while functional and perhaps the best option, the shuttle service isn't exactly ideal, quick, or easy. Unless of course the game's in line for only a half-capacity crowd. Pity MARTA didn't run a line closer to the stadium.

- - - -

Regarding mass transit in the States in general - People must recognize that few US cities had the density of their European counterparts once the technology arrived. The development of the US has been a group march of utility expansion, the evolution of the automobile and the desire for private homes (aka: The American Dream). True, the auto industry bought transit companies and intentionally sank them (a fact many first learned through Roger Rabbit!), but the forms of business and industry combined with the available land almost guaranteed US communities would rapidly grow outward
as opposed to upward. As a result, the majority of modern, large US cities lacked the density for them to invest in transit, apart from buses. Sadly.

Moving into small markets is a recipe for disaster. Just look at Columbus Crew. Heck, KC is a relatively big market but their attendance is horrendous too.

Moving into small markets is a recipe for disaster. Just look at Columbus Crew. Heck, KC is a relatively big market but their attendance is horrendous too.

I hope you are not implying that the Columbus Crew have been a "disaster", or are you saying that it is successful despite it's small(ish) market, and is an exception? Because that is the truth, the opposite of a disaster. The Crew is right about average for MLS attendance at around 15,000 per game (20,555 seat stadium)

Like I said earlier sorry to get off topic, but atleast it's not the regular trolls trashing another thread completely. Besides the two are somewhat related, people are always bitching about how much of a pain it is to get to this game or that stadium.

BTW just confirmed the MLS will officially expand to 18 teams in 2011, the Commish mentioned St Louis, Montreal and Vancouver, so that is a positive, and I believe on topic:)

Any pics from the all-star game in Toronto ??

Like I said earlier sorry to get off topic, but atleast it's not the regular trolls trashing another thread completely. Besides the two are somewhat related, people are always bitching about how much of a pain it is to get to this game or that stadium.

BTW just confirmed the MLS will officially expand to 18 teams in 2011, the Commish mentioned St Louis, Montreal and Vancouver, so that is a positive, and I believe on topic:)

no San Diego :(

The All-Star Game was fun. I didn't have my Camera since with me though

I watched the all-star game yesterday on TV and unlike most exhibition matches this one was really exciting and enjoyable. The stadium looks top notch with the stands being close to the pitch and also a great view of the Toronto skyline also the atmosphere looked pretty decent too. The only thing that was disappointing was that West Ham didn't play their two biggest names in Dyer and Bellamy and played quite a few kids which was a shame but that didn't take away from what was a good game and certainly a good spectacle for the MLS.

There was a point when we were chanting "We want Brennan!" pretty loud. Did you hear on TV?

Yeah I did hear that made me laugh the English commentary thought you was chanting for Donovan :nuts: I remember him from his England days I knew you lot loved Danny Dichio but didn't realise Brennan was a big player. The atmosphere seemed very well natured and some of the chants did make me laugh, for example at every chance chanting at West Ham players “who are yu”. I love the fact that you can drink on the stands at TFC for some stupid reason you can't in England and also the tables at the front of the stand at the side we're interesting I haven't seen anything like that before. It’s a shame that the MLS if fixated with English opposition you probably could have got a better team from Europe or South America a Lyon, Ajax, Boca etc. I trust you had no trouble with the West Ham fans I thought that there would be more of them but there didn't seem to be any of them.

That was nothing compared to the game against Montreal though. Since that game meant a lot and the ASG meant almost nothing.

I love the fact that you can drink on the stands at TFC for some stupid reason you can't in England

Wait wait wait......what? You can't have a beer while watching the game over there? Are you kidding me?

Yeah I did hear that made me laugh the English commentary thought you was chanting for Donovan :nuts: I remember him from his England days I knew you lot loved Danny Dichio but didn't realise Brennan was a big player. The atmosphere seemed very well natured and some of the chants did make me laugh, for example at every chance chanting at West Ham players “who are yu”. I love the fact that you can drink on the stands at TFC for some stupid reason you can't in England and also the tables at the front of the stand at the side we're interesting I haven't seen anything like that before. It’s a shame that the MLS if fixated with English opposition you probably could have got a better team from Europe or South America a Lyon, Ajax, Boca etc. I trust you had no trouble with the West Ham fans I thought that there would be more of them but there didn't seem to be any of them.

I was at the game. There was a decent size group of West Ham supporters closer to the North End. Also, for some reason a lot of TFC fans thought that it would be a good idea to cheer for West Ham because the MLS All-Star team is filled with our "enemy" and "wankers". You can tell that they haven't heard of model characters such as Bellamy and Dyer....

I was having none of that and cheered the entire 90 for the All-Stars. The atmosphere would have been infinitely better if more people did the same thing as me instead of being indecisive pricks. Seriously, half the people around me started cheering for the MLS All-Stars when they got the 3-2 lead, although I must point out that having a local boy in Dwayne DeRosario score the goal might have swayed their opinion. Either way, it was a great game and I thoroughly enjoyed it. Even if West Ham was in their mid-season form, I have no doubt in my mind that if the All-Stars were a proper club, they would still be better than the Hammers, albeit having a much lower combined salary (excluding Becks that is). The MLS really is quite talented....even more so that I had imagined myself.

Wait wait wait......what? You can't have a beer while watching the game over there? Are you kidding me?

No. The ones that do serve it force you to finish your beer within the concourse rather that bringing it to the stands.

Wait wait wait......what? You can't have a beer while watching the game over there? Are you kidding me?

Nope don't ask me why just one of many stupid rules that this nation forces when it comes to football (soccer), another one which peeves me off is that you can't stand during games and if you are an away supporter and you try and protest this you will probably get kicked out of the stadium, it seemed like you could do that happily at the BMO stadium.

I was at the game. There was a decent size group of West Ham supporters closer to the North End. Also, for some reason a lot of TFC fans thought that it would be a good idea to cheer for West Ham because the MLS All-Star team is filled with our "enemy" and "wankers". You can tell that they haven't heard of model characters such as Bellamy and Dyer....

I was having none of that and cheered the entire 90 for the All-Stars. The atmosphere would have been infinitely better if more people did the same thing as me instead of being indecisive pricks. Seriously, half the people around me started cheering for the MLS All-Stars when they got the 3-2 lead, although I must point out that having a local boy in Dwayne DeRosario score the goal might have swayed their opinion. Either way, it was a great game and I thoroughly enjoyed it.

I noticed that after MLS went 3-2 up all the sudden the volume seemed to go up and all the sudden people seemed to be getting into the game more i just presumed the fans wanted to see West Ham get smashed. Also from what i heard most of West Ham fans weren't even from England and are actually from the US i don't suppose if you noticed if this was true or not?

Even if West Ham was in their mid-season form, I have no doubt in my mind that if the All-Stars were a proper club, they would still be better than the Hammers, albeit having a much lower combined salary (excluding Becks that is). The MLS really is quite talented....even more so that I had imagined myself.

I'm afraid I’m not so sure about that. Don't get me wrong I think the MLS is hugely underrated by people around the world. But you have to remember that West Ham’s fitness levels were at around 70% and also they were missing some of their best players who weren’t being risked on a surface that is considered detrimental to players who are recovering from injury. And I would have to say that a full strength and fully fit West Ham side would probably beat an MLS all star team but give it 2/3 years I’m sure that won’t be the case. From what I saw there was clearly some talented individuals but as a whole I reckon even with more practice I would probably say that the team would have to scrap against relegation in the Premier League.

Out of all the MLS teams TFC clearly has the strongest fan base. Can you tell me seeing as every game is a sell-out do you reckon there will be any stadium expansion in the next few years because to me it seems that there is definitely room and even a need for expansion?

The National Sports Center's main stadium is one that hasn't been mentioned. A USL-1 stadium that is home the the Minnesota Thunder located in Blaine Minnesota. It just received a renovation that involved tearing out the track and moving the field 80 ft closer to the main stand, placing bleachers around the other three sides and adding in a beer garden in one end. It seats 12,000, and I believe has a small standing terrace in one section of the main stand, and apperently schematics have been looked at for explansion to 20,000 (the owner would like to move up to the MLS eventually, though thats a ways off). The Complex has 52 regulation pitches as well as an eight rink ice hockey center (4 NHL, 4 Olympic size) a velodrome and 4 baseball diamonds. As far as I know it's the soccer (football) complex on the planet. The site also hosts the Schwans USA Cup, a large youth competition that draws almost 1,000 teams from all over the world annually.

Here is pre renovation shot (the best i could find, no photos around, and I haven't made it up there yet this summer)
http://www.nscsports.org/images/gallery_images/stadium/images/Stadium%20Aerial%201.jpg

Here is a pretty good photoshop of the current site plan
http://www.blueskysoccer.com/mediashare/5v/dd64s2s7dm5r8j6rn3o5orvtyzgvxh-org.jpg

Real Salt Lake Stadium will open in October.
http://www.rslstadium.com/images/RSL_stadium_2008.jpg

Pics of RSL stadium construction here, it looks great...
http://www.rslstadium.com/construction.html

Out of all the MLS teams TFC clearly has the strongest fan base. Can you tell me seeing as every game is a sell-out do you reckon there will be any stadium expansion in the next few years because to me it seems that there is definitely room and even a need for expansion?

There certainly is space to expand a fair bit, I'm kind of suprised about the horseshoe layout, and that even with ticket demand they haven't bothered to put a stand in that end. I don't know if it gets a lot of concert use, but Toronto already has fair number of large concert venues, so it would seem to make sense to at least add seats into the scoreboard end. They also sold out all 30 suites during their first season, so it would seem to make some sense to continue them around one end and get that total up around 45, and seating up towards 25,000. Eventually they could add a 2nd tier behind the end/s stands as well. get over 30,000.

There is definitely lots of room for expansion. Currently, there is a beer garden (patio) type of setting in the North End. If need be, that can easily be demolished and replaced with a proper stand (similar to the South End stand). As for the South end itself, there is more than enough room to add a 2nd tier. In addition, the gaps between the stands can be filled as well. All of this can probably increase the capacity upto 28,000 - 30,000.

And yes, there certainly is a strong need for expansion. The queue for season tickets was around 7,000 at last check. However, I think that all the parties have done well not to make any premature decisions in terms of expansion thus far. If the tickets are readily available on the market, the demand may dramatically decrease and that might have unexpected results in terms of popularity of the team. Its probably better for them to keep the tix scarce.

Maybe, but I think TFC would have no trouble drawing 25,000 per, it's really not that many, and even if they added 5,000 season tickets to the pool you would still have a waiting list of 2,000 for the short term, which is not bad considering. Even an extra 3,000-4,000 seats and another 15 suites would really help them boost revenue. Filling 30,000 for every match would be a stretch for any MLS side at the moment, and probably for a few years though.

^^ waiting list is like 9 000.

From the ASG.

http://64.13.252.151/forums/showthread.php?t=3796

well then I'd say an extra 5,000 seats are in order.

Real Salt Lake Stadium will open in October.
http://www.rslstadium.com/images/RSL_stadium_2008.jpg

Very nice stadium, seems like adding a second tire on south/north stand won't be too much of a problem if there will be need for it in the future.

I hope that roof is more functional than it looks.

this is art-deco style as in the old highbury in london. but a soccerstadium needs a roof over the entire tribune, because of better acoustics and protection against the weather

this is art-deco style as in the old highbury in london. but a soccerstadium needs a roof over the entire tribune, because of better acoustics and protection against the weather

To be a "proper" football stadium, as in the sort prevalent throughout Europe you're right. However outdoor's american sports have a tradition of not being closed in.

The weather is a relevant point, and football grounds in Europe (especially in northern Europe and Britain) are in climates where it's prone to rain a bit, making a roof an essential part of the ground. I can't imagine Salt Lake city having the same problem!

During the warmer months, Salt Lake is a DRY, DRY place. Rain definitely is not going to be a problem.

During the warmer months, Salt Lake is a DRY, DRY place. Rain definitely is not going to be a problem.

But actually, does it provide some shades? If so, its a propper football stadium indead.

But actually, does it provide some shades? If so, its a propper football stadium indead.

Wear a hat.

a roof doesnt make a proper football stadium, it makes a proper non american stadium. Theres a difference.

^^ Umm no, it just makes a stadium

acoustics.

Well I'm trying to become a soccer fan, and I'd love to go out and see a Red Bulls game, but it really is hell to get out there. I think the other problem is that being that NYC is a huge baseball city (I'm a Met fan myself) a lot of the attention is taken away from them. It doesn't help that not all their games are televised and when they are MSG's cameras/camerawork are just downright awful. And in terms of marketing, they're so-so.

well thats a dumb statement. What do all those stadiums have in common? Retractable roof. Do we put roofs on open air stadiums? No.

Please dont argue for the sake of arguing.

I thoguht it's impossible for all of them to have a rectractable roof in common if NOT ALL of them have retractable roofs... They all have regular roof over stands though. So... :cheers:

I dont like those types of people. Your American, support an American team! People think they are too cool for school, when they support some European or South American team. And in regards to South America, a team that they would never dare step foot in their stadium.
If they are American, then yes, I totally agree. Same for Poles in love with some Real Madrids and so on... But- if they're immigrants, I still cannot see a reason for making them love MLS, we already had this converstation some time ago.
Or even if they were born in the US, in some cases. Like people whose families originate in Ireland- I wouldn't be surprised if they saw no option, but to support Celtic instead of MLS teams, it's far more than football here.

They did when they built Texas Stadium, but obviously that was for architectural purposes. However the hole is very small. I dont think its a normal stadium with a roof its more of a domed stadium with a hole. Whatever it is it makes me wanna barf.

I'm sure it just happens to be a coincidence that you're a Redskins fan and your opinion is based purely on the architecture of Texas Stadium.

Soccer in America is NOT the NFL. Why compare NFL fans who travel for 8 games when soccer teams play a minimum of 18 home games, sometimes more. Soccer has long roots in this country, but for many reasons our leagues never lasted. That's what kept this country out of the soccer loop for many years. In the 1920's when waves of immigrants came to this country and we had an established soccer league that was strong and sound, the sporting world would be a different place. That didn't happen, and now we are playing catchup with 80 years of sporting alleigance.

yeah. I realize its a bitch to get to Giants Stadium and all, but you would think that the market would be big enough for people to do whatever they can to get to games. What are ticket prices like anyway?

New York should really start building some stadiums within the city limits. It was a shame that Jets Manhattan stadium never got off the ground.

I do find sporting history in this country to be intersting. Like how cricket was in line to be our national pasttime, as late as the beginining of the 20th century. If this country did get behind soccer like other nations a hundred years ago, I think we would have multiple World Cup championships.

I thoguht it's impossible for all of them to have a rectractable roof in common if NOT ALL of them have retractable roofs... They all have regular roof over stands though. So... :cheers:


If they are American, then yes, I totally agree. Same for Poles in love with some Real Madrids and so on... But- if they're immigrants, I still cannot see a reason for making them love MLS, we already had this converstation some time ago.
Or even if they were born in the US, in some cases. Like people whose families originate in Ireland- I wouldn't be surprised if they saw no option, but to support Celtic instead of MLS teams, it's far more than football here.

Yeah and I still stand by my original points. These Mexicans should be going to Red Bull games! :cheers:

heck, it's called Red Bull! I know I would never support a product-club...


oh yeah, I forgot it's not Americans building Lucas Oil, Cowboys Stadium, Reliant, Cardinals, Red Bull Park, etc... doesn't it seem a bit improper kind of architecture to you? I mean it's the US, were there no demonstrations against it?! ;)

I thoguht it's impossible for all of them to have a rectractable roof in common if NOT ALL of them have retractable roofs... They all have regular roof over stands though. So... :cheers:


i highlighted it for you, they are retractable roof stadiums. I guess it pains you that we dont like roofs, sorry but everything doesnt have to be the way you like it. We dont like roofs, get over it.

I'm sure it just happens to be a coincidence that you're a Redskins fan and your opinion is based purely on the architecture of Texas Stadium.

i really think Texas Stadium is the ugliest thing ive ever seen. i mean, honestly. :puke:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/153/344707289_b9d834c350_o.jpg

i highlighted it for you, they are retractable roof stadiums. I guess it pains you that we dont like roofs, sorry but everything doesnt have to be the way you like it. We dont like roofs, get over it.
It's pretty sad you are unable to read sentences longer than 14 words, I didn't put Red Bull Park there for no reason. After having seen a proposal for St. Louis or Washington I think permanent roofs aren't just a one-time event for MLS (as if we haven't seen the Home depot Centre or other designs having any roof, which you seem to want to erase from your memory), more a long term persepective...
But you don't like them, it's as if they didn't exist :P

It's pretty sad you are unable to read sentences longer than 14 words, I didn't put Red Bull Park there for no reason. After having seen a proposal for St. Louis or Washington I think permanent roofs aren't just a one-time event for MLS (as if we haven't seen the Home depot Centre or other designs having any roof, which you seem to want to erase from your memory), more a long term persepective...
But you don't like them, it's as if they didn't exist :P


Oh yay! You found some stadiums that have roofs. I guess your all excited thinking that we are actually going to start putting them on all of our stadiums now! Ok, so MLS stadiums use them to conform with the rest of the world. Whoop de doo. Its not that i dont like roofs, we just dont need them.

i really think Texas Stadium is the ugliest thing ive ever seen. i mean, honestly. :puke:
......but what they're getting is phenomenal!!!!:okay:

Yeah, even though it kind of draws on Texas Stadium abstractly it is pretty. Whereas I would say Texas Stadium is the ugliest stadium in the history of the NFL, if not all of American Football.

Yeah, even though it kind of draws on Texas Stadium abstractly it is pretty. Whereas I would say Texas Stadium is the ugliest stadium in the history of the NFL, if not all of American Football.

It's probably the ugliest stadium in the NFL. But there are far more uglier stadiums than Texas Stadium in the US.

Its not the best looking stadium, but its one we have come to love. Its different and does what its supposed to do, house champions.

yeah. I realize its a bitch to get to Giants Stadium and all, but you would think that the market would be big enough for people to do whatever they can to get to games. What are ticket prices like anyway?

New York should really start building some stadiums within the city limits. It was a shame that Jets Manhattan stadium never got off the ground.

I do find sporting history in this country to be intersting. Like how cricket was in line to be our national pasttime, as late as the beginining of the 20th century. If this country did get behind soccer like other nations a hundred years ago, I think we would have multiple World Cup championships.

The teams has sucked from Day 1. If this Metrostars teams was a good as DC United has been from Day 1, things would be different. But alas, we stink. Oh well. There has been talk of the Mets building a MLS stadium in the parking lot of the new Shea stadium and starting a NYC expansion team. But so far it's just talk.

As far as supporting a European team instead of a MLS team, why should I support a second rate product.
Arsenhole isn't first-rate. They didn't win the Premiership last year. Looks like you should find a new bandwagon.

Ill use FedEx Field as an example of how its not necessarily true. Last year the home game against the Cowboys was the highest attended Redskins game in the history of FedEx Field with 90,910 people there. FedEx field seats 91,704 people and has been sold out every year it has been open. Since it was sold out, shouldnt the attendance have been 91,704?


You are forgetting the orphan seats. In all of the major leagues there are orphan seats. One seat here, and another one there, that are not filled, even in the season ticket area. Most clubs count them as sold, even when they aren't.

Nobody wants to sit alone, with their spouse or friend or siblings in another section. A family or group of fans wish to sit together.

i really think Texas Stadium is the ugliest thing ive ever seen. i mean, honestly. :puke:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/153/344707289_b9d834c350_o.jpg

Texas Stadium used to be less complex, the blue and white ring above the bowl was another row of suites added, with elevators and separate stairs serving them, as there were no access provided to begin with. Jerry Jones added that extra ring up top, not Clint Murchison or Bum Bright. After Jerry added the extra ring of suites, whatever breeze which vented the stadium disappeared. When the stadium was built in the late 1960s, concrete bowls and cookie cutters were the norm. There was a time when Bum Bright wanted to add an outside wall of brick or stucco covering up the concrete bowl.

Is there any mass transit via rail to Chester from Philly ?

Arsenhole isn't first-rate. They didn't win the Premiership last year. Looks like you should find a new bandwagon.So it's championships or bust for what constitutes a first rate club, then, eh? And you're accusing him of being a bandwagon fan!?! At least the lad went to school in Arsenal's backyard, providing more connection then 3/4 the fans of ManU or Chelski.

However...
As far as supporting a European team instead of a MLS team, why should I support a second rate product. Don't go that route or you're risking the glory-chasing status krudmonk is insinuating. While MLS lacks overall quality it demands some respect as THE local league. Particularly given its youth and obstacles in luring casual sports fans, any fan of soccer in the US should at least give it respect and attention. I'm a Gooner first, MLS fan second, because of established loyalties. But I still greatly support the league want it to do better and proudly promote/defend the MLS as deserving of its shot. The Premiership had to earn its way in the world once, too.

As far as supporting a European team instead of a MLS team, why should I support a second rate product.

Sorry America Actually develops there teams from rookies up where as your Chelsi, ManU, Millan and Real Madrid teams try to buy the best players like The Yankees.

Better to earn a championship then Buy one.

Is there any mass transit via rail to Chester from Philly ?I know there is an Amtrak route that runs from Philly to Newark, but I doubt that offers the scheduling convenience or cost efficiency of a traditional SEPTA line. I thought there were some long-term plans to establish this connection, either via rail or trolley, but have not been able to find that on the net. Ask the Sons of Ben supporters group or the Philly page at BigSoccer.

A trolley would be great for the stdaium!

So it's championships or bust for what constitutes a first rate club, then, eh? And you're accusing him of being a bandwagon fan!?! At least the lad went to school in Arsenal's backyard, providing more connection then 3/4 the fans of ManU or Chelski.
I root for an MLS side and was merely taking his sorry logic to the inevitable extreme.

The problem I have with British football is the few teams that win over long stretches of time. With 30 teams, over 30 years there should be 15 different winners, not 5. With 30 teams, over 60 years every team should have won the league once, not 10. In America. its hard for a team to repeat. While its done, its difficult to do so. You need an amateur draft, spreading the young talent around the league, giving every team the ability to wisely develop their teams. The second tier league should act as a minor league to a major league franchise. While they may never see a major league team, these fans can see the young talent develop to major leaguers. A salary cap will prevent a few teams buying up the free agents. Free agents are players who have played out their contracts. They can either resign with the major league team or attempt to market themselves freely. Teams should swap players without cash incentives. Spending money to other teams to buy players from your team, whether major or minor league, is a waste of money. You might even be able to afford new stadiums with the nicer amenities if you didn't waste your money on buying players. It should be more like lend-lease, not cash on the barrelhead.

While the British Premiere League has a lot of great old stadiums, the vast majority don't even hold 40k fans. Considering the history, you would think they would all be playing in stadiums as large as 50k. But since there are only 4-6 teams with a chance, by the way the same 4-6 teams have a chance of winning the trophy, I now understand why so many of your old stadiums are small. The clubs don't draw well because their teams don't do well. And since they don't draw well, why build new stadiums?

Of course the few teams that win the trophies do draw well, and have outgrown their small stadiums. Unfortunately, since money is so important to acquire your players, you don't build new stadiums to pay the players. The players are more important. Seems to me that you don't quite get it how it works in Europe... most of the people support local team, it doesn't matter in which league they are, for example Chelsea, one of the richest team in Europe, team full of stars is just average (at best) London team in terms of fan base. (Many lower league clubs have FAR bigger fan base and support) You are looking it too much trough North American franchised system where whole country supports "established, fix" teams, theres no relegation, promotion... its different sports world and system and its not comparable.

Seems to me that you don't quite get it how it works in Europe... most of the people support local team, it doesn't matter in which league they are, for example Chelsea, one of the richest team in Europe, team full of stars is just average (at best) London team in terms of fan base. (Many lower league clubs have FAR bigger fan base and support) You are looking it too much trough North American franchised system where whole country supports "established, fix" teams, theres no relegation, promotion... its different sports world and system and its not comparable.

A "franchise" in American sports is different than a "franchise" as a business. Its just another name for a sports team here.

Seems to me that you don't quite get it how it works in Europe... most of the people support local team, it doesn't matter in which league they are, for example Chelsea, one of the richest team in Europe, team full of stars is just average (at best) London team in terms of fan base. (Many lower league clubs have FAR bigger fan base and support) You are looking it too much trough North American franchised system where whole country supports "established, fix" teams, theres no relegation, promotion... its different sports world and system and its not comparable.

no, you have no idea what you are talking about, it is the exact same in the USA. We are fans of the teams near us because we see them all the time, but there are those few that were raised in California, but cheer for the Celtics, or live in Chicago and root for the 49er's, its one of those things that does not make since but it happens. Same happens in Europe, dont act like it doesn't, There have to be Chelsea fans out side of London, There has to be ManU fans outside of Manchester and etc etc etc..... To think there is a huge difference about how fans choose teams in America and Europe is pure blind sidedness on your side my Euro using friend.

I think dudu's point is that many of those smaller clubs throughout England are in more direct competition with the big names we're all familiar with. Because of the promotion and relegation system it makes it that much more difficult to adopt other teams the way we might here in the States. Doncaster may be divisions below Chelsea but they're part of the same overall association. So while it's true the bigger clubs retain fans who've been transplanted across the country, it's not as natural for fans in England to automatically align themselves with a Premiership side when they have a local club to support with hopes of making it big as well.

i really think Texas Stadium is the ugliest thing ive ever seen. i mean, honestly. :puke:



What's this got to do with soccer? Soccer has never been played (nor will it ever be) in that place, with its pukey artificial turf.

Is it safe to say that many in Europe support their local club, but adopt a big 4 or 5 club as well?

The problem I have with British football is the few teams that win over long stretches of time. With 30 teams, over 30 years there should be 15 different winners, not 5. With 30 teams, over 60 years every team should have won the league once, not 10. In America its hard for a team to repeat. While its done, its difficult to do so.

From reading a number of your posts you seem to have a misunderstanding about the ENGLISH premier league you seem to have some kind of misunderstanding as to its standing within football/soccer and its history.

Firstly you have remember that the English Premier League is one of a few select major leagues in Europe in no particular order the Italian, Spanish and even the German leagues as well as the English are traditionally the strongest based upon performances in Europe, there are also strong leagues with strong teams in Holland, Portugal, France, Russia, Turkey, Greece, Ukraine and Scotland.
In England over the last 30 years there has been 9 different clubs that have won the championship and on 9 occasions did those teams manage to retain the title. Admittedly the last decade has been poor in terms of competition and new champions but it is merely a faze that the league is currently going through. Another example is in Italy where also over the last 30 years there has been 8 different champions with 7 of those teams managing to retain their title. This pattern is common among the other major leagues that I mentioned. My point is that although competition may not be as level and competitive as in North American it is still fierce and it is still a major achievement for a team to retain their championship. You also have to remember that within the league that there is more up for stake than in an NFL or NBA season where it is champions or not champions, within the Premier League and every other league in Europe there are teams fighting for safety from relegation (3 teams EPL), a place in the UEFA Cup (anything from 1-3 teams) and a place in the Champions League (4 teams). You also have other competitions that clubs compete in which are highly prestigious, the FA Cup final is the English equivalent to the Super Bowl although not as prestigious as winning the League title it is still a major title. And as I have already mentioned there are the two European competitions that can be won the Champions League which is the biggest honour a team can win. And there is also the UEFA Cup and there also used to be the Cup Winners Cup which got cut sadly. My point about these is that there are other honours to be won other than the league title and in a way winning these cups can help build a side and build a winning tradition within a cup, what some people forget is that in the 90s Chelsea without Abramovich and his money went from a mid-table team to being a major competitor in the Premier League and that during a period of 5 years won 2 FA Cups, 1 League Cup and the European Cup Winners Cup and Qualified for the champions league on two occasions due to this success the club was able to use the increased funds made by their success and improve the stadium and attract new and greater talent and I am sure that without this success Abramovich would not have come in and made them the major force that they are now. I hope you understand this and questions you have about the above I would be happy to answer.

You need an amateur draft, spreading the young talent around the league, giving every team the ability to wisely develop their teams. The second tier league should act as a minor league to a major league franchise. While they may never see a major league team, these fans can see the young talent develop to major leaguers. A salary cap will prevent a few teams buying up the free agents. Free agents are players who have played out their contracts. They can either resign with the major league team or attempt to market themselves freely. Teams should swap players without cash incentives. Spending money to other teams to buy players from your team, whether major or minor league, is a waste of money. You might even be able to afford new stadiums with the nicer amenities if you didn't waste your money on buying players. It should be more like lend-lease, not cash on the barrelhead.

In terms of young talent teams have a bit of protection in England in that teams can only sign youngsters within 1 hour drive of that clubs training facility this means that teams have the ability if they find the talent to hold onto them and develop them. It's very much a reward system which can be extremely rewarding for clubs. Some clubs success has been based around their youth programme but it also has its ugly side because once again teams can sell and on occasion are basically forced to do so.
Some teams do player swaps but it isn't very common as plain and simply teams don't want to lose their best players even for 2/3 average players that might provide the team with more strength in depth. One thing though transfer money can be used for good on occasions with teams investing it in their youth system or off pitch activities teams such as Crewe and Sheffield United have had their success helped greatly by transfer money. The reason that player swapping isn't common is mainly down to the fact that unlike American sports there are less players involved and the league season is also relatively long, due to the nature of it although the team nature is still very important even a slight improvement or loss of talent can have a major impact on a teams performance an example of this that I can give is sadly my team Reading, last season we lost one of our best players and we were unable to find an adequate replacement and although there were many other reasons for our failure this contributed to our fall from 8th place to 18th and relegation. My point is that individuals are more important than in some North American sports.
How would Man U have done without C Ronaldo? Would Porto have won the Champions League without Deco? Will Zenit continue their recent success without Arshavin? I hope this once again is of help to you once again I would be pleased to answer any questions you have.

Is it safe to say that many in Europe support their local club, but adopt a big 4 or 5 club as well?

I have written about this before in the Fan Emotions maybe this will help you understand

I think what you two are seeing is a clash of sporting culture. Obviously seeing as I’m not from the US I can’t really talk about fan culture accurately there but I certainly can try and explain it for Europe. What i notice about sport in the US is that generally the clubs are of all very similar size and that the main tradition within the club is the city that they currently reside, also the leagues are very competitive with a new champion regularly so there is generally no stand-alone franchise.
Whilst in Europe you have certain leagues that are clearly bigger then others and that there are certain clubs that dominate these leagues. Its hard to describe but the best way of putting it is that generally most nations will have 3/4 dominating clubs which are clearly superior both in tradition, history and quality of team compared to the rest of the clubs in that nation examples of this include in Greece where the most popular clubs are Olympiakos, Panathanaikos and AEK and also in turkey where the big two are Galatasaray and Fenerbache and another example is in Portugal where the big clubs are Benfica, Porto and Sporting. But then you get people around Europe who support the European superclubs such as Real Madrid, Manchester United, Barcelona, AC Milan, Chelsea :nuts: and so on and this is despite the fact they may never actually get to watch their team in the flesh. Obviously you get people who support their local team but quite often if their team is poor and don’t compete in the top league they quite often have a second team being generally a bigger club.

The best way of categorising it is that in the nations with the strongest leagues England, Germany, Spain, Italy, France, Holland are that if a city has a team that competes and/or regularly competes in the top league then that team will be the most popular in that city, but there will still be some who support other clubs and in other cities where the local club isn’t strong they wont be well supported. Then you get second tier nations such as Turkey, Greece, and Portugal where the leagues are less competitive than the bigger nations but as I have mentioned there are some stand-alone clubs where generally the people of that nation will support one of those bigger clubs. And then you get nations where the league offered is of poor standard and generally people will support one of the European super clubs and the team in their city.

.

Is it safe to say that many in Europe support their local club, but adopt a big 4 or 5 club as well? No, quite oposite, big clubs and big clubs fans are usually hated more than anyone. Usually ppl claim to "support" foreign club if team they support isn't that big or is in some really lower division. Tho thats more the case in smaller football nations, in top5 leagues amount of gloryhunters as we call em here isn't that big.

What's this got to do with soccer? Soccer has never been played (nor will it ever be) in that place, with its pukey artificial turf.

Actually, it has. It was briefly an NASL venue.

I root for an MLS side and was merely taking his sorry logic to the inevitable extreme.

So I should support an MLS team even though I feel I have no connection to any of them as opposed to supporting an English team that I do have a connection too. I might be moving to the Seattle area soon so I may choose to support the new Seattle team, but unless that happens I see no reason to support an MLS team.

So I should support an MLS team even though I feel I have no connection to any of them as opposed to supporting an English team that I do have a connection too. I might be moving to the Seattle area soon so I may choose to support the new Seattle team, but unless that happens I see no reason to support an MLS team.

Seattle is going to be a very well run team. But the lack of a long term stadium plan bothers me.

Seattle is going to be a very well run team. But the lack of a long term stadium plan bothers me.

Why does it bother you?

Doesn't the owner also own Qwest field?

Why does it bother you?

Doesn't the owner also own Qwest field?

Yes, the same thing in Foxboro. But you ask anyone who goes to soccer games at Foxboro, they all say the same thing. The place is WAY to big for MLS and it kills the atmosphere. Every Revs fans wants a SSS built in Boston, or at least near an active rail line.

Granted the NFL stadium in Seattle is in a good location from what I hear, but the fact remains that MLS games are not going to generate any self sustaning atmosphere at these NFL stadiums.

In other words, its better to have a full house with 20k capacity than a half full house at 40k capacity. More fans will buy season tickets if the house sells out. The Red Sox with the smallest stadium in baseball usually sells the most season tickets. Much like the effect of season ticket holders for basketball and hockey teams.

Te Rex Sox would sell out anything, the stadium size doesnt matter. Oakland is a better example IMO

Could the Red Sox fill 56, 000 seats every night? Who knows....... The lure of Boston baseball was always the intimacy and atmosphere.

Could the Red Sox fill 56, 000 seats every night? Who knows....... The lure of Boston baseball was always the intimacy and atmosphere.:lol:

yes and yes.:cheers:

Could the Red Sox fill 56, 000 seats every night? Who knows....... The lure of Boston baseball was always the intimacy and atmosphere.

seriously?

Well Red Bull Arena is coming along well.
Pics from Red Bulls Reader
First steel girder (Yesterday)
http://redbullsreader.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/img_1026.jpg?w=300
http://redbullsreader.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/img_1007.jpg?w=300
Today
http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj31/NYOS87/west-bldg-north-end-8-20-08.jpg

no digging?

Guess not.

Red Bull Park park is going to be the envy of MLS when it's done. Lucky devils! Of course when Vancouver gets the anticipated MLS franchise:wink2: and builds the planned Waterfront Stadium, it might just be better....j/k.

Tampa just announced the plans (but no renderings) for our SSS of the USL-1 Rowdies:

http://blogs.tampabay.com/breakingne...s-stadium.html

Rowdies pick Tampa stadium site

TAMPA -- A group of investors has chosen a site in Town 'N Country for the new Tampa Bay Rowdies soccer stadium, a team official said Wednesday night.

The stadium will be on 18 acres near the Veterans Expressway at Waters Avenue, according to Perry Van Der Beck, a former Rowdies player who is now a marketing official for the team. It will seat 5,500 to start but also have the capacity to be expanded to 15,000 seats. The privately funded stadium would likely be named after a corporate sponsor that has not yet emerged, Van Der Beck told a group at a Brandon Area Youth Soccer League meeting.

The investor group includes Bern's Steak House president David Laxer and other local and out-of-town businessmen.

"They're young, they're aggressive and they're smart," Van Der Beck said of the owners.

The team, which first played in Tampa from 1975 to 1993, will retain the Tampa Bay Rowdies name and sell retro merchandise in its gift shop. The stadium design features seats on a lower level, a mid-level concession area and luxury boxes above. It is unknown whether the group has the funds in hand to build the stadium, which the investors would like to finish in time for a scheduled April 2010 opening.

-- Andrew Meacham, Times Staff Writer

I'm guessing Tampa doesn't have immediate plans to try to get into MLS. Miami seems to be the one that has it's eyes on it. It's great that Tampa is doing this with private money though!

We did have an MLS team, the Mutiny but they are gone (bad stadium rental among other problems). Currently MLS has a vendetta against Florida, or so it would seem. Of course there are good reasons to to expand back into our state. But it will be great to have a team here again, especially with their own stadium.

Steve

Ya it was strange how Florida were erased from MLS. What I was wondering about your new stadium, if they had planned to try to get into MLS again soon, they would need to build the 15k to 20k seats now. So I don't think they plan on getting in at all in the near future. Post 2015-18 perhaps.

There are advantages to being in the USL if you play your cards right (all of your cards).

I'm glad this Tampa stadium plan is going through.

Metro stadium finaly has beams in the ground after 8 years of talk.

Red Bull Park park is going to be the envy of MLS when it's done. Lucky devils! Of course when Vancouver gets the anticipated MLS franchise:wink2: and builds the planned Waterfront Stadium, it might just be better....j/k.

Yeah, well I'll take a shack and a championship dynasty (Dynamo/DC) than the best soccer stadium in Jersey. No offense. But it might almost makeup for all the crap they've had to take the last 12 years. Almost.


Anyhoo, most MLS SSS are bleh at best. HDC is good.

Toyota Park isn't bad, but it just lacks something. But honestly I don't care, I go there for the team not the stadium.
I mean otherwise, I would go to Sox games instead of Cubs games.

Giants Stadium is not in NYC, its in a swamp in New Jersey, and to my knowledge the only way to get there is by car.

As far as supporting a European team instead of a MLS team, why should I support a second rate product. Besides who would want to support a team called the Red Bulls that has no actual ties to NYC, its a New Jersey team that has never played in New York. The Giants and Jets at least started out in New York.

Also in many cases people who support South and Central American teams are supporting the teams from their homelands, the teams they have been supporting their whole lives. I support Arsenal because I went to school for a short time in Islington. there is more to it that just snobbery.

lol, this totally reminds me of this.

http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.com/2008/03/03/80-the-idea-of-soccer/?cp=67
Most white people choose a favorite soccer team based on either a study abroad experience or a particularly long vacation to Europe or South America. When they return, they like to tell their friends about how great “football” is and that they are committed to ‘getting more into’ now that they have returned home.

It's funny cause it's true

As an American I have traveled abroad too. Yes, many nations love what we call soccer. But I have also traveled to New Zealand where rugby is king. I have also traveled to Melbourne where Aussie Rules Football is king. I have traveled to Japan where baseball is king. I have traveled to India where field hockey is king. Half the world's population lives in China and India, soccer isn't king everywhere. Without a doubt, hockey is king in Canada. Have you traveled to these locations?

Oh, by the way, the sissie sport of soccer, notice our American women won gold at the Bejing Olympics. Where were the British women? Culture indeed.

Most white people choose a favourite soccer team based on either a study abroad experience or a particularly long vacation to Europe or South America. When they return, they like to tell their friends about how great “football” is and that they are committed to ‘getting more into’ now that they have returned home.

That sounds like the experience that Randy Lerner had when he went to University in England and started to support Aston Villa.
I think that some of the people who support European or South American clubs in the US might actually be genuine supporters of that club and actually have a real passion for that club if that is the case then they should not be criticised. But I’m also sure that there are many fear whether fans as there are all around the world in any sport. I think it isn't unreasonable for a person to support a team that they choose as long it is genuine it should be accepted.

I think that sometimes foreign and especially American owners are generalised and criticised a little too much, which is harsh and unfair. It has to be pointed out that Randy Lerner is actually one of the best chairmen in the Premier League he has steadied a massive club in Aston Villa that was sinking rapidly. He has got them performing well once again without lumping debt onto the club and he has made the club much better run and has got in touch with the local community and fans that had started to fall out of love with the club.

As an American I have traveled abroad too. Yes, many nations love what we call soccer. But I have also traveled to New Zealand where rugby is king. I have also traveled to Melbourne where Aussie Rules Football is king. I have traveled to Japan where baseball is king. I have traveled to India where field hockey is king. Half the world's population lives in China and India, soccer isn't king everywhere. Without a doubt, hockey is king in Canada. Have you traveled to these locations?

Oh, by the way, the sissie sport of soccer, notice our American women won gold at the Bejing Olympics. Where were the British women? Culture indeed.

Sea Toby some of your comments infuriate me I know you are putting across your point of view and sometimes you are just trying to gain a greater understanding of that subject which is great and is perfectly fine but i wish you would do some research and think about what you are writing because some times you come out with a comment and points which are entirely incorrect and/or just sound a little condescending.

Firstly in your post I have quoted you say in India field hockey is king that is wrong it is Cricket and by a long way too. In Australia it is a very much multi-sport nation like the US where many sports are equal (Rugby Union, Rugby League, Cricket, Soccer) but if you meant Aussie Rules is the national sport then yes you are right. In Japan many other sports are extremely popular and are gaining more popularity all the time but you are right Baseball is still king and in New Zealand yes Rugby is by a long way the most popular sport.
Women’s soccer on a world scale in all honesty is not big at all it gains little or no air time on TV and it is not professional unlike the WNBA or the domestic US soccer scene so therefore the US winning it is not a big deal in all honesty.
And the reason that there is no British team because I don't know I you knew this but there is no British Soccer Team there is the English, Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish national teams and therefore cannot compete at an Olympics as none of these nations are represented at the Olympics and other than England they are strongly against a joint British Olympic team.
I do not many offence by this post and hope you do not take this as being rude i just want to make a point, that you should do a little research before you comment at times.

^^ Why no mention of Canada. :(

Boy aren't we just a tad out of topic?:) Anyway, lemme try and steer it back just a bit. I'm looking forward to seeing RSL Stadium. Its getting closer and closer to opening and its first game is going to be televised on ESPN (against the Red Bulls).

^^ Why no mention of Canada. :(

Well, he knew I at least got that one right, hockey is the king of Canada. How do I know, just by watching Guy Carbonneau videos on You Tube. My favorite hockey player, ever. And to think he is now the head coach of the Habs. When was the last time a new head coach received a standing ovation when announced by the home team announcer for the first time? Well, Guy got one. This reflects passion.....

At least George Gillette did something right, allowing the GM Bob Gainey, another hockey legend, to name Guy coach...... But, of course, as a Yankee, George isn't qualified to own the Liverpool Reds, and should be tarred and feathered out of town. All because George won't lose, I meant spend all of his money for new players for Liverpool. At least Gillette and Hicks know they new a new stadium to compete financially in the Premiere League, something the previous owner David Moores knew too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0JMXpA7MBug

Well, he knew I at least got that one right, hockey is the king of Canada. How do I know, just by watching Guy Carbonneau videos on You Tube. My favorite hockey player, ever. And to think he is now the head coach of the Habs. When was the last time a new head coach received a standing ovation when announced by the home team announcer for the first time? Well, Guy got one. This reflects passion.....

At least George Gillette did something right, allowing the GM Bob Gainey, another hockey legend, to name Guy coach...... But, of course, as a Yankee, George isn't qualified to own the Liverpool Reds, and should be tarred and feathered out of town. All because George won't lose, I meant spend all of his money for new players for Liverpool. At least Gillette and Hicks know they new a new stadium to compete financially in the Premiere League, something the previous owner David Moores knew too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0JMXpA7MBug

Ooops I forgot about Canada but that defiantly is a Hockey nation but from what Canadian forumers have told me and from looking at the figures and passion of the fans of TFC it is clear that the sport is becoming much bigger in Canada in fact I reckon it has a better chance of becoming major in Canada than it has in the US. Canada already has produced 2 or 3 players that are of real quality and all honesty are better than anything the US has produced all they need to do now is to actually get these players to represent Canada rather than another nation.

To be honest I think spending money and putting loans isn't the problem it’s the way that Hicks and Gillett have gone about the situation. Firstly and probably most importantly they have broken a number of their promises which shouldn't have been made in the first place as they were very big statements to make in the first place. The debt is a problem because of the system in England, it was also a problem for Manchester United. All it takes is one disastrous season where they miss out on European Qualification and then it can become a slippery slope and they could become the next Leeds, which is unthinkable for any club. I suggest you look up Leeds United I have noticed you have struggled to understand what the problem with debt in England is and I reckon this is a perfect example of why there is such a huge problem, it’s not your fault mind all the people who have tried explaining it haven’t done a good job and all they have done is criticized foreign owners and the lack of understanding of the English passion which isn’t the right why of explaining the problem. As for debt at my club Reading we were bought out by a multi millionaire over 10 years who promised to get us a new stadium and get us to the Premier League and he managed to do both. But what has become clear is that he has done this through loans to the clubs rather than using his personal wealth but what he did well was keeping it quiet and also building up the club brand and business side so that the club could deal with the debts and loans and maybe this is what Gillett and Hicks should have done. As for American owners they as I have already mentioned it doesn’t come into how qualified they are to own a club or how good they are, Randy Lerner is a terrific chairman and he has done a great job with Villa.

As an American I have traveled abroad too. Yes, many nations love what we call soccer. But I have also traveled to New Zealand where rugby is king. I have also traveled to Melbourne where Aussie Rules Football is king. I have traveled to Japan where baseball is king. I have traveled to India where field hockey is king. Half the world's population lives in China and India, soccer isn't king everywhere. Without a doubt, hockey is king in Canada. Have you traveled to these locations?

Oh, by the way, the sissie sport of soccer, notice our American women won gold at the Bejing Olympics. Where were the British women? Culture indeed.

well said, Toby. When people say that "Soccer is king' and deride the US for not being so 1 sport-focused, I say they have 'tunnel vision' and narrow lives whereas in the US, we are blessed with a plethora of choices, and they are all thriving with some degree of success.

Your points above only buttress the rather narrow-minded, totally blindered view espoused by some Europeans and SOME South Americans.

How is football (soccer) sissie? I don't know about you but some of the tackles those guys take look somewhat painful.

Ooops I forgot about Canada but that defiantly is a Hockey nation but from what Canadian forumers have told me and from looking at the figures and passion of the fans of TFC it is clear that the sport is becoming much bigger in Canada in fact I reckon it has a better chance of becoming major in Canada than it has in the US. Canada already has produced 2 or 3 players that are of real quality and all honesty are better than anything the US has produced all they need to do now is to actually get these players to represent Canada rather than another nation.


Ahh Hargreaves...he's a douche but I won't lie, he is pretty good. At least he has somewhat of a reason, the CSA seemed to take no notice of him. But him saying that he has nothing of Canadian in him was uncalled for.:ohno:

As for Judas (Jonathan De Guzman), he's just a glory hunter. If the lure of having your own brother playing along side you on the national team can't get you to play for Canada, then nothing probably will.

^^
I think you have the wrong idea by what I meant in my posts I am a huge sports than and love other sports other than football/soccer and it is the same with many other people in my country its not just the US that celebrates many sports you know, i even try and watch and learn about American sports when I can because I love sport and everything about it and I am sure you would get the same reaction from most Europeans and South Americans but the fact is that my favourite sport is Football. I thinks its great that the US has a load of sports and don’t feel there is anything wrong with that and such diversity should be encouraged and I would love to see soccer being part of that sporting culture one day.
I think what gets us "EUROPEANS" up the wrong way is that only with the US does the sport that we love and cherish get such a battering and gets so many condescending words. I have heard so many stupid disrespectful things about the sport and the people who play and watch the sport and in all honesty it generally comes from people from the US and that is a reality. I'm sure and know that the same things get said back about North American sports but generally it is a reply to one of comments that instigates these sorts of replies.
But then again what do I know I like soccer I must be poor and live in a communist state and I probably only watch the sport so I can get into a mass brawl :bash:

I'm going to assume that was directed towards Knitemplar ;)

^^
:lol: that is correct.
It's a shame that players do that they seem to lack loyalty nowadays. In Hagreaves case I know that he turned his back on Canada because when he was representing Canada at junior level a team coach told him to give up on playing professionally because he wasn't good enough so due to that he turned his back on Canada when it turned out he was rather good I bet that coach regrets those comments now. As for De Guzman I find that sort of disloyalty disgraceful and it shouldn't be allowed and as far as I know he hasn't got any Dutch blood in him. I would love to see Canada get to the World Cup would be nice to see someone else make it other than US Mexico and Costa Rica every time, but from looking at your WC qualifying group and it looks difficult which I don't normally say about CONCACAF qualifying.
On topic can someone tell me what's happening with the soccer specific stadium proposals of Kansas City, Houston Dynamo, San Jose Earthquakes and what about New England are they going to continue at Gillette Stadium?

Canada for 2010! Hell, at least we're leading one of the expected countries to get out of the group!

There are some bitter Americans who won't give soccer a chance b/c of preconcieved notions of the sport due to watching young children play and because these people refuse to really analyze soccer at a high level, instead giving it cursory attention - sissy is not a word I would ever use to describe high level soccer.. it is much more hard hitting then most US sports (baseball, basketball, etc) and injuries are common due to hard tackles. I'm an american and I love the sport. It pains me to see how some americans resort to xenophobic notions such as socialism to ridicule the sport and the fact that the sport is not American or physically weak (what a joke). Thank god these people are on the decline. White Americans will be the minority in 2050, and hispanics (esecpially those from mexican parentage) generally enjoy soccer culture - the United States will change gradually as the population changes. Also, are league will continue to grow which will help our soccer talent...soccer can exist alongside other traditional sports here, there are enough people. It may not be in the top 3-4, but still, it can be a success here.

Europeans should be wise enough to know that America has a large population and many many people enjoy the sport here and do not ridicule it. Just ignore the bad apples and don't label all of use football haters.

You mean top 3-4 sport in just the US? Of top 3-4 soccer league in the world. Because if you are talking about top 3-4 sport in the US, the MLS is already closing in on the NBA and NHL at least attendance wise. Which is pretty considering that the MLS has less teams than either league and will be expanding in the next two years (Seattle/Philly).

Didn't see these posted yet... The new design for Philly's stadium in Chester.


http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/dd86/alasra2000/stadium_waterside_thumb.png


http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/dd86/alasra2000/stadium_aerial_thumb.png

How is football (soccer) sissie? I don't know about you but some of the tackles those guys take look somewhat painful.

Body contact is severely restricted in soccer. Only the shoulder-charge is allowed. Those tackles look worse than they really are, because the players "play-act" (exaggerate) in order to win a foul.

Didn't see these posted yet... The new design for Philly's stadium in Chester.


http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/dd86/alasra2000/stadium_waterside_thumb.png


http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/dd86/alasra2000/stadium_aerial_thumb.png
To bad...the old design looked alot better:(

it looks like it could be turned into the old design though.

Body contact is severely restricted in soccer. Only the shoulder-charge is allowed. Those tackles look worse than they really are, because the players "play-act" (exaggerate) in order to win a foul.


I can't remember the team (Croatia?)or player right now but did you see the the Euros when the player was on the sideline getting his head stapled and then went back on the feild? I've yet to see that in the NFL... Eduardo from Arsenal had his leg shattered in half and Eddie Lewis just got laid out the other day with a head to head challenge in Guatemala...

I've seen more players gushing blood in soccer than any American sport barring hockey... I'd say it's very misleading to say contact is "restricted." Hand balls are "restricted" too... They still happen frequnetly... Also soccer does suffer from the whole "play-acting" thing as you've stated but alot of times those challenges do actually hurt even though they appear not to be serious...

Soccer players being "sissies" is just another way for cocky xenophobic Americans that have probably never watched 90 minutes in their lives to dismiss it as a foreign/homosexual sport, Cuz, "Real Men Play Football!"

Didn't see these posted yet... The new design for Philly's stadium in Chester.


http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/dd86/alasra2000/stadium_waterside_thumb.png


http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/dd86/alasra2000/stadium_aerial_thumb.png

That looks pretty nice.

Didn't see these posted yet... The new design for Philly's stadium in Chester.


http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/dd86/alasra2000/stadium_waterside_thumb.png


http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/dd86/alasra2000/stadium_aerial_thumb.png

They could have done so much better, IMO.

I don't understand why is 1 stand not connected with other 3. They could have had class Karaiskaki/New Hoffenheim type of stadium.

I really hope that they don't go for this design it's a copy of the other MLS SSS the original design was much more original. Does anyone know why the original proposal was dropped?

Well that's kind of disappointing. The original was something that could rival Red Bull Arena, now it looks just about the same as every other MLS stadium... Hope they reconsider this decision.

I don't understand why is 1 stand not connected with other 3. The Sons of Ben supporters group could offer more info, but from what I understand that's part of where they were trying to foster some character. That stand may yet be more different in form from the others, plus they wished to offer more views and access to the river front, and the detachment allows the pedestrian flow in that direction. I certainly agree that this is the stand that should be treated differently if that's the route the owners and designers wished to take.
They could have had class Karaiskaki/New Hoffenheim type of stadium.Again with the Kariaskaki references. Why do so many people think that place was a trendsetter?
I really hope that they don't go for this design it's a copy of the other MLS SSS the original design was much more original. Does anyone know why the original proposal was dropped?I'll go out on a limb and say $$$. It's actually not that much different from the original concept drawings. Most of what's changed is the size and shape of the ancillary structures (concessions, etc) and the roof, aka: The elements with the smallest return on revenues. The footprint and configuration of seating is pretty close, so it appears what we have is the leftover pieces after the designer found every way possible to trim costs. Stands to reason given how construction costs have increased since the team was awarded.

Let's keep in mind folks, this is MLS. That they have places of this calibre is fantastic enough. Even if they do often look alike, most low-end football are based on other facilities - There's only so many cheap ways to redesign stands around a soccer pitch. :cheers:

Eh, yeah that could be a reason. But I guess your right, its good that the MLS is getting soccer specific facilities that actually don't look half bad, even though they're a bit generic. Its something.

Bigger renderings for a comparison of old & new

http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/dd86/alasra2000/800px-Chester_soccer_stadium_concep.jpg



http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/dd86/alasra2000/202480-600-0-2.jpg

^^ Thanks, Cubsfan. This helps illustrate the similarities, including the separation of the far end stand. In fact, I dare say the only differences are:

- Deeper single tier instead of two smaller tiers
- Roof over just the sides
- Field built at ground level as opposed to being sunken in

All these changes make sense as a means of cutting cost. I agree the full 360' roof would've been iconic, but this is still someplace I'd love to play! :cheers:

^^^ I agree Gunner, I like the new one, whatever happens I just hope that they don't have a stage. I hope it's not the temporary seat thing to make way for concerts... I beleive Salt Lake's original plans had 4 sided permanent seating and of course they followed suit and added a stage.

Bigger renderings for a comparison of old & new

http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/dd86/alasra2000/800px-Chester_soccer_stadium_concep.jpg



http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/dd86/alasra2000/202480-600-0-2.jpg

I think the new design can be renovated in the future when soccer attendance is busting the seat limit to look like the old all around design. I think most US soccer stadiums are designed to be able to be expanded apon in the future, if not...man, were they stupid.

That rendering doesn't seem to show the roof fully extended over the stands.

I can't remember the team (Croatia?)or player right now but did you see the the Euros when the player was on the sideline getting his head stapled and then went back on the feild? I've yet to see that in the NFL... Eduardo from Arsenal had his leg shattered in half and Eddie Lewis just got laid out the other day with a head to head challenge in Guatemala...

I've seen more players gushing blood in soccer than any American sport barring hockey... I'd say it's very misleading to say contact is "restricted." Hand balls are "restricted" too... They still happen frequnetly... Also soccer does suffer from the whole "play-acting" thing as you've stated but alot of times those challenges do actually hurt even though they appear not to be serious...

Soccer players being "sissies" is just another way for cocky xenophobic Americans that have probably never watched 90 minutes in their lives to dismiss it as a foreign/homosexual sport, Cuz, "Real Men Play Football!"

I used the word "restricted" in the sense that body contact is not allowed by the rulebook. Contrary to what many people think, charging (other than the shoulder-charge) IS illegal. On the other hand, if the refs enforced the rules to the letter they'd have to stop play every 10 seconds or so & call 200 fouls per game.

That rendering doesn't seem to show the roof fully extended over the stands.

Philadelphia or Chester isn't England where it rains every day. Americans are used to rainy weather, the rain usually passes within an hour, and by the end of the game the stadium has dried out.

Even in Florida where it does rain it seems daily, its only for a hour or so. The lone exception is the Pacific northwest, Seattle and Portland do see a lot of rain almost all day, but during the winter months. During the summer even Seattle can have sunny weather.

Most of our football stadiums don't have shade so much, as football is played during the fall. The game that requires some shade is baseball during the very hot summer months, especially in the southwest and southeast. But since most games are played at night, or dusk, most of the stadiums face east with home plate located at the westward end of the stadium. If not a roof, the stands provide the shade as the sun sets.

Philadelphia or Chester isn't England where it rains every day. Americans are used to rainy weather, the rain usually passes within an hour, and by the end of the game the stadium has dried out.

Even in Florida where it does rain it seems daily, its only for a hour or so. The lone exception is the Pacific northwest, Seattle and Portland do see a lot of rain almost all day, but during the winter months. During the summer even Seattle can have sunny weather.

Most of our football stadiums don't have shade so much, as football is played during the fall. The game that requires some shade is baseball during the very hot summer months, especially in the southwest and southeast. But since most games are played at night, or dusk, most of the stadiums face east with home plate located at the westward end of the stadium. If not a roof, the stands provide the shade as the sun sets.


Look at Lambeau field and Michigan stadium. Those are giant coverless bowls where it snows and rains with below zero temps. I think american fans are just a little tougher ;)

I wonder perhaps that the actual quality of the render might have had an effect upon how we interpret it. I mean the first one is clearer and looks neat, but the second one just looks a bit grainy.

I don't understand why is 1 stand not connected with other 3. They could have had class Karaiskaki/New Hoffenheim type of stadium.

It's cheaper to expand it this way.
That's also why the roof doesn't go all the way around.

It should also help segregate sons of ben from away fans, which is great. Considering the distance between DC and NYC. Man, I'm almost jealous...almost...of the proximity to rivals and away trips.

Not in Chicago, We get the "honor" of taking 5-8 hours trips to Kansas City and Cow-lumbus (I don't like to throw the word hooligan-wannabes in MLS, but if anyone fits it...it's HSH). Which is why I'm semi-rooting for a St Louis team. I wouldn't even have to leave the state.

no, you have no idea what you are talking about, it is the exact same in the USA. We are fans of the teams near us because we see them all the time, but there are those few that were raised in California, but cheer for the Celtics, or live in Chicago and root for the 49er's, its one of those things that does not make since but it happens. Same happens in Europe, dont act like it doesn't, There have to be Chelsea fans out side of London, There has to be ManU fans outside of Manchester and etc etc etc..... To think there is a huge difference about how fans choose teams in America and Europe is pure blind sidedness on your side my Euro using friend.

Oh yeah, Chelsea built a global fan base all those years in the 2nd division paying off the loans for the bridge. Which is why Chelsea is a total bandwagon team, most of their stateside fans were only wooed in the 21st century.

So I should support an MLS team even though I feel I have no connection to any of them as opposed to supporting an English team that I do have a connection too. I might be moving to the Seattle area soon so I may choose to support the new Seattle team, but unless that happens I see no reason to support an MLS team.

Vancouver is one of the most likely expansion cities in MLS. Let me guess, you didn't even realize Vancouver had a team*rollseyes*.

Personally, USL is pretty decent for the money and the fans get away with crap because the teams don't have to cater to the soccer mom crowds. Notice, Timbers Army.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Jp7q05ieIk

Talk about taking two steps back with the design...

Can someone tell me when will the final two expansion places be announced? I would like to see Vancouver get one of the slots the Canadians seem to have a real passion for the sport and on a simple business note seem also to fill their stadiums which looks good for the MLS brand.

Talk about taking two steps back with the design...

So maybe Chester stadium isn't as good as it was before (though I disagree), I think that this may be the most attractive stadium, present or future, in MLS.

------------------------

Back to Metro Stadium/Red Bull Arena, please give us updates as you find them! I'm hungry for pics!

Back to Metro Stadium/Red Bull Arena, please give us updates as you find them! I'm hungry for pics!

Ask and you shall receive:lol: From Redbullsreader.com: "Here are some more pics from the rapidly growing Red Bull Arena. The structure is now up to the fifth level. Level 5 is the second level of Suites and the Broadcast Booths. With these photos ending your day, RBR wishes you all a great Labor Day weekend!! A positive result at DC would make this weekend even better!!"

Pics
http://redbullsreader.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/aug-29-08-c.jpg
http://redbullsreader.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/aug-29-08-a.jpg
http://redbullsreader.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/aug-29-08-b.jpg

can't beleive it's actually happening.

And at quite a fast pace too.

Our American women did well at the Olympics, a soccer gold medal. The Europeans better watch out, it won't be long before our men win a gold medal as well, with our fifth or sixth sport. It won't be long before our MLS teams rob your best players during transfer time.

While our new stadiums maybe small, there aren't that many more old stadiums in the United Kingdom that are larger. There is still a problem with the length of a season, not that many games are played, one or two per week. Anfield only seats 45k, no where near enough to support financially a NFL team. Our new stadiums may have public support at the local level, an idea that is foreign in the UK. But these small soccer stadiums fill up, and are used by high school football teams as well in these cities.

The Europeans better watch out, it won't be long before our men win a gold medal as well, with our fifth or sixth sport. It won't be long before our MLS teams rob your best players during transfer time.


funniest. post. ever.

Vancouver is one of the most likely expansion cities in MLS. Let me guess, you didn't even realize Vancouver had a team*rollseyes*.

I am well aware of the Vancouver Whitecaps, but I spend the vast majority of my time in Alaska, and I'm pretty sure there aren't any USL teams in Alaska or the Yukon Territory. Are USL games televised?

Do you know if there is any new news about the Whitecaps stadium near Gastown? That stadium they play in now in Burnaby is a dump. That stadium would be a great addition to that area of the city and might help the Whitecaps move up to the MLS.

Saying DART is a world wide model is a bit of an overstatement, it's good, but isn't usually regarded as the model system in the US, let alone Europe. Systems like Portland's MAX are usually considered the model for US light rail (especially in the urban planning courses I've taken), with substantially higher ridership. Minneapolis' Hiawatha line is very well planned, connecting the mall of america, both terminals of the airport through to downtown with stops directly at the Metrodome, the new ballpark and within two blocks of the Target Center right in the entertainment district. it has already well exceeded it's 2020 ridership goals, with about 26,000 riders/day.

By the way is there any talk of linking Jerryworld into DART, because the could really help alleviate parking issues (I don't really know if DART gets anywhere near Arlington).

The reason why Jerry World is being built in Arlington is because Arlington does not provide the half cent sales tax for Fort Worth's T or the full penny sales tax for DART. Instead, they used this sales tax to build Jerry World. Jerry Jones attempted to get Irving to end its participation with DART, but the citizens of Irving voted no. Irving has a commuter rail line, the Trinity River Express that runs to downtown Dallas and Fort Worth. In a few years the orange line of DART's light rail will be built through the city to connect Dallas with DFW airport finally.

Already, the old Texas Stadium site is being planned by Irving, the Crossroads of Irving or DFW mixed used development and entertainment district is planned. Google Crossroads of Irving or DFW to see images.

There is talk that Arlington will join DART after the new Cowboys stadium is paid off. There is the T&P railroad main line which runs within a mile of both the Ballpark in Arlington, the new Cowboys stadium, Six Flags amusement park, and the Arlington convention center. The problem is that its own by Union Pacific, the worst ally of rail lines America has. Its their main line, not a abandoned rail line.

Of course, there is room on the north side of their right of way to build either commuter rail or doubled track light rail. But UP will ask for the moon to sell that slice of land thirty three miles to DART or the T from both downtowns. Both DART Rail (69,861 trips) and the Trinity Railway Express (11,105 trips) posted their highest-ever average weekday ridership totals. DART Rail was up 14.2% over June 2007 and the TRE was up 19.8% over the same period.

Are USL games televised?


Yes, Fox Soccer Channel shows them.

Our American women did well at the Olympics, a soccer gold medal. The Europeans better watch out, it won't be long before our men win a gold medal as well, with our fifth or sixth sport. It won't be long before our MLS teams rob your best players during transfer time.

While our new stadiums maybe small, there aren't that many more old stadiums in the United Kingdom that are larger. There is still a problem with the length of a season, not that many games are played, one or two per week. Anfield only seats 45k, no where near enough to support financially a NFL team. Our new stadiums may have public support at the local level, an idea that is foreign in the UK. But these small soccer stadiums fill up, and are used by high school football teams as well in these cities.

Toby you cannot be serious with this comment:lol:
Sorry to all MLS fans about the comment I’m going to make, I'm a huge fan of the league and I hope the league and the sport becomes bigger but I have to set this comment straight to someone who is learning the sport.
Let’s put it like this it’s like saying the Euro Basket league is going to overtake the NBA and do you know why it won’t happen? Because the best kids don't dream of playing in Europe they dream of playing in the US and it is the same with football do you really think a wonder kid would choose and dream to play for DC United rather than Real Madrid? Also the difference in revenue is huge Man U are the biggest sports club on this planet(estimated support of 300+million) as are Real Madrid plain and simply MLS cannot compete financially with Europe.
Your point about their not being many bigger stadiums than in the MLS is wrong there are 29 stadiums that are larger than the biggest soccer specific stadium The Home Depot Centre in England (35 in the UK) and most are in better condition and are making more money than Anfield and that's only England that's not including a host of other major leagues I'm pretty sure that there is something like 60 stadiums with 50,000+ capacities in Europe and that will go up massively over the next decade with projects such as the new stadiums for Shakhtar, Galatasary, Zenit, Spurs, Liverpool, Lyon, PSG, Valenica etc. the list could go on for a long time. I'm pretty sure that the MLS won't be building any stadium with 50,000 capacities any time soon.
Also MLS is only in its 13th season the top flight in England is in its 110th, the Champions League (which is biggest club competition in the world in all sports) is in its 54th year can you really see MLS competing with history and tradition like that? MLS clubs don't even get into a decent continental competition if the league is going to get real international recognition it needs to get their clubs into the Copa Libertadores.
The MLS can’t even hold onto decent US talent, the recent Hermann Trophy winner (soccer equivalent to the Heisman Trophy) Joseph Lapira declined a contract with the MLS in favour of moving to a club in the Norwegian Second Division. Even some of the more seasoned pros move from MLS in the hope of cracking Europe you have players such as Pat Noonan a decent MLS striker leaving to play in Norway, Nate Jaqua who left to play in Austria, both have now returned because they weren't good enough doesn't that say something to you.

You also seriously overate the US team, which is typical of Americans who either overate the team(common in every nation on this planet) or massively underrate the team (normally soccer bashers) in reality the team is ranked 31 in the world by FIFA which in all honest is about right the team is solid but not spectacular. I think I am right in thinking only Jozy Altidore will be the only American playing in the Champions League this season. There is only 17 Americans that play in one of Europe’s top 10 leagues (according to UEFA co-efficient) that really isn't much. In the recent U17 world cup in 2007 the US team got knocked out in the second round, the best the US team has done was in 1999 when they reached the semis with players such as DaMarcus Beasley and Landon Donovan so don't be so sure that your team is on the brink of greatness. The so called great Freedy Adu just got sold by Benfica (3rd Portuguese League) after making just 11appearances to Monaco (12th French League) so much for him. And I’m pretty sure that no American has ever won a league in England, Spain or Italy and the most a player has ever commanded in terms of a transfer fee is Jozy Altidore ($10million) the world record transfer was Zinadine Zidane for $100million+. Lets put it like this the US is still a long way from getting a gold medal at the Olympics or winning the World Cup but there is definitely potential their to do better which I am sure it will I don't think you will become a world power but there is definitely potential to become a top 10 nation. As for the MLS it will never compete with Europe in reality it is competing with Leagues such as the Japanese, Korean and Australian at the moment. Maybe in a few years it will become the strongest outside Europe but I can tell you know it will never become an Elite World League.

Will they ever bring back the NY Cosmos?

Mind you even if they were to have a team called that, could they possibly ever assemble a team of great stars like the original side in the late 70s.

As for the MLS becoming the strongest league outside of Europe. Maybe one day, but I doubt it will close the gap on the Brazilian or Argentine league.

It will need Cosmos style spending to get close.

Bekshire Royal Guisseppe Rossi is also American and will be playing in the Champions League...Freddy Adu was black listed at Benfica, he scored 5 goals basically being a 70th+ minute sub, what do you want? Jozy Altidore may have sold for only $10 mil. but that's a pretty big number considering Clint Dempsey was the record holder just three years ago with $2 mil. Also I have my suspicions that if Jozy were from Internacional that number probably would've been three fold.

As far as our U-17's go, not a great performance in the World Cup but we do have some very promising youth coming up the ranks, probably just as impressive as alot of top 10 nations. 13 year old Charles Renken, future superstar written all over him, two footed midfeilder with great feild vision, accuracy from range and seamless passing, 14 year old Joseph Gyau, signed by Bayern and has silky skills on the ball reminiscent of Robinho. Sebastian LLeggett who is another extremely gifted player signed by West Ham when he was 12. The future is bright indeed. Our U-17's which were mostly under 15 beat Brazil 2-0 at Bradenton which were mostly 16 & 17.

I don't think that we're even close to MLS becoming a powerhouse league. The NBA & NFL are way too established with way too much money and way too instilled into American hearts and minds for soccer to ever compete with them. However, if a grass roots effort was made where soccer acadamies were brought into inner cities where the best American athletes are traditionally located there could be a seismic shift in quality. As of now soccer is seen as an elitist sport reserved for rich white suburban kids.

This is America though, the largest and richest market in the world and it is completely plausible that one day MLS could become a multi-billion dollar revenue league. If this happens, beleive me, players will follow the money, Champions League or not. The NFL's annual revenue is $7.6 billion, The BPL is around $2.5 bil. not even close. The Dallas Cowboys are worth $1.6 billion compared to Man U's $1.8 Bil. This is without having anywhere near the hemisphere of 300 million fans. Hockey could be considered the 5th most popular sport in America and it's revenue is equal to that of the Prem. This is all with hockey's Television ratings in the doldrums and hardly a mention in major American Newspapers and TV sports shows. So it's very possible for MLS to oneday financially become a Viable option to Europe.

One thing that needs to change and perhaps the most important is our attitude when it comes to teh way our federation is run. You don't send a bunch of journeyman MLS'ers to the Copa America and bring in our A team to the Gold Cup. You don't play Mexico 5 times a year in America and never go take your beating down at Azteca. The Philosophy of American soccer is the most toxic thing happening to our growth. When you have special players like Adu and Altidore you play them and you play them often. These are valuble experineces that prove invaluable later on. Finally the U.S. has actually lined up some excellent competition in Brazil & Spain and they're actually playing away games too. I never understood what beating Honduras in LA did for their growth.

Bekshire Royal Guisseppe Rossi is also American and will be playing in the Champions League...Freddy Adu was black listed at Benfica, he scored 5 goals basically being a 70th+ minute sub, what do you want? Jozy Altidore may have sold for only $10 mil. but that's a pretty big number considering Clint Dempsey was the record holder just three years ago with $2 mil. Also I have my suspicions that if Jozy were from Internacional that number probably would've been three fold.

As far as our U-17's go, not a great performance in the World Cup but we do have some very promising youth coming up the ranks, probably just as impressive as alot of top 10 nations. 13 year old Charles Renken, future superstar written all over him, two footed midfeilder with great feild vision, accuracy from range and seamless passing, 14 year old Joseph Gyau, signed by Bayern and has silky skills on the ball reminiscent of Robinho. Sebastian LLeggett who is another extremely gifted player signed by West Ham when he was 12. The future is bright indeed. Our U-17's which were mostly under 15 beat Brazil 2-0 at Bradenton which were mostly 16 & 17.

I don't think that we're even close to MLS becoming a powerhouse league. The NBA & NFL are way too established with way too much money and way too instilled into American hearts and minds for soccer to ever compete with them. However, if a grass roots effort was made where soccer acadamies were brought into inner cities where the best American athletes are traditionally located there could be a seismic shift in quality. As of now soccer is seen as an elitist sport reserved for rich white suburban kids.

This is America though, the largest and richest market in the world and it is completely plausible that one day MLS could become a multi-billion dollar revenue league. If this happens, beleive me, players will follow the money, Champions League or not. The NFL's annual revenue is $7.6 billion, The BPL is around $2.5 bil. not even close. The Dallas Cowboys are worth $1.6 billion compared to Man U's $1.8 Bil. This is without having anywhere near the hemisphere of 300 million fans. Hockey could be considered the 5th most popular sport in America and it's revenue is equal to that of the Prem. This is all with hockey's Television ratings in the doldrums and hardly a mention in major American Newspapers and TV sports shows. So it's very possible for MLS to oneday financially become a Viable option to Europe.

One thing that needs to change and perhaps the most important is our attitude when it comes to teh way our federation is run. You don't send a bunch of journeyman MLS'ers to the Copa America and bring in our A team to the Gold Cup. You don't play Mexico 5 times a year in America and never go take your beating down at Azteca. The Philosophy of American soccer is the most toxic thing happening to our growth. When you have special players like Adu and Altidore you play them and you play them often. These are valuble experineces that prove invaluable later on. Finally the U.S. has actually lined up some excellent competition in Brazil & Spain and they're actually playing away games too. I never understood what beating Honduras in LA did for their growth.

You make a number of good and very interesting points.
The main problem with players from the US even the talented ones is that they find it very hard to adjust to life and the soccer in Europe and I have seen this first hand. My team Reading have a player called Bobby Convey from Philadelphia who broke records, he became the youngest ever MLS player and youngest ever to appear in a CONCACAF competition, he almost got a move to Spurs but the move fell through due to work permit issues the next year after getting more international recognition he joined my team Reading for $2million when he was 21, in his first season he struggled to adapt to life in a small town and couldn't handle the more physical nature of the league. In his second year though he was terrific and got selected for the League XI and got named 8th best player outside the EPL and with the team getting promoted he got a chance to prove himself in the EPL. But then everything fell apart and he has been getting permanently injured ever since and whenever he does play especially when we were in the EPL he struggled to have any impact at all.

And this is a similar case with a number of talented Americans that have come to Europe(Landon Donovan, Freddy Adu, Benny Feilhaber etc.) I can only hope that the young Americans you can adapt to the life and the difference in the sport over in Europe because if they can then these youngsters have every chance of making it and have a far greater chance of becoming a star than if they stay in the MLS.

You need to remember that loads of clubs from Europe go abroad to sign talented youngsters, Chelsea have bough 9 year olds from Scandinavia and in all honesty it doesn't mean he will make it. I will be convinced of all these kids awesome talents when they are making a big impact at senior level like Jozy Altidore did at MLS or when they are doing what kids such as Bojan Krkic(Barcelona + Spain) Henri Saivet (Bordeaux + France) Lulinha (Corinthians + Brazil) Tony Kroos (Bayern + Germany) Jack Wilshere (Arsenal + England) all under 18 and all making an impact in the first team at major clubs. My point is that you can only tell how good a player can be when they hit around the 18 years age and start playing pro and competing in international youth competitions. I think everyone knows the US has the potential to produce players of the highest quality as it’s shown in the number of quality athletes produced it’s just a matter of actually making those players and so far they haven't in all honesty.

I strongly agree with your point about bringing soccer academies into inner cities it seems crazy to me that they wouldn't do this already this sport is clearly a working class sport. I don't understand why it would be offered as a rich white suburban sport shouldn't that market be more American Football then Soccer? It's the complete opposite in the UK and Europe, Rugby is the rich white kid sport. The only sports you will see kids playing in Hackney, Moss Side etc. are football and basketball.

Where did you get your figures from if it where from Forbes then believe me they are not good when it comes to football they always have out of date info or incorrect information.
Actually the EPL revenue is $3.2billion (if you add in Scotland as you seem to think with a BPL it would be close to $4billion) and the EPL has the 4th highest revenue of any domestic sport league in the world. When you add in the revenues of the other 4 top leagues in Europe (Spain, Italy, Germany, France) the revenue goes up to $8.5billion and these are figures which are 2 years out of date are very likely to have gone up since then. Also whilst the NFL franchises average rate of growth is only 5% the top 25 clubs in Europe had an average growth rate of 30%.

You have to realise the concept of making money from football is very new the game is more cultural and social then business. Many of the clubs have only recently become more professional in making money recently although most now make huge money from merchandising many are still poor when it comes to stadium revenue, broadcasting deals and ownership investment and many will make much more money in the next few years.

Liverpool only put executive boxes into Anfield in the late 80s and it was only in the early 90s that you could buy a replica shirt anywhere in the country of one of the major clubs before that the only way you could you one was by making a visit to the official club shop at the clubs stadium. There is still evidence now of major teams and leagues missing out on revenue, Barcelona who have a stadium of 95,000 make $60million less than Man U from Matchday Revenue alone due to the poor state of the stadium but this will change over the next few years with a modernisation and increase in capacity. Bayern Munich make $35 million less than Chelsea from Broadcasting revenue despite having a much larger fan base due to German Laws which force the league to give join rights to Terrestrial TV where money available and what could be made is far less than what if they made rights available to any channel as happens in the English Game where they make considerably more but this going to improve as from next season there will be a 20% increase in the leagues TV rights.

As big as the US market is it is smaller then the major market I’m talking about and that is Europe which has a bigger population and a bigger economy. You have to remember you’re not just comparing the US with England what you should be thinking of it as is the US v Europe. Yes players will follow money but how many Beckham style contracts can the MLS or even NFL afford and even then to attract a Christiano Ronaldo or a Messi you have to also pay transfer fees ($100million+) and also make them believe that this won’t hinder their career which would involve probably paying even higher wages then what Mr Beckham gets do you really see that happening? I reckon not and I reckon a more reasonable aim long term is to become one of the top 10 leagues in the world.
I hope you understand my points I'm not knocking the US I'm just stating facts which need to be remembered. If anyone has questions or a point of view that differs from mine I will be very interested to hear your view.

The main problem with players from the US even the talented ones is that they find it very hard to adjust to life and the soccer in Europe

This doesn't surprise me in the least seeing as how Americans are very self-centered and ego-centric and have mistakingly been lead to believe that the American way is the only way

Whenever he does play especially when we were in the EPL he struggled to have any impact at all. And this is a similar case with a number of talented Americans that have come to Europe(Landon Donovan, Freddy Adu, Benny Feilhaber etc.)..

I would hardly consider this an American phenomenon considering the fact that I could say the exact same thing about many great players such as Riquelme at Villareal, Denilson at Betis, Adriano at Inter, Shevchenko at Chelsea, Henry at Barca, Owen at Newcastle, Alonso at Liverpool, Podolski at Bayern, Quaresma at Barca... The list goes on and on....

I can only hope that the young Americans you can adapt to the life and the difference in the sport over in Europe because if they can then these youngsters have every chance of making it and have a far greater chance of becoming a star than if they stay in the MLS.

Again, hopefully America makes a grass roots effort and Europe isn't the only viable option to succeed at soccer. Hopefully in time great young players won't have to adapt to different cultures & lifestyles.

My point is that you can only tell how good a player can be when they hit around the 18 years age and start playing pro and competing in international youth competitions. I think everyone knows the US has the potential to produce players of the highest quality as it’s shown in the number of quality athletes produced it’s just a matter of actually making those players and so far they haven't in all honesty.

My point is that these youth players that I've highlighted have already shown more skill, capabilities and potential than the greatest American players we have to offer today... There is a clear and definite difference between the likes of players which posess the basic fundementals and players like Renken, Gyua and LLegett, these are players that posess that natural God given ability like Cristiano Ronaldo and Messi, I'm not saying that they'll be that good or even make it near their heights but they have the potential. Im aware that most players at 14 don't even resemble themselves by 18 but when you witness greatness you just know...

There's a difference betwen shooting from 30 meters because you're hoping for a miracle and shooting from that distance beacause you believe that you have the skill to actually make it. Theres 'a difference between doing step-overs and Cryuff turns because you want to appear talented (Clint Dempsey & Eddie Johnson) and doing them within the natural flow of the game to beat a defender and set your team up for a better attack (Gyau, Renken, Adu) On the other hand I've never seen Donovan even do anything remotely skillful other than outrun every other player on the field, take away his speed and he is average at best. Keep in mind that this is the best player America has ever produced. So naturally I'm optimistic about these talented kids we have, also Adu out performed Pato at the under-20 World Cup and Altidore may have as well depending on your standards....

I strongly agree with your point about bringing soccer academies into inner cities it seems crazy to me that they wouldn't do this already this sport is clearly a working class sport. I don't understand why it would be offered as a rich white suburban sport shouldn't that market be more American Football then Soccer?

Someone smarter than me can explain this but my shot in the dark is the fact that poor inner-city families don't have the money to send their kids off to Florida for the summer for proper training and don't have expendable children to ship overseas to grow up in Liverpool's youth squads during their formative years.


Where did you get your figures from if it where from Forbes then believe me they are not good when it comes to football they always have out of date info or incorrect information.

I did get my numbers from Forbes Magazine, I should have guessed that an American institution wouldn't know shit about soccer. However, The NFL is still twice as rich as the PL.

You have to realise the concept of making money from football is very new the game is more cultural and social then business. Many of the clubs have only recently become more professional in making money recently although most now make huge money from merchandising many are still poor when it comes to stadium revenue, broadcasting deals and ownership investment and many will make much more money in the next few years.

Not being condescending but I thought that every sporting club realized that it was about making money, I often hear Brits bitching that American owners are going to take over the Prem and make it all about business but can I ask you how the hell you guys survived all these years if the number one priority wasn't money?



As big as the US market is it is smaller then the major market I’m talking about and that is Europe which has a bigger population and a bigger economy. You have to remember you’re not just comparing the US with England what you should be thinking of it as is the US v Europe. Yes players will follow money but how many Beckham style contracts can the MLS or even NFL afford and even then to attract a Christiano Ronaldo or a Messi you have to also pay transfer fees ($100million+) and also make them believe that this won’t hinder their career which would involve probably paying even higher wages then what Mr Beckham gets do you really see that happening?

You're correct in the fact that Europe has a bigger population but according to the World Bank, as a single economy, the U.S. is worth $13.8 trillion/ Europe is worth $10.5 trillion, that's a $3 trillion difference with less than half as many people, Chicago ($442 billion) by itself is richer than 21 European nations... If you were to combine New York, Los Angeles and Chicago's economies they would be richer than the entire U.K.

For sn example of how decadent we can be, when Alex Rodriguez was signed by the Yankees, the Rangers paid $67 million, the Yankees paid $275 million and offered him a $30 million bonus, this is a grand total of $372 million or 186 million pounds, NO SOCCER PLAYER EVER HAS RECIEVED THIS COMPINSATION
Thierry Henry signed a 4 year/$32millon contract with Barca, one of the richest teams in the world. This is for arguably one of the greatest strikers of all-time... On the contrary that's the going rate for a player ready to retire in America....

John Terry set a record with a $13.5 million contract, in contrast, the NBA's Kevin Garnett at the age of 32 which is past prime got a 3 year/ $60 million contract, $20 million annualy, the money is here in America... Tiger Woods is the richest athlete on the planet who averages beteween $85/ $100 million annualy, that's for a golfer playing a sport which most Americans laugh at and he still makes two/three times annualy what that of Beckham and Ronaldinho makes...


BTW, David Beckham only recieves $5.5 million from the Galaxy, the rest of the money is intertwined with image rights, profit sharing & endorsements....

Average Salary for EPL, NBA, MLB, NFL, NHL, MLS, WNBA, AFL etc...
NBA: $4,900,000
MLB: $2,866,544
NHL: $1,460,000 (used to be $1,830,000)
NFL: $1,250,000
EPL: $1,162,720
MLS*: $90,000????
AFL: $85,000
WNBA: $55,000

http://sport.independent.co.uk/footb...icle357006.ece

Quote:
What The Independent's survey revealed

AVERAGE BASIC WAGE

Premiership £676,000
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slu...v=ap&type=lgns

NFL is only 1 league with fix teams, its whole system is not comparable with European football league system. UEFA is made from 53 countries. Thats roughly 100 pro leagues (not everyone has more than one pro divisions, but then again some countries have up to 3). If we say that average league has 18 clubs and average squad has 20 pro's on payroll thats around 36000 professional players. NFL doesn't come even close to that number. Ofcourse that the average earnings will be lower when u combine low leagues where players play for 50 000€ per year and leagues where players play for 5 000 000€.

In terms of contracts its a lot different as well. Garnet contract is worth 32 mil € while Terry gets 13 mil €. But look at what those numbers really mean? What Terry signed will really be what he will get. Taxes are already counted in that. It means that he will get exactly 13 mil on hands (bank account tho). Garnet will probably have his contract reduced a lot by all mighty IRS. Stuff like houses (for example Niko Kranjcar in average club like Pompey got as bonus house as well as BMW7). If i'm not wrong in USA sports system players provide all that for them self with their own money. And comparing basketball and football isn't possible anyway because basketball has less players than football and its easier for them to offer higher contracts to less players.

As for MLS i do believe that it could have a great future. Market is big, money is more/less there. People are interested in it but it needs to change the way it works. Its not compatible with global football and those who suffer the most in that system are kids. Youth academy is essential part of every football club in the world and MLS clubs don't seem to care about that part. What can a talented kid do after highschool in USA? MLS pro club will rarely play such a young player. He can either go to college (when he gets out he will already be around 22 without single year of pro football while his rivals from around the world might have already around 2,3 full seasons in their "legs"), go to some independant academy like Donovan, Beasley did and then wait for some Euro club to put them in their own youth/reserve teams while they are developing and as a result of that many of highly talented kids will just lose themself in whole process (as we saw in many cases, even in Donovans). Main thing is that MLS won't develop and USA NT won't develop until they realize that its better to give a chance to some talented young guy instead of signing 30 years old European on high payroll.

As for MLS i do believe that it could have a great future. Market is big, money is more/less there. People are interested in it but it needs to change the way it works. Its not compatible with global football and those who suffer the most in that system are kids. Youth academy is essential part of every football club in the world and MLS clubs don't seem to care about that part. What can a talented kid do after highschool in USA? MLS pro club will rarely play such a young player. He can either go to college (when he gets out he will already be around 22 without single year of pro football while his rivals from around the world might have already around 2,3 full seasons in their "legs"), go to some independant academy like Donovan, Beasley did and then wait for some Euro club to put them in their own youth/reserve teams while they are developing and as a result of that many of highly talented kids will just lose themself in whole process (as we saw in many cases, even in Donovans). Main thing is that MLS won't develop and USA NT won't develop until they realize that its better to give a chance to some talented young guy instead of signing 30 years old European on high payroll.

The poor, suffering kids...in the U.S., according to you, they have to go to college rather than playing in the MSL. Then they graduate at 22 years old, yet their rivals around the world have 2 or 3 seasons of experience ahead of them and all the poor, suffering U.S. kids have is A COLLEGE EDUCATION. What a lame view of the world you have...

Take notice also that a large percentage of world-class athletes attend or attended college in the U.S. How many times do we see Olympic athletes representing Croatia, Chile, or Indonesia who play/played their sport in college at UCLA, North Carolina, or Ohio State?

This doesn't surprise me in the least seeing as how Americans are very self-centered and ego-centric and have mistakingly been lead to believe that the American way is the only way

I'm guessing you're being sarcastic but that wasn't my point at all. When I said Americans don't adapt well I meant that sometimes they struggle to adapt being so far from their families and in a different culture.
As I said in my example Bobby Convey it is a known fact that he stays up regularly till 2-3 in the morning to speak to his parents on the phone which is quite obviously fair enough but it does hinder him when he is training and/or got a game the next morning. He has also quite a few times said that he struggles to find anything to do in Reading which is fair enough he went from a world renowned city of 5 million+ where he has spent his entire life to a town of 300,000 that’s a bit of a difference.

I'm not saying it always happens we have another American called Marcus Hahnemann who loves it here and is a real favourite among the fans.
What I mean is that Americans especially younger ones tend to fall away when they move to Europe I think many of the kids are too eager to move to Europe without really considering the different lifestyle (languages, culture etc.) where seas the more experienced pros tend to adapt easier.

The difference with kids from Africa or South America is that they tend to be very poor and becoming a superstar in soccer is one way of getting out of poverty and providing for their families back home, also all they ever hear is of superstars in the game and these stars become heroes to these kids who aspire to become those players, whilst in the US you hear much less of players like Thierry Henry, Ronaldinho, Messi and therefore the kids don’t really have someone to aspire to be but that may well change with the greater coverage the sport gets now and with Beckham playing in the states. Also when the kids from Africa and South America move as youngersters they tend to move to countries where the language is the national language making it easier to adapt. This a problem for American kids in that only England and Scotland have major leagues and have English as the national language the problem and with the work permit needed means they seldom move to the UK to play, and it means that they cannot move to England so therefore tend to go to Germany/Italy where they have to learn the language and leave their families. I think this will become less of a problem as the game moves from suburbia to the inner city the reality is as you said the game at the moment is for rich white kids and in reality kids from poorer inner city areas have thicker skin and can handle adversity better and are also more determined to make it, as the transition happens I’m sure there will be a much greater quality of player coming through.
..

I would hardly consider this an American phenomenon considering the fact that I could say the exact same thing about many great players such as Riquelme at Villareal, Denilson at Betis, Adriano at Inter, Shevchenko at Chelsea, Henry at Barca, Owen at Newcastle, Alonso at Liverpool, Podolski at Bayern, Quaresma at Barca... The list goes on and on....

I wouldn't say all those players have been disasters some where/are actually playing alright. But yes you are right it isn't confined to American players and far from it.



Again, hopefully America makes a grass roots effort and Europe isn't the only viable option to succeed at soccer. Hopefully in time great young players won't have to adapt to different cultures & lifestyles.

I agree hopefully that does happen and yes moving to Europe at a ridiculously young age shouldn't be the only option for a youngster but the problem is that it can hinder a youngsters progress if they move to late as happened with Freddy Adu who made very little progress in the 2/3 years he had in the MLS, but I’m sure this will become a much smaller problem as time goes on in the MLS and the quality of coaching gets better at both pro level and junior level (not being condescending it was a problem that was noted by Ruud Gullit) it is also key that when kids move to Europe that they choose the right time and team to do so as it is important that they join a club where they will get playing time and are ready for the different lifestyle.



My point is that these youth players that I've highlighted have already shown more skill, capabilities and potential than the greatest American players we have to offer today... There is a clear and definite difference between the likes of players which posess the basic fundementals and players like Renken, Gyua and LLegett, these are players that posess that natural God given ability like Cristiano Ronaldo and Messi, I'm not saying that they'll be that good or even make it near their heights but they have the potential. Im aware that most players at 14 don't even resemble themselves by 18 but when you witness greatness you just know....

There's a difference betwen shooting from 30 meters because you're hoping for a miracle and shooting from that distance beacause you believe that you have the skill to actually make it. Theres 'a difference between doing step-overs and Cryuff turns because you want to appear talented (Clint Dempsey & Eddie Johnson) and doing them within the natural flow of the game to beat a defender and set your team up for a better attack (Gyau, Renken, Adu) On the other hand I've never seen Donovan even do anything remotely skillful other than outrun every other player on the field, take away his speed and he is average at best. Keep in mind that this is the best player America has ever produced. So naturally I'm optimistic about these talented kids we have, also Adu out performed Pato at the under-20 World Cup and Altidore may have as well depending on your standards.....



I see your point and understand it completely lets hope that these kids make into the big time and continue their development.
As for Freddy Adu i hope he has a good season at Monaco, he can still get himself back to centre stage he definitely still has time to make it to the biggest clubs, I hope he doesn't get distracted by the casinos and designer shops in Monte Carlo.





Someone smarter than me can explain this but my shot in the dark is the fact that poor inner-city families don't have the money to send their kids off to Florida for the summer for proper training and don't have expendable children to ship overseas to grow up in Liverpool's youth squads during their formative years.

And your point is true it isn't a matter of skills as these are almost always gained through personal training but from what I have heard about the US is that these camps are sometimes the only way to get spotted by scouts, I think MLS is doing something about this giving teams their own acadmies and security with developing their own players which I'm sure involves scouting kids from the inner-city areas. This new system is good also in that it reduces the need to rely upon the poor college system which doesn't work in this sport.


I did get my numbers from Forbes Magazine, I should have guessed that an American institution wouldn't know shit about soccer. However, The NFL is still twice as rich as the PL.

Not being condescending but I thought that every sporting club realized that it was about making money, I often hear Brits bitching that American owners are going to take over the Prem and make it all about business but can I ask you how the hell you guys survived all these years if the number one priority wasn't money?

Well it is true forbes aren't good for soccer try deloitte they are a specialised company who have work and see first hand the financial side of the biggest clubs. Last time I checked the Forbes figures they still had Leeds in the top 20 :nuts:.

The thing is the teams used to have no ivestment from billionaires or massive tv deals. Tickets used to be cheaper than tickets to the cinema and player wages and transfer fees where much smaller so the need to make money wasn't so great as long as a club cold compete at the top level they weren't going to worry about finance. But recently due to the competitive nature clubs and leagues have been forced to modernise and become more adept in making more money because if they don't they will get left behind and unable to compete this has happened in Italy with Seria A which was the strongest league 10 years ago and is now the fourth and former powers such as Nottingham Forest and Leeds struggle in the lower leagues.


You're correct in the fact that Europe has a bigger population but according to the World Bank, as a single economy, the U.S. is worth $13.8 trillion/ Europe is worth $10.5 trillion, that's a $3 trillion difference with less than half as many people, Chicago ($442 billion) by itself is richer than 21 European nations... If you were to combine New York, Los Angeles and Chicago's economies they would be richer than the entire U.K.?

The World Bank figures you have are correct but represents the Eurozone which includes only 15 of the 27 member states, the actual figure according to the International Monetary Fund is $14.7 trillion and according to the CIA is $14.3 trillion which is larger if only slightly than the US economy these figures also don't include Russia or Turket which have stong and competitive leagues which would add the economy up to roughly $18million according to the International Monetary Fund. My point here as I have noted earlier is that clubs across Europe are competing against one another at a regular basis whether it be signing a player, making money or competing in a European game. Therefore Europe can compete against a US super league but I am certain that if it where to compete against an NFL style MLS investment and the necessary money needed would have to go up which I am sure it can and will.

For an example of how decadent we can be, when Alex Rodriguez was signed by the Yankees, the Rangers paid $67 million, the Yankees paid $275 million and offered him a $30 million bonus, this is a grand total of $372 million or 186 million pounds, NO SOCCER PLAYER EVER HAS RECIEVED THIS COMPINSATION
Thierry Henry signed a 4 year/$32millon contract with Barca, one of the richest teams in the world. This is for arguably one of the greatest strikers of all-time... On the contrary that's the going rate for a player ready to retire in America....

John Terry set a record with a $13.5 million contract, in contrast, the NBA's Kevin Garnett at the age of 32 which is past prime got a 3 year/ $60 million contract, $20 million annualy, the money is here in America... Tiger Woods is the richest athlete on the planet who averages beteween $85/ $100 million annualy, that's for a golfer playing a sport which most Americans laugh at and he still makes two/three times annualy what that of Beckham and Ronaldinho makes...


BTW, David Beckham only recieves $5.5 million from the Galaxy, the rest of the money is intertwined with image rights, profit sharing & endorsements....

I'm certain the US sport personalities make more as I have noted already wages used to be extremely small in comparison, George Best one of the greatest players of all time when he retired had barely any money and had to open a pub so that he had an income and could live sustainably this would never happen now and the rate that wages increase now is going up massively it used to be only the biggest clubs who offered $180,000 weekly wages but now most teams can do so as has happened with Newcastle who haven't played in Europe for 3 years and have as good as no hope of qualifying for the Champions League have offered Michael Owen a contract of $190,000 a week despite being injury prone. Chelsea recently gave a contract of around $290,000 a week to Frank Lampard which only 3/4 years ago would have been unthinkable believe me wages are shooting up. I'm sure it will never reach the same level of wages in the US but it is going up. And money isn't everything with players Samuel Eto got offered $40million to play 6months in Uzbekistan but he turned it down because he thought a player of his talents shouldn't be playing at that level, I know there is a bit of a difference in going to Uzbekistan or the US but do you really see the MLS suddenly or even in the future offering huge wages to attract players of his quality? When that happens I think people will really take notice as there is a difference between a player in his prime and a player who has little left to do iin his career like Beckham.

Hold up, did that croatian kid seriously claim that an American millionaire would pay LESS taxes than a Brit?

Hah, Obvs he has no idea what's he talking about and should remove himself from the thread. In fact....I'm dissapointed...you guys are making bigsoccer look good in comparison.

I swear to god, if someone claims than an MLS team would or would not be better than Derby last year...I'm going to shoot you guys.

Back to stadium talk.

Vancouver's plan is to play in a revonated BC Place. Which is a 60K CFL stadium. They wont control the revenues and they will have to share the ground. Oh yeah, they will have to play in a half-empty stadium...best case scenario.


At least with the sounders, the team is owned by the same people as the Seahawks. So they team all goes to the same pot. But even then, I'm against seattle's bid.

It will be Gillete/Giants/RFK/Soldier Field all over again, it's a step backward.

The Europeans better watch out, it won't be long before our men win a gold medal as well, with our fifth or sixth sport. It won't be long before our MLS teams rob your best players during transfer time.

.

Yes, and a european club will win the superbowl......, with our 36th sport...

Hold up, did that croatian kid seriously claim that an American millionaire would pay LESS taxes than a Brit?

Hah, Obvs he has no idea what's he talking about and should remove himself from the thread. In fact....I'm dissapointed...you guys are making bigsoccer look good in comparison.

I swear to god, if someone claims than an MLS team would or would not be better than Derby last year...I'm going to shoot you guys.

Back to stadium talk.

Vancouver's plan is to play in a revonated BC Place. Which is a 60K CFL stadium. They wont control the revenues and they will have to share the ground. Oh yeah, they will have to play in a half-empty stadium...best case scenario.


At least with the sounders, the team is owned by the same people as the Seahawks. So they team all goes to the same pot. But even then, I'm against seattle's bid.

It will be Gillete/Giants/RFK/Soldier Field all over again, it's a step backward.

Dependng who gets the expansio team for Vancouver, plans are in the works for a soccer specific stadium. Ranging from a renovated/expanded Swanguard to a waterfront downtown site, to a University site. So it would be fair to say Vancouver would have a sss with a few years of joing the league. So it may be Seattle with the 1/2 to 3/4 empty stadium.

Our American women did well at the Olympics, a soccer gold medal. The Europeans better watch out, it won't be long before our men win a gold medal as well, with our fifth or sixth sport.

If you want to get technical, in the sense of winning a World Cup it'd be with our second sport, soccer is second to basketball in terms of active American players (your town will have at least four leagues playing year round, plus school teams, church teams, ect.). Because spectators don't win cups, if they did South Korea would be unbeatable.

MLS won't be taking anyone's players anytime soon. Soccer in America is highly complex and somewhat tribal, it goes deeper than what you see on ESPN. MLS tries very hard to win over the general American sports public, but at the same time it's alienating itself from the "futbolistas". In doing so, some say they've dug their own grave. They won't win over these guys who listen to sports talk, but they could have won over the other group. In the process of going for the jackpot, they may have overshot their safety net. The roots of American soccer are just fine, but the fruit is very rotten.

They should have looked at what was going on in a similar country, that being Japan. The J. League is a wonderful success and is on pace to not only catch, but blow by the Japanese Baseball League. This was done by connecting clubs with their home towns and focusing on the city rather than the "market". I'll speak as a soccer fan here, we despise being called "consumers", it's not that we aren't capitalist, but we want to be seen as supporters and not customers. We want our towns to be referred to as towns and cities and villages, anything but a "market". We're not anti-capitalists or anti-American, we're romantics. The thought of some local boys who play in a converted cow pasture beating a professional team delights us to our very core. That can't happen under MLS' set up, and that's why we follow European leagues...I'm sorry, but I can't pretend to be a Washingtonian anymore than I can pretend to be a Parisian.

Edit: Joe Public just beat New England...Joe Public.

Dependng who gets the expansio team for Vancouver, plans are in the works for a soccer specific stadium. Ranging from a renovated/expanded Swanguard to a waterfront downtown site, to a University site. So it would be fair to say Vancouver would have a sss with a few years of joing the league. So it may be Seattle with the 1/2 to 3/4 empty stadium.

But that's just it. It's not "fair to say". A stadium is such a complex business deal with so many layers of bureaucracy, that's it's hardly a slam dunk. I mean...here it is...2008 and we're just seeing Red Bull Arena...being built.

Meanwhile, I think that having SSS on day one helped Toronto immensely. The scarcity of tickets and intimacy create the atmosphere. RFK is about the same size and it has the exact same number of fans as BMO and even more organized supporters and yet it's still dwarfed by the building.

I'm still not convinced by the sounders...at least when it comes to matching the atmospheres of other teams. I dunno, i think just on gut feeling, Philly will end up being a better place to see the game than Seattle and down the line..that makes a difference.

Well it helps that Philly will probably have it's own stadium.

If you want to get technical, in the sense of winning a World Cup it'd be with our second sport, soccer is second to basketball in terms of active American players (your town will have at least four leagues playing year round, plus school teams, church teams, ect.). Because spectators don't win cups, if they did South Korea would be unbeatable.

MLS won't be taking anyone's players anytime soon. Soccer in America is highly complex and somewhat tribal, it goes deeper than what you see on ESPN. MLS tries very hard to win over the general American sports public, but at the same time it's alienating itself from the "futbolistas". In doing so, some say they've dug their own grave. They won't win over these guys who listen to sports talk, but they could have won over the other group. In the process of going for the jackpot, they may have overshot their safety net. The roots of American soccer are just fine, but the fruit is very rotten.

They should have looked at what was going on in a similar country, that being Japan. The J. League is a wonderful success and is on pace to not only catch, but blow by the Japanese Baseball League. This was done by connecting clubs with their home towns and focusing on the city rather than the "market". I'll speak as a soccer fan here, we despise being called "consumers", it's not that we aren't capitalist, but we want to be seen as supporters and not customers. We want our towns to be referred to as towns and cities and villages, anything but a "market". We're not anti-capitalists or anti-American, we're romantics. The thought of some local boys who play in a converted cow pasture beating a professional team delights us to our very core. That can't happen under MLS' set up, and that's why we follow European leagues...I'm sorry, but I can't pretend to be a Washingtonian anymore than I can pretend to be a Parisian.

Edit: Joe Public just beat New England...Joe Public.


Well put.

Football has partisan crowds the world over largely because the team represents the people and not a corporation. The team is the focus for a suburb, a city, a town etc. rather than a parachuted in franchise to provide a commercial entertainment show.

Well it helps that Philly will probably have it's own stadium.

Do people in Philly know where Chester is ?

IDK the franchise would hope so:lol:

Bit of an embarrassment for MLS yesterday both New England and Chivas USA got knocked out in the preliminary round of CONCACAF Champions League by teams from in all honesty mediocre football nations Joe Public of Trinidad (6-1) and Tauro of Panama(3-1) respectively.
So much for MLS becoming a big league no offence but if it is going to compete at the highest level the teams from the MLS need to be doing the business in the CONCACAF Champions League. I'm sure the MLS teams weren't taking it very seriously but that still isn't good either way, MLS teams need to be winning these competitions to gain respect overseas and get a chance to have a crack at some really big teams from South America and Europe in the FIFA World Club Cup.

If there is one thing that could promote MLS in the long term to both non soccer fans and soccer fans it would be to have teams getting into the Copa Libertadores, which is a genuinely big competition no offense to the CONCACAF CL but it isn't very good no matter how much the people in CONCACAF try changing that it wont change anything. The Copa Libertadores has some real giants competing and this would allow US fans to see world famous teams such as Boca Juniors, Sao Paolo, River Plate etc. and I’m sure getting an American audience would be happily accepted and would also be good for the competition, it would look good for the league seeing American teams competing with genuinely big and quality teams rather than tin pot teams. I would only do it around 2012-2014 WC time in Brazil because it could also end up blowing up in the face of the league if a mass riot breaks out in a poor stadium when an MLS team is playing there which I’m sure a number of soccer haters in the media would lap up. But around the date I gave the Brazilians have the 2014 world cup and I am sure a number of other teams in South America will be playing in impressive new and improved larger stadiums. This would mean that MLS teams would probably get a chance to play on a decent channel I’m sure ESPN would have a big enough audience interested in seeing DC United battle against Boca Juniors to put it on TV which could only be good for the league. Also the Superliga should be scrapped its clearly a stupid competition it would be better of as a pre-season competition all it does at the moment is cause fixture congestion and fixture back log.
What do you reckon will it ever happen?

Bit of an embarrassment for MLS yesterday both New England and Chivas USA got knocked out in the preliminary round of CONCACAF Champions League by teams from in all honesty mediocre football nations Joe Public of Trinidad (6-1) and Tauro of Panama(3-1) respectively.
So much for MLS becoming a big league no offence but if it is going to compete at the highest level the teams from the MLS need to be doing the business in the CONCACAF Champions League. I'm sure the MLS teams weren't taking it very seriously but that still isn't good either way, MLS teams need to be winning these competitions to gain respect overseas and get a chance to have a crack at some really big teams from South America and Europe in the FIFA World Club Cup.

If there is one thing that could promote MLS in the long term to both non soccer fans and soccer fans it would be to have teams getting into the Copa Libertadores, which is a genuinely big competition no offense to the CONCACAF CL but it isn't very good no matter how much the people in CONCACAF try changing that it wont change anything. The Copa Libertadores has some real giants competing and this would allow US fans to see world famous teams such as Boca Juniors, Sao Paolo, River Plate etc. and I’m sure getting an American audience would be happily accepted and would also be good for the competition, it would look good for the league seeing American teams competing with genuinely big and quality teams rather than tin pot teams. I would only do it around 2012-2014 WC time in Brazil because it could also end up blowing up in the face of the league if a mass riot breaks out in a poor stadium when an MLS team is playing there which I’m sure a number of soccer haters in the media would lap up. But around the date I gave the Brazilians have the 2014 world cup and I am sure a number of other teams in South America will be playing in impressive new and improved larger stadiums. This would mean that MLS teams would probably get a chance to play on a decent channel I’m sure ESPN would have a big enough audience interested in seeing DC United battle against Boca Juniors to put it on TV which could only be good for the league. Also the Superliga should be scrapped its clearly a stupid competition it would be better of as a pre-season competition all it does at the moment is cause fixture congestion and fixture back log.
What do you reckon will it ever happen?

Preaching to the choir, but let's walk before we can run.

basically MLS rosters are made up of 18 men(2.3 million bodies) and then 10 warm bodies (kids making 12k-18k USD). But New England and Chivas are crap anyway.

But MLS has won those competitions before. Galaxy and DC United. Actually DC beat Vasco de Gama (CL winners) for the intercontinental cup one year.

The collective bargaining agreement will be renegotiated and basically it will be the players union trying to get bigger budgets from the teams. Who will claim poverty even though with sales like Jozy for 10 million, Beck's contract and local cities gifting teams 100 million dollar stadiums...that's going to be hard to prove.

oh, by the way, the sissie sport of soccer, notice our American women won gold at the Bejing Olympics. Where were the British women? Culture indeed.

Lol Mr Toby I suggest you play a game of soccer on a muddy grass pitch on a wet sunday afternoon with 21 other nutters and then revise your "sissy" comment :)

Soccer in this country will suck until they set up teams for natural rivalries. Perhaps, in smaller towns.

http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/dd86/alasra2000/rsllll.jpg

Just like the rest.

www.rslstadium.com

^ More pics.