So Jeremiah Oshan of Sports Blog Nation, the site of faux-independent blogs, has decided to rank MLS stadiums using a metric consisting of long-term sustainability mixed with Groupon and some sort of Urban Hiking Today vibe.
Which is great.
If I'm looking at building a sidewalk cafe next to a soccer stadium.
(I'm not.)
As a Union fan, I'd like to take issue with the article's assertion that PPL is the second worst location in the league. No, we're not offering walking tours of Chester anytime soon, but it's a short train journey and a free bus ride to the front door of the stadium. Or if you prefer to drive (a straight shot just a few miles down I-95 from the city), the club provides free shuttles to the stadium before and after the game. There's uniformed police on every corner for blocks surrounding the stadium and private security in the parking lot. The Union FO has handled the safety of their customers fantastically. I've never heard of any crime issues involving fans coming to or leaving from the stadium.
Under Oshan's methodology, teams which people want to see are punished for setting ticket prices which reflect that, and rewarding teams that have dirt cheap price. Even worse, this ranking kind of cancels out the truly valid metric of attendance (More fans = generally a better experience).
In this blogger's opinion, if you're ranking stadiums, "stadium situation" is a cop-out. New, soccer-specific stadiums are going to be around for longer and be better for soccer than NFL stadiums? Thanks for that, yeah.
We're aware that RFK is falling down, and is a financial albatross killing D.C. United. That doesn't change that it's the most iconic soccer venue in the country and quite possibly, the most fun place to see a game; You aren't a true die-hard until you've bounced on the bleachers at RFK, one of the few bits of mythology this country's soccer culture has managed to cultivate (albeit one with gridiron roots). SBN doesn't take that into account; apparently history and the product offered are irrelevant.
--
