Midweek soccer is still a tough sell in America. Even in markets where the local side is well-supported, it's often difficult to fill stadiums on a Wednesday or Thursday night; for a myriad of reasons, Americans just don't do weeknights in large numbers (save one or two exceptions).


Which made last night's two league matches heartening, in a way. New York announced 19,035 (not all there in person, but it was still a good crowd) at Red Bull Arena and the Union had 16,000 at PPL Park. Sure, New York now has Henry to go with their shiny new stadium, but Toronto is hardly a big time visiting draw; the Union, meanwhile, have a passionate fan base that gives them a home advantage every time out in year one of the club.


I don't know that last night is indicative of an increase in midweek attendance across the league, and I'm not able to do any research at the moment. But it's just cool to see people out at the park on a Wednesday night, sign of a trend or not.


Alternate competitions, the US Open Cup and CONCACAF Champions League, will remain a problem, and the former will likely never get fans excited enough to show up in large numbers. But if the league is considering a 34 game schedule for 2011 and must put more games in midweek slots, there's at least hope that respectable numbers will show up in a handful of cities.


I dig good atmosphere. Both of those games last night had it. It's too bad that neither was nationally televised, but without knowing the specifics of TV contracts, it's hard for me to come down on anyone for that. Production cost money.


Oh, and the games weren't too bad either. That definitely helps. Sellouts on the weekends are flashier, but it's ultimately growing midweek numbers that will reveal the strides MLS is making as a marketable entertainment product.

USA supporters and MLS fans: Not mutually exclusive

I don't know Paul Gardner, and I'm guessing he'd be a very interesting guy to talk to, but he he seems like a pretty angry man. Today's Soccer America screed is on the effect the World Cup might have on MLS, an effect Gardner says "is likely to be close to zero".


Gardner's contention that the World Cup won't have any real effect on MLS' popularity is reasonable, and somewhat based on precedent (precedent Gardner admits he was too lazy to actually research, but whatever). The U.S. run to the quarterfinals in 2002 didn't really push Major League Soccer to marvelous new heights, and 2006's disaster didn't pull it back. Not that it's just about the U.S. National Team and their fortunes, of course; the World Cup is a global event, the story lines are interesting across the tourney's field, and the simple display of soccer on such a magnificent scale might entice a few more people to head out to their local MLS stadium.


One would think, anyway.


But even if that logic fails, and the reality of the matter is that there is no real bump, it would be ridiculous to fault MLS for not at least trying to swing things to their advantage. The World Cup break, something that I was in favor of as a matter of appearances and legitimacy, indicates that the league has changed its tactics; for the most part, this is viewed as a good thing, and as a sign that the league is staring to "get it".


MLS has hired a creative agency called Dentsu America to help them leverage World Cup interest. A smart move, in my opinion, even if the agency has an uphill battle ahead of them. I suspect in the past, the league simply assumed the World Cup would help them. Hiring an agency is a proactive step, and therefore laudable.


Major League Soccer isn't the World Cup. Major League Soccer isn't the Premier League, Serie A, La Liga, the Bundesliga, the Mexican Primera, or any number of other more visible and better supported leagues. Selling fans of those leagues on a lesser quality product that doesn't involve cultured English accents or century of history is difficult. There are also millions of Americans for whom the World Cup is the only soccer they'll be watching, on TV or in person, until the next one comes around. But there's certainly room for improvement in both areas, because not everyone is completely intransigent, and I disagree with Gardner that the overlap between passionate USMNT fans and prospective MLS fans is less than one would think; looking for the worst in the group (he singles out Sam's Army specifically), he boils down these fans to xenophobic pro-USA cheerleaders rather than soccer fans, making them unlikely to gravitate to the world of club soccer.


I'm certain that element exists, and they might be some of the more annoyingly loud members of the group. But I doubt seriously they represent a majority, and I reject the notion that they should be allowed to dictate the image of all supporters group members. I know they don't reflect my views.


My biggest problem with "the World Cup effect is untrue" argument is that is doesn't allow for changing variables; the world is a different place, particularly in terms of the Internet and social media, than it was in 1998, 2002, and 2006. Just because nothing significant happened then doesn't mean it can't happen now. Will the World Cup lead to a bump this time? I have no idea. But I do the logic Gardner's uses for saying it won't is clearly flawed.


As for Gardner's views on ESPN's coverage and the British voices, I'm going to leave that alone. Besides, I've already had my say.

Allow me to introduce Vlad Bouchoev, a student at Carnegie Mellon University with a passion for soccer who is dipping his toes into the MFUSA waters with a piece on the Red Bulls and their new stadium attendance struggles. - JD


by Vlad Bouchouev

New York, New York. A city with nearly 10 professional sports teams. A city of over 18 million inhabitants in its metropolitan area. The world capital so to speak. Yet somehow the New York Red Bulls still manage to not sell-out their newly built state-of-the-art stadium. The question cannot be as simple as to whether or not soccer is popular in New York City, because NYC has a plethora of foreigners who have a passion for the game. Just last week the new Giants Stadium hosted a sell-out crowd of 77,507 for the Mexico-Ecuador match. Likewise, every summer we see sell-out crowds in New York's American football stadium when world-class soccer teams come play there, either against other international visitor or the local NY Red Bulls. So yes, there are soccer fans in New York City.


So then maybe this brings up the great ole’ New York City sports fans’ complaint of the horrid location of the Meadowlands and how commuting to the stadium takes away any motivation to see their team play. Well my friends, have no fear because Red Bull Arena is here. You hate driving? Don’t want to spend your entire day in traffic? Take the train. You can literally take the train from as far away as Princeton or Long Island, make it to the stadium in a little over an hour and not have to pay the ridiculous $15 parking fee. Sadly, I still don’t think that the commute has been the underlying problem. Attendance figures in the past two NY Red Bull game have only risen by about 4,000 people, bringing this year’s average to a little over 14,000 people. This is not including the barely sold-out NY Red Bull home opener against the Chicago Fire since the team was still riding the “Red Bull Arena-awe-effect” at that point. Remember, the new stadium seats 25,189 so we’re still looking at a stadium that is a little over half-full.


This almost leads us to my last point: competition in a big city market. In a city that boasts the historic NY Yankees and NY Mets, two football teams, a world-famous Midtown arena that sells out any team that plays inside, and the NJ Nets, NJ Devils, and NY Islanders (who even when they struggle seem to steal away some sports fans and bring them to their games), there just seems to be little room for the NY Red Bulls. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying to take my beloved NY Red Bulls away from this city. But I am hinting on the fact that maybe cities like Seattle, which have one less “big-4” (football, baseball, basketball, hockey) sports team than other large U.S. metropolitan cities may hold a formula for success for MLS. Granted, I know that argument will be shot down by the likes of the LA Galaxy fans (who live in a city that has more than 4 professional sports teams), Philadelphia Union fans (who even with the “big-4” in their city manage to get 30,000+ to their games), or Salt Lake City folks (who with only the Utah Jazz, don’t get numbers nearly as comparable as the Seattle Sounders at the Real Salt Lake games). Then again, I don’t really consider Salt Lake City a large U.S. metropolitan city. Bottom-line, the NY Red Bulls need to prove that they are a worthy competitor in the NYC sports market. Similar to the way the New York Cosmos did a couple of decades ago…


Ah, that’s more like it. The New York Cosmos. Could that be the missing piece of the puzzle? Were they doing something right that the NY Red Bull franchise has overlooked? Let’s flashback to way before my time, 1976. The Cosmos crashed out of the playoffs that year losing to the Tampa Bay Rowdies. At that point, the world’s greatest player ever, Pele, had been on the Cosmos for two years, and the “Soccer Bowl” was yet to be won. Attendance increased by a mere 8,000 people from the previous year. Thus, Pele initially had only a marginal “Beckham-effect.” The next year the Cosmos loaded up on more world-class players like Carlos Alberto, Franz Beckenbauer, and Giorgio Chinaglia and saw attendance skyrocket to a very steady 45,000 pace for the next several years.


The Cosmos then won a few championships but soon after ran out of money and folded. So what conclusions can we make about all this? Well, money is power. If you have the money (which the Red Bulls do) spend it, bring in high-end players, and fans will gradually flood the stadiums to not only see the talent of the players but to also see their team succeed. If you would like to grind out success from your team, feel free to go about this way. But here's another thought: Maybe it’s the brand that New Yorkers don’t support, not the game. If there’s one thing that stays away from American sports, it’s commercialization. You don’t see advertisements on your American sports jerseys; you see the name of the city, the name of the team, and the logo. In the case of the Red Bulls, the whole franchise is named after an energy drink that doesn’t even have an association to New York, and the logo on the New York Red Bull jersey is the actual logo of the Red Bull energy drink.


So New Yorkers: would you attend if your team’s name was the Cosmos? Perhaps we’ll find out if the MLS sticks another expansion team somewhere in Queens, NY and names it something more evocative. Will fans attend if the Red Bulls stock up their team with big-name players and dominate the rest of the season? Perhaps we’ll find out after the Red Bulls get Theirry Henry, Ze Roberto, and Raul, and go on to win MLS Cup. Until then, the case of the Red Bull franchise in New York City is just as much of a mystery as the Shroud of Turin. One thing is for sure: the Red Bulls have to continue building their name. The MLS is an investment. The NY Red Bulls is an investment. The arena is an investment. Professional soccer in the US may never reach the same popularity level as in Europe, but if it will, it will take time.

In the continual saga of American Soccer's inferiority complex, comparing attendance sizes with other sports is our equivalent of whipping it out on the playground to see who's got the biggest one. Discarding that metaphor before it gets weird, at the top end of the asses-in-seats table, teams like Seattle, Philadelphia, Toronto, and Los Angeles are tickling Major League Baseball numbers. Around the rest of the league, most teams put up numbers that wouldn't be out of place in the NBA or NHL. Sure, there are always some laggards, but for the most part, Major League Soccer has done pretty well in justifying the "major" part of its name.


Then we get turnouts like last night's debacle in New England. The Revolution drew a paltry 5,990 people to Gillette Stadium, where they were hosed 4-0 by Chivas USA. That's closer to Major League Lacrosse than Major League Baseball. For all the good signs we've seen, and all the huge steps our sport has taken in the past two decades, an attendance figure like that paints an alarming picture of continued fragility for one of the league's original clubs.


The Revolution's problems are myriad. Foremost, perhaps, is the fact that Gillette Stadium is terrible for this level of soccer. Even a good crowd of fifteen or sixteen thousand gets swallowed up in a vast sea of empty seats. It's also notoriously difficult to get to. Thirty miles of claustrophobic highway separate the stadium from Boston, and in fact, it's closer to Providence, Rhode Island, than it is to downtown Boston. To make matters worse, there isn't a normal public transit stop within miles of the stadium. The special train that runs for NFL games isn't used for MLS matches.


Then there's the product on the field. In the past, Steve Nicol has done admirably with limited resources, taking the Revs to four MLS Cup finals, two US Open Cup finals (winning one), winning the 2008 SuperLiga, and finishing as MLS Supporters' Shield runner-up in 2005, but the ultimate prize, an MLS Cup title, has eluded them. This season, they've managed just two wins in their first seven matches, overcoming only a poor Toronto FC side and a DC United squad in the middle of its worst ever start to a season.


Additionally, there are few big names on this Revolution roster with the clout to bring out the unwashed masses. Of the club's two most marketable names, Revolution legend and all-time leading scorer Taylor Twellman is battling career-threatening injury, while captain Shalrie Joseph is on indefinite leave of absence while he is seeking treatment for substance abuse.


The lack of star players is just another accusation leveled at the Revolution's owners, Kraft Sports Group, by concerned and fed-up Revs fans. Some of the supports feel like KSG is using them to add a few extra zeros at the end of a balance sheet for a facility they've already paid for. They also contend that the Front office has done a poor job of marketing the team, and too often has made questionable personnel decisions. In recent seasons, talented young players like Clint Dempsey, Michael Parkhurst, and Jeff Larentowicz have left the club, and although of those three, only Larentowicz was traded, the fans are disappointed that issues of quality and long-term development haven't been addressed.


Now, the sub six-thousand attendance is more of an aberration than a rule, but it highlights the problems New England is facing. Boston is an important market for MLS, and solutions must be sought. The vast majority of the public would like to see a smaller facility close to the heart of the city; Harvard Stadium has been mooted as a potential option, while another proposal would see a stadium built in the much closer suburb of Somerville.


Whatever happens, the most important thing is that something does happen. MLS has grown beyond what the Revolution management are currently able of accomplishing, and stagnating in the current situation will have detrimental impact on the league's development and credibility.

The Philadelphia Union made their Major League Soccer debut against the Sounders Seattle two weeks ago, but their real beginning as member of the city's sports scene comes this Saturday at Lincoln Financial Field.


Philly's reputation as a tough sports town is well-earned. From the regular booing of their own teams when the play isn't up to snuff, to the now mythical story of Eagles fans pelting Santa Claus with snowballs, Philadelphia is where good feelings in the world of sports go to die.


It makes the Union's home opener perhaps the most important home debut for any expansion team in the modern MLS era. With their soccer specific home in Chester still under construction, the Union will play DC United on Saturday in an American football venue; on one hand, this provides them an opportunity to sell more tickets than they could at PPL Park. On the other, the number of empty seats at the Linc will suck away some of the atmosphere of the game, making the product less appealing to both fans there in person there for curiosity and not yet committed to supporting the team passionately, as well locals (potential fans) who might see the game on TV.


The Union has a lot going for them in terms of support. We know that the Sons of Ben will be at every match, and that their numbers are significant. The Union leadership seems to be getting things right, both with the selling of their product and their attempts to marry the club to the local sports scene. But success is not guaranteed, no matter how good things look prior to the club's home debut, and though many are confident that the club will sell out PPL Park when it opens and the team will make an impact on the Philly scene, only time will tell. As of this writing, 25,000 tickets have been sold for this weekend's match, a number that is equal parts impressive and disappointing. It's difficult to criticize the team for selling more tickets thank anyone but Seattle can manage, but it's disappointing to think that such a large venue will go less than half-filled.


If the enthusiasm for a team that will struggle to keep their heads above water on the field all season thanks to a long term plan that includes a collections of young, inexperienced players is to carry through the year, the Union will need to connect with as many fans as possible through atmosphere and excitement rather than results.


Even as I have faith they can achieve that goal, I wonder when the collective teeth of the Philly sports community will come out. If the Union lose on Saturday, and show no signs of improvement over their opening night debacle, how quickly will a city that loves winners and is known for turning on their own stick with them?

Some of the few that did show up

Major League Soccer has a problem, and it's the stickiest possible kind. One of the league's original franchises, owned by the family of perhaps the game's most important American benefactor, has become an embarrassment.


The saying goes "Everything's bigger in Texas". Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to apply to the crowds at FC Dallas games in Frisco.


An announced crowd of 8,016, of which perhaps 7,000 were actually in attendance (though these things are admittedly difficult to assess), showed up at Pizza Hut Park on Saturday to watch the Hoops draw 1-1 with the in-state rival Dynamo. That number represents an almost 50% dip from last year's home opener, and only 35% of the capacity of the stadium. Any way you cut it, those numbers are disgusting, disappointing, and ultimately, troubling.


Of the eight clubs that opened at home this weekend, only two saw a drop from their 2009 home opener attendance (Columbus and FC Dallas). Both happen to be owned by the Hunts Sports Group, currently controlled by Clark Hunt, son of the late American soccer pioneer Lamar. What conclusion can be drawn other than that HSG itself is the problem?


Major League Soccer has a lot going for it. New stadiums, new teams, labor peace, and a World Cup year to leverage for more attention. Perhaps the league's leadership is content to allow HSG to fail miserably at the gate in Dallas because of those positives; or perhaps it's a simple matter of deferring to the legacy of the Hunts in the sport, no matter how poorly they're performing. The club does do okay on the bottom line, after all, but only because soccer is just one of their revenue streams. For HSG, Pizza Hut Park is as much a concert venue as it is a soccer stadium. With so many teams in the red, are the league's hands tied when it comes to forcing things to change in Frisco?


The excuse in Dallas is location. The club took the only deal offered and put their stadium too far removed from the region's population center and its Hispanic communities; after falling flat and alienating their fan base in previous years, the club was forced to find a way to attract people to a stadium in the middle of no where (figuratively speaking, of course). Pizza Hut Park opened in August of 2005; in the four full seasons since, the club has averaged 15k, 15k, 13k, and less than 10k last year (excuse the rounding). With more time to market the club, educate the fans about where they play, and make inroads in the community they now inhabit, how is it possible for the club to be going backwards?


Last year FC Dallas started terribly and used a late-season push to get themselves in playoff contention. Winning is always a draw, and it's possible that the fans stayed away because the team was poor to start the year. That conclusion might be reasonable if the ownership of the club didn't have such a poor track record, both in Dallas and Columbus; the Crew are in the midst of a trophy winning streak yet have failed to crack the top half of league attendance the last two seasons. Dallas' problems on the field combined with Pizza Hut Park's location is a double whammy; but even bad teams and those playing in massive American football stadiums far from their natural base can draw more than 10k.


Regardless of why it's happening, it seems obvious that something needs to be done. Lamar Hunt has passed, and his legacy as an architect of professional soccer in America will no doubt live forever. There is no more debt owed. HSG and Clark Hunt cannot be afforded a free pass simply because Lamar's contributions loom so large.


MLS makes so many of its decisions based on the business of running the league that one wonders if they're simply willing to eat failure in Dallas because the club doesn't lose money. That may be fine for the bottom line, but it does a disservice to the rest of the league, the image of game as a major sport, and the future of professional soccer in north Texas. The worse it gets for FC Dallas in the stands, the more we must wonder why Major League Soccer stands idly by and lets it happen.

Finally, Major League Soccer returns tomorrow night in Seattle, with a full slate of matches to follow this weekend. I'm buzzing with excitement, and plan to take in every possible minute of action I can manage (provide MLS gets their act together on their Match Center streaming video service).


But outside of the actual play on the field, who's good, who's not, which new players make a difference for their clubs, and which head coaches seem to have a grasp on their teams early in the year, I'll be paying attention to something else: attendance.


Opening weekend should be an attendance winner. Clubs have had all off-season to pump awareness of their product into their communities, and though this year's CBA melodrama may have hampered some efforts, a properly marketed club should have no problem getting a sellout or close to it.


A big average number would be nice, but I'm much more interested in how the games do in terms of percent of capacity; with two tiny stadiums in the mix and Seattle on the other end, that's the truer indication of success.


We know Seattle will have in excess of 30k, selling out the seats they make available in the 60k+ capacity Qwest Field. New York will sellout for their opener in their brand new arena against Chicago. Kansas City should have no problem filling their tiny stadium, with just over 10k in attendance, and I would hope San Jose can do the same. If we're being optimistic, that's four clubs with one hundred percent capacity.


After that, there are some questions.


Columbus, despite the quality of their team, continues to come up short at the gate. Last year's opener drew just over 14k in a 20k capacity stadium (70%). That's not terrible, but keep in mind that none of the TFC supporters groups are organizing away support for the match. How will that affect things? I'm not sure, but I don't know that there's any indication that Crew fans will make up the difference. That's disheartening considering that Columbus will once again be contenders for the title this season.


Both LA and Chivas did better than the Crew in terms of raw numbers for their '09 openers, but each came up short of the percentage of seats Columbus filled. Will they do better this year? I'm not sure there's any way to tell, though Donovan's return as a conquering hero from England might help LA.


That brings us, unfortunately, to FC Dallas. Pizza Hut Park is a beautiful place to watch a soccer match that is simply too far removed from the population center of the area. Dallas drew 15k for their opener in 2008, their best crowd of the season (throwing out a Cotton Bowl crowd for a doubleheader that included Mexico); from the rumblings out of Texas (rumors, to be clear), it sounds like they'll be supremely lucky to get half of that on Saturday, despite a weather forecast of 76 degrees and partly sunny. If FCD does draw as poorly as some think they will, they'll have moved beyond a simple concern to a major problem; no club with a consistent history in a market and soccer-specific stadium should come up short of 10k in their first match of the season, when record has no bearing.


I'm sure you don't need me to point out the common element shared by Columbus and FC Dallas, two teams that struggle to draw consistent crowds despite built-in advantages. Pizza Hut Park's suburban location doesn't fully excuse FC Dallas' issues, while any club with the success of Columbus over the past few seasons should simply do better in the stands. After each of their openers I'll be particularly curious to see how many fans showed up.


Attendance on opening weekend is guaranteed to be better this season than last for the simple reason that there's one more match on the schedule. But the more interesting measure of how much MLS was affected by the CBA uncertainty will be seen in Columbus, LA, and Dallas, where there is no buzz over a new stadium (New York), track record of massive sellouts in an expansion market (Seattle), or tiny stadium that obscures the real level of attention on the local team (Kansas City and San Jose).


For reference, here's 2009's opening weekend attendance from MLS Daily.

For all of its flaws, there are a few things that Major League Soccer does right; the game is the healthiest and most financially viable on the professional level it's ever been, soccer-specific stadiums are going up all over the country, and young MLS players are going on to careers in the more lucrative environs of Europe.

The economic crisis that hit the US last year threatened to derail all of that. The league, just as with any entertainment product, faced an uncertain 2009 as the expendable income of millions of Americans disappeared. While the bargain-nature of soccer in the US was viewed as a strength that might mitigate the economic effect, no one knew for sure.

Kristian Dyer at Soccernet did a little research, talked to some people, and wrote an excellent piece on the situation; MLS seems to be doing okay, and remains well positioned despite the downturn.

Yes, attendance is down. But in relation to more established sports products, it hasn't really been a bad year for MLS. Cost-cutting measures, no matter how much we despise them (remember the reserve league?) do help.

MLS can't stand still, of course, and will need to be proactive if they hope to come out strong on the other side. The argument could be made that expanding during the bad economy actually makes sense; the league pockets the expansion fees as a buffer against their losses, the new teams build the league's brand in new markets, and the fans have a new cheaper pro sports alternative in their cities.

Raymond Sauer, a professor of economics at Clemson and the man behind The Sports Economist blog, is quoted by Dyer in the story and gets to the heart of the matter by summing up MLS' dilemma going forward:

"MLS will have to spend more on talent if they are to build a generation of fans for their own home-grown teams. There are plenty of challenges ahead."

The economy is now showing slow signs of recovering, and with the World Cup likely to raise soccer's profile considerably in 2010, Major League Soccer should stand to reap the benefits if they continue to do (more) things right.

For me, I mean. I have no idea if you are in the same boat as me; perhaps you've been able to split your attention. Club and country, all at the same time.

I'll admit that I've had some tunnel vision recently. I've been locked in on the US National Team, so much so that Major League Soccer seems like just a wispy dream. I knew it was there, and I as vaguely aware that I was interested, but I found myself unable to give it the attention it actually deserved while there was still a question surrounding the US World Cup spot.

With the conclusion of the Hexagonal last night, I shouldn't have anymore problems giving the domestic club competition some love. The playoffs are coming, teams are still jockeying, and I'm pretty sure I've missed some interesting and highly competitive games. It's about time I rectified that situation, now that there are no more USMNT distractions.

Case in point, and how I know it's about damned time I switch off blinders: Greg Seltzer on No Short Corners today noted that six of the first seven matches in this MLS week (round, whatever) have playoff implications; it started last night with RSL keeping their hopes alive by beating Red Bull at Rio Tinto, and continues through the Colorado-FC Dallas on Saturday night. Of the two non-crucial matches, one is a top-of-the-West clash between the Galaxy and Dynamo; who knows how that game will play out with both sides already qualified, but it could be a real cracker.

Without meaningful international football that I truly care about until the World Cup next year (yes, I care about the friendlies, but only in that how-did-we-look kind of way), MLS is the only American game in town. I'm hoping for a rousing post-season with last-minute wins, dodgy penalties, golazos, full-throttle play, unlikely heroes, full stadiums, and manager meltdowns. You know, all of those things that make soccer worth watching when the pressure is at it's most intense.

A few things I really do hope to see this weekend:

• Seattle beat Kansas City to secure their playoff spot
  
  I'm not a fan of the Sounders, but I want to see them in the playoffs. MLS needs playoff soccer in Quest.

• New England lose
  
  I now that sounds harsh, but I really don't want to see those American football lines anymore.

• United play hard but come up short against Columbus
  
  Again, it's harsh, but United needs a house-cleaning desperately, and I fear that making the playoffs would gloss over the problems and keep Will Chang/Kevin Payne from pulling the trigger that puts Tom Soehn out of his misery.

• Goals
  
  Since I'm returning my attention to the league, I expect that I'll be watching more than a few games this weekend; it would be nice if those games had some goals to keep me entertained.

• People
  
  Without the National Team to compete with, and with the playoff races at a full gallup, maybe we'll see a decent crowd or two around the league. Let me check that schedule again...okay, nevermind.

The return of Deep Cuts means scouring the internet for unique and off-the-beaten-path stories, opinions, and news. It's not always easy to track down worthwhile links that go beyond what you might find elsewhere, and frankly, I'm not always successful. It's part of the reason there wasn't an edition yesterday; between cranking out an conjectural piece on how the Honduran crisis might affect next month's US qualifier and doing the work of tracking down the links, there just wasn't enough there or enough time to present a Tuesday offering.

We're back, but without the atypical vibe; instead, it's all about stadiums.

• After all of the consternation over the needed renovations to Portland's PGE Park in preparation for the Timebers' MLS debut, the remodel plan won't increase the stadium's current capacity. Well, it will/can in some situations, but the typical capacity will be set at 17,000. That seems like a fairly low number to me, even with the mentioned ability to increase available seating to 22,000 when needed. I can't imagine that those Portland residents that continue to vehemently oppose the city's investment in soccer (and paint the league as risky proposition that isn't likely to last) will be too impressed.

• In contrast to Portland's low attendance bar is the continued raising of Seattle's; the Sounders are considering opening up the "Hawks Nest", general admission bench-style seating at the north end (shame on the writer for referring to the area of the stadium as the "end zone" in a soccer story) of Qwest Field as a response to high demand for tickets. The section of seats has a capacity of 2,200, meaning that sold out Sounders game next year could take place in front nearly 35,000 fans. The simple fact that Seattle has averaged 30,000 this season is stunning. If the momentum continues, and the Sounders prove that the initial heat won't be wearing off, 2010 should be another record-setting year in the Pacific Northwest.

• From the high of increased capacity at Qwest Field, we go to the low of the confirmation from Philadelphia Union CEO Nick Sakiewicz the the club won't be playing their home opener at the new Chester Stadium. Even worse, Sakiewicz suggests Union's second home game might not be played their either; construction delays are stealing some of the club's thunder as they head towards their MLS debut next year. I've joined the chorus of voices that suggest the league send the Union on an extended season-opening road trip to allow for stadium preparations to be completed rather than play in front of a half empty Lincoln Financial Field.

I apologize for the slight delay; as I write this, I am in Texas, taking care of some various site business.

But I'd be remiss if I didn't post a little something on Wednesday's US Open Cup final.

Quite a final, wasn't it? On it's own, the actual play would have made the game an instant classic, as least in terms of the US Open Cup. Two fairly strong MLS teams intent on winning silverware, putting out the best sides they could in light of the rules that govern the tournament. Add in the Josh Wicks-inspired drama, and the final enters the realm of "much talked about". It's a condition that the Open Cup doesn't always possess.

Wicks' actions, with the Sounders victory as the other story, are dominating the discussion. What Wicks did, and there is little question as to his intent as he "stomped" Freddy Montero after the Columbian's goal, was terrible and inexcusable. Frustrations boil over, and players are human, so "blow ups" are always only moments from happening; but for Seattle's first trophy as an MLS club to be overshadowed by Wicks is unfortunate.

Montero avoided injury, however, and so Sounders fans should be happy to move on and celebrate their Open Cup win. They've achieved one of their states goals for their inaugural top-flight season, and will now head into the CONCACAF Champions League next year. That's a massive thing, not just for them but for that competition, as (if they are able to carry over their momentum in the stands) they will surely bring bigger crowds to their CCL matches than any other American club.

The other battle, the one over the site of the final and whether or not DC United could draw a crowd "worthy" of winning that bid, was of just as much interest to many observers as the game itself. 17,329 fans filed into RFK Stadium, a number that represents a massive success considering the midweek date and the non-league nature of the match. That crowd represents the fourth best attendance for United in 2009, and I don't think it's a stretch to say that DC's marketing department should be applauded for all they did to make it happen. Their investment in the game, spurred by the war of words between Kevin Payne and Adrian Hanauer, was impressive.

I'm sure, however, that Sounders fans would still claim they would have sold out the match and almost doubled United's crowd; but their team won the match, and that should be the most important thing.

Congrats to the Sounders; if Major League Soccer's most successful club couldn't win their 13th trophy, then having the newest gold standard of American soccer clubs win their first is a fine alternative. Hell, it might even be a better result for the future of the tournament.

Feel free to post your thoughts on the match, the "success" of United in the stands, or the fallout that might/should come from Josh Wicks ill-advised foul.

Highlights, courtesy of DCUnited.com

While not exactly a continuation of my The Beckham Experiment review (which you can read here and which was my immediate reaction to the book), this post is significantly influenced by Grant Wahl's look inside the 2007-2008 LA Galaxy; simply put, I have more to say on the subject of American's soccer savior with his return to MLS imminent.

While many passionate American soccer fans, both those that follow MLS and those that denigrate it, would more than likely prefer to forget about Beckham and move on, he remains a relevant and polarizing figure in our little world. To ignore that fact, or to downplay Beckham's return as some kind of mundane development is to miss the point; while those of us committed to MLS and soccer no matter Beckham's presence may wish for him to just fade away, he's still a part of the equation, and one that bears analysis.

When Beckham arrived in 2007, he was hailed as the man that would take American soccer to a new level. He was the Golden Boy, the man with the magic right foot and the shriek-inducing good looks who would bridge the divide between casual American sports fans and the world's game. While that didn't happen, and poor planning combined with an unfortunately-timed injury ruined the momentum and stole away the good feelings, Beckham did have a reasonable effect. Name recognition of Major League Soccer and the LA Galaxy rose significantly, and plenty of money was made by both entities.

My, how times have changed.

Beckham's strong-arm act that led to a loan stint in Milan and a half-season compromise with MLS has predictably pissed off more than an few people. American soccer fans are by nature overly-defensive creatures, a result of constantly having to stave off attacks and disdain from the majority the US sports community, and Beckham's double-cross has inflamed their anger. Beckham is potentially set to make his 2009 MLS debut in less than two days time, and even if he does not play, he will certainly be in attendance. The reception, which might be called "icy" if it was to take place in a more polite setting, will likely instead boil with intensive heat. Beckham will be booed, jeered, derided, and abused by every verbal volley the New York crowd (and I can think of no better for the job-okay, maybe you people in Philly) can come up with. He will be the most hated man in the stadium by a large margin, an impressive feat considering his short time as an MLS figure.

"Pariah" is the word most often used in these situations, a clichéd term that nonetheless properly conveys the utter disdain with which the subject is held. To say that it applies to the English superstar is to state the obvious.

And yet, I feel it necessary.

David Beckham is the American soccer's newest pariah.

Despite this newly earned status, new fans will come out simply to see him play, anxious to get a glimpse of the man for perhaps the first time. Still, the "Beckham Effect" on attendance will have waned, a reflection of our short attention span and his unfulfilled cultural-transforming potential. Yet, he will still be the center of attention and remain the man that most want to see. For some it will be about the free kicks and good looks; for others, the chance to rain down their displeasue and berate him lustily will be too inviting to pass up. I'm betting that there will be more of the latter, more people whose ire has been raised than whose desire to see "greatness" has been piqued. Beckham turned his back on the very people who were most excited to see him here; all of those that were soccer fans before his arrival, who truly believed that he might lift the sport they loved up the American sports hierarchical ladder a rung or two.

If this was any other country, Beckham's betrayal would simply be a matter for the fans his own club. Anywhere else in the world, and it would only be his team's supporters who would turn on him, disgusted by his lack of loyalty and growing list of broken promises. But this is MLS, a league with a collective soul that remains unique in the footballing world. While rivalry and dislike runs rampant between fans just as is it does everywhere else, MLS fans have a sense of community and kinship built on the nature of the game here and its secondary status that means Beckham's slight against one is a slight against all. American soccer is the victim here, and its defenders across the country are certain to let Beckham know that his behavior is unacceptable.

Cheers to them all.

While this may not be the way that Tim Leiweke, the LA Galaxy, or the MLS leadership wanted it to go, Beckham's heel turn may in fact be a blessing in disguise. Hate is often an easily emotion to evoke in a large group than love, and may in fact be more effective in provoking action. Beckham's impact on ticket sales may actually be stronger now than it would have been had he not sped off to Milan and appeared so hesitant to return. The number one-off ticket buys and family packages purchased during his initial year and a half tour naturally ebbed over time; with a new found reason to head to the stadium (i.e. let's yell at Beckham), perhaps the ebb has been stemmed. Beckham may have missed half of the 2009 MLS season and stolen away dates previous envisioned as blockbuster sellouts; but his return as a hated figure might bring more attention to the league and create a stronger second-half as a result.

Does Beckham as the villain have the same drawing power as Beckham as the savior?

Probably not, but I have to wonder if it just might not be all that bad...

Besides, we Americans just love to hate.

It's not often that my news reader fills up with soccer related news that doesn't come from a soccer focused site. Generally, I hear about happenings in the soccer world through various keywords that I hope will pull anything and everything related to American soccer that is floating around the interweb.

Blogs are the largest source, though I certainly get stories through soccernet, ESPN proper, CNN and the like (especially if the name "Beckham" is involved). Today, though, the web blew up.

Every sports site in the country posted a story on Don Garber's verbal beat-down by Yankees' president Randy Levine over The Don's recent comments about the baseball club's attendance "woes".

I don't quite get what all the fuss is about. First, I think it's very possible that Levine took Garber's comments out of context. Second, Levine is clearly guilty of overreacting. Third, even if Garber meant what he said, so what? Why is Randy Levine so sensitive that he felt it necessary to respond? Especially in light of his obvious disdain for Major League Soccer?

"Don Garber discussing Yankee attendance must be a joke," Levine told the AP today. "We draw more people in a year than his entire league does in a year. If he ever gets Major League Soccer into the same time zone as the Yankees, we might take him seriously.

Come on now, Randy. If MLS isn't even in the "same time zone" as the Yankees (what does that even mean?), why bother wasting your breath? Someone once told me that "eagles don't hunt flies". If the Yankees are the eagle and Garber/MLS is the fly, then all Levine has done is lower himself.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a staunch supporter of MLS, and I'm no Yankee-lover either; but the fact remain that the New York Yankees are one of the world's biggest sports brands, and Major League Soccer is one step removed from fly-by-night.

This little shot shows just how petty Randy Levine truly is:

"Hey Don, worry about Beckham, not the Yankees. Even he wants out of your league.''

There are two ways to look at this little overblown episode. Either Levine's comments have given the soccer-hating public (and they're falling over themselves to comment on the story wherever they can) license to bash the sport (again) and the league takes another P.R. hit, or the attention MLS is getting from the mainstream media over what amounts to a misunderstanding is a good thing, something that will actually be a positive in the long run.

What do you think? Is this another hit for MLS and American soccer, or is there a silver lining to all of the attention?

Okay, so maybe it's my mood today, but it seems my rose-colored glasses are beginning to fail me. Objectivity is tough when you invest yourself completely in something, which is what I've apparently done with soccer by writing this blog; so for the past few months, I've managed to convince myself that everything will be alright, and that MLS will thrive in 2009.

While I'm not going to back off that belief completely (Hey Ma! Watch me hedge!), I do think I need to revaluate things a little. Let me give you a brief glimpse into the processes of my brain today:

Saw Bill Simmons post on the NBA entititled "No Benjamins Association" (didn't read it, not that interested)--->
Thought about the economy's effect on pro sports in the near future--->
Wondered if MLS will fare better or worse than other leagues--->
Reconsidered my belief that MLS attendance will increase over last year

It's certainly possible that things will get better, and that the net gains made in 2009 (at least in terms of visibility and Q-rating*) will outweigh any setbacks caused by the economy; but the league will cetainly take a perception hit if attendance drops. The soccer-haters won't care that the economy is bad, or they'll ignore the fact in order to badmouth soccer again.

I'm inclined to believe that baseball will get a pass from the media (because of the economy) if their crowds shrink, but that probably isn't true in light of the most recent steroids scandal. Still, baseball acts as though it's bulletproof for the most part, and it will be interesting to see if the two factors do combine to bring attendance down.

I'm rather steadfast in my belief that MLS is prefectly positioned to take advantage of the weakened economy, although that convcition is tempered by the disheartening lack of mainstream buzz for the league. If wishes and buts were....something.

Seattle's ticket selling success only means something if it translates on a grander scale; if the mainstream media points to the Northwest and says, "Hey! Look up there! A bunch of people are excited for soccer! Maybe we should go investigate!"

Then, maybe the rest of the league, and the teams that need the help, will get a bump. I said it in my last post, and I'll say it again: people are followers, so they'll start to show up at MLS stadiums if it becomes the "in" thing to do.

Hell, forget the mainstream media, I'd take Tyler Durden and Perez Hilton writing about it at this point.

I believe that blogging is our future, let them grow and watch them lead the way...

Or something. I'm in a really weird mood today.

Lemme sum up:

I think attendance can go up this year, I'm just not convinced it definitely will anymore. But I'm hopeful. And excited for the season.

Blech. Tuesday.

*Damnit, I put the asterisk in there to follow up with a footnote, and then completely spaced on it. Let me just say that I'm not really sure what "Q-rating" means, other than that's it's some subjective measure of the popularity of a given person/product/thing. I think.

I've been told that everybody loves a list, so to that end, I've decided to take another stab at one.

With the 2009 MLS season less than a month away, I've put together the five reasons that 2009 will be the most important year for MLS.

1. It's the Economy Stupid

With the economy in the proverbial crapper, MLS must show that despite the squeeze, the league is in no danger going the way of the NASL. At the first sign of distress, the anti-soccer crowd will will jump to bury MLS and its efforts to establish soccer as a major American sport. With creative ticket plans, smaller rosters, and the suspension of the reserve league, the league appears keenly aware that pragmatism will need to win out, at least for the time being.

2. Beckham-bubble

Whether Signor Beckham returns from Milan or not, it appears that his influence on the profile of MLS has waned significantly. Without Golden Balls drawing attention from the mainstream media, awareness of the league among the general public will certainly backslide. If attendance and TV ratings take another hit, the aforementioned soccer-haters will have another reason to bash the sport. MLS must do everything they can to stem the tide, using what positives it can (expansion announcement, Seattle ticket sales, etc.)

3. TV Fallout

With the decision to "cancel" MLS Primetime Thursday on ESPN, it appears that MLS is teetering on the edge of television oblivion. If things continue to go poorly, future revenue for the league and the clubs is at risk. While the financial benefit of the current contract is minimal for teams, television exposure on a widely dispersed network like ESPN is essential to the growth of the league. Another poor year of ratings in 2009 will make it all the more difficult to convince ESPN that soccer deserves a desperately needed push across their various platforms (TV, radio, Internet).

4. Baseball's Problems

Conventional wisdom says that only sportswriters care about the ongoing steroid problems in baseball; although that may be true in a general sense, there will certainly be fallout from yet another black eye for MLB. MLS is in a position to capitalize on baseball's problems, as it is an alternative to baseball for the fan's entertainment dollar during the summer months. With lower prices and livelier atmospheres (for the most part), soccer has things to offer sports fans that baseball just can't provide; the onus to turn baseball's ills into a boon for soccer is now on both league office itself, as well as the individual clubs.

5. CBA on the Horizon

Despite the looming expiration of the current collective bargaining agreement, the soccer public has heard little about potential negotiations. While indications are that the players intend to be reasonable in their demands, several issues remain up in the air between the two sides. The new CBA could go far in bringing the league more respect among players, as well as help it hold onto young American talent (see Tracy, Marcus). A major salary cap increase is unlikely with the current economy and revenue position of the league, but concessions from MLS on minimums and player movement could go a long way towards improving overall league quality.


Feel free to share your thoughts, add you own issues the list, or pick apart my reasoning on any of the ones above.

My first attempt at a title was horrible; fixed it the best I could.

If you've been paying attention, you know that I'm extremely interested in what the Montreal Impact have cooked up for Wednesday night when they take on Santos Laguna at home in the CONCACAF Champion's League.

While the number of tickets that Montreal has apparently sold is impressive, I wanted to be fully educated before I spouted off that American clubs need to look north to Quebec for a little lesson in how to market a team. Sure enough, there are a couple of facts that dampen my enthusiasm just a little. Without first hand knowledge of the Impact's tactics, however, I don't feel comfortable attempting to qualify their success; besides, if the team is able to get 50,000 to a soccer match in the dead of winter and in the heart of hockey season, regardless of how they did so, it will be difficult not to be impressed.

Rumors that Montreal may reenter the expansion sweepstakes on the strength of their attendance Wednesday night now include an appearance by Don Garber at Olympic Stadium, something that would be very telling if it actually happens. I'm not sure why Garber would attend the match after the Saputo expansion bid has been rejected, unless he was open to their reduced entry fee proposal. Anything is possible in the current economic environment, although the other bids still in play would seem to make a discount for Montreal unlikely.

Besides, what does selling 50,000 tickets, severe discounts and handouts or not, really mean when it's for a one off match? Civic pride and the underdog status of the Impact are major factors, and maybe the people of Montreal are just excited that they have something on Toronto; it would still seem be a stretch to say that those things are certain to carry over if MLS puts a team in Quebec. Viewed in context, I don't think the ticket sales numbers alone are enough to bring Montreal back into the expansion mix; besides, there is still the little matter of the actual attendance, something which could be significantly affected by the weather.

The actual effect of the Impact's "success" should be negligible. Montreal is still unlikely to secure an expansion franchise, and the club itself is unlikely to significantly improve on it's 2008 attendance (just less than 13,000). Perception is important, however, and the shadow cast by both the Impact's progression through the Champion's League as well as their ticket sales bonanza for Wednesday's match will not bode well for MLS. Unfortunately for the league, this is exactly the type of information that will be picked up by the mainstream American media as well as the soccer-hating public as evidence that American soccer is failing. While those of us with a little knowledge understand the extenuating circumstances at play in Montreal and the context in which their sales numbers should be viewed, none of that will matter to the anti-soccer masses.

Without a "Beckham bump", would any MLS team be able to match what the Impact have done? I don't get the sense that any of the American clubs are capable; Houston's attendance for their CCL match tomorrow night should be a good indication that even the top teams in MLS struggle to sell out (although I suppose Atlante-supporters could help to fill Roberston), no matter the stakes. Toronto may be the only organization in the league that could legitimately sell 50,000 tickets to a match that doesn't involve David Beckham. So what is it about these Canadian clubs that has them light-years ahead of their American counterparts?

Perhaps the cultural differences between the two countries are such that soccer will always get a fairer shake with sports fans north of the border; maybe Americans are just incapable of the freedom of thought it takes to appreciate soccer, while Canadians embrace the game with a more continental attitude. It often seems that Canadians, while clearly proud of their country, are less burdened by the collective national self-image that keeps so many Americans from opening their minds to anything new.

My small history of personal interactions with Canadians does not give me a proper platform from which to speak to the reasons that it seems they get it and we don't; and I know I'm glossing over (or leaving out completely) the cultural differences between the cities in question themselves. Toronto and Montreal are probably as different as Boston and Dallas. It just seems that the as the successes for soccer in Canada pile one on top of the other, American clubs are left behind, choking on the dust of the Canuck express powering away into the distance. Seattle's season ticket sales gives me hope that the U.S. is not a lost cause, however, and I'm optimistic that Philadelphia will make a similar impact in 2010.

I'll be rooting for the Impact on Wednesday, and I hope they fill Olympic Stadium to capacity. I even hope Garber shows up. Not to revive the Montreal expansion bid, but to get marketing tips from the Impact front office.

From Sports Business Journal (through WVHooligan, where I stumbled across it) comes the news that MLS clubs are doing well with season ticket sales despite the poor economy.

While Seattle's season ticket success prior to their first MLS match has been well documented and has those in soccer circles buzzing, and Toronto's sellouts gave the league and potential expansion cities reason for optimism, it was unknown how the economic downturn might effect MLS clubs for the 2009 season. While it is still early, and not all clubs have commented on their sales figures, it may be safe to say that soccer will actually benefit from an environment where consumers are more frugal.

With limited entertainment dollars at their disposal, fans may find themselves priced out of the mainstream American sports. Several MLS teams play in cities where there is little or no competition during the league's summer schedule. Those that do share markets with Major League Baseball clubs (the only other major sports league active during the summer) may have a leg up on those teams due to smaller, less expensive ticket packages. Even when competition is not a factor, MLS teams are simply doing more to creatively market their product. While I have heard of two MLS teams that do little or no marketing in their local areas, several clubs have taken positive steps to connect with their communities and engender loyalty that will serve them well in the future. MLS teams, just as with all sports franchises, must build long lasting fan relationships that will carry them through hard economic times, or through losing spells that would otherwise see attendance lag and revenue drop drastically.

I'm certainly buoyed by the figures, and I hope that MLS shocks all observers and sees an overall attendance increase in 2009. The reports of creative ticket programs and marketing campaigns are encouraging, as they indicate an understanding on the part of the clubs of both the current economic climate as well as their place in communities on which they rely. Filling stadiums should be job one, as the MLS has sorely lacked for consistent stadium atmosphere in its brief history. Atmosphere may be more important for soccer than for any other sport, as full stadiums and passionate crowds make for engaging televised matches. Television is key to the long term survival and potential financial strength of the league, and ratings must improve if MLS is to continue to grow unimpeded. The connection between television ratings and attendance is often overlooked, so any progress on the latter should help to raise the former from their current poor standing.

Whether or not they see the big picture and understand the importance of strong attendance numbers for the league as a whole, or if they are simply doing their jobs and are taking steps to sell tickets in a tough economic time, it seems MLS sales departments are doing work that will benefit all. Discounting tickets and moving towards a "bargain event" mentality may seem a step back and a tough pill to swallow for a league striving to play with the big boys on the American sports landscape; but it is the right thing to do for now, and will hopefully see MLS take the next step towards increased popularity. If going to a MLS game is cheaper than the alternative, casual fans and those who may not have otherwise considered the option may find themselves enjoying American professional soccer at its highest level. Let's hope some of them catch the bug and end up with the passion for soccer that will help our game grow in our country.

Soccer specific stadiums will help atmosphere as well, but pure numbers are the most important factor. It's disheartening to wach an MLS game with large gaps through field level seats; the first instinct of any sports fan flipping by the game is to change the channel. If not enough people care to fill the good seats, why should they care?