Match Fit USA: fans

Showing posts with label fans. Show all posts

Robbie Keane and Soccer Happy America

Friday, August 19, 2011 | View Comments

- Jason Davis

Robbie Keane landed in LA yesterday. The Irish forward was greeted by a small collection of Galaxy supporters sporting scarves and (I imagine) chanting his name. I'm in danger of making this blog a little too Keane-heavy, but as I do see his signing as a seminal moment in the history of a league with the reputation of Scrooge McDuck when it comes to transfer fees, it's a hard development to ignore.

The "Welcome Robbie" contingent reportedly surprised Keane, who was no doubt expecting the anonymity footballers typically enjoy in the States (though, with his wife on his arm, it's not like he could go unnoticed). Rather than point to that fact and turn it into yet another "the game is growing" pillar, let me instead focus on the tenor of the crowd.

The US Fan Base in Contrast

Thursday, June 16, 2011 | View Comments

By Jason Kuenle

In two weeks time, we’ve seen opposite ends of the US fan base. We saw this piece by Chris Ballard on this site while nearly simultaneously seeing an uptick in the usual twitter vitriol as the US has struggled in the Gold Cup. Perspective is a funny thing.

I’m not going to pontificate on changing perspectives. People believe what they believe because of the values that they hold shaped by what they have experienced. Changing values is an exercise in futility and no person has experienced what another has. But the contrast between two opposite viewpoints deserves a bit of attention.

Those who have followed US soccer over the last twenty years have really only seen two true tournament failures in the US’ ascent in the footballing world, the 1998 and 2006 World Cups. Both of these instances were followed by coaching changes that coincided with the US “getting back on track” on their inevitable rise toward the top. Or at least that’s the narrative that is often told. The struggles here and elsewhere in Bob Bradley’s tenure make it easy to make his departure the beginning of the next upswing of the USMNT.

That narrative influenced part by increasing US success in soccer and part by general success of the US in everything else is a powerful one that rings true for most American fans. There is a manifest destiny aspect to it all; with the right player selection, the right tactics, and the right manager the US would have…choose your expected level of international success.

Contrast that with this quote from Chris’ post: “I had been keeping an eye out just to see how she was doing, but even though so far she’s not reached the levels of achievement as some, I just find that I have more fun with her than I ever did with you [England]. I see great potential, and I’d like to be along for the ride.”

But commonality may also be found in Chris’ words, “Every two or three years you say that you’re going to change; that this time it will be different, that this time you’ll repay my faith in you, but each time I’m let down badly. I don’t really think this is your fault – I’m sure you genuinely believe that this time, things will be different – but I feel like I need to protect myself from the constant disappointment.” He, of course, was talking about England, but two see those words from a US fan would not be out of place.

Results often determine the narrative. Opportunities taken or lost determine results. In a game as fickle as soccer, drastic swings in narrative can come from an inch here or there. In my perspective, almost all US successes and failures can be attributed that way. Without the right scorelines in matches that the US wasn’t even involved in, the knockout round successes in the 2002 World Cup and the 2009 Confederations Cup don’t happen. By finishing routine chances in the Gold Cup, the US could have drawn Panama 2-2 and beaten Guadeloupe 3-0 or 4-0. When those inches fall our way, the US does well, when they don't, red flags rise.

Potential is a dangerous thing. It presumes the ability to do great things, but without the guarantee or even probability of success. For those who see the US' potential but are unsure of when or how it will be fulfill, the first quote from Chris is most fitting, but for those that expect US success now, Chris’ second quote rings truer. The choice between the two is one of perspective.

fans, USMNT |

One Path to MLS Fandom

Monday, August 16, 2010 | View Comments

July 18, 2010 - Washington Dc, District of Columbia, United States of America - 18 July 2010: DC United fans wave flags prior to Sunday's match against the LA Galaxy at RFK Stadium in Washington DC. The LA Galaxy went on to win 2-1.

by Dan Barkley

This is a bit of response to Jason's post on the English Premier League, coming from a different perspective. I am not a huge Premier League fan; I'll watch a game when it's on, but I have no favorite team, nothing more than a few players I'll cheer on and a general desire to see some good soccer. I do, however, owe my beginnings as a soccer fan to Serie A, specifically AS Roma.

I studied abroad in Rome, and at that point I probably hadn't played more than two pick-up games since I had quit soccer after elementary school. I went from a typical American sports fan who only watched some World Cup games, to a pretty serious fan by the end of that season. When I was back in the states, I was waking up early to catch streams of games of which I didn't know excited a year before.

In all this fun accession to being a soccer fan, there was something missing. Even now I can't imagine when I'm going to get a chance to get back to Rome to see a match; my grad student budget doesn't have return trip to Italy anywhere on the horizon. I love watching sports live, I love having a 'home team', a team that you feel a part of. That's what makes sports great for me. Roma couldn't give that, at least not all of it, and so I started following MLS as well. I can't be sure that the preceding was my decision process; it was probably more along the lines of, “There's a soccer game on ESPN!”, but I soon had the same process of 'discovering' MLS like I had with the European game.

I don't have a home-town team, living in Michigan, but I do feel strongly that MLS is my league. I can visit friends and drag them to games, watch games at reasonable hours, and watch the league grow. Roma will be my club, at least until I move somewhere with a professional team, but I am firmly an MLS fan.

Fans don't have to start out as fans of MLS. Why not start with the beautiful game somewhere else, then migrate to the American league? More soccer on tv, whatever league it is, is good for MLS. Sure, many people will stay steadfast EPL fans and never deign to attend a MLS game. There will be fans that can get their fix on weekend mornings, and may be less likely to watch the MLS game later that night. But the more soccer fans there are, the more fans there will be that want to attend a match. MLS will continue to improve, albeit slowly, in both quality and in atmosphere, and the more soccer fans there are in the country is more potential fans for the future.

fans, MLS |

On Home Field Advantage, Again

Thursday, August 12, 2010 | View Comments

Aug. 10, 2010 - East Rutherford, New Jersey, United States of America - 10 August 2010 - Fans celebrate during the first International Friendly at The New Meadowlands Stadium in East Rutherford, New Jersey.Brazil defeat the USA 2-0.

Grant at Some Canadian Guys brought up one of my pet issues today: the continued inability of the US National Team to draw a crowd that gives the feel of a true "home" environment. The Brazil game is the impetus of course, with the conclusion drawn that USMNT fans were outnumbered by Brazil fans at the New Meadowlands on Tuesday night.

I wasn't there, so I can't say for sure, but it looked/sounded to me via ESPN like there were plenty of US-backers in the stadium; whether the breakout was 50/50, 60/40, or something worse/better, I'm not sure it really matters. The fact that Americans were able to make a ruckus and be heard at a game in the US involving one of the world's most popular teams is a clear step in a positive direction.

Because, let's face it: even without the front-running that is a natural part of the deal with soccer in America, immigrants, children of immigrants, and even those further down the line are more likely to spend their entertainment dollars on an international friendly than Americans just coming to the sport or who did so without the framework of familial tradition. In other words, USMNT fans are not as culturally inclined to value a game like Tuesday's as highly as Brazilians.

The same goes for fans of the Mexican National Team living in the US; when the USMNT plays Mexico at an easily-accessible venue, an overwhelming majority of the crowd is going to be of Mexican descent. I don't see this as a failing on the part of US fans as much as it is a credit to the commitment of El Tri's; without an unbroken tradition of support passed down from parent to child, which there can hardly be considering the American history prior to 1990, US supporters just can't compete with Mexico for numbers.

So while USA-Brazil on American soil wasn't the home game we all wanted it to be, it does show the support is growing. Part of the draw was Brazil; if the Americans had been playing a lesser team in New Jersey midweek, I'm sure the number would have been reduced dramatically. But this is a baby step process, not something that will change overnight. For all of the talk about the modern attention span, Americans are still slow to change their habits. We should recognize a 50/50 crowd on a Tuesday night in a 75k+ capacity stadium for what it is: improvement.

And I'll take issue with Grant over his headline: "U.S.A. still waiting for that true home game." Does Columbus not count? Sure, it's a third the size of the New Meadowlands, and it takes some controls on the part of US Soccer to ensure a partisan crowd for the US, but it still represents a true home game. Call it "cheating" if you want, but I see no problem with manipulating the system, within the rules mind you, to gain a home field advantage in World Cup qualifying when it's clear that the stadium would be 90% Mexico fans without doing so.

I want a change to happen overnight, I really do. I don't want to know that every time the US plays Mexico, Brazil, Honduras, Argentina, etc. on American soil our boys will be booed by a large portion of the crowd while the visitors are feted as conquering heroes. But wanting it to change does not justify righteous anger or forgive pointless whining. It is what it is, and small steps are better than no steps.

Grant wonders how a nation of immigrants that turns so many newcomers into proud patriots can find it so hard to fill up a stadium with a majority supporting its own national team. There's a point of logic there, but Grant is looking at it from the wrong angle; while many of those immigrants are happy to be here and proud to call themselves American, they're also supremely proud of their roots. Soccer is a bridge to those roots, a way to celebrate their the culture they left behind when they left home for a new start. This reality is why it's hardly common for the next generation to switch allegiances to the USMNT, despite spending all or most of their lives here.

The Brazilian population of the US is much smaller than the Mexican one; but with passion just as fervent and the match set in the country's most populous metropolitan area, a large Brazilian contingent was a foregone conclusion.

Augmented by Americans who just like Brazil, of course.

Nevertheless, I'm going to throw on my rose-colored glasses and view Tuesday's night's crowd as a small improvement. Besides, only time will turn the tide; we've only been respectable for the last 25 years. It takes much longer than that to grow the roots that lead to sold out stadiums of passionate supporters in a country filled with people cheering for the other team.

Apologies, since much of this is covered ground. I just couldn't help myself.

Brazil, fans, USMNT |

The Calm Before the Storm

Friday, May 21, 2010 | View Comments

Hello, friends and fellow fans. Today is Friday, May 21st, 2010. The World Cup countdown stands at three weeks. As I sit here, chained as usual to a desk I would prefer to have nothing to do with, I find myself pondering an notable fact: Things are about to get crazy.

From a U.S. National Team/World Cup perspective that is; this coming weekend, which could not possibly start soon enough, is the calm before before the storm that begins with super important warm up friendlies and ends with the conclusion of their World Cup campaign. Whenever that may be.

Starting next week there will not be a seven day period without a U.S. match until the World Cup story is over. By then our beers will be salty with tears no matter when the U.S. exits, and the autopsy of the tournament from an American perspective will have fully begun. Sure, all of the buildup to June 12th won't have half the intensity of the World Cup matches, but we can be sure there will be laser-focused criticism, honest and overwrought analysis, and rampant teeth-gnashing. It's what we do.

But before I find myself in need of dentures and a new beer, I'm going to try and enjoy my weekend "off". The molecules that constitute my physical being are already beginning to vibrate more violently, so while my fan-at-rest state is less at-rest than usual, I'm going to make an attempt. I'll relax, kick my feet up, watch a few games that won't have me clenched with nervous tension, and try not to think about the coming storm. There will be plenty of time to worry about the state of the team come Tuesday when the send-off series begins in Connecticut.

Champions League final? Sure, that's a nice distraction. A little MLS, some patio sitting, firing up the grill...ahh, sounds nice. I'll put out of my mind all of the questions: who Bradley will start up front, which midfielder has a bead on the job to pair with Michael Bradley, how Gooch's sharpness really is despite his outward confidence, whether Donovan is ready to put in a virtuoso performance, if we'll avoid debilitating red cards...it goes on and on and on.

Because really, why give myself an ulcer before anything of real import has actually taken place? There will be plenty of time to turn myself into an throbbing ball of nutso, and I don't want to blow my wad too early. This is my World Cup prep time as well; the best thing I can possibly do is bring everything down to neutral, let the peace of a detached soccer weekend wash over me, and fire up the thrusters when Monday rolls around.

At least try, anyway.

There may be more content around here between now and Monday, and I'm still supposed to tackle the ending of the USMNT movie script. But I won't blame you if you take the weekend off yourself. Unless your MLS team is playing.

fans, USMNT, World Cup |

USMNT: On Questions of Rust

Monday, May 10, 2010 | View Comments

Be it the soccer gods conspiring against the Americans or just a bit of rough luck, the US National Team faces a two-sided problem leading up to the World Cup. Just a few hour separate us from the announcement of a camp roster that will include a few extra bodies; this means that Bob Bradley still has decisions to make, and only a month ahead of the opening game against England. Optimal, the situation is not.

Such is the state of the US player pool; due to injury and questionable fitness, uncertainty at more than a few spots is the reality of World Cup prep. In a perfect world, Bradley would have his team selected, head to Princeton with twenty-three players, and have the balance of the buildup to work out strategy, lineups, and team cohesion rather than spend time evaluating potential contributors.

Additionally, crucial players are returning to full health at just the right (or wrong, depending on your viewpoint), time, with little to no competitive minutes to their names and a layer of rust thick enough to cause serious concern among the fan base. Onyewu, Holden, Brian Ching, the inspiring Charlie Davies; none is "match fit", none has shown enough in recent weeks to be termed "ready", and none is likely to be on top of their game anytime soon. Is a few weeks of training enough to round them into form? More to the point, is it enough to round them into World Cup form?

All of this leads to a question for the fans, one tied to the amount of anxious energy we spend assessing our team's chances before a ball is ever kicked: Would we rather have a settled team of completely health players, even if they are of lesser talent than those they're replacing, than deal with the uncertainty of players returning at the last possible minute?

It's impossible to know if an on-form secondary option is better than an un-ready usual first choice (and readiness is obviously subjective). Clarence Goodson might be deserving of a start against England over Oguchi Onyewu if the latter is still not up to game speed, but we'd almost always prefer the player with the higher ceiling be in there, no matter his questionable sharpness (Onyewu and Goodson are just an illustrative example, not an attempt to reflect what Bradley would actually do). Analytically, we can see that the first choice player shouldn't be first choice if his lack of recent time negates his advantage in quality over another option. Our guts, however, and largely due to the magnitude of the World Cup stage in this case, churn with less violence when we see what we're used to. If our regular starters are healthy enough, we want them playing.

There's an analogy here somewhere, struggling to be found, to illustrate just how much a player should be downgraded when he's in a situation like Onyewu's. How many "quality points" does lack of playing time over the course of the past eight months subtract from Onyewu's overall score? Is he a five now when he was an eight before, or is it worse than that? His replacement could be a six; wouldn't that mean sitting Gooch down is the right move to make?

It's not that easy, of course, and determining which is better, the rusty stalwart or the of-lesser-caliber-but-on-form replacement is not as clear as picking the better of two from a deck of Magic the Gathering cards (if that applies, I have literally no idea). If it were so simple, we could all probably do Bob Bradley's job.

Onyewu will likely play, as will Holden in some form, because talent wins out. As fans, we'll probably feel better because some of our best players are back. It's not the known that is the problem - Onyewu is better than anyone that could replace him when's he's fully himself - but the unknown; how much will his play suffer because he was forced to sit out an entire European season?

The World Cup, with the four year wait and the international scope multiplying our usual levels of fan consternation, makes us all a little crazy. It might not be smart to rely on players who haven't kicked a ball in an actual match in months. But we want our "best" team on the field, even if some of our best have been coated by layers insidious rust obscuring the gleaming brilliance underneath. We know the brilliance is there, and we'd rather take our chances that it will reemerge in time for the world to see than take our chances with something functional, yet much less impressive. One can be polished to shine, the other isn't getting any better. We rest our hopes on that fact.

I'm working on my own level of rust here, so forgive me if this is a bit strained. Again, let me reiterate that the Onyewu/Goodson example is just an example, and not representative of any belief it could actually happen.

Let me close with a question, which I may or may not have gotten out in the piece: Would you rather have an entirely healthy and on-form side that may not be made up entirely of first choice players (say Onyewu was out for the World Cup, for example), or a team with several first choice players getting healthy just as the preparations begin (the situation we actually have)? How much of the uncertainty surrounding players who haven't played much or at all recently affect your feelings about the team as a fan?

fans, injury, USMNT, World Cup |

American Soccer's Punk Ethos

Friday, April 16, 2010 | View Comments

One of the things that I've always loved about soccer in America is the DIY, punk rock ethos of the sport. While youth soccer (like any sport) can often be orchestrated painfully rigidly, and the very highest level of the domestic game is often an exercise in corporate legalese, there's a beauty to be found in low-level street soccer. I remember back in High School, I'd regularly play Saturday pickup games with a group of Mormon dental students, all of whom looked like they just finished an Abercrombie and Fitch photo shoot. The summer after I turned nineteen, I'd take two buses and a train on Thursday nights to play on a rocky West Philadelphia pitch, often being one of the only players in the country legally, and I'd get home around one in the morning, often bloodied. There were good players, and not-so-good players, but none of them was ever going to threaten to make it professionally. We were playing for simple love of the sport, for the cathartic release of a cutting pass, the triumphant feeling of a well-timed tackle, and that occasional, spontaneous ecstasy that comes from scoring a goal.

And then there's fandom. That weird cocktail of loyalty, competitiveness, socialization, love of sport, petty oneupmanship, and base tribalism that drives otherwise perfectly rational people to part with significant chunks of their hard-won lucre for the privilege of watching someone else play. Often, fans spend time and money crafting banners and tifo displays (The sheer size of Toronto's Dichio banner still takes my breath away), learning songs, and setting off pyrotechnics to show their support. I'm a member of the Sons of Ben (number 949, to be exact), and the story of the SoBs is a pretty interesting tale. Basically, a small group of soccer fans got bored with waiting for the league to give us a team, so they started going to games and MLS events with the sole purpose of annoying Don Garber into giving Philly a team. Long story short, the group isn't so small anymore, and we get to complain about goalkeeping errors and missed calls just like anybody else. The thing that always amazes me, though, is just how much work these average guys were willing to do to realize this pipe dream.

And it's certainly not just Philly fans. The American soccer landscape is more than just a lot of people who like game. It's a movement. There's a real cohesiveness born from the fandom, and shaped by our status as perennial underdogs. Our sport is under-appreciated by the mainstream American sports media, and in true punk fashion, we decided to solve our own problem. There is an impressive number of quality soccer blogs and podcasts out there, many of which were started by regular guys with normal jobs, who were simply tired of not seeing intelligent discourse about the game.

There's also a weird feeling of "we're all in this together" when it comes to rivals, which really doesn't exist in other major sports, or in soccer circles around the world. I may despise a certain group of over-caffeinated pitchmen masquerading as a soccer team, but deep down, I know it's better for the sport as a whole to have twenty thousand fans in a glorified bedpan than twelve thousand in the Meadowlands, and on some level, I want Red Bull Arena to be a success.

And then of course, there's Danny Califf's hair.

American soccer, fans, ramble, Random |

Dispelling the Myth of the Philadelphia Fan

Wednesday, April 07, 2010 | View Comments

First of all, the Santa Claus incident happened in 1968. We can let it go. Besides, it had more to do with the quality of Santa (A last minute stand-in who appeared to be drunk and egged the fans on) than anything else. The Santa, Frank Olivo, thought it was a joke. The fans thought it was a joke. The only person who didn't see it that way was Howard Cosell, and a fleeting moment of levity became the foundation of a tumultuous and sometimes brutal reputation, thanks to ABC.

But you know what people don't talk about? It was the last game of a miserable season, where the Eagles went 2-12, it was 22 degrees with 30 mph winds and 15 hours of snow the day before. The game was meaningless, miserable, and to be honest, nobody would have cared if they'd ended it at halftime. And still, 54,000 fans showed up. That's this city.

Philadelphia loves winners. But we don't hate losers, not really. Richie Ashburn's name is spoken with reverence usually reserved for martyred saints. We'd have voted Brian Dawkins in with a landslide if he'd run for mayor. We take Allen Iverson back like an abused ex-girlfriend who thinks she can change him. No, we don't hate you if you don't win (example: Rocky was way better than Rocky II). We hate you if you don't care. We want you to live and die and celebrate and suffer with your team as much as we do, and if you don't, we let you know how we feel about it.

That's why some players hate playing here. We expect you to fulfill your potential. Do so, and you're a shining golden god. Just ask Chase Utley, Julius Erving, or Bobby Clarke (playing version, not the GM). You don't, and you can expect the same treatment given to Scott Rolen or Eric Lindros.

And when it comes to our treatment of opposing fans, I'd assert that it's largely overblown. Sure, there have been unfortunate incidents, and if you come to an Eagle's game in the other team's gear, you're either very, very stupid, or very, very big. But go to Lambeau Field in a Bears jersey or Fenway Park in a Yankees hat and see if anything different happens. And of course we hate New Yorkers, who seem to think that numerical advantage confers some sort enlightened status that the rest of the country should be in reverent awe of.

If Piotr Nowak lives up to his reputation, his team should have no problem endearing themselves to the Philadelphia faithful. Fans aren't stupid. We know the troubles most expansion teams have. And Philadelphia soccer fans have waited so long just to have a team, they're not going to lose patience with the whole club over a couple of routine growing pains. Nowak has already shown himself to be decisive with players who aren't good enough. After a performance bordering on the pathetic in his first game, defender David Myrie was tossed like last week's leftover tuna casserole. After being sent off in the same game, midfielder Toni Stahl was sent to Harrisburg, to play with the USL-2 City Islanders. Nowak's laying down the law, and his approach, given time, should win plenty of admirers amongst Philly fans.

Philadelphia is a passionate sports town, but there are plenty of cities who care deeply about their teams. However, you take an anecdote like the infamous Santa story, add in a national media based in the market where most of our main rivals come from, and top it off with a healthy dose of Philly fans liking the bad boy reputation, and you've got the makings of plenty of good stories, truth be damned.

fans, Philadelphia Union, Piotr Nowak |

Taking the Pulse of the Fans

Thursday, March 18, 2010 | View Comments

MLS Cup - Los Angeles Galaxy v Real Salt Lake

Despite the fact that Twitter has experienced an explosion over the past year and seems completely ingrained in the Internet culture at this point, I realize that not everyone partakes in the social media movement.

That said, Twitter is a major part of my day-to-day interaction with fans, other bloggers, and players. Because I've managed (somehow) to attract a decent following, I thought I'd use Twitter to take the temperature of MLS fans only a few days before a possible labor stoppage.

The response was interesting on a couple of different levels, and none of them scientific or illuminating on a mass scale. But it's the fan that is being left holding their you-know-what in this whole thing, so I wanted to get direct window into the thoughts of a few.

Here was my first question, paraphrased a bit to give it clarity:

How frustrated are you on a scale from 1 (not at all) to 10 (ready to give up on MLS)?

@hardcoco

"A five right now. If Monday becomes strike day, it will be even higher."

@MrTuktoyaktuk:

"I'm not quite at the rage level yet, I'd say a '3'."

@JFreedman13:

"I'll put it at a 5 because i'll never give up on the league, but this whole strike thing is tearing me apart. This could kill soccer."

@coachjginn:

"10. 2 new clubs not being showcased is huge. But most of all, Im an RSL fan. This is their most stignificant year, defending the CUP."

@shwaxinator:

"8 - I sympathize with the plyrs, but theyre snubbing their nose at all who've sacrificed money and career to lay leagues groundwork."

@stoehrst:

"I'm probably at a 7 level of bitterness. 5 to the players, 9 to the owners."

That last response is interesting because "stoehrst" rates his frustration level differently for each side involved; he clearly sees the owners as more at fault than the players. I received several other responses along these lines, with the higher frustration level invariably aimed at management over labor.

The clock is ticking, and though I think there is plenty of time for a deal to get done before any of the season is threatened (and still believe there will be a deal without a strike), certain fans have more reason to be nervous than others. Phialdelphia Union fans, and specifically those involved in the Son of Ben group, might be the most anxious. Not only is the debut of their club in jeopardy, a large group of supporters plan to attend the game in Seattle next week.

@Thomas19064:

"frustrated on a scale of 9...... probably extra because I'm a philly fan getting into panic mode though......."

And because I was curious as to how many fans might support the players to the hilt regardless of the possible fallout (delay, lost season, etc.), I asked one more question:

How many of you would rather see a strike than have the players take a deal that doesn't include free agency?

What exactly constitutes "free agency", and what form it needs to take to sate the players isn't exactly clear, so keep that in mind as you read the responses.

@stoehrst:

"not me. Take what you can get this time around. Guaranteed contracts would be a huge step in the right direction"

@Longshoe:

"No strike, it could be a death blow to the league. Get the best deal possible and let's go."

@abemedoff:

"I sympathize with the players but I'd rather a compromise than a strike leaving me with worthless tickets"

@CBielstein:

"I would not. MLS has weird player ownership rules, but no soccer, no money, no league. If USSF2 is the top, we're screwed"

@midnightrevs:

"I think it's important that the players carry through with their threats. That being said I think they should strike."

I expected a few more "They should strike!" responses, but most of the respondents simply want there to be games next week. Apparently few of my followers on Twitter track with my podcast co-host or the opinion of Dennis Justice.

@hardcoco:

"I don't care what happens between both parties. I just want to watch some #MLS next week."

That's the bottom line for most people. Those of use the live and breath every detail and development in the process get wrapped up in the philosophical arguments and "right and wrong" of it all. Most people don't, or refuse to care more about how the league is run than the games themselves.

Oh, and if for some reason you'd like to follow me on Twitter, I'm @MFUSA.

CBA, fans, MLS |