Jump to content

MLS and Sporting KC - Official Thread


Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, aphilso1 said:

 

Yard House.  And if you like poke nachos, you should hit Twisted Cork next time you're in Omaha (note: this is a different restaurant and not the same as the better known Twisted Fork).  Twisted Cork has the best seafood in Omaha and some really creative dishes.  Super underrated restaurant.

 

That's it. Yard House. Everything I've had there was really good. And the place was always busy, which is a good sign.

 

I have to tell a side-story about the place. The first time I was there, there was this EXTREMELY super hot girl at the bar with this dude and, from their interactions, they were on a first date kind of situation rather than, like, a couple that had been dating awhile. She keeps on having him buy drinks. About the time we're done with our meal and getting ready to go, she starts acting like she's so drunk she's about to pass out and, lo and behold, her not-so-attractive female friend, who is definitely not dressed for a night out, shows up to give her a ride home.

 

She regains some lucidity just long enough to say she was sorry for having to bail on him but, y'know, she's just so drunk she needs to go home and go to bed.

 

And hot drunk girl and not-hot friend just walk out and leave the poor guy alone at the bar with the tab.

 

And I just remember thinking I have never seen a person so blithely use two other people the way hot girl had just used the guy to buy her dinner and a bunch of drinks and then used the not-hot friend to come bail her out. And I was betting "this has probably happened before. Probably not the first time she's called not-hot friend to come 'rescue' her. And probably won't be the last."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • hhcmatt changed the title to MLS and Sporting KC - Official Thread
37 minutes ago, 49r said:

 

Atlanta and LAFC joined the MLS at the same time (alongside Minnesota) in 2017, Atlanta didn't "set the tone" for LAFC - they literally have been around the same amount of time.  The only clubs newer are Cincinnati (2019), Nashville and Miami (2020) and Austin FC (2021)...and those teams didn't build their nice new stadia because Atlanta "set the tone" or any bullshit like that.  They did it because the MLS requires new clubs to play in stadiums owned by the club and have done for probably a decade or so?

 

If anyone "set the tone" it was ten years ago when Seattle joined the league and set attendance records of their own way back then.  That, or David Beckham.  He has probably done more for the popularity of the league, like it or not, than any other single person.  And in some cases he's done more than some whole clubs.

 

My beef is in general with Atlanta "fans".  They are a bunch of plastics that cosplay as soccer fans and think that because they were gifted a championship early on in their tenure by the heinous MLS draft rules for new clubs and being placed in a pathetically weak eastern conference all of a sudden they have a club "culture" and "tradition" that somehow elevates them beyond who they really are.

 

Let them have a decade of wooden spoons and missing the playoffs and we'll see just what kind of "tone" they set down there.

Well Seattle and Portland, long running tradition and especially in Portland making something in a smaller market stand out was impressive.  I don’t quite agree with your description of Atlanta fans.  I was there for a week and that city bleeds the red and black stripes.  It’s a city of transplants from all over the world who have very little connection to American football, basketball and baseball.  They have been clamoring for something they can start from the get go and it’s more grassroots then you are making it out to be. I also disagree with Atlanta not setting the tone...but not with the stadium, other than it being accessible for all social classes which I thought was cool.  Ample parking and both the bus and train go directly there.  They did change the way academies and buying and selling players has helped the league IMO.  For years you had teams like the galaxy just overpaying for older players who put butts in seats for a bit but didn’t really elevate the game and then you were strapped for cash to put into your development.  Then you had teams like Dallas who were developing well but weren’t selling when Europe was interested or putting money into making the game day experience better.  Atlanta and Red Bull’s are the first two that come to mind when I think, develop, buy talented young players and build them up to sell (Almiron) and really play for a style all our own.  This is where this league has really blossomed in the last few years, for this league to improve it has to become a selling/development(playing time) league and you can tell the half of the league that has figured this out and implemented it.  And this post is not a knock on any other team, just a observation of a guy who has watched the coverage and game grow so much in the last 20 years.  This is also why I’m excited for Union Omaha here!!! Grassroots club with invested ownership, great player signings and a development program that is ahead of schedule.  Growing the game at the bottom makes the top even better.  Anywho, debates aside keep watching footy and glory glory Man United.  :)

 

P.S. Paul Scholes is the best premier league midfielder of all time and I’ll die on that hill.  Haha 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, HuskerFever said:

 

Didn't Atlanta start in 2017 and LAFC in 2018?

 

I agree that Seattle propelled the league when it joined. Is it too much to say there was a second wave circa 2017, regardless of what you'd associate that cause to?

 

I guess you're right about LAFC starting in 2018.  Could have sworn it was at the same time as the other two.

 

Not sure how one would accurately attribute what a second or third or fourth wave or whatever would look like.  It's honestly been an evolving and growing league since its start in '96, at least in my eye.  Some would say the wave of soccer specific stadiums built during the 2000's could be MLS 2.0, culminating with the addition of David Beckham to the Galaxy and Toronto Football Club, Seattle and Portland starting up.  Then MLS 3.0 would be during the 2010's with bigger, nicer stadia and club rebrands and the ESPN/Fox media deals propelling the league forward along with massive expansion.  But to me it's more of a smooth progression...and I'm happy to see it.

 

I just hate to place too much importance on any one event, club, or person on the rising popularity of the league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Keenan9595 said:

Well Seattle and Portland, long running tradition and especially in Portland making something in a smaller market stand out was impressive.  I don’t quite agree with your description of Atlanta fans.  I was there for a week and that city bleeds the red and black stripes.  It’s a city of transplants from all over the world who have very little connection to American football, basketball and baseball.  They have been clamoring for something they can start from the get go and it’s more grassroots then you are making it out to be. I also disagree with Atlanta not setting the tone...but not with the stadium, other than it being accessible for all social classes which I thought was cool.  Ample parking and both the bus and train go directly there.  They did change the way academies and buying and selling players has helped the league IMO.  For years you had teams like the galaxy just overpaying for older players who put butts in seats for a bit but didn’t really elevate the game and then you were strapped for cash to put into your development.  Then you had teams like Dallas who were developing well but weren’t selling when Europe was interested or putting money into making the game day experience better.  Atlanta and Red Bull’s are the first two that come to mind when I think, develop, buy talented young players and build them up to sell (Almiron) and really play for a style all our own.  This is where this league has really blossomed in the last few years, for this league to improve it has to become a selling/development(playing time) league and you can tell the half of the league that has figured this out and implemented it.  And this post is not a knock on any other team, just a observation of a guy who has watched the coverage and game grow so much in the last 20 years.  This is also why I’m excited for Union Omaha here!!! Grassroots club with invested ownership, great player signings and a development program that is ahead of schedule.  Growing the game at the bottom makes the top even better.  Anywho, debates aside keep watching footy and glory glory Man United.  :)

 

P.S. Paul Scholes is the best premier league midfielder of all time and I’ll die on that hill.  Haha 

 

That's why you wore 18!

 

also gotta say Chelsea 🦍

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, 49r said:

 

I guess you're right about LAFC starting in 2018.  Could have sworn it was at the same time as the other two.

 

Not sure how one would accurately attribute what a second or third or fourth wave or whatever would look like.  It's honestly been an evolving and growing league since its start in '96, at least in my eye.  Some would say the wave of soccer specific stadiums built during the 2000's could be MLS 2.0, culminating with the addition of David Beckham to the Galaxy and Toronto Football Club, Seattle and Portland starting up.  Then MLS 3.0 would be during the 2010's with bigger, nicer stadia and club rebrands and the ESPN/Fox media deals propelling the league forward along with massive expansion.  But to me it's more of a smooth progression...and I'm happy to see it.

 

I just hate to place too much importance on any one event, club, or person on the rising popularity of the league.

This is how I feel, it’s been growing pains for sure.  I remember driving down with my brothers and dad to watch KC when they were the wizards with like free tickets we’d gotten at a gas station and they played at arrowhead in front of like 200 people. I think the league as a whole as grown tremendously, but I do think there are probably 10-12 teams that can be credited with either keeping the league alive, upping facilities/academies/selling/buying expectations and having the fan bases to support these things.  Now that we’ve found some footing as a selling league is put us up there with the Portuguese, Belgian or Dutch leagues in overall parity.  Obviously you are going to have the Ajax’s, Porto’s and Anderlechts that are going to be above the top MLS teams year after year, but I’d like let’s say Seattle or LAFC’s chances of finishing in the top 5-6 in those leagues.  You have like your top 3 monster teams and then it’s normally a grab bag after that.

Edited by Keenan9595
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, 49r said:

 

I guess you're right about LAFC starting in 2018.  Could have sworn it was at the same time as the other two.

 

Not sure how one would accurately attribute what a second or third or fourth wave or whatever would look like.  It's honestly been an evolving and growing league since its start in '96, at least in my eye.  Some would say the wave of soccer specific stadiums built during the 2000's could be MLS 2.0, culminating with the addition of David Beckham to the Galaxy and Toronto Football Club, Seattle and Portland starting up.  Then MLS 3.0 would be during the 2010's with bigger, nicer stadia and club rebrands and the ESPN/Fox media deals propelling the league forward along with massive expansion.  But to me it's more of a smooth progression...and I'm happy to see it.

 

I just hate to place too much importance on any one event, club, or person on the rising popularity of the league.

 

Yeah, it's probably more of a grouping of inflection than single events.

 

Over generalizing, but to me it felt like MLS has been through the following:

 

1. Inaugural season: hype coming from the World Cup (much like how the recent boost in NWSL viewership).

 

2. MLS dips. It's too niche within its own country and a joke to other countries (clocks counting up, shootouts, talent level just doesn't match in the global landscape, etc.)

 

3. MLS gets another boost by bringing in older global talent.

 

4. Expansion teams start finding success in the league (circa RSL to Seattle era).

 

5. MLS takes another hit when the USMNT doesn't even make it past World Cup qualifiers.

 

6. Circa 2017-2018, new clubs come in and the investment in the league elevates, even at the inagural clubs and prior expansion clubs. Especially in terms of acquiring talent from Central and South America and becoming a stepping stone to Europe, rather than the old MLS strategy of bringing in players nearing retirement.

 

Next wave to me would be building a league that can compete with Liga MX. We're close. Liga MX is already worried about the growth in value for these MLS clubs and the growth of the contracts. There were even talks of a Concacaf Super League a couple years ago (touchy subject in UEFA) to grow the media revenue pie between MLS and Liga MX.

 

MLS has had to fight against the "relevance" chatter its entire history, and these recent years have trended very positively to elevate the talent of the league. We're seeing that even with American-born players playing at top clubs around the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, HuskerFever said:

 

Yeah, it's probably more of a grouping of inflection than single events.

 

Over generalizing, but to me it felt like MLS has been through the following:

 

1. Inaugural season: hype coming from the World Cup (much like how the recent boost in NWSL viewership).

 

2. MLS dips. It's too niche within its own country and a joke to other countries (clocks counting up, shootouts, talent level just doesn't match in the global landscape, etc.)

 

3. MLS gets another boost by bringing in older global talent.

 

4. Expansion teams start finding success in the league (circa RSL to Seattle era).

 

5. MLS takes another hit when the USMNT doesn't even make it past World Cup qualifiers.

 

6. Circa 2017-2018, new clubs come in and the investment in the league elevates, even at the inagural clubs and prior expansion clubs. Especially in terms of acquiring talent from Central and South America and becoming a stepping stone to Europe, rather than the old MLS strategy of bringing in players nearing retirement.

 

Next wave to me would be building a league that can compete with Liga MX. We're close. Liga MX is already worried about the growth in value for these MLS clubs and the growth of the contracts. There were even talks of a Concacaf Super League a couple years ago (touchy subject in UEFA) to grow the media revenue pie between MLS and Liga MX.

 

MLS has had to fight against the "relevance" chatter its entire history, and these recent years have trended very positively to elevate the talent of the league. We're seeing that even with American-born players playing at top clubs around the world.

Good take man, guys like Tyler Adam’s and Weston McKennie were those first stepping stones of leaving MLS league/academies and showing they could play on top 5 leagues.  Now guys like Aaronson, Dike, McKenzie, Reynalds, cannon, Clarke are showing that they will make teams better by being bought over there.  We’re like 5 years away from sending talent to Europe on a normal click which willl help the national team and domestic leagues here so much better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just think we can all agree that SKC is the Tottenham of the MLS, sometimes good, usually okay...rarely do anything of note but will always tell you they are a top 4 team and have blue and white as colors.  😜

Edited by Keenan9595
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I caught some of the replay of a KC game last night because there was nothing good on. That guy playing random songs on his tuba or whatever needs to be punched in the face. it was annoying. This concludes my only soccer take. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Red Rum said:

I caught some of the replay of a KC game last night because there was nothing good on. That guy playing random songs on his tuba or whatever needs to be punched in the face. it was annoying. This concludes my only soccer take. 

 

It's a trombone and the songs aren't random.  When the stadium is at full capacity (during non-COVID times), the fans in the Cauldron sing and chant the entire match along with the trombonist and drummers.  There are specific songs for corner kicks, for big saves, for goals, and even ones for specific times in the match.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Keenan9595 said:

I just think we can all agree that SKC is the Tottenham of the MLS, sometimes good, usually okay...rarely do anything of note but will always tell you they are a top 4 team and have blue and white as colors.  😜

 

Bad take.  Sporting KC has lifted a trophy 7 times since 2000; Tottenham has lifted one.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, 49r said:

 

Could be worse...could be an Atlanta United "supporter".

 

Are they really the team you hate the most?  Can't say I support them, but they are super entertaining to watch when Josef is healthy.  Although I get the issues with their fanbase.  They do come across as entitled with a very cookie-cutter manufactured culture.  But I think that would be the case with any fanbase that wins a title in Year 2.  The bandwagon was full before they could develop a culture of their own.

 

Personally, I would place LAFC, Seattle, and Portland at the top of my most hated teams list.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, hskr4life said:

 

Seattle certainly my #1-- Houston Dyna probably my #2 (maybe because they always seem to be a thorn in our side)

 

Houston is a nuisance because they take points from us regularly with a far less talented team.  They always seem to play their best against SKC and then tank the rest of their schedule.  But they also have like 5 total fans in the stands, so it feels weird to hate them.  That would be like hating the Miami Marlins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, aphilso1 said:

 

Bad take.  Sporting KC has lifted a trophy 7 times since 2000; Tottenham has lifted one.  

 

I believe I saw somewhere not long ago that we're like tied for the most silverware (with LAG) in MLS history or something like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, aphilso1 said:

 

Are they really the team you hate the most?  

 

 

Yes

 

4 hours ago, aphilso1 said:

 

They do come across as entitled with a very cookie-cutter manufactured culture.

 

 

 

This is why...mostly.  That and I hate that stadium.  I also hate when teams play on plastic instead of real grass.  But it's almost entirely about the bandwagon fans and horrible plastic culture.

 

4 hours ago, aphilso1 said:

 

Personally, I would place LAFC, Seattle, and Portland at the top of my most hated teams list.

 

 

Of those three, I'd have to say I dislike Seattle the most, but for the most part I don't have a problem with any of them.  And I love the stadium that Portland plays in, really want to go to a match there sometime, I just wish they would replace that awful turf with real grass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, hskr4life said:

 

Seattle certainly my #1-- Houston Dyna probably my #2 (maybe because they always seem to be a thorn in our side)

Any team with the word "Orlando" in its name and purple as its uniform color. Ack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...