BainbridgeBrewer said:Well I better send the wifey an e-mail warning her of the game tonight. She may want to make plans due to a screaming fan downstairs.... e-mail sent.
They played with pride and were just a tad bit unlucky this last one.
What will be hard is waiting till the season starts up again. We'll see what they do in the offseason.
Does anybody know why the MLS conference semifinals were a 2 game series with aggregate score winning, but the conference finals were just one game? It doesn't make much sense to me, especially since the MLS cup is two more weekends away. I'm a Galaxy fan, so I'm glad they're in the final already, but it would make more sense to me if the conference finals were also a 2 game aggregate score series. More games=more revenue.
I'm with you, I don't get it. But they do similar things with Champions League in Europe.... after group stages, everything is home and away series....... EXCEPT THE STINKING FINAL. And while I understand that the final is at an allegedly neutral site, it just seems goofy to me to have more games for every other round but the finals.
It seems especially goofy when you consider that, in theory, according to the seedings... you have far less need for multiple games early in the process. The matchups should be more lopsided, and you'd be less likely to have the "lesser" team win. Once you get to the finals, you should have two very well matched teams, and they should have to play multiple games to truly determine who is best.
The group stages in Europe are also home and away formats. Each team in the group plays each other twice. Once at home and once away. They just don't use the two-legged tie (aggregate) scoring system during the group stage. The reasons for the home and away (two-legged ties / home and away group stage matches) has everything to do with ratings (high profile matches) and putting butts in seats.
My point wasn't "why do they do home and away" for everything else, it was "why the heck do they only do one game for the finals if everything else merits two."
I think a home and home situation would make more money for the league and the teams, and the actual fans would enjoy it much more. Its like every superbowl party I go to, except that one against the damn Steelers. The Seahawks aren't there so I'll usually just eat the food and drink the beer without caring who wins.
But then that would alienate a large portion of neutral fans as well as cities from the opportunity of hosting and/or attending. I watch the finals in every sport that I enjoy because I like a good match, even if my team isn't in the game. I like the single game, neutral ground final concept. Actually, there is typically always a chance that a team will have home field advantage in a final (LA). I am of the opposite opinion related to multi-game finals. I think that kind of structure is best suited for baseball and should stay there.
But should there be that much concern for the neutral fan?
Good point on the all or nothing aspect. It does hype things up a bit.
I guess, by chance, the ss winner got home field advantage in the final. And that is a big advantage... literally. The pitch at hdc is huge. Maybe the largest legal dimensions.
I guess my problem just comes from my idealistic view that if you're going to have a playoff, you shouldn't at any point have fewer games in any given "series" as the games get more important. At the risk of being overly dramatic, it seems like if you're not striving to ensure the best team wins, you're to some extent sacrificing the integrity of the game.
As for the neutral city aspect, I wonder if they've thought about having non-member cities host the final. Meaning cities that don't currently have an MLS team.
I'm not knocking on the systems for Hockey and Basketball...just saying I don't get the logic (other than TV and ticket sales revenue) of applying a "series" format within those sports.
Not sure how this would work. The most problematic aspect being the need for the infrastructure to host a game. Obviously all that is really needed in terms of infrastructure is a suitable venue. However, if I had to watch an MLS final played on an American Football field (lines and all) I would probably pull out my hair. Proper stadiums coming into the league has been huge for the game in my opinion. Not to celebrate these venues (as a priority) would be a poor decision.
...I think Las Vegas has a really good chance to be the 20th MLS club.
So this is totally unrelated to soccer... but my telephone at home has talking caller ID. And I got a call from Reno yesterday. It was pretty amusing, because it told me I had a call from Reno En Vee.
I think it will be the Cosmos. The American game needs more local derby matches. Although a lack of infrastructure may set them back. The next expansion will be interesting. There are a lot of names in the hat.
But what about the ownership fallout...
...and the fact that Don Garber said he was making more ground with three other potential owners in NY, none of them being the Cosmos.
Enter your email address to join: