How to Make the Gold Cup Better.

[Free kick]

5 hours ago, Kent said:

But I will also add that the USA has been given plenty of time to build up crowds. We could look to past tournaments and I'm sure find lots of small crowds for USA games. In 2003 for example they played a game in front of just over 8k fans in New England's NFL stadium. They also played a quarter final that year in front of just 15k fans in the same stadium. I think other countries should get more than one chance to prove themselves.

There are likely be more hondurans who live in Houston than in San Pedro Sula.     Looking at the crowd in last night’s Hon-Qatar game, there werent many empty seats.   You could probably say the same for : 

Costa ricans in the north east of the US (eg.: New Jersey).

Same for El Salvadorans living in the US.

For Mexico, there were stories years ago that they wanted to play more games in Los Angeles but were rebuffed by the USSF.   Given that the revenues would be in US dollars when playing in the US and that the standard of living and disposable incomes of mexican americans is higher than in mexico.  I’ll say,  There would be more money to be made by the Mexican FA if they played all their international games in Los Angeles
 

The fan base (with money) for these central american teams is in the US.  Thats why the US is the the only place that can host the gold cup.  And the only place that will ever host the GC.

Edited July 21, 2021 by Free kick

[RJB]

2 hours ago, Kent said:

I should have looked back one more year. USA in a SEMI FINAL (against Canada actually) in 2002 drew only 7k to the huge Rose Bowl. Even the final that the USA won that year drew only 14k.

I'm not entirely sure that attendance from nearly 20 years ago makes for a reasonable comparison.  The landscape for soccer in both countries is very different in 2021 vs. 2002.  It's very different even from just ten years ago.  

Having the Gold Cup in the USA every year is annoying, but it makes sense from much more than just an attendance point of view.  They have the infrastructure to spread the tournament around to different cities, as well as a foolish number of different stadiums to choose from.  Even compared to a large country like Mexico with lots of soccer facilities, the USA is vastly superior.  I imagine this makes organizing the tournament a piece of cake for them.

[Kent]

2 hours ago, RJB said:

I'm not entirely sure that attendance from nearly 20 years ago makes for a reasonable comparison.  The landscape for soccer in both countries is very different in 2021 vs. 2002.  It's very different even from just ten years ago.  

Having the Gold Cup in the USA every year is annoying, but it makes sense from much more than just an attendance point of view.  They have the infrastructure to spread the tournament around to different cities, as well as a foolish number of different stadiums to choose from.  Even compared to a large country like Mexico with lots of soccer facilities, the USA is vastly superior.  I imagine this makes organizing the tournament a piece of cake for them.

My point in the 20 years ago comparison is that the USA is ahead of us. They were given this unique opportunity to be eternal hosts of the Gold Cup, and quite possibly if WE had been given that opportunity instead of them we might have a bigger fanbase for our national team than we have. Due to getting home field advantage in every tournament might give us a bump in our ranking and get us into higher pots and give us a better chance at qualifying, or at least making the final round of qualifying. I don't know how the finances are split up from the Gold Cup but we might get a bigger slice of the pie as well for all I know.

I understand why it is always hosted in the USA and if I was in charge and faced with the numbers I just might make the same decisions, but from a purist competitive point of view, and perhaps even with a long term view of growing the game in the region, it stinks.

And for what it's worth, the attendance numbers for the Gold Cup are exaggerated (including for the games that were in Toronto). When you see 30,000 for a group stage game, it's really 2 games at 15,000, or one at 1,000 and the other at 29,000. The way the numbers are reported makes it look like a hotter ticket when in reality they give you tickets to 2 games for the price of 1, and count you as being at both, even if you have no intention of watching them both.

[SpursFlu]

Love it or hate it.. the Central American fans living in the US make for an amazing atmosphere. This Saturday there will be a giant stadium filled with El Salvador, Honduras & Mexican fans. Should be awesome 

Interested to see how many are drawn to Cowboys stadium with US, Canada, Jamaica & Costa Rica 

Edited July 21, 2021 by SpursFlu

[Obinna]

16 minutes ago, Kent said:

My point in the 20 years ago comparison is that the USA is ahead of us. They were given this unique opportunity to be eternal hosts of the Gold Cup, and quite possibly if WE had been given that opportunity instead of them we might have a bigger fanbase for our national team than we have. Due to getting home field advantage in every tournament might give us a bump in our ranking and get us into higher pots and give us a better chance at qualifying, or at least making the final round of qualifying. I don't know how the finances are split up from the Gold Cup but we might get a bigger slice of the pie as well for all I know.

I understand why it is always hosted in the USA and if I was in charge and faced with the numbers I just might make the same decisions, but from a purist competitive point of view, and perhaps even with a long term view of growing the game in the region, it stinks.

And for what it's worth, the attendance numbers for the Gold Cup are exaggerated (including for the games that were in Toronto). When you see 30,000 for a group stage game, it's really 2 games at 15,000, or one at 1,000 and the other at 29,000. The way the numbers are reported makes it look like a hotter ticket when in reality they give you tickets to 2 games for the price of 1, and count you as being at both, even if you have no intention of watching them both.

As a soccer fan, I find it interesting that people buy these 2 for 1s and don't stick around for both. I mean, yes I get that people have other things on the go and/or may just be interested in their team and that's it, but I can't fathom it for myself. You have the ticket and it's higher level footy than you've probably ever played at, even if it's Grenada vs Cuba or whatever.

Hell, I go out of my way to watch the National Challenge Cup whenever I get a chance, even if I have no preference for who wins whatsoever.

[JohnnyFranchise]

5 hours ago, Kent said:

played a game in front of just over 8k fans in New England's NFL stadium

 

5 hours ago, Kent said:

only 7k to the huge Rose Bowl.

i was gonna make a point about stop playing in 70,000 seat stadiums. stick with the mls soccer-specific stadiums. memories of watching us play in seattle againt costa rica in 05 jump in my head, there were maybe 5,000 people in a 70,000 seat stadium for that game. 

[CanadianSoccerFan]

16 hours ago, JohnnyFranchise said:

 

i was gonna make a point about stop playing in 70,000 seat stadiums. stick with the mls soccer-specific stadiums. memories of watching us play in seattle againt costa rica in 05 jump in my head, there were maybe 5,000 people in a 70,000 seat stadium for that game. 

The choice of Arlington for the quarters is bizarre.  Will be a small crowd. The semi in Austin is sensible.

 

Other than that, CONCACAF has announced the QF in Arizona is sold out.  The final in Vegas has been sold out for months.  Houston always packs the joint so the semi should sellout as well.

 

[gigi riva]

cannot see the reason why they dont use  MLS Staduums at keast during the round robin and QF. 

[CanadianSoccerFan]

12 hours ago, gigi riva said:

cannot see the reason why they dont use  MLS Staduums at keast during the round robin and QF. 

They did.  The only round robin game in big venues involved Mexico.  Our doubleheader tomorrow is the only one where the non-MLS venue makes little sense.

[gigi riva]

I guess they have A chance to fill the ROSE BOWL with 100k compared to hopefully getting 25k at BMO  i guess they would go with the Rose Bowl

[CanadianSoccerFan]

Throughout this tournament I had a worry in the back of my mind about Qatar winning the tournament and making a mockery of CONCACAF's championship.  However, there are clearly some advantages to guest nations in terms of increased competitiveness and influx of money to fund CONCACAF development.  Add to this, the repetitiveness of the Gold Cup being every 2 years and the desire for increased competition.

We've discussed the joint Copa America a million times and the reasons why it's not happening but what about alternatives?  Instead of the 2nd Gold Cup, what about a different tournament hosted by CONCACAF that is half CONCACAF teams and half guests.  Invite teams from all over that will bring competitiveness and money/sponsorship.  Australia, Japan, South Korea, and China would be valuable to sponsors and TV companies.  There's a chance some UEFA teams could play if it's the odd numbered year.  If you let the Qataris buy their way in then why not let MBS have the Saudis join through a lucrative sponsorship with Bonesaw Airways.  Ok, maybe not the last one but you get the point.

Anyway, my point is that I don't mind CONCACAF hosting a tournament every 2 years as long as the 2nd one is something a bit different.  Obviously the joint Copa America makes all the sense in the world but if it can't be then they should look at alternatives.        

This could also be more interesting in the lead up to the 2026 World Cup.  Ourselves, Mexico, and the US won't be playing qualifiers so that year before the WC will be just friendlies anyway.

Edited August 1, 2021 by CanadianSoccerFan

[JohnnyFranchise]

19 minutes ago, CanadianSoccerFan said:

Instead of the 2nd Gold Cup, what about a different tournament hosted by CONCACAF that is half CONCACAF teams and half guests. 

i like that idea a lot

[Watchmen]

1 hour ago, CanadianSoccerFan said:

Throughout this tournament I had a worry in the back of my mind about Qatar winning the tournament and making a mockery of CONCACAF's championship.  However, there are clearly some advantages to guest nations in terms of increased competitiveness and influx of money to fund CONCACAF development.  Add to this, the repetitiveness of the Gold Cup being every 2 years and the desire for increased competition.

We've discussed the joint Copa America a million times and the reasons why it's not happening but what about alternatives?  Instead of the 2nd Gold Cup, what about a different tournament hosted by CONCACAF that is half CONCACAF teams and half guests.  Invite teams from all over that will bring competitiveness and money/sponsorship.  Australia, Japan, South Korea, and China would be valuable to sponsors and TV companies.  There's a chance some UEFA teams could play if it's the odd numbered year.  If you let the Qataris buy their way in then why not let MBS have the Saudis join through a lucrative sponsorship with Bonesaw Airways.  Ok, maybe not the last one but you get the point.

Anyway, my point is that I don't mind CONCACAF hosting a tournament every 2 years as long as the 2nd one is something a bit different.  Obviously the joint Copa America makes all the sense in the world but if it can't be then they should look at alternatives.        

This could also be more interesting in the lead up to the 2026 World Cup.  Ourselves, Mexico, and the US won't be playing qualifiers so that year before the WC will be just friendlies anyway.

I've always thought that the region should be pushing and promoting the Caribbean Cup and Copa Centroamericana more.  If those two were pushed on the "alternative" years, that would leave Canada/Mexico/US, and maybe that's where you do an "invite" tournament.  The overall result would be that you get smaller countries still playing each other in meaningful games with a trophy on the line, with the US/Mexico/Canada playing a higher caliber of competition (which the US and Mexico desperately need).