MLS Cup 2011 On Sunday Night 20 November In Home Depot Center

by Dave Clark on May 10, 2011 8:55 AM PDT in Sounders: MLS Regular Season

The neutral host of MLS Cup will occur at least one more year, unless the Los Angeles Galaxy or Chivas USA winds up in the MLS Cup Final. Carson, CA's Home Depot Center will host the Final with the Galaxy being the presenting team (their colors will be used in Cup and Supporter Summit signage). The game will have a 6 PM Pacific start time and be shown on ESPN, ESPN Deportes and TSN getting broad national multi-lingual coverage.

While there will be much gnashing of teeth through the blogosphere about the time, particularly from East Coast teams, the fact is that the NFL only has one game at that time, where as daytime would be a full slate of the other football. Saturday was a non-starter as ESPN would be packed with college football.

For us here in Seattle Sounders land it means a West Coast opportunity (3 time zone trips are problems in US sports), cheap plane tickets and a decent time for viewing. There would be no perfect solutions. No matter the day in late November or early December there were going to be scheduling conflicts with more significant sports in America. But at this time, on this day, the MLS Cup Final will be on the most significant sports station in the world and in a venue that should have perfect weather for soccer, now if only they can keep the lights on...

Tweet Comment 27 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Not a fan of the location

It’s clear the LA Galaxy are making a final push for the cup this year before the end of Becks contract forces them to rebuild. I’m not a fan of giving them home field advantage for a Cup Final that they have a very good shot of making. Also, there are going to be a host of new stadiums this season that could have been used to show the growth of the sport in other markets. Most of those teams are less likely to make the finals as well.

by Dizzo on May 10, 2011 9:07 AM PDT reply actions

New stadiums

I agree… Vancouver, KC, PDX all have new ones by end of the season right? I can see not vancouver because 2 in a row in canada. But why not PDX or KC?

Scoreboards, not billboards.
Regular season, not pre-season.

by lysander on May 10, 2011 11:59 AM PDT up reply actions

Not too mention

Philly and New York have brand new stadiums and haven’t hosted a Cup Game yet.

by Dizzo on May 10, 2011 12:52 PM PDT up reply actions

Ny had the all star game though

right?

Scoreboards, not billboards.
Regular season, not pre-season.

by lysander on May 10, 2011 9:18 PM PDT up reply actions

They have the all-star game this year

It wouldn’t make sense to have the MLS Cup and All-star game in the same venue. I think Philly would have been a good choice. A nice stadium, passionate fans and an opportunity to give a bump to a young club.

by Dizzo on May 11, 2011 7:18 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions

I can see the case against KC

They haven’t traditionally had the greatest attendance. It could be pretty chilly there by November, too. Cold weather, no home team to cheer on, could lead to pretty bad attendance.

I think Portland could have made a lot of sense, but I imagine that there are those who don’t like the surface they play on and would rather have the warmer weather in SoCal.

by ubelmann on May 10, 2011 9:55 PM PDT up reply actions

Cold and no home team to cheer on?

sounds like Toronto! :)

Scoreboards, not billboards.
Regular season, not pre-season.

by lysander on May 10, 2011 11:03 PM PDT up reply actions

Also

they have traditionally had poor attendence becuase they played at stadium that is smaller than many HS football stadiums in Texas! The place was had people sitting in the grassy hillside behind the goal! And the game was horrible to watch because the field was about half as wide a soccer field should be!

I bet it improves with their new stadium.

Scoreboards, not billboards.
Regular season, not pre-season.

by lysander on May 10, 2011 11:14 PM PDT up reply actions

I'm not a fan of the location

but mostly because they had it there 3 years ago, and there have only been 8 locations of the MLS Cup throughout it’s history. It’s been at the Galaxy’s stadium 5 out of the 16 years. Spread it around a little. LA should not be getting preferential treatment. Every stadium/city in the MLS should be getting a chance to host it.

by majora999 on May 12, 2011 12:25 PM PDT up reply actions

my only real complaint...

is that not announcing the host site for the big championship game until well after the season starts just adds the the general sense of half-ass-ed-ness I get from this League in many ways…

...that's MISTER Keller to you!!!

by malcontentjake on May 10, 2011 10:11 AM PDT reply actions

Agree also

Half ass ness and some bit of infairness. At least before the season they can say at the time the picked it all teams had an even shot at getting to the final. Once the season starts it rtightfully or wrongly raises doubts about whether there was some partiality in the decision.

Scoreboards, not billboards.
Regular season, not pre-season.

by lysander on May 10, 2011 12:01 PM PDT up reply actions

I'm sure nobody will want to watch Eagles at Giants on SNF that night

Why not play it midweek? Better that going head to head with the highest-rated sport on television.

by lemonverbena on May 10, 2011 10:56 AM PDT reply actions

Because it's a lot harder to get away supporters to show up for a mid-week game?

If they’re going to have a neutral site game, I think it has to be on a weekend.

Plus, as of right now, NFL stands for Non-existent Football League. If the labor dispute wipes out the season, then I suspect MLS Cup will be earlier on Sunday.

by ubelmann on May 10, 2011 11:14 AM PDT up reply actions

Reeeeeaaaaallllyyyy doubt that will happen

Just sayin’

by chrisperry1983 on May 10, 2011 11:43 AM PDT up reply actions

Never underestimate the power of greed and stupidity

Both players and managers lose if the season doesn’t happen, but big $$$ creates big blinders for all involved.

by Dizzo on May 10, 2011 12:55 PM PDT up reply actions

mid week?

I am nto sure if friday counts as midweek but to me friday seems decent comprimse. You are only competing against HS football and it is still weekend so you not really risking low attendence as much.

Scoreboards, not billboards.
Regular season, not pre-season.

by lysander on May 10, 2011 12:02 PM PDT up reply actions

Another example of the MLS tilting the playing field in favor of LA and NYC.

I definitely want to know why it appears that league is favoring LA and NYC in terms of moving in high profile players, and also why Seattle’s payroll is so far below that of LA and NYC when there are 32k season ticket holders like me filling up the stadium and buying $8 beers?*

http://deadspin.com/#!5800045/mls-salaries-make-no-secret-of-mls-plan-to-create-ny+la-rivalry

Here’s the 2011 guaranteed payrolls for NY and LA, ourselves, and two smaller market teams. The difference is obvious:

NY Red Bulls: $13,397,087.04
LA Galaxy: $12,205,725.12
Real Salt Lake: $3,517,856.76
Seattle: $3,465,629.23
Colorado Rapids: $3,173,078.64

I had hoped, just this once, that Seattle would have the ability to compete financially with NYC and LA. But from the looks of it the league is manipulating player acquisitions and salary. in a way that would make David Stern and the NBA blush.

Are we getting screwed by the league? If this is the way its going to be then tell us now so we can set our expectations accordingly.

*If my math is correct, this year the Sounders will realize nearly $11 million off season ticket holder sales alone. That doesn’t count TV, Radio, Concessions, or Apparel sales.

by Choskasoft on May 10, 2011 12:35 PM PDT reply actions

Frankly their payroll is higher due to over-priced super-stars

The only DP level player on those two squads that is worth the money is Landon Donovan. I wouldn’t want to be an LA Galaxy fan. Having to watch the rest of the LA midfield haul around the corpse of David Beckham just so he can take corner kicks is just depressing. I’d rather watch the young guys.

by Dizzo on May 10, 2011 1:00 PM PDT up reply actions

Teams pick their DPs

Seattle’s two are young players who look to improve.

The 5 in LA and NYC are guys that are past their peak.

And that’s really the difference in payroll.

I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart

by Dave Clark on May 10, 2011 1:04 PM PDT up reply actions

Like I said when you posted this in the other thread

$10M of NYRB’s payroll is Henry and Marquez. $10M of LAG’s payroll is Landon, Beckham, and Angel.

The league isn’t manipulating anything when it comes to this. The Sounders have chosen (wisely, in my view) to not blow their wad on DP salaries, and have invested in Montero and Flaco. There’s nothing to stop the Sounders from spending $10M on DPs if that’s what they really wanted to do.

Honestly, this is simply an illustration of why the salary cap is so important. NY and LA would spend a lot more money than that if they weren’t limited to 3 DPs, probably because their TV rights are worth a lot more than everyone else’s TV rights.

by ubelmann on May 10, 2011 1:04 PM PDT up reply actions

RBNY in particular would be tough

as they see the entire club as an advertising expense.

Seattle does great earning revenue, but it is still a business here. Though I wouldn’t be surprised if Seattle adds a major talent this summer.

I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart

by Dave Clark on May 10, 2011 1:15 PM PDT up reply actions

The league isn't manipulating anything?

I just can’t believe that the league isn’t guiding the guys with star power to LA and NYC. Even if we allow that those guys are choosing to play in NYC and LA, how is that not an example of the league manipulating its rules?

As for whether or not those guys are worth what they are getting paid, lets take a look at the table. Ah yes, RBNY and the Galaxy are at the top. Funny how a bunch of guys past their prime are winning.

As for your assertion of why the salary cap is so important because otherwise NY and LA would spend “a lot more” than everyone else. How is spending 3x than 4x more than the next clubs not a “lot more.” (Even the Yankees payroll is only 2x that of the Mariners.) Again, is this not an example of the league manipulating its rules?

If there is nothing to stop the Sounders from acquiring higher priced, higher quality DPs than Flaco and Montero, then why haven’t they?

by Choskasoft on May 10, 2011 1:51 PM PDT up reply actions

Wait...

…the league is manipulating its rules because Henry, Marquez, Beckham, et al would rather play in NY and LA than Columbus and Kansas City? I really don’t follow your logic here.

If there is nothing to stop the Sounders from acquiring higher priced, higher quality DPs than Flaco and Montero, then why haven’t they?

Well, for one thing, they have. Ljungberg and Nkufo made more than Montero and Flaco. For another, it’s not always a smart way to allocate their resources. How many MLS Cups does Henry have? How many MLS Cups does Beckham have? How many MLS Cups does Angel have? In Beckham’s entire time in LA, they’ve won one meaningful trophy (Supporter’s Shield 2010) and that was with Beckham playing 7 regular season games.

Certainly LA and NYRB are good teams, but LA’s fourth in the league in points per match, and if their older roster is going to bite them it will be as the season wears on, not in the first stretch of the season.

by ubelmann on May 10, 2011 2:15 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs

The more I read this sentence the more I wonder

Even if we allow that those guys are choosing to play in NYC and LA, how is that not an example of the league manipulating its rules?

I have no idea how that can be written and have meaning.

I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart

by Dave Clark on May 10, 2011 2:18 PM PDT up reply actions

Let's restate that

Beckham wanted to be in LA. The league’s salary cap didn’t enable LA to sign him. Voila! MLS manipulated its rules and the DP was born.

Or as the Guardian said at the time, "Having set their eyes on attracting Beckham, AEG set about removing the only barrier to his arrival, a salary cap intended to keep the MLS competitive. " http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2007/jan/12/football.topstories3

Last year RBNY fell apart. Henry expressed an interest in playing in NYC. Voila, MLS manipulated its rules and new DP slots were created.

by Choskasoft on May 10, 2011 2:47 PM PDT up reply actions

I actually appreciate those changes

I’m glad MLS allows DPs. One point salient point, though: teams could have multiple DPs as far back as 2009 and could have up to three well before Marquez became the Red Bulls’ third DP. In fact, the Sounders made Alvaro their third DP before Marquez signed with the Red Bulls.

Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter

by Jeremiah Oshan on May 10, 2011 5:15 PM PDT up reply actions