Oh the Rowdies, the Rowdies, the Rowdies are a pain in the ass.
Now that the MLS 2005 expansion is complete and two new clubs have been added, I started to think about the state of the game in the States. I have been a supporter of some club or another for most of my life and I've been an observer of the history and the future of the sport in America for some time now. I know that when both leagues were in their infancy in the 1920's, the American Soccer League was as successful as the National Football League in terms of attendance. But organizational problems in the ASL stifled its growth and eventually killed the league in 1933. Of course we know what happened with the NFL over the next seventy-five years. Then there was an attempt in the 1960's to establish a top-flight league to fill a void of over thirty years. The United Soccer Association and the National Professional Soccer League were created in 1966 and merged the following season to form the North American Soccer League. The NASL struggled for almost twenty years before collapsing under the weight of inflated salaries and over-expansion. Now we are in the Third Republic of American soccer with Major League Soccer filling the first division. But we really find ourselves in the strongest soccer environment in this country probably since the old ASL days in the twenties. This is not because of the strength of MLS, which is completing its ninth season in 2004. While the league has learned from some of the mistakes of previous efforts at U.S. first division soccer, they are far from being one of the top leagues in the world. No, we are in a renaissance because of the wide base the sport has across the country. Firstly, the U.S. men's national team is experiencing unprecedented success having qualified for the last four World Cup tournaments and surprising the world by making the quarterfinals in 2002. With the establishment of the youth programs, U.S. Soccer is creating a pool of players for American (and foreign) clubs to draw from. The NASL was stocked with aging foreigners. The league actually had to mandate a minimum of American players for each team. I think MLS has a similar quota, but with mostly homegrown talent it is one establishing a maximum of foreign players. Another reason that the game is stronger now than in recent memory is that there is a configuration of lower divisions. The United Soccer Leagues form a pyramid structure with their USL First and Second Divisions (USSF second and third divisions), and a de facto fourth division Premier Development League for amateur clubs. And a couple of years ago several former USL clubs broke away and formed the Men's Professional Soccer League in the west. The league recently expanded eastward and renamed themselves National Professional Soccer League. While there is no promotion or relegation between any of the divisions, at least there were almost one hundred clubs who competed in 2004 from Cape Cod to San Diego and from Seattle to Palm Beach and all points between. There are currently MLS, USL First Division, USL Second Division, PDL or NPSL clubs in 33 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. There has never been such a cultivation of the sport at a professional and nationally-organized amateur level as developed in the 1990's. Lastly, there are finally soccer-specific stadiums being built and planned for clubs. Columbus, Los Angeles and Chivas USA already play in their palaces. (Galaxy and Chivas USA share the Home Depot Center.) Dallas and Chicago will open their soccer specific stadiums shortly. Construction or plans have already begun for new homes for NY/NJ, Salt Lake City, Colorado and D.C. That would leave on the MLS level only Kansas City and New England, still playing in NFL stadiums because those clubs are operated by those same NFL owners, and San Jose who are negotiating with Santa Clara for a potential stadium to be able to stay in the South Bay area. So that makes nine of the twelve first division sides who will (hopefully) be playing in smaller soccer-specific facilities within the next several years. Add Blackbaud Stadium in Charleston and others planned for second division sides like Rochester and Atlanta and things are looking up in terms of clubs not having to share with football teams.
This does not mean everything is hunky-dory. Although stability has increased in the past few years, clubs in the lower divisions still come and go. Even MLS contracted their Florida clubs in 2002. And there are still too many owners who get into the game thinking they are going to make gobs of money. These people are generally not soccer people. Generally the best an owner in the U.S. can hope to do is break even and the higher up a club is the slimmer that hope is. And my old bugaboo of the current generation of youth soccer players becoming the next generation of adult supporters. That has never come true. At best it is a very slow process. The hope in the sixties and seventies (and eighties and nineties and on) was that the explosion of young players would grow up to attend matches. The NASL died waiting for that to happen. What seems to have happened instead was that each subsequent batch of former youth players represents a new generation of non-soccerphobes. While we still have the bullet-headed American sports fan who will not give soccer the time of day, it is less of a pariah than it used to be despite the continuing snicker of many in the major sports media.
And another thing...
Since the new MLS expansion clubs have announced their names, I'll give you my ranking of the best of the American bunch.
Best Names (in no particular order)
D.C. United - Hands down the best. It has a traditional English club sound to
it without being obvious about it.
FC Dallas - Okay, so this really is a lack of a name. That plays to its advantage considering they are changing from someone's stupid marketing idea Dallas Burn. Another international-sounding name.
CD Chivas USA and Real Salt Lake - Points to both new MLS clubs for avoiding the contrived names. Chivas is owned by the Mexican club of the same name. They weren't terribly imaginative. I don't understand the choice of the Spanish Real name, but it could have been infinitely worse. There is another club in town called the Utah Blitzz. Ack!
Los Angeles Galaxy - I generally dislike singular theme names, but of the bunch this is the least offensive. Galaxy kind of reminds me of Cosmos.
Charleston Battery - Reminds me of Arsenal.
Bradenton Academics - There is a club in Scotland called Hamilton Academicals. Academics is unique and not "clever" like Flash or Burn or other edgy American names.
Names that draw on U.S. soccer history (Portland Timbers, San Jose Earthquakes, Seattle Sounders) - There is soccer history in this country. These clubs are paying homage to clubs who played in those cities decades ago. Cheers to Canadian club Vancouver Whitecaps as well.
Names that have a local flavor (Chicago Fire, San Jose Earthquakes, Virginia Beach Mariners, etc.) - I like names that have local historic significance. A club called the Fire playing in any other city wouldn't quite sound the same.
Worst Names (in no particular order)
Singular theme names "with attitude" (I don't have space to list all
the horrible names, but for just a taste there is Albuquerque Asylum, Cascade Surge, Des
Moines Menace, Fresno Fuego, Minnesota Blast, Reading Rage, Vermont Voltage, West
Virginia Chaos). Points off for intentional misspelling (Central Florida Kraze).
Singular weather related names (Austin Lightning, Colorado Springs Blizzard, Minnesota Thunder, Springfield Storm).
And another thing...