Revs happy in Foxboro (epic fail)

[ag futbol]

http://www.thesunchronicle.com/articles/2010/04/07/sports/7213612.txt


Revolution management is happy with the consistent number of fans in the seats and the legion of followers. But why, they ask, should they move? The Revolution, under the Kraft Sports Entertainment group, own the stadium, own the surrounding land and parking lots and concession rights. It's not that Revolution would not welcome a "soccer only" facility. But, some public and private financing would have to make it work "and why should we spend 100 million on a new stadium and have our attendance increase only 10 percent and have to pay that off?" asked Bilello.
When does that meteor that killed the dinosaurs hit MLS again? I just want a few pieces of deadwood set on fire. Maybe the Hunt brokers can go too...

Everyone always talks about the upside of single entity. Well here's a big down-size. Bob Kraft clearly doesn't care to invest in his team, is happy to rake the profits from his ownership share in the rest of the league. End result: good luck ever establishing a larger fan base in Boston.

[Carts]

This is why Garber needs to have a 100% firm policy of...

1. all new teams MUST HAVE their SSS built before entering the league...
2. all existing teams have until (insert date here) to build their SSS...

The league looks BUSH LEAGUE in big NFL stadiums...

In year-1, I did the roadtrip to the DC United game. There was something like 25,000 at the game - unfortunately at RFK all you could see was 40,000+ empty seats...

Carts...

[Dirk Diggler]

There is no pressure on Kraft to build a SSS considering how he gets the revenue from the stadium as it is and that MLS is unlikely to force them into action considering how they are definitely not going to abandon an original MLS team based in a big market like Boston. But whatever ... I'm just glad that stadiums like Gillete Stadium are fast becoming the exception rather than the rule in MLS. It would bother me a lot if every stadium in MLS was a cavernous NFL stadium.

[Pachuco]

There is no pressure on Kraft to build a SSS considering how he gets the revenue from the stadium as it is and that MLS is unlikely to force them into action considering how they are definitely not going to abandon an original MLS team based in a big market like Boston. But whatever ... I'm just glad that stadiums like Gillete Stadium are fast becoming the exception rather than the rule in MLS. It would bother me a lot if every stadium in MLS was a cavernous NFL stadium.

I would propose not to abandon the team, but instead, tax the shit out of them. Then spread the money to all teams through allocation.

[nascarguy]

gillete is a good stadium it's not as bad as gaints stadium was that place was a place of shit.

[jabbronies]

This is a tough one.

Their attendance is erratic. Some years they've brought in the higher end of the league attendence average. Then they tailed off, But recently, they've seen a resurgence. Will a SSS stabalize those numbers?

Plus they are debt free. Everything they bring in is profit. So they are not sucking off the leagues tit are they?

From a business percpective, it makes sense to stay put. After all these years of the league shitting the bed finacially, why go and spend more money now?

However, from a league growth percpective, they should invest the $$$.

1996: 19,025
1997: 21,423/16,233
1998: 19,188
1999: 16,735
2000: 15,463/10,723
2001: 15,645
2002: 16,927/19,018
2003: 14,641/14,823
2004: 12,226/5,679
2005: 12,525/13,849
2006: 11,786/9,372
2007: 16,787/10,217
2008: 17,580/5,221
2009: 12,427/7,416

[canadian_bhoy]

Garber looks to have his sights set on getting DC a new stadium at the moment. He made some pretty strong comments not too long ago about how DC (the place) needs to get their act together

[CretanBull]

From a business percpective, it makes sense to stay put. After all these years of the league shitting the bed finacially, why go and spend more money now?

However, from a league growth percpective, they should invest the $$$.


That it in a nutshell.

[Shakes McQueen]

http://www.thesunchronicle.com/articles/2010/04/07/sports/7213612.txt


When does that meteor that killed the dinosaurs hit MLS again? I just want a few pieces of deadwood set on fire. Maybe the Hunt brokers can go too...

Everyone always talks about the upside of single entity. Well here's a big down-size. Bob Kraft clearly doesn't care to invest in his team, is happy to rake the profits from his ownership share in the rest of the league. End result: good luck ever establishing a larger fan base in Boston.

If this was MLSE, we'd have a thread 42 pages long decrying how crappy corporate ownership is, because of stuff like this - putting profit margins before the good of the team. Being content to sit back and accept the status quo, because it's "profitable enough".

- Scott

[Beach_Red]

^ How many pages long would it be if we went 0-4 in championship games and then missed the playoffs and still had the same manager?

[Blowing Bubbles]

They are never going to force Kraft's hand, sad but true.

DC United on the other hand might come to a resolution b/c Baltimore is ready to lure them over with taxpayer giveaways.

[forza_tfc]

Hey guys--I moved to Massachusetts last year and will be going to my first Revs game, only because the Reds are in town. I see two problems with the Revs: (1) Kraft doesn't really care about making the Revs a legitimate club (look at their logo, no jersey sponsor, etc.) (2) their supporters fail to mobilize. I check out the Revs discussion forum, and they really have no idea how to get organized in order to send a message to the ownership. They complain a lot, but don't know how to make their message heard.

As an example for point #1, after buying my tickets, I received an e-mail with a survey from the Revs organization. It asked if it was my first game, if I plan on going back, etc., but the stupid part was when it asked what it would take to bring me back. They gave a forced choice between various giveaways (would you prefer a t-shirt? mini soccer ball? bobble head?), discount tickets, and stupid promotions (like having fireworks at games). This organization has absolutely no clue to build a soccer culture.

[Oldtimer]

Kraft is a notorious cheapskate.

No way he'll spend on a SSS unless he sees a benefit, and the league won't force him because he is one of the original MLS backers.

He'll do it if (1) it's almost free (paid for by a city), or (2) if he can fill it up (that would probably be combined with a DP with high potential "off the field" financial success).

[Beach_Red]

^ Yes, he's one of the owners who really likes the NFL model - he's been very successful in that league.

[Steve]

There are a few important parts of that article that would also bear quoting:

""Our philosophy hasn't changed," said Bilello Tuesday, "an urban soccer stadium is the answer." But to do that in Foxboro, in Framingham, in Somerville, the logistics are many. Soccer-only stadiums are becoming the norm as MLS soccer franchises move away from mega-seat football stadiums into smaller, economic friendly confines."

"The Revolution however, are intrigued by an urban setting, "to be able to have that shift in demographics," said Bilello of fans having access to public transportation and opening the door to a potential new wave of fans. "To look at (acquiring) urban land is difficult, then you have to factor in the importance of private-public ownership."

Sure, the article isn't all positive, but it seems like the message is this:

"We're not going to move to a soccer specific stadium just for the sake of moving to a soccer specific stadium. We aren't going to build a new facility in a place like Foxborough just for fun. If an urban location is available, we'll look into that".

I think that's actually the right way to go for them. They are saying that while a soccer specific stadium in the burbs might help a little (their 10% figure) it would not turn things around (just look at FC Dallas). They mention "shift in demographics", as in, if they can get into the city, they will attract a whole new demographic that they currently aren't (and that, frankly, another SSS way out of the city won't either). So again, they are correct. If it were TFC, I'd rather play in Gillette for 10 more years then have a stadium downtown, then build a nice, 20k seater beside Gillette and NEVER move downtown.

Edit: I just listened to the actual press conference, and it's even more clear from that.

Here is the link:

http://www.revolutionsoccer.net/mediacenter/index.cfm?ac=VideoNewsdetail&pid=42445&pcid=117

Stadium talk starts at about 6:24. Essentially he is saying exactly what I said above. He is saying that they want an urban stadium, how Toronto and Seattle opened their eyes, and no matter what you do if it's 30 minutes away from the city, you can only do so much. The quote about 10% was actually "We don't want to build a stadium and have our attendance only increase by 10%, we want to build a soccer stadium and have a sold out venue week after week after week". Again, he is referring to downtown vs somewhere beside Gillette, and saying that getting a deal done downtown takes more time than getting land in the suburbs, but since they are already in a nice stadium (they own) they can take the time to get it done right instead of rushing into a poor decision and being stuck with it for 30 years.

To clarify: I don't know if Kraft is blowing smoke up our asses, I'm not saying he isn't. I'm just saying that the quotes that spawned this thread are way out of context, and what they are actually saying isn't "Fuck it, why build a stadium?" they're "If we're going to build a stadium, we're going to do it right".

[Keystone FC]

The only way for the Revs to get a SSS is if a a deep pocket money bags type of guy who loves soccer wants to take the revs off Krafts hands for a very, very, very, very nice profit for Kraft.
This seems to be the only way for the club to become 'legit' in alot of peoples eyes, but again as long as 10,000 (+/-) show up during the time between the Patriots seasons he'll keep the Revs right there at Gillette.
Then agian...if a Boston club was to come into the NASL/USL 1 league and started to win and even BEAT the revs in USOC competition, this might force Kraft to consider making changes to the club as people abondon the Revs for this new Boston club.
FYI a new team in Boston (the Boston Tea Men) will start in the NPSL this season. The NPSL is about the CSL level but this could be the start of something.

[rocker]

I don't think money is the only question though. What site would they choose? the Sommerville site was good, but the locals opposed putting a stadium there (let's not forget Vancouver has faced opposition).
The reason you see stadiums outside of downtown is because of the cheap land and no locals to oppose it.

Almost every MLS stadium has received some sort of government support, even Red Bull Arena. So I'm not surprised the Revs execs would ponder government support in terms of finances and in terms of getting the project approved in a certain neighbourhood.

[Alixir]

so basically the revs owner is kinda like Harrold Ballard.....except the revs win every now and then. :p

[RPB_RED_NATION_RPB]

every team should be forced to have a SSS within a certain time frame...if not reached.... then goodnight!

I remembered when TFC came in.....they had to have a SSS to enter......but when Seattle came in it didnt matter?...Unless they have intentions of getting one?

REVS and SEATTLE are the only ones left now....MLS should put pressure!

[rocker]

REVS and SEATTLE are the only ones left now....MLS should put pressure!

MLS won't pressure Seattle. They ain't gonna build a 45000 seat SSS downtown. The stadium they have now was designed in part for soccer, it's in a great location, and it's really cool in design.
It's perfect for them.

[Toronto Ruffrider]

This is a tough one.

Their attendance is erratic. Some years they've brought in the higher end of the league attendence average. Then they tailed off, But recently, they've seen a resurgence. Will a SSS stabalize those numbers?

Plus they are debt free. Everything they bring in is profit. So they are not sucking off the leagues tit are they?

From a business percpective, it makes sense to stay put. After all these years of the league shitting the bed finacially, why go and spend more money now?

However, from a league growth percpective, they should invest the $$$.

1996: 19,025
1997: 21,423/16,233
1998: 19,188
1999: 16,735
2000: 15,463/10,723
2001: 15,645
2002: 16,927/19,018
2003: 14,641/14,823
2004: 12,226/5,679
2005: 12,525/13,849
2006: 11,786/9,372
2007: 16,787/10,217
2008: 17,580/5,221
2009: 12,427/7,416

I wouldn't put much stock in New England's attendance numbers. The Revs are one of those teams that play in double-headers, in which one of the matches is an MLS fixture while the other one is a high-profile friendly. At the end of the day, crowds of 50,000-plus - which are clearly there for the friendlies - are added to the Revs' attendance numbers, skewing the real total by quite a margin.

[Toronto Ruffrider]

Garber looks to have his sights set on getting DC a new stadium at the moment. He made some pretty strong comments not too long ago about how DC (the place) needs to get their act together

Unlike New England, though, DC United doesn't own RFK, and the lease at that stadium is quite expensive. It is this type of situation the league is trying to eliminate, not the Seattle and New England situation in which there is a common ownership group between an MLS team and its stadium.