Lots of talk about Blanco going nuts at in the Fire's Open Cup loss to D.C. United the other day. I especially love the instant hypocrisy of first comment on the guest post to Goff's blog, because I'm sure whoever posted it didn't offer a similar recommendation about Hristo Stoitchkov when he broke that kid's leg.
I suspect Blanco will be banned from the U.S. Open Cup for life, and that's exactly what needs to happen from a soccer standpoint. Precedent would be another Mexican National Team star, Luis Hernandez, who was banned for stepping on Ante Razov's face. Maybe Mexican players just hold a grudge against USSF, and are looking for excuses not to participate? In spectacularly violent fashion?
Whether or not the D.C. United staffer who was allegedly head-butted by Blanco decides to press charges is another matter, and almost certainly well within his rights. Even odds that it might happen, but I could see Don Garber intervening for an out-of-court settlement to avoid a PR fiasco.
While we're talking about the U.S. Open Cup, you can always tell someone is a fairly recent fan of MLS when they bemoan the lack of coverage of the tournament. Sorry, Tom. U.S. Soccer doesn't have the budget, and the teams have their hands full -- and their pockets empty -- just marketing them at all. It's the way it is, and it's the way it's always been. Could some owner decide to make it important and throw resources at it in an attempt to differentiate themselves? Sure, but don't hold your breath.
Thanks for the patronising comment, Coz, but I understand the historic issue regarding U.S. Soccer's marketing of the Open Cup.
U.S. Soccer does have the money, and with the internet these days, marketing can be done much cheaper than ever before. How about they ask bloggers in to cover games, or offer consistent web feeds for a low cost? You're telling me USL can afford to do this and US Soccer can't for far less games?
US Soccer are spending almost $100,000 paying ESPN to televise this week's development academy games, and putting all their manpower into that; these are important too, but don't tell me they couldn't market the Cup better if they wanted to.
Um, you spelled "patronizing" wrong. ;-P
If you look at it from US Soccer's POV, MLS and USL clubs have marketing budgets, while development academies don't. Plus, if that development academy tournament is at a single location, it makes that $100K go a long way.
So in that respect, it may be a fairly conscious choice to focus money elsewhere *because* there are other entities that could pick up the slack. Only those entities choose not to.
Personally, I tend to discount the "let the bloggers do it" argument, but that's because I've read too many bloggers that think that's the answer to everything. And it's not like US Soccer can mandate that clubs provide a web feed, so that's on the clubs anyway.
So the net result is really that US Soccer doesn't have the infrastructure to promote all the US Open Cup matches properly, so they almost *have* to delegate to the clubs. Would a block grant of marketing money help? That one's tricky, and probably opens the can of worms that is the politics of USSF vs. MLS.
I just don't think there's an easy solution, so if that made me overly dismissive of your argument, I apologize. Or even apologise. ;-P
The Shape of Things To Come, 2013 Edition
posted to
February 11, 2013
Firing Away: Chicago Fire at DC United
posted to
August 22, 2012
A Few Thoughts On The Home Opener
posted to
March 26, 2012
Firing Away: Chicago Fire at Montreal Impact
posted to
March 17, 2012