Minnesota Stars Could Host Seattle Sounders with Tuesday Night US Open Cup Win
The Minnesota Stars FC are being called road warriors these days. They have battled through a brutal NASL schedule that inflicted on the team a 4-game road trip that started on May 19th in Fort Lauderdale and won’t end until June 9th in Cary, N.C.
In the meantime the Stars lost a flip of the coin to host their first US Open Cup match against the Des Moines Menace on May 22nd and sold their home venue rights to Real Salt Lake on May 29th. With those two games in the mix, that’s over 10,200 miles the team has traveled. In that time and with all the travel, the team has managed a 3-0-2 record with the biggest victory being last Tuesday’s defeat of Real Salt Lake at Rio Tinto in front of over 17,000 fans, which is the largest crowd ever at at a non-final USOC match.
Add to all of the Stars’ travel Tuesday night’s USOC game in San Jose, California against the Earthquakes and it makes 6 away matches in 16 days, traveling over 13,300 miles. Yes, road warriors!
So it had to be a relief to the Stars front office, coaching staff and its players when US Soccer announced on Saturday that if the team should win its game against the San Jose Earthquakes on Tuesday night, they will get to host the winner of the Seattle Sounders v Cal FC match. That Quarterfinal USOC game would take place on June 26th.
Here are all the potential 5th Round USOC Quarterfinal matchups and their potential venues.
Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup Schedule QUARTERFINALS – Tuesday, June 26
New York Red Bulls (MLS)/Harrisburg City Islanders (USL PRO) Winner at D.C. United (MLS): RFK Stadium; Washington, D.C.; 7:30 p.m. ET
OR
New York Red Bulls (MLS)/Harrisburg City Islanders (USL PRO) Winner at Philadelphia Union (MLS): PPL Park; Chester, Pa.; 7:30 p.m. ET
—
Michigan Bucks (PDL)/Dayton Dutch Lions (USL PRO) Winner at Sporting Kansas City (MLS): LIVESTRONG Sporting Park; Kansas City, Kan.; 7:30 p.m. CT
OR
Michigan Bucks (PDL)/Dayton Dutch Lions (USL PRO) Winner at Colorado Rapids (MLS): Dick’s Sporting Goods Park; Commerce City, Colo.; 7 p.m. MT
—
Chivas USA (MLS)/Carolina RailHawks (NASL) Winner at San Antonio Scorpions (NASL): Heroes Stadium; San Antonio, Texas; 7:30 p.m. CT
OR
Charlotte Eagles (USL PRO) at Chivas USA (MLS): Home Depot Center Track & Field Stadium; Carson, Calif.; 7:30 p.m. PT
OR
Charlotte Eagles (USL PRO) at Carolina RailHawks (NASL): WakeMed Soccer Park; Cary, N.C.; 7:07 p.m. ET
—
Seattle Sounders FC (MLS)/Cal FC (USASA) Winner at San Jose Earthquakes (MLS): Kezar Stadium; San Francisco, Calif.; 7:30 p.m. PT
OR
Seattle Sounders FC (MLS)/Cal FC (USASA) Winner at Minnesota Stars FC (NASL): National Sports Center; Blaine, Minn.; 7:30 p.m. CT
Comments are closed.
You mean Minnesota Stars could sell home field to Seattle Sounders. AM I RITE? CASH MONEY! MAKE IT RAIN!
Has anyone seen this. So Sigi thinks US Soccer is against his Sounders? Wow!
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/soundersfcblog/2018349863_sigi_schmid.html
i really wish that the Stars would keep the home game IF they were to somehow pull off a win at San Jose this tuesday. there is no excuse for the Seattle match being sold for short term gain. they would have 3 weeks to market the match to the MSP metro area, and the 15-20k they would have to pay to host the match should not be an issue with the RSL money. there is no longterm gain by selling the potential Seattle match, the only thing that could longterm help the Stars IS if Seattle bought the Stars and made them an NASL affiliate of their team, until/if a MLS team comes to town
Wow. Sigi sounds about as informed as a random message board poster. To his point that it would be nice if the draw were more transparent – sure, hard to argue with that. But I’m not sure what his point is about DC always hosting when, prior to this year, hosting was explicitly based on bids rather than a draw. So this is the first year of there being coin flips, and he’s lost a couple of them and ergo it’s a conspiracy. Someone needs to get him a Probability 101 textbook so he can figure out the odds of winning/losing a couple coin flips within any given very small sample size.
Thanks for the link to the comments from Sigi. Can he really be that obtuse?
Anyway, it just goes to show that he’s afraid of going on the road to either San Jose or Minnesota.
And afraid he should be.
BQ, you should send a link to this article to the Sounders press department.
@leper
lol, i agree with the Sigi comments
Controversy is good for the league …….perfect example WWF
Although I understand the frustration of fans not being able to watch their Stars in person, those same fans need to try to understand something. The Stars are not getting rich by selling home venue rights. These clubs lose money hand over fist, and if Djorn is going to have any luck finding a buyer, then he needs to make the books look as good as he possibly can. The simple fact is that if a buyer is not found, then MN does not have a professional soccer team until/if an MLS team comes. And right now, that is still a huge “if.” So please stop saying that selling the venue rights is only for short term gain because it is simply showing your ignorance towards the business side of running these teams. There is nobody who would rather play these games at home more than the Stars and their management, so you can only imagine how important it must be to grab that additional revenue if the opportunity arises. I’m sorry for venting, but I’m just tired of all the whining about selling venue rights when those that are complaining simply have no idea the difficulty in running one of these franchises… especially when they are trying to find someone to buy a business that loses money year in and year out.
@2cents
because of the wordage in the stadium bill, the vikings ownership group is really the only feasible option to an MLS team. if the vikings decide not to buy the Stars at some point, the NASL can decide after the 2012 or 2013 seasons to cease operations, having the team fold. selling the match is much more of a short term gain, than anything long term. long term gain would be a RSL or Seattle buying the Stars and making them an NASL affiliate for their reserves, etc… keeping the Stars afloat until/if a MLS side were to eventually come. outside of that, there really aren’t long term gains by selling the hosting rights. talking about “ignorance” and how to run the “business side” of these decisions, any pro team in any league bleeds money. there are plenty of variables that affect that, makin less than 6 figures on the sale of hosting does not miraculously help and save the situation. especially considering the unique situation of the Stars, NASL ownership of them, USSF “requirements, state wordage towards ownership of MLS team in stadium bill, etc. keeping or selling hosting rights has zero effect on whether the vikings’ ownership group decides to, or not to, buy the Stars
@BQ,
In a separate article, Adrian Hanauer – the Sounders GM, stated that the estimated travel costs for the Atlanta match would have been $53,000….
A couple of thoughts:
1) Either they bring a whole lot of staff and/or the MLS obviously travels a whole lot nicer than D2 (and understandably)
2) Might give a small insight into potentially just the starting point for the cost of buying the hosting rights.
I’m sure BQ probably has a better idea than most of us being pretty tuned into what goes on in the Stars FO. My guess is, if they’re willing to sell a third round game to an MLS team, they’re almost certain to do it again for the fifth round. This decision is most likely not int he hands of Djorn or anyone else invovled in the day to day operations of the Stars. The team is league owned, which means the decision is probably being made by the owners of all the teams. The league does have a board of governors or its equivalent right? Considering they’re all paying for the Stars to operate, I’m pretty sure that unless the team could guarantee a sell out, a la Railhawks hosting the Galaxy, it’s a decision that’s already been made. Even if they did think they could get 8,000+, it still might not matter.
@jezapenguin – I don’t think it is very realistic at all to think Seattle or Real Salt Lake would be interested in buying the Stars as a “farm” team. But then that’s getting into a whole other conversation about the value of MLS teams having reserve teams in D2 as opposed to the reserve league.
I’d bet Bart’s pension that if the Stars are able to beat the Earthquakes (and I believe they have a very good chance of doing so considering what I’ve seen from both teams against the Strikers this year) they’ll certainly sell the rights to the QF game to the Sounders. That of course assumes the Sounders take care of business against Wynalda’s Call FC.
@jezapenguin – Your argument is correct in stating that the if the Vikings do not buy the Stars or bring in an MLS team, and an alternative owner is not found, then the NASL will most likely vote to cease operations of the Stars. Since it is silly to assume that MLS in MN is a foregone conclusion, then the Stars need to continue operating under the assumption that they need to find a new owner. In order to do this, it is imperative that they make the books look as attractive as possible. Your statement that “any pro team in any league bleeds money” makes absolutely no sense to me. I guess I’m misunderstanding you since, in this country, the majority of pro teams outside of soccer turn a substantial profit. Even some MLS teams are economically viable. That being said, even if your statement were true, are you suggesting that a potential owner won’t care how much the club loses simply because all teams lose money? The idea that RSL or Seattle would buy the Stars as a feeder team is nothing but a pipe dream. That is not happening. Lastly, you make it sound as if the Wilf’s are the only people that will ever buy this team. The management of the Stars would be dropping the ball big time if they made the same assumptions as you are making. When operating a business, you have to prepare for every possible scenario and you cannot afford to make assumptions. In this case, that means making sound business decisions. And anything that will bring in more money to a company that is losing money, is a sound decision.
Wrong! Yes, Djorn had to check in with the powers that be, but it was Djorn’s decision and he will tell you that. Nobody is forcing Djorn to sell the game and we are getting the cart before the horse here. San Jose play a different style that the Stars and with all the travel I think this is going to be a very difficult game for Minnesota.
If they should win, and if Seattle gets by Cal FC, which you have to believe they will as they will be playing their starters, then my best guess is the Stars will host the game with 2 full weeks to promote it and as I already posted a similar comment on another post, but my guess is that the NASL front office would also encourage Buchholz to host because it will be a good thing for the league and for the team in terms of publicity.
@Strikers Return
i do agree with you that it is not realistic to think RSL or Seattle making the Stars a farm team. i was simply throwing out an option for a real long term gain from selling the hosting rights for the match. as for hosting a possible match against Seattle IF all things work out, for some reason i feel different about this one. they would have 2-3 weeks to market it to the MSP area, and although i would have loved to see RSL come to town… i believe seattle is the sexier name/appeal. yea, seattle already bought out atlanta, but i think this would be under slightly different circumstances. seeing as it would be the quarterfinals, and a great opportunity for the NASL to have its name/brand tossed out there. so i personally, would not bet Bart’s pension IF all things were to play out
@2cents
i never once said MLS to Minnesota is a foregone conclusion, seeing as i kept saying “until/if”… of course they need to make the books as attractive as possible, but at the same time, good luck finding an owner(s) for an NASL side with the potential owner knowing full well in advance, that if an MLS side were to come, his investment was for a few years without any benefit of real gains at the MLS level. the naievity to think that someone would purchase the Stars outside of the vikings’ ownership group, bleed money for a few years (seeing as this is a minor league team), then potentially have to fold or relocate IF an announcement is made that the vikings ownership group has brought MLS. seeing as the vikings have exclusivity at the new stadium until 5 years after the first nfl game is played, which gives them until (roughly through) 2021… that right there is the pipe dream, that an owner outside of the vikings’ ownership group would come in, knowing full well that their investment in minnesota & the stars may last for a year, or a few. as for the RSL/Seattle feeder team, as i mentioned in my response above to Strikers Return, i never said it was feasible… i was simply giving an option to a real longterm gain, not 5 figures of cash that temporarily make the books look good. and lastly to your final comment, i never said the wilf’s are the be all, end all. i continuously say, the vikings’ ownership group… if you want to buy a 3% share of the vikings, and buy the stars or start an MLS team? more power to you, but the wording has been completed, signed, stamped, and approved.
@BQ – Well there you have it, the man in the know gives it to us straight. I think it’s great for the Stars and the league if things do play out that way. Lord knows I would have been in heaven being able to see an MLS team come to Lockhart last round. I think it is not only good for the fans, but it almost forces the local media to pay at least some kind of attention to your team for the game, especially if we’re talking about one of the higher profile MLS teams like the Galaxy or Sounders. And getting the local media to actually provide even a small amount of coverage for your team is a big coup for most NASL clubs.
I still worry about the whole business of so much money being lost in a season that a check with enough zeros on it has to be incredibly difficult to pass up. Being a league owned team, and presumably on a VERY tight budget, would you say $1 million in losses net for the year is a fair estimate? If, by selling two USOC hosting rights, you can knock off 10% – 15% of that, isn’t it significant enough to consider? We wouldn’t be hearing about how difficult a decision it is for these teams to sell off these games if they were only getting $10,000 or $20,000. These MLS sides must be offering a large enough amount that it’s worth it, and considering how seriously the Sounders have been taking the competition over the last few years, I’m sure they’re probably offering even more than other MLS teams would.
But all that said, if you really believe realistically that hosting the Sounders in your place would not only pull in your best crowd of the year for that game, but also boost your sttendance significantly for the rest of your NASL season, than it does make sense to consider keeping the game instead of selling it. Everyone in the NASL is looking for ways to get more butts in seats. It’s what enables our teams to survive. If they can accomplish this by spending little to no extra money, by having something like these MLS opponents fall into their laps with a coin toss, then that is great. Sure has meant something to the Railhawks who I heard even took it a step further by selling a package of tickets that included the USOC game plus regular season games. Now that’s solid marketing, and props to the new apple of Traffic’s eye. LOL
@2cents
one more thing… it is a bit naive to think that teams do not bleed money in the NFL, NHL, NBA, MLB, MLS, etc etc. there are many variables in each particular league, team, and situation. while most teams make an effort to run as an actual business, and be profitable. i never said there aren’t any profitable teams in any league. i simply said they all bleed money, one way or another for various reasons whether it may be economical forces or not. one simple example of many, the minnesota wild have not been profitable in years, and they have had a packed house for every game up until a season or two ago. or in the NFL, miami and detroit for years were not profitable, IN a revenue sharing league. to stay soccer related, look at how much Chelsea spent over the years, do you think they have been profitable for a single year under Roman? lol, or to stay closer to home, how about Columbus or Chivas USA? making revenue, does not equal profit
@Strikers Return
rumors had the Seattle buyout of Atlanta’s hosting rights for around 75k… putting RSL’s figure to Minnesota, in a similar figure. as for Traffic’s prized possession, i have not heard about that with the tickets. but i agree with you, that is very good marketing
@BQ
thank you for sharing some of your wealth of knowledge… any and all, is always appreciated as usual
i agree with your sentiment regarding the upcoming San Jose match, it should definitely be a different monster. but it should make for one great match this tuesday
IMO, on the tight budget some of these NASL teams are on I have a hard time with them even coming close to having $2M operating budgets (if someone could break it out I’d love to review and disect it). With that in mind, if they are still losing close to $1M (meaning barely $1M in revenue) then this does not appear to be a viable business…..
Personally, I think they are losing money, but maybe more in the max $500K range – meaning pocketing a nice check would make a much greater impact.
Tom, I’ve heard directly from several GM/CEO/Preidents in this league that $2 M is the average operating expense. Unfortunately I can’t break that down for you but I have a tendency to believe that coming from numerous persons.
After losses are between 75K and 1.5 Mil.
@jezapenguin,
If all the Sounders had to pay was $75K then that was a steal as they had commented that the travel costs would be a net $45K ($53K less the $8K that the USOC kicks in) plus they drew a respectable crowd at a fairly inexpensive venue (they would have cleared a whole lot more than $30K at the end of the day).
@BQ,
I do not doubt that operating budget number. I guess what I’m trying to say is if your budget is $2M and you are losing $1.5M (or even $1M) then you should turn off the lights (unless the owner is paying himself an exorbitant amount which is a huge chunk of the negative cash flow – which does happen in many other sports/businesses).
Tom, I know your a smart guy but the reason these guys are doing this is for (supposed) long term gains. You and I both know we’ve been hearing it for years but the phrase that soccer is growing in this country, does not seem to be true. At least at the professional level. This is any business and it’s not just any minor league sports business. It’s a sport business that they feel has the possibility of really taking off and they want to be there when it does.
Now, I’m not saying I necessarily agree with that, but that’s why so many of these people are willing to take the big hit each year. The risk and the loss is exactly the same reason that is causing people from jumping all over teams like Minnesota and Carolina and snatching them up. The jury is out.
Oh, by the way, Atlanta sold there’s for more than Minnesota. Seattle had to put more money up than what RSL put up.
@BQ
for some reason, i have a feeling that you know all of the details for the minnesota handshake, as well as atlanta’s… my only question is, will we ever get to know? or will it stay in a lockbox
Some of it already came out and (I think) was posted by someone here in the comments.
http://www.bizjournals.com/triangle/blog/2012/05/railhawks-bullish-after-beating-galaxy.html
Put that together with what Djorn said in the details of the interview we did.
“…with the biggest victory being last Tuesday’s defeat of Real Salt Lake at Rio Tinto in front of over 17,000 fans, which is the largest crowd ever at at a non-final USOC match.”
Non-final, non-doubleheader USOC match.
The Rapids drew 20,376 against Seattle in a third-round match on July 14, 1999 with the USMNT playing Derby County as the featured attraction.
Why you always gota be pulling those sort of obscure facts out of the hat, KT?
KT, Are you suggesting the Sounders WEREN’T the main attraction?
(Yes, I know OF COURSE they weren’t, just havin’ a little fun with the arrogant/ignorant Seattle fan stereotype.)
You see, that article BQ linked is where I’m coming from on all this. To me one of the biggest points was where Johnson says revenue from them hosting the game was in the six figures. Now THAT is worth holding onto. It’s a doubel win. Not just a great fan experience and exposure for your team, but more revenue than you could have brought in by selling the rights. Plus on top of it, they won, and can now do it all over again.
The Stars are not in that position. How many people would they have to get to the NSC for an Open Cup match to generate six figure revenue? Nothing against the Stars, but I’ve seen nothing from them in the last three years that suggests this is possible. If they do win tonight, and the Sounders win, and Seattle calls you up and says, ok, $100,000 for that next home game….how do you rationalize turning it down? You can speak with passion and emotion easily on why to turn it down. But when it comes down to the cold hard facts of dollars, can you really afford to pass it up?