Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: SoccerInsider and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  Sports e-mail alerts  |  RSS

USA at HDC

Insider loyalists knew about it weeks ago. Today it was made official.

The U.S. national team will play its 2010 World Cup qualifying opener at Home Depot Center in Carson, Calif. The opponent will be Barbados or Dominica. As we reported, kickoff is 2 p.m. Pacific time, with TV coverage to be determined.

HDC makes sense for several reasons, most notably the fact that Carson has become the U.S. team's most frequently used, long-term training grounds. Also, because this is just a first-round match and is against an overmatched opponent with a small following in the States, a medium-sized stadium is appropriate for the medium-sized (at best) attendance. Four years ago, in their WCQ debut against Grenada, turnout in Columbus was 9,137.

So with this match set (and assuming the American lads advance), the USSF will now have to turn its attention to selecting three semifinal-round locations this fall. We've already told you that HDC is making a serious play for the Cuba game in October. That leaves home matches against Trinidad and Tobago mid-week in early September and Guatemala mid-week in mid-November.

Where would you like to see those games staged? Keep in mind fans supporting the visiting team, weather, stadium size and scheduling conflicts. Also consider the travel logistics of the T&T home game as it comes just a few days after an away match in Cuba.

By Steve Goff  |  February 4, 2008; 12:58 PM ET
Categories:  U.S. men's national team  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Guardado Is Out
Next: Houston, Too Close to New Orleans

Comments

I would like to announce I will endorse Goffinho for president.

Goffinho Presidente!

Posted by: juanma | February 4, 2008 1:21 PM | Report abuse

I'd stick TnT on the East Coast - RFK. For Guatemala - I'd stick that one at Toyota Park and make those Guats freeze in the night. For Cuba - I'd put that in the Orange Bowl and try to sell it out and cook up the drama and forget Carson, CA.

Posted by: AW | February 4, 2008 1:26 PM | Report abuse

You put Cuba in the Orange Bowl, and Miami is gonna explode. Probably not a prudent choice of venue.

Posted by: Ali | February 4, 2008 1:31 PM | Report abuse

You put Cuba in the Orange Bowl, and Miami is gonna explode. Probably not a prudent choice of venue.

Posted by: Ali | February 4, 2008 01:31 PM
---------------
You wouldn't need Cuba in the Orange Bowl to make it explode. The Orange Bowl is set for demolition in a few months.

Posted by: James | February 4, 2008 1:40 PM | Report abuse

RFK, of course.

DC is full of immigrants from T&T and Guatemala, plus many more sympathetic neighbors. Fall weather is perfect for soccer. Stadium is big enough, and if it won't fill, the top bowl can easily be closed. No scheduling conflicts now that the Nationals and their 800 games are gone. And we're a lot closer to Central America and the Caribbean.

Posted by: ML | February 4, 2008 1:40 PM | Report abuse

The USSF should ask Becks to show up and wave to people at HDC - would double the crowd.

Posted by: Kev | February 4, 2008 1:46 PM | Report abuse

RFK seems like a reasonable choice for the mid-week WCQ in early September, potentially versus Trinidad and Tobago.

Assuming of course that Pros v Joes (or some other fabulous event) isn't using the stadium.

Posted by: DCSEC to the rescue | February 4, 2008 1:51 PM | Report abuse

RFK.

Local fans need a reward after baseball and watching DC United play Real Madrid in Seattle!!

At least give us one Qualifier.

Posted by: Robert F Kennedy Memorial | February 4, 2008 1:53 PM | Report abuse

RFK, of course.

DC is full of immigrants from T&T and
Guatemala, plus many more sympathetic
neighbors

That's exactly why RFK won't host any USMNT qualifiers. T&T aren't great, but they aren't pushovers either. We can't afford to give them or Guatemala a home game in the U.S. Why do you think they schedule games against Mexico for places like Columbus and Foxboro?

Posted by: Davinho | February 4, 2008 1:56 PM | Report abuse

T&T: RFK. We deserve it!
Cuba: Denver. A nice remote location to minimize the politics, hopefully.
Guatemala: Chicago or Columbus. Make 'em shiver!

HDC and any other stadium should be limited to one USMNT match per year.

Posted by: SSMD | February 4, 2008 1:56 PM | Report abuse

"We deserve it!"

No you don't. The only attendance numbers for USA games at RFK that have exceeded the capacity of purpose-built soccer stadiums have been games like Jamaica (1997) and Honduras (2001), when US homefield advantage was converted into an away game by huge numbers of opposition fans.

Not coincidentally, those games resulted in a rare home draw (Jamaica) and an incredibly rare home loss (Honduras, who broke a 19 game USA home unbeaten streak, and which was the only non-Mexico home WCQ game which the USA has lost in the last 19 years).

RFK is a good home for DC United, but for the USA it's in the category of Giants Stadium: too big, and in a city that many opposition fans either live or can get too very easily to fill up the excess capacity.

DC fans' sense of entitlement does NOT trump the USA's need to win world cup qualifiers, full stop. Use your frequent flyer miles and get over yourselves.

Posted by: Anonymous | February 4, 2008 2:10 PM | Report abuse

I say DC deserves a game. I don't feel entitled, just neglected.

If Sunil can funnel two or three games per year to Gillette (home of the "bridesmaids") then RFK should get at least one per WCQ cycle.

If the US can't beat T&T at RFK because all the scary Tobaggans will show up then we are wasting our time worrying about the World Cup.

Posted by: Tommie | February 4, 2008 2:26 PM | Report abuse

To the above comment -

While I know it may shock you to come to a Washington newspaper and see people who feel that DC should host WCQ's, perhaps you could craft your criticism a little more constructively.

While the away support argument is a fair point, to say that the USMNT would not have support in RFK is simply not true. It will be interesting to see where the matches end up, but I agree with the above poster that a city should not host more than one WCQ per qualifying campaign (or at least, per anum).

Posted by: Kyle | February 4, 2008 2:28 PM | Report abuse

Pizza Hut Park for the T&T game

Posted by: Quills | February 4, 2008 2:31 PM | Report abuse

Goff says " ...the American lads..."

I hate when people who aren't Scottish use this phrase. "Lad" is not a common part of the American vernacular, except among those feigning soccer credentials. Goff, your credentials are legitimate, so please call them "men", or "guys", or some other American slang instead. It's OK for a British ex-pat making some money as a youth coach, but not for anyone else.

Posted by: LeesburgSoccerFan | February 4, 2008 2:31 PM | Report abuse

-------
DC fans' sense of entitlement does NOT trump the USA's need to win world cup qualifiers, full stop. Use your frequent flyer miles and get over yourselves.
-------

The last WCQ at RFK was in Oct 2004 (a 6-0 victory over Panama, in front of 19,793 fans). The match in the semi-final round v T&T would be the perfect opportunity for RFK to host another match. Yes, another venue could/might host it, but the date/opponent and venue seem to make sense.

Certainly your concerns for "the USA's need to win world cup qualifiers" will apply to the hexagonal/final round, but these semi-final games (when "away" support won't be as strong as what the US faced in '97 and '01 in the hexagonal round) are a good fit for what DC and RFK can provide.

Posted by: Anonymous | February 4, 2008 2:32 PM | Report abuse

Salt Lake City... We all come out and support our losing team, and the one qualifier here a couple years ago was huge. We deserve another!

Posted by: Nathan | February 4, 2008 2:33 PM | Report abuse

Yeah Goff, stop using words.

The lads will get upset with you.

Posted by: This is America | February 4, 2008 2:34 PM | Report abuse

NEW YORK the usa is yet to play here and in one of these gimme games lets find out if they can draw a crowd

Posted by: david | February 4, 2008 2:42 PM | Report abuse

I wonder how much attention this will get? If it happened during MLS Cup, I am SURE it would have been big news.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/02/04/super.bowl.shooting.ap/index.html?iref=mpstoryview

Posted by: PA DC Fan | February 4, 2008 2:51 PM | Report abuse

anyone find video highlights of the Heerenveen - Vitesse Arnhem game from this weekend? Bradley with 2 assists and a goal i gotta see.

Posted by: Andrew | February 4, 2008 2:52 PM | Report abuse

RFK should not get a game until the district gives DCU a stadium deal. period.

Posted by: Sharp | February 4, 2008 2:53 PM | Report abuse

The USMNT has played a home semi-final WCQ match at RFK every four years since 1996.

Check the Results/Line-up links at:
http://ussoccer.com/common/stContent.jsp_16-MNTRB.html

It's not that DC fans are "entitled" to a game in late 2008, but it sure does seem like something US Soccer might opt to assign, and it's not strange for fans in DC to expect a game in the semi-final round at RFK.

Having said all that, there's obviously a very good chance (and some would argue good reason) that RFK would not be among the venues used by US Soccer in 2008.

I guess we'll see.

Posted by: History | February 4, 2008 2:53 PM | Report abuse

The deception here is frigging ridiculous.

I keep hearing that the crappy 19k crowd for the RFK game against Panama in '04 was due to the fact that the results were meaningless. No, actually: the US was three points up with two to play, ahead of Jamaica and (surprise!) Panama, who had five points each.

In that semifinal round, the US won once and drew twice. None of the away games were resounding triumphs.

Guatemala, T&T, and Cuba will NOT be easy away wins. It would be conceivable for the US to have only three or four points from away games.

For 2006, two groups had second place teams with ten points, and one had a second place team with eight.

A not inconceivable scenario would see the drawing away three times. What if we drew-- or lost-- in front of 25k Soca Warriors fans inspiring their team at RFK Stadium? T&T qualified for Germany, after all. They'll be up for it. A loss in front of a split, or worse, largely Trini crowd (I was at the Jamaica game in 1997, which was a humiliation) combined with tough away games could well mean that we would need two home wins in our last two home games, against teams that will put eleven behind the ball and foul constantly-- and try to counterattack like Honduras did so well in 2001.

It is not worth playing a critical game at a location that could well provide an "away at home" crowd, just to puff up the collective ego of fans who think they're the best thing going. If you're really a fan, you'll travel to a stadium where the US will have a home field advantage.

Besides, if DC United refuses to even TRY to develop talented young American players, the USSF should avoid RFK like the plague.

Posted by: Mastodon Juan | February 4, 2008 2:59 PM | Report abuse

Bottom line, we need to play in cities that favor us (USA).
DC or LA are not a good place to play Guatemala or any other latin american country.

Posted by: Joel | February 4, 2008 3:00 PM | Report abuse

Two Points:

1) The PG County article above doesn't surprise me.

2) The NFL is going to have the issues that European football did to prompt the Taylor report and the focus on security and no alcohol sales during matches.

Posted by: UVA-United | February 4, 2008 3:01 PM | Report abuse

--------
I wonder how much attention this will get? If it happened during MLS Cup, I am SURE it would have been big news.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/02/04/super.bowl.shooting.ap/index.html?iref=mpstoryview
--------

Who knows what kind of attention this would receive if it happened during a soccer broadcast and not an NFL broadcast.

I doubt that many people gather in Pizzeria Uno (or any establishment) to watch MLS Cup.

Posted by: Sad story | February 4, 2008 3:04 PM | Report abuse

Well said - Mastodon Juan

No games will be easy, we need to pick the cities that give us the best opportunity of having a solid US crowd.

Posted by: Joel | February 4, 2008 3:05 PM | Report abuse

"NEW YORK the usa is yet to play here and in one of these gimme games lets find out if they can draw a crowd"

The USA has played in NY plenty of times. There is NO CHANCE that ANY vital US game would be played in the area that has the largest and most diverse population in the country. Name a FIFA country with a population over 2 million and I guarantee they will have substantial away support in the NY area.

"The USMNT has played a home semi-final WCQ match at RFK every four years since 1996."

More stadiums, and more appropriate ones at that, have come online even since the last RFK qualifier in fall '04.

And the USA record in WCQ at RFK, vis a vis all other US stadiums, frankly sucks.

Posted by: Anonymous | February 4, 2008 3:05 PM | Report abuse

-------
Besides, if DC United refuses to even TRY to develop talented young American players, the USSF should avoid RFK like the plague.
-------

Before, I didn't care that much if other venues were used, but because of this outlandish attack, I really do want to see RFK host a USMNT WCQ match in Sept or Nov.

Posted by: Silly | February 4, 2008 3:09 PM | Report abuse

"How dare you, sir! You have offended my honor with your outlaaaandish remark!"

Posted by: Mastodon Juan | February 4, 2008 3:11 PM | Report abuse

-------
What if we drew-- or lost-- in front of 25k Soca Warriors fans inspiring their team at RFK Stadium?
-------

And what if T&T doesn't even reach the semi-finals?

The US likely would have had the same result in any home venue (and those Soca Warrior fans are going to travel, just as much if not more than any USMNT fans that are spread around this large country).

And what if the US wins no matter where the games are. I think it's ridiculous, especially in the semi-final round, to be so concerned with the potential "away support" that might show up at RFK.

It's up to the US fans to bring it (in noise and larger numbers) than the away fans. RFK is a suitable venue for semi-final round games. It might not get used. But if it does, it certainly won't be a disaster. Again, look at the results the US has put up in the semi-final round games that are played at RFK.

Posted by: who knows? | February 4, 2008 3:14 PM | Report abuse

There are good reasons for US Soccer to put the Sept 2008 home WCQ at RFK.

And there are good reasons for US Soccer to put the Sept 2008 home WCQ not at RFK.

We'll see what they do.

I think the odds are actually in RFK's favor for the Sept '08 date, but we'll see what decisions are made.

Posted by: pro and con | February 4, 2008 3:18 PM | Report abuse

If I have the choice of seeing DC United trample the RedMetroBulls and the rest of MLS instead of "developing" young american talent for the sake of watching some crap ass WC qualifier then I say bring on Reyna. United building a team that can win international cups, build brand loyalty and put butts in the new stadium is WAY more important to me.

Posted by: HulkHogan | February 4, 2008 3:24 PM | Report abuse

It will never happen, but a USA-Cuba match in Miami would garner massive press for soccer, and tons of controversy.
I like the idea of sticking one of these games out in Utah. Those people approved the stadium and truly support their team, and they aren't good. No tradition out there, but who cares when you have your own place and are making money?

Posted by: Jimmy | February 4, 2008 4:00 PM | Report abuse

USMNT at RFK will draw more AMERICAN fans thatn T&T fans. DC United games are always weel attended (20k+ avg), with people BUYING tickets for the games not some giveaway-inflated nonsense that goes on at other clubs.


As long as we aren't playing Mexico (who outdraw us everywhere), Guatemala, Honduras or El Salvador the USA fans at RFK will outnumber, and outsing, anyone else. I have to admit that Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador would bring plenty of passionate fans to RFK and it would be a split environment. Mexico is in another class with fan support. I'm sure that Houston tonight will be 80-20 or 90-10 for Mexico, just like Chicago.

I want the USMNT to win and qualify. Give RFK a game with Cuba, T&T, Canada, Jamaica, or somebody. I want to cheer on the USA in a stadium that will rock, and bounce, for the USA.

There hasn't been a USMNT in the DC area for 4 years of any kind. There is pent up demand. I think a game at RFK is due for a huge pro-US crowd.

Posted by: GoldenChild | February 4, 2008 4:06 PM | Report abuse

Obviously selecting a stadium with grass would be better, but does FIFA require games to be played on it or do they allow fieldturf as a surface?

Also, if the qualifiers are played in a multi-use stadium, can the USSF please pay the appropriate people to have the football yardlines/endzones/etc paint removed ?

Posted by: emanon | February 4, 2008 4:06 PM | Report abuse

Anyone smell a troll?

""Besides, if DC United refuses to even TRY to develop talented young American players, the USSF should avoid RFK like the plague.""

Let's see all the young talent we've developed (and who've been capped or called up by the way) and then who may have chosen Europe, been sold to Europe or have even stayed in MLS:

Perkins, Convey, Adu, Carroll, Simms, Olsen (see UVA graduate to DC U then England and back), Namoff, Boswell, Pope, Josh Gros,

future caps? Burch, McTavish?

Now it's your turn . . . can NYRB speak to the same caliber or quantity?

Posted by: delantero | February 4, 2008 4:08 PM | Report abuse

DC and talented young American players -- uh, Perkins? Were we supposed to shackle him to the goalposts? What about Olsen, was he "old" when he started here?
How about Convey?
Were we supposed to keep Arguez at $300k?
We even let Moose run around like a headless chicken for a game last year and allowed him to stay, give us some credit.

Posted by: gringo | February 4, 2008 4:18 PM | Report abuse

"DC fans' sense of entitlement does NOT trump the USA's need to win world cup qualifiers"
------------------------

No sense of entitlement here, just a love of soccer. If playing at RFK jeopardizes our chances of qualifying, how will we do well in the WC!?

Posted by: ML | February 4, 2008 4:24 PM | Report abuse

I'd put T&T in either Houston or Dallas. The logistics and less of a temperature transition for the US team are my reasons. Either should result in a pro-US crowd.

I'd put Guatemala in RSL's brand new, natural grass, stadium.

Salt Lake City in November will be cold and Utah and the surrounding states are guaranteed to provide a pro-US crowd, as was proved in the last round of qualifiers. Up to that game all my other qualifier experience had been at RFK. It was a delight and a unique experience to finally be part of an overwhelmingly pro-US crowd.

RFK is out. As the last round proved, a team like Guatemala at RFK would guarantee a primarily pro-Guatemala crowd. Although it's an exciting fan experience, I don't want us to give any opponent the equivalent of a home and home series by putting a Central American team in RFK.

Posted by: seahawkdad | February 4, 2008 4:31 PM | Report abuse

"Obviously selecting a stadium with grass would be better, but does FIFA require games to be played on it or do they allow fieldturf as a surface?"

Fieldturf is now approved for use by FIFA (see: controversial use in Russia for their qualifier v England)

http://football.guardian.co.uk/News_Story/0,,2123840,00.html

Posted by: Kev | February 4, 2008 4:35 PM | Report abuse

The stadium in Nashville, TN is natural grass and even is designed like a Euro soccer stadium. The Morroco game drew fairly well and there are so many rednecks around there (I live in Knoxville) that it would be a HUGE USA to opponant ratio.

P.S. For some reason today my spelling is worse than normal..

Posted by: gilbert | February 4, 2008 4:44 PM | Report abuse

Surely there will be a few friendlies sprinkled in there somewhere. Can we get a high-profile South American or European opponent for RFK, in lieu of a qualifier?

Posted by: 22201 | February 4, 2008 4:48 PM | Report abuse

Surely there will be a few friendlies sprinkled in there somewhere. Can we get a high-profile South American or European opponent for RFK, in lieu of a qualifier?

Posted by: 22201 | February 4, 2008 04:48 PM


22201: That is a good point. We don't need to see a WC qualifier, a "name" opponent would be almost as good. Just don't give us a friendly against a minnow. RFK needs a game worth watching and supporting.

Posted by: GoldenChild | February 4, 2008 4:51 PM | Report abuse

Yanks vs Red Coats at FedEx!

Posted by: UVA-United | February 4, 2008 4:52 PM | Report abuse

So we know the time, 2 pm pacific. Do we have an idea of the date yet?

Posted by: MemRook | February 4, 2008 4:54 PM | Report abuse

Random Inquiry - does anyone know how S.U.M./AEG's latest Horse and Pony Show Tournament on the 50th State of the Union is shaping up tickets wise? Did the Islanders blow all of their disposable income on the Sugar Bowl?

Posted by: UVA-United | February 4, 2008 4:56 PM | Report abuse

I wonder how much attention this will get? If it happened during MLS Cup, I am SURE it would have been big news.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/02/04/super.bowl.shooting.ap/index.html?iref=mpstoryview
***********

The only thing this proves is that Maryland sucks.

Posted by: Virginian | February 4, 2008 4:58 PM | Report abuse

Random Inquiry - does anyone know how S.U.M./AEG's latest Horse and Pony Show Tournament on the 50th State of the Union is shaping up tickets wise? Did the Islanders blow all of their disposable income on the Sugar Bowl?

Posted by: UVA-United | February 4, 2008 04:56 PM


I've been wondering the same thing myself (obviously we have too much time on our hands). You would think if ticket sales were going well SUM would be announcing the figures to generate more hype and demand. Is it possible that a game with Beckham won't be a sellout? He drew 80k+ in Australia.

Posted by: GoldenChild | February 4, 2008 5:00 PM | Report abuse

RE: Pan-Pacific waste of time..

are the games going to be televised?

Posted by: gilbert | February 4, 2008 5:05 PM | Report abuse

The PP site has a page titled Television, but no station info is listed on it yet.
http://www.ppchampionship.net/television/

Posted by: emanon | February 4, 2008 5:14 PM | Report abuse

I'd like to see it in DC or Miami. I guess there's not stadium in Miami now, so Tampa would be a better idea. They drew a good crowd for the Ecuador game, so why not. And, of course DC has the best fans, so i always have to put my vote in for RFK.

Posted by: Kevin | February 4, 2008 5:14 PM | Report abuse

Guatamela plus November should equal Columbus, Ohio

Posted by: MJ | February 4, 2008 5:26 PM | Report abuse

PHP for T&T, SLC for Guat.

Book it, Dan-o.

Posted by: Doug | February 4, 2008 5:31 PM | Report abuse

The scheduling of the PP matches is not especially television-friendly (afternoon in Australia and Japan; late evening in the mainland USA).

Posted by: 22201 | February 4, 2008 5:35 PM | Report abuse

Mastadope Juan

Why are you so afraid of T&T? In the last cycle the US beat them in their fierce island nation. What is this irrational fear about the ex-pat Trinidadians?

A Saturday night or Sunday afternoon WQC at RFK would draw more than 25K and most would be rooting for the US (as long as it is not Mexico).

Not only do I believe that RFK should get a WCQ match, I believe RFK should be named our national stadium (ala Wembley) and all qualifiers should be played in our nation's capital.

Posted by: Tommie | February 4, 2008 6:21 PM | Report abuse

I have the ideal location for a late fall or wintertime World Cup qualifier against a warm-weather country: The frozen tundra of Lambeau Field in Green Bay. Let's see El Tri play there!

Posted by: SportzNut21 | February 4, 2008 6:54 PM | Report abuse

43 days to the first home match!

Posted by: Curious | February 4, 2008 6:54 PM | Report abuse

I have the ideal location for a late fall or wintertime World Cup qualifier against a warm-weather country: The frozen tundra of Lambeau Field in Green Bay. Let's see El Tri play there!

Posted by: SportzNut21 | February 4, 2008 06:54 PM

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Bwahahaha!! Yeah, maybe it will be like the Green Bay/NY Giants game!

Posted by: gilbert | February 4, 2008 6:59 PM | Report abuse

For those who think that RFK only sells out when the U.S. plays a Central American country, keep in mind that the Scotland game in '98 drew 46,037. It was awhile ago, but I seem to recall there being an overwhelmingly pro-U.S. crowd.

Posted by: Glaucon | February 4, 2008 7:07 PM | Report abuse

Tommie,

If we had stayed the 13 colonies that might have been a bit more reasonable. Anyone in England can get to Wembley for a reasonable amount of money.

I think it is important to keep spreading the games around the country. I think Salt Lake should get a game in their new stadium and there needs to be one on the east coast. Within the next 5 years there should be some great soccer specific venue options on the East coast.

Posted by: CD | February 4, 2008 7:07 PM | Report abuse

Tommie,

If we had stayed the 13 colonies that might have been a bit more reasonable. Anyone in England can get to Wembley for a reasonable amount of money.

I think it is important to keep spreading the games around the country. I think Salt Lake should get a game in their new stadium and there needs to be one on the east coast.

Posted by: CD | February 4, 2008 7:09 PM | Report abuse

I doubt that many people gather in Pizzeria Uno (or any establishment) to watch MLS Cup.

Posted by: Sad story | February 4, 2008 03:04 PM

What's funny is that I sat in THAT EXACT BAR to watch the US/Czech World Cup match 2 years ago. I had to ask the manager to put the game on instead of ESPN News. It's tough being a soccer fan working in Landover.

No shootings occurred.

Posted by: DCUMD | February 4, 2008 8:51 PM | Report abuse

Bottom line, we need to play in cities that favor us (USA).
DC or LA are not a good place to play Guatemala or any other latin american country.


Posted by: Joel | February 4, 2008 03:00 PM

Stop using logic, sir :p Seriously though, people need to keep that in mind.

The Cuba game in Miami would make perfect sense since the Cuban team would be drown out in boos. Cuba would never let that happen in DC since more people would be inclined to sneak away and seek asylum.

Guatemala in Chicago seems good in theory, but there are quite a few latin americans in Chicago. Granted, most are Mexican but still, there are plenty of El Tri fans there who would go just to boo the Nats. Guatemala should be in Utah.

Posted by: papa bear | February 4, 2008 9:12 PM | Report abuse

Jeze, you all are getting picky. Why not just play Guatemala at the U of Alaska-Anchorage? That way there'd only be two or three fans supporting the other side.

Posted by: Glaucon | February 4, 2008 10:02 PM | Report abuse

1. East Hartford
2. Giants Stadium
3. Gilette Stadium (Foxboro, MA)

Posted by: Tim F. | February 4, 2008 10:26 PM | Report abuse

Gotta second the props to Nashville. The stadium is large but the fans really turned out for the USMNT-Morocco match. Packed, and a great atmosphere. Natural grass, too

Posted by: Hedbal | February 4, 2008 11:13 PM | Report abuse

I go to grad school around Nashville and I have to say the interest in soccer here is underground and huge.

There should be a lot of people there.

Posted by: Dave | February 5, 2008 1:37 AM | Report abuse

Semifinal Round
1. RFK
2. RFK
3. RFK
Final Round
1. RFK
2. RFK
3. RFK
2010 World Cup (moved from S. Africa due to outbreak of chicken pox)
Opening Round
RFK

Semi Final
FED EX

Any Questions

Posted by: Washingtonian | February 5, 2008 1:40 AM | Report abuse


"Besides, if DC United refuses to even TRY to develop talented young American players, the USSF should avoid RFK like the plague."
Posted by: Mastodon Juan

Uhhhhh, why????
Did DCU sign a contract with USSF that no one knows about?
How does one affect the other, exactly?
How do 'lads' like Olsen, Convey, Perkins, Boswell, Gross, Carroll, Namoff, et al, influence your statement?
Or was it just a rash, I am jealous of that team and it's success, statement?
Inquiring minds want to know!
There are plenty of reasons to avoid RFK, this does not appear to be on the list.


Posted by: marksman | February 5, 2008 1:47 AM | Report abuse

NY Giants Stadium. You have the second largest Cuban population in Hudson county.

Posted by: Johnny | February 5, 2008 7:22 AM | Report abuse

RFK for Cuba, if it happens. no question. Can you imagine? US-Cuba in a stadium named after a Kennedy? it would be rabidly US-friendly (since there is not a large Cuban population in DC, and those that would travel to the beltway would be seriously anti-Castro partisans. It would make everyone happy (including, by the way, Cuba, since their diplomats and government people could come, due to it being inside the beltway) heck, it would be a politcal issue domestically. more attention. it's too sensitive to get riled up to whip Mexico, but Cuba? everyone can get behind that.

Posted by: northzax | February 5, 2008 9:18 AM | Report abuse

Forget Giants Stadium. Everything I said about RFK applies double to the swamp.

I go to Nashville for work pretty often, and except for the fact that they have no mass transit to speak of, I love the place. It would be a very good pick for T&T or Cuba, though not for Guatemala. Like most cities in the south, Nashville has large numbers of recently arrived Mexicans and other Central Americans. (If ever there's an independent Kurdistan, that would be the other national team to avoid: tens of thousands of Kurds live in the city).

I went to the Morocco game two years ago, and I might even go to the Olympic qualifiers. BNA is easy and cheap to fly to from just about everywhere, and the stadium is in a perfect place, on a river downtown (across from all those honkytonks, which are a blast), so the hotels and bars and good restaurants are all right there.

It would be a great choice for the USSF to make. And I must have flown BWI to Nashville two dozen times: short flight (1.5 hours at most) and dirt cheap.

Posted by: Mastodon Juan | February 5, 2008 9:39 AM | Report abuse

As I said before, we have to play games in a pro US crowd, we need to have as much support as possible for our team and the least possible from our opponent. I assume the USSF can figure this out. Every game counts and no one will be a push over.

Posted by: Joel | February 5, 2008 10:00 AM | Report abuse

Not only do I believe that RFK should get a WCQ match, I believe RFK should be named our national stadium (ala Wembley) and all qualifiers should be played in our nation's capital.

Posted by: Tommie | February 4, 2008 06:21 PM
------------------------------------------

Since RFK will be torn down in a few years, would this carry over to a new stadium in, say, Greenbelt that would start out with zero tradition associated with it?

Posted by: 22201 | February 5, 2008 10:10 AM | Report abuse

I'm just getting to this thread today, so I apologize if this has been written before.

You people who think that there won't be support for T&T at stadiums other than RFK are deluding yourselves.

For the WCQ98 match, Jamaicans flew in from all over the US, Canada, and Jamaica to support their team. My guess is that Trinidadians and Tobagonians will do the same.

Posted by: I-270, Exit 1 | February 5, 2008 10:37 AM | Report abuse

"Jamaicans flew in from all over the US, Canada, and Jamaica to support their team"

I drove down 95 for the 1997 "Agoos" game. There were thousands of cars coming down from NY, and the number grew as we passed Philly. The RFK parking lot was full of DC/MD/PA/NJ/NY tags with Jamaican flags.

Would some Jamaicans fly to Boise to see Jamaica play? Sure, but not the tens of thousands who drove or even took the Metro.

And here's the other thing: at a lower-capacity stadium, a pre-sale to a USSF mailing list/Sams Army/MLS season ticket holders/other identified supporters would nearly sell the place out, as was done in Columbus, before the "public sale" allowed lots of away fans to buy up tickets. That was done at Columbus, with its capacity in the low 20Ks. That won't happen at a big stadium, and instead we'll see a repeat of the Honduras debacle (when the presale sold 15-20k lower deck seats and nearly everything else was Honduran).

Posted by: Mastodon Juan | February 5, 2008 10:53 AM | Report abuse

since I missed out on the previous Qualifiers here, I'd say that if we play Mexico, there is only 1 place for it to happen - Crew Stadium. Stage or no stage, it must happen there.

And I'm gonna give Sigi credit with Burch, since he turned him into a back. It's not Burch's fault that Sigi lost track of his potential, but Sigi did put him in as a back, so Sig gets credit for that transformation...

Posted by: gary | February 5, 2008 12:56 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company