By IVES GALARCEP
When the U.S. Men's National Team takes on Guatemala at Livestrong Sporting Park next month in World Cup qualifying, there will be more on the line than a spot in the Hexagonal round of CONCACAF qualifying. The stadium the game is being played in will be competing for a new role as the national team's preferred home for marquee qualifiers.
Ever since that freezing winter day in 2001, when the U.S. beat Mexico in World Cup qualifying at Crew Stadium, Columbus has been adopted as the unofficial home for big national team matches. We have seen three USA-Mexico qualifiers played at Crew Stadium over the past decade, and each time American fans converged on the nation's first soccer-specific stadium and given the team a tangible home-field advantage. Earlier this month, in a must-win USA qualifier against Jamaica, we saw what was arguably the best crowd to ever watch a national team at Crew Stadium.
Given that impressive history you would think there would be no chance for Columbus to lose its place as the preferred USMNT venue for important matches, but that beautiful new stadium near the Kansas/Missouri border is threatening take that spot. The Oct. 16th qualifier at Livestrong Sporting Park will be the Kansas City market's chance to make the very case that it is ready to take the baton from Columbus.
So why would U.S. Soccer consider anywhere but Columbus, where the team has had so much success and where we have seen some of the best and most passionate American crowds ever, for matches like USA-Mexico qualifiers?
From a practical standpoint, Kansas City, Kansas, where Livestrong Park is located, is about as close to the exact middle of the country as you can get, which means the most central location possible. It would mean an approximately 1,200-mile shorter commute (round trip) to major national team matches for fans from at least half the country.
Then you have the fact that Livestrong Sporting Park is an immaculate new $200 million facility, one of the nation's true crown jewels for soccer. As important as Crew Stadium is to the history of Major League Soccer, and as amazing as the crowds have been at national team matches there, you can't deny that Crew Stadium just doesn't measure up to the new stadiums that have been built after it.
Lastly, you have an aggressive Sporting Kansas City ownership group that understands what it would mean for their stadium, and for soccer in the midwest, if major national team matches become the norm rather than a rarity. The value of being considered the home of the U.S. national team, even in an unofficial capacity, would be a boon for a club that has already made amazing strides in establishing itself, not just in the Kansas City market, but nationally.
We saw just how agressive Sporting KC's owners can be when Sporting Kansas City beat out big-spending Seattle Sounders for the right to host the 2012 U.S. Open Cup. People in Seattle will certainly point out that the bidding process seemed to be a curious one considering both clubs apparently made very comparable bids, but that is what stands out most in that whole situation. Sporting KC's owners managed to put up a competitive bid against a team that generates considerable more revenue, and a club that isn't still paying off the cost of a brand new stadium like Sporting KC's owners are.
As much as Sporting KC's owners will do their part to help push Livestrong Sporting Park, it will still be up to the fans to maximize the venue's potential on Oct. 16th. The upcoming qualifier against Guatemala will serve as an audition of sorts. A passionate and packed Livestrong Sporting Park will show U.S. Soccer officials that turning to Kansas City in 2013 for the USA-Mexico qualifier might not be a bad thing (assuming the USA qualifies for the final round of CONCACAF qualifying).
If that change does happen, and if we find ourselves heading to Livestrong Park next year, instead of Crew Stadium, for the USA-Mexico World Cup qualifier, there will be some inevitable sadness. Why? The fact is the USA has never lost in Columbus, and Crew Stadium has always produced amazing crowds and memories. Trips to Columbus for important matches have become traditions for countless fans throughout the country. The lasting memory of the U.S. national team at Crew Stadium will be that unforgettable crowd urging the team on in a must-win qualifier on Sept. 11th.
The emotion of that night won't soon be forgotten, and that memorable night only served to set the bar higher for the fans who travel to Kansas City for USA-Guatemala.
The Oct. 16th qualifier is going to be a dramatic event already because of what will be on the line for the national team, but the reality is that more than just a place in the Hexagonal is on the line. A chance to turn Livestrong Sporting Park into the U.S. national team's new unofficial home will also be on the line. Put that all together and you have the makings of an unforgettable night, and potentially the first of many memorable U.S. national team visits to Livestrong Sporting Park for important qualifiers.
The USMNT’s purpose should be to promote the sport nationwide, so selecting a designated National Stadium (or preferred ground in this case) I think is a bad idea. It does not help increase the visibility of the game across the nation. Spread games throughout the nation, in all areas (NW, California, SW, Midwest, South, East, SE). As a Northwesterner I’m sad that the USMNT has not had a game in the Pacific NW since 2009 (qualifier or friendly). There is seriously something wrong with that. No wonder we Pacific NWers are talking about having our own “Cascadian National Team.” No love from the USMNT.
No, I was careful not to imply the selections were racist, just that the selection of Columbus and KC were not close to major metro’s with very large Hispanic populations. The Hispanic populations in KC and Columbus are minor compared to cities like Chicago, and the major populous states like Florida, California, Texas. Columbus and KC DO NOT choose the venues to host the WCQ,they only bid for the right, the selector is the USSF, who by no means have any agenda other that to host a good competition that gives an edge to the USMNT. BUT they may ultimately coddle the USMNT to the point it needs to rely on the NEED for not only a home field advantage, but a large raucous, rabid fan base to win key matches. Teams that get into this “comfort zone” may end up doing poorly in away or even neutral venues.
Best soccer stadium in the US? I thought you played at the Seahawks stadium?? That’s a football stadium, Livestrong is the best soccer specific stadium in the hemisphere and probably will be for at least the next 5 years.
I agree that being the first SSS in the US leads it to be a little outdated nowadays, but you talk to any MLSer or USMNT who has played on that field and they will tell you that the field quality is the best in the MLS. The grounds crew for the Crew is top notch, go back and watch the game interviews – all the players talk up the field…. in addition to the atmosphere!
Jeld-Wen is going to be widened to 74yds at the start of next year. The stadium has the FIFA 2 star rating.
It sucks we’ve gotten to the point where we make decisions on cities openly based on how few non-black minorities they have…not saying it doesn’t make sense or that history hasn’t proven it necessary, just sad that is the decision calculus.
So don’t have a qualifier against those nations then-Chicago has a super small population of Jamaicains, Panamanians, Canadian’s don’t matter (Detroit game perfect example)-have one of those qualifiers. If hex=US, Jamaica, Canada, Mexico, Panama, Costa Rica, I’d do-
Mexico-Columbus
Costa Rica-Kansas City
Canada-LA/Houston
Panama-Salt Lake City
Jamaica-Chicago
I think you completely missed bottlcap’s point. Sure having a majority pro-US crowd might make it a bit easier for the US to beat Mexico, but it doesn’t help with the long term goal of improving US soccer. Sure we might qualify for the WC, but what happens if we meet Brazil in the WC (or Uruguay or Argentina who will also probably have good support)? Playing Mexico in Azteca, and Italy in Italy is what will help improve the team for those situations. And secondly having the team play in the larger metro areas will increase media awareness of the sport as a whole, which is also good not just for the future of the US national team, but MLS as well. Having them play in smaller markets like Columbus and KC (and also some of the suggestions like Portland and Seattle, just so you know I’m not disparaging the midwest) does not increase media awareness, it just makes it easier for them to ignore it.
Never been to LSP. But I did get pitchside before the 9/11 WCQ in CCW and the pitch looked immaculate. Made me proud.
LSP is, easily, the best soccer venue we have in the country.
That includes everything: facilities, fan support and pitch quality.
There’s zero question: best in our country.
It was still unmatched in Columbus in regards to atmosphere. Don’t even try to downplay it, you will sound dumb.
I have to agree with some of you on here that Seattle needs a shot at a WCQ match. I bet a grass field could be placed on top of the existing turf field in order to accomodate FIFA regulations. Seattle fans would exceed 60,000+ and it would be a PRO-USA crowd at that. Maybe a good test run would be against an opponent from the Caribbean? When we think of Azteca Stadium, we all have a sense of fear about our MNT getting a positive result there. I feel like Seattle would also create that hostile environment for opponents.
Distance from London UK to Columbus = 3,356 Nautical Miles
Distance from London UK to Seattle = 4,173 Nautical Miles
Distance from London UK to KC = 3,774 Nautical Miles
Distance from Frankfurt to Columbus = 3,565 Nautical Miles
Distance from Frankfurt to Seattle = 4,420 Nautical Miles
Distance from Frankfurt to KC = 4,086 Nautical Miles
(source: happyzebra.com/distance-calculator
Is distance really the issue with Seattle? Time zones is more likely than distance. The diff is between 400 and 900 nautical miles.
Having the entire stadium standing the entire match doesn’t make for a better atmosphere. It just makes it annoying for the 6 year old kid and 5’4″ lady sitting behind you in the general sections.
agreed DJ. What nobody has mentioned is the large percentage of season ticket holders that SKC has. These folks will have first shot at tickets and are largely (90%+) USA fans. Also, the FO in KC is very generous in working work supporters groups like the American Outlaws.
Where do you get this information regarding immigrants in the midwest or are you just stereotyping? There are plenty of Latino immigrants in Ohio and KC. I was at the last US – Mexico WC qualifier in Columbus and it was probably 30 – 40% Mexican fans. The difference was they didnt drown out the US fans, and it was a party atmosphere with both sets of supporters being respectful of each other. You will get a healthy Mexican crowd at any location in this country but the litmus test is if you get a homefield advantage.
Ohio is loaded with immigrants so stop implying some sort of racist agenda on behalf of Columbus and KC. Have you ever taken a look at the fans in the Crew supporters section ? Also Ohio is home to eastern large populations of eastern european immigrants do they not count cause they’re not Latino.
Having WCQ matches in the midwest described as “going into a shell” is one of the most elitist, ignorant and intolerant things I’ve read in a while.
It does kinda matter. For our defacto national stadium to look like an erector set is pretty embarasing. LSP is a gem Crew Stadium is a dump.
Do not forget Jacksonville, FL! Amazing support there! My clear choice for one of the venues.
Your comment is as big as Ives’ article! Sorry I didn’t read your comment.
Ives is laying down the gaunlet for KC fans. I dont know if people realize this but at the US – Jamaica match in Columbus the entire stadium stood on their feet for the whole match, not just the AO, Crew and SA sections. I’m not sure you’ll get that in KC but I hope they prove me wrong.
As far as the lack of bells and whistles at Crew Stadium that is part of the history of the stadium that is important. Lamar Hunt built that stadium with his own money and was taking a huge risk when no one else would. Bells and Whistles? We dont need no stinking bells and whistles.
We’re not talking about raw demographics, we’re talking about demos (actual folks through the turnstiles) at LSP. Again, not even close to a “pro-Mexico” crowd.
In virtually every major metropolitan market you are going to have a base of immigrants with a good portion of them Latinos with ties to Mexico and Central American countries. NAturally these fans are not only great football fans but also sentimental supporters of their home country. As such you can virtually rule out ever having an important WCQ against a Central A or Mexican team in LA, Chicago, San Francisco, Texas, New York, Philadelphia, D.C., Anywhere in Florida and even Seattle. This pretty much leaves the South, who have no MLS teams and no soccer specific Stadiums, and parts of the Heartland/Midwest, which coincidentally is Columbus and KC.
What this article is trying to say in an albeit round-about manner, is that we should not consider any cities when these venues would be close to a population center that would have ..gasp.. a heavy portion of Latinos who may or may not root for the US.
Seattle has a descent and large stadium, a cadre of rabid football fans and a burgeoning latino Community, but I bet if you were to have ANY WC qualifier against ANY team, you would get a sold out stadium 60,000 plus rabid US fans who would drown out opposing football population of any immigrant group.
My point is is that KC and Columbus according to the article are proposing to be the “de facto” home of the US team with ties against Mexican and Central American teams because they are nice stadiums with raucous US football fans, BUT not said but obvious, is they are also away from population centers with large concentrations of immigrant/ Latino fans.
If the USMNT would offer a tighter ticket distribution policy, ie., tickets through USMNT supporters groups and team MLS supporters. limiting resales and other targeted sales, THE US Soccer Federation could hold WCQ at any US venue it wanted, and still have a raucous and loud US crowd. The USSC could have had more fans, just as loud in a better stadium against Jamaica as there are so few immigrants from these nations that there would be np chance of having, let’s say, a huge Jamaican crown at the Home Depot Centre.
YOU NEED to have important WCQ in LARGE MEDIA MARKETS to make US football grow, No offense, but hiding them in Columbus and to a lesser extent in KC, because they are “good luck” puts the USMNT at a disadvantage when they need to perform against a hostile crowds in hostile stadiums. JK has done wonders, beating Mexico in Azteca, beating Italy in Italy and taking the US out of its comfort zone to improve the team. No one likes having the majority of the crowd against them, especially if you are the home team. But Going into a shell, avoiding major media markets because you are afraid of adverse crown turnouts is self-defeating.
I clearly remember playing Spain in a friendly in Spain in a smallish stadium. The fans were still great and the atmosphere seemed good too. I distinctly remember thinking, we can fill a stadium that size of all US fans rather than an NFL stadium w/ all the opponent’s fans.
That’s why I love having qualifiers in Columbus and KC. It looks, feels, and is a complete home field advantage. If it works every time, too bad if we leave out other locations. I’d rather qualify for a World Cup and take a trip every now and then to one of those spots.
I’m a bit mystified at Yusef’s (and others’) response(s). LSP hasn’t been even close to being a pro-Mexico crowd for ANY such match, including Chivas last year. (1) Study demos in the KC/MO area, and (2) actually go to a game or three.
As much as I’d love a qualifier in my home city of Chicago…it’s not smart. Way to many fans of way to many nations in a way to accessible location.
Only substantial grass field I could find in the pacific northwest is Safeco field. Maybe their are others I don’t know of (college fb). Could definitely work though.
Our azteca is seattle or portland and columbus needs a new stadium. If seattle would get a sss that would be our azteca. I would also love a north carolina city for a usa vs mexico.
i think there is plenty of room for both stadiums to be the go-to stadiums. but i think Ives is right in that this game will be essentially an audition. i’m sure SKC will pull out all the stops for this game.
as for Pacific Northwest…it’s tough. i don’t see Portland getting one until the field is bigger (which they are doing after this season, right?) and Seattle has the turf issue. but i think both deserve a chance for sure. Seattle should be able to give a good home field advantage for a USA/Mexico game:
Total Population 620778 100.00%
Hispanic or Latino(of any race) 6.6%
Mexican 3.17%
Portland has about twice as many Hispanic residents (about about 100,000 less residents), but i could not find a similar breakdown. but i did read that most are of Mexican heritage.
by comparison, Kansas City:
(Kansas portion) Total Population 146453
Hispanic population % 27.8%!!!
(Missouri portion) Total Population 463202
Hispanic population % 10.0%
Columbus:
Total population 797434
Hispanic population % 5.6%
numbers from US Census Bureau. either way, i think each of these cities would be great for the USMNT.
loving these daily USMNT articles!
last USA – Mexico match in Chicago was an utter embarrassment in terms of a USA home field advantage
No chance. Mexican population would definitely come out in support of Mexico in KC. That match needs to stay in Columbus.
Went to the USA – Canada Gold Cup match in Detroit, MI (Canada-US border) and while the Canadian fans were an awesome bunch, they were an extremely small, awesome bunch that did not threaten our home field advantage.
seattle will NEVER EVER be a consistent WCQ site. not a slight to the city or it’s fans.. it’s just to far from europe. get over it.
Those 4 make a ton of sense. In addition, I’d include a less accessible (further south) stadium for any qualifiers against Canada.
I agree that Crew stadium has been great to the us team but the atmosphere currently in kansas city is unmatched in my opinion and I have been to home games in the last two years in chicago, columbus, denver, seattle and portland. Portland closely folows with seattle following them. I beleive that is time start easing in a changing of the guard for USMNT matches while still continuing to have matches in Columbus
I was at the Gold Cup game last summer, and it was amateur hour. C-bus all the way.
I live in Kc now and attend every SKC home match at livestrong and attended the matches the last few years where they have hosted foreign club teams including chivas de guadalajara there were mexican fans there but still 80% of the attendance was pro skc and that was for a friendly where most of the non die hard fans dont even consider showing up. I have no doubt that if Livestrong were to host a usa-mexico wcq that livestrong would become a pro american fortress
I don’t think it should matter one bit that Crew Stadium isn’t new or that it’s not as flashy as other stadiums. As long as there is a pro USA crowd, that is all that should matter. Our guys need support! Even if there is a pro USA crowd against Guatemala, you have to remember that they look alike but Guatemalan’s aren’t Mexicans. Don’t underestimate Mexico and their pride for their national team.
And they’re way too close to Canada. We don’t want any Canadians with their flapping heads messing up our home field advantage, eh.
Too many people from [insert country we’re playing] live in Chicago. We lose the home field advantage.
Seattle and Portland have artificial turf. In other words, a WCQ will never happen.
Columbus needs a new soccer stadium and a special one and they will become the new skc. If its an important game stay north and friendly spread the game but seattle, portland, salt lake, columbus needs a new stadium, kansas are very strong home advantages. New york and los angeles are a disappointment and the immigrants hurt the market but southwest and southeast are hidden markets for the national team that can help mls as well. remember soccer fans are unique and love rowdy.
Nooooooo! Crew stadium = our Azteca, and I am not a Crew fan
I don’t think it’s a straight up battle between Columbus and Kansas City. If the US makes it to the Hex, I imagine both will host games no matter what. But it’s hard to see the USSF taking the Mexico game away from Columbus. Columbus has a lower season ticket holder base, but with the new USSC program in place – and the growth of American Outlaws – it should be fairly easy to ensure a pro-US crowd.
As for Seattle and Jeld-Wen, both have incredible atmospheres but it’s impossible to see the USSF choosing to go to turf even if it has temporary sodding. Jeld-Wen’s field dimensions also pose a problem. If and when those things are changed, I think both will become permanent fixtures on the USMNT schedule.
Weather+demographics favor columbus
Seattle doesn’t have a soccer Stadium…and the WCQ aren’t looking for highest attendance. They would do that if we got a World Cup but they care more about playing in a soccer specific stadium with a good atmosphere than sheer number of fans.
I lived in KC pre-Livestrong Stadium days.
The first time the Wizards played Chivas USA at home, it was close to a sell out game with 80% of those fans turning up to support the “new” chivas team.
This was also in Arrowhead mind you.
I have a hard time thinking that any crowd at a USA-Mexico game in KC would be anything other than pro-Mexican.
Meh. If you’re far enouogh away that you have to fly, they’re the same. No direct flights. Chicago would be better.
The article is correct, but it is almost a slap in the face of Seattle right now.
Best soccer stadium in the US, biggest attendance, you could go on and on, best looking fans…..
…..turf being the only negative and that can be overcome.
After the amazing atmosphere I witnessed first hand in Columbus on Sept. 11, there is NO way Crew Stadium should lose the “unofficial home” title…but there is plenty of room on the USMNT home stadium bus. Fact is, we need more than one “friendly home” for our boys. Let Crew Stadium, Livestrong Park, Century Link in Seattle and Jeld-Wen Field in Portland all host important home matches. I just hope the US-Mexico matches continue to be hosted in Columbus.
I was at LSP for the Open Cup final. It was downright amazing, the atmosphere was our if this world.