MLS Cup 2010 was a disappointment, if not an embarrassment, and stamped a low point on a season of distinct upward trajectory. There was no glamour, no brilliance, no imagination or lasting image. Seventh-place, middle class Colorado defeated plucky fifth-place underdog FC Dallas 2-1 by virtue of an own goal in a rugby-style match that unfortunately dragged into overtime. Even Colorado’s equalizing goal was shabby – the ball simply escaped from a mass of bodies tangled on the ground and rolled into the net. The season’s obviously number one goalkeeper Kevin Hartman (though oddly he didn’t earn the MLS honors) didn’t even get the notoriety of missing a save on a great shot. The game was just an awkward mess.
BMO Field was the wrong venue, with all respect to Toronto FC fans who turned out for two teams on par with theirs, but without a star like Dwayne De Rosario. A neutral site three-quarters across the United States and in another country on a frigid late November night is not a tantalizing destination for away fans of two teams without much charisma and with historically sketchy records. The blocks of empty seats and mass early exit during the League’s supposedly shining hour said it all. Beautiful Toronto itself made a strong case for hosting the event at the home of whatever MLS Cup finalist, even God forbid, "Sporting" Kansas.
The underdog card is always good in America and FC Dallas would have played it well had they faced a sophisticated opponent like LA Galaxy, New York Red Bulls, 2009 Champion Real Salt Lake, or even Columbus Crew, loaded with veteran professionals. The game is entertainment and passion, not a mathematical formula. Enhanced drama, especially metaphorical, is key to packaging a season finale when one branded side stares down another, the battle of two philosophies squaring off. Somewhere, a point is supposed to be made, however stretched.
There was no point to this match-up. The Rapids were average at best all season and lucked into the playoffs while clinging to the edge of a slippery bubble. When one average team plays a skilled team, sometimes the average team is forced to play above their level and players go beyond their proven abilities and the consequence is high entertainment. But when two teams of average ability square off in a fight to the death in a heavily publicized spectacle, it’s never pretty. They’re already playing at their fullest potential and have no need to go beyond that because the opponent doesn’t know how to do that either. The teams do what they do a little more desperately, resulting in a physical (read not technical, not stylish) match with players routinely dragged off, patched up and referred to as gladiators as they stagger back onto the pitch. Two major talents, Hartman and MLS MVP David Ferriera, simply weren’t enough luminaries for such an event, ostensibly crowning the best of the best.
The season of 2010 was a very good season. There was improved play and officiating, perhaps due to MLS rule changes permitting additional designated players and those investments requiring increased protection. Two additional soccer specific stadiums, PPL Park and Red Bulls Arena, raised the bar on venues. The League’s decision to re-institute a reserve League to develop players and showcase MLS Academy products is the most important achievement of the year (or decade) and puts MLS clubs on more level ground with established clubs around the world. The United States is recognized as fertile ground for the next generation of international players, although Americans will be the last to believe that. These and other decisions, including a possible transition to the FIFA calendar, bumped the MLS up the stairs in a remarkably short period.
But progress is not linear. At the Cup, MLS Commissioner Don Garber announced changes to the playoff structure, which thankfully will include some provision for not having two Western Conference teams compete for the Eastern Conference Championship. However, he also announced that by increasing the League to 18 teams in 2011, the playoffs would feature ten teams - two additional clubs. That’s right, there could be two teams worse than the Colorado Rapids arbitrarily competing for the title of the best team in MLS. The rational for this is hard to justify to those other than club owners. The shine of the playoffs will be smudged, the value cheapened. Halfway though Colorado-Dallas, it was painfully clear this was just another MLS game between two average sides with budget players, and not a very good game at that. For a League that’s increasingly attracting international attention and trying to show the world the value of the American playoff system, a bloated playoff grouping is a step backward. By focusing more on the commercialization and less on the aesthetics of the game, the League proves it's still a work in progress and not yet on course with the rest of the world.
See the MLS Cup slideshow.
FOLLOW US SOCCER EXAMINER AND LE EISENMENGER ON TWITTER AND SUBSCRIBE TO EMAIL ALERTS.
Comments
I would like to see MLS adopt the English Premier League use of a single table with the winner of the league being whoever has the most points at the end of the regular season of home and away games with all of the teams.
I would not like to see MLS become like major league baseball where a team like the New York Yankees basically outspends the other teams by multiple amounts of dollars. I prefer the "budget players" of middle America to the glitzy players of New York and Los Angeles.
Go FC Dallas! Win it all next season!!
The playoffs work here, but the regular season winner deserves more credit, advantage. Maybe home field advantage in playoffs. I love seeing players come up through the ranks, but there's definitely a place and purpose for splash in marketing. Dallas would have done better playing up.
The way it should be:
Home and away schedule...one table
No. 1 seed is the team with the best record (LA)
No. 2 seed is the US Open Cup winner (Seattle)
You now add 4 playoff teams with the best record.
Round 1 Home and away
Columbus at New York
Dallas at Real Salt Lake
Round 2--one game
Lower seed winner at LA
Higher seed winner at Seattle
Championship
If neutral site...give it 2 week gap, so fans can plan
If at highest seed site, make it one week since home fans will buy tickets
Reasoning:
Team with best record is rewarded
US Cup becomes much more important and will draw more fans/TV, plus lower league may have a shot.
To get to the championship, a champion in Round 2 will have to be knocked out.
Playoffs are now full of better and more interesting teams.
If you don't like the US Cup champ being seeded No.2 then maybe you seed them the one of the playoff four.
If the US Cup and Supporters Shield is the same team, you put them at No.1 and use No.2 best record as the No. 2 seed.
I'm sure there are some tweaks to it, but I would prefer to see this system.
your right it should be this way this system reminds me of the nfl playoff system which i think is the fairest system in American sports because in the end the best team wins and the top seed is rewarded with a bye...simply put mls has to take out the conferences because every team plays each other twice so the conferences serve no purpose because an east team is playing the same amount of games against a west team that they are against their own conference which makes no sense because the purpose is to play your conference more than the other... MLS has to change or it will go down like NASL back in the early 80's
Rob, good thoughts, but the Open Cup priority seems a little random. The Open Cup needs to fix itself before it deserves greater priority. In that case, the lower seed (D2 teams) should host to openly play the underdog card and brand the tournament in that way.
L.E. - I have read a lot of your pieces, but this one seems to be one of the more incoherent. It just seems like you complain about the "package", like it's something MLS can control, or *should* control. You seem genuinely embarrassed, revealing an MLS inforiority complex a lot of Americans have.
Also, FC Dallas was never the underdog. They had the league's coach of the year, MVP, and a keeper of the year candidate. They only lost 4 games all year. They destroyed the Supporter Shield winners on the road. There was nothing underdog about them.
My feeling about the playoffs: it's exciting, but needs changes. First, I would like to see each conference send their 4 best teams, to avoid teams winning a conference they don't belong to (RBNY 2008, RSL 2009, Rapids 2010). Secondly, I think all rounds of the playoffs should be home and away series, and the final should be at the higher seeded team's stadium. I like playoffs. If Galaxy was great, they should have been able to handle that semifinal game. Should the Support Shield winner get advantage? A Bye? Something? Perhaps. But truly great teams are consistent, and if they can't win the big games when they need to, they don't deserve the Cup. Rapids, I am not a fan...but they won 3 post season games in a row, including over Crew and all of their "veteran professionals". Winning talks...bullcrap walks.
ROB - The US Open Cup should have nothing to do with the playoffs. It is a separate competition, open to all teams in the pyramid. Besides, sometimes, crappy teams win open cup competitions. Two years ago, DC United got to the final, but their regular season record wasn't so stellar.
As for the FIFA calendar, it won't happen. I don't know how often you have been to Chicago, Toronto, Massachusetts, New York, DC, or Philly, in January, but it's not pretty. I have been to all of them many times in the winter, and MLS will simply not be able to sell enough seats to compete with NFL, NBA, and NHL in the winter. If MLS would break for international play, that would be a suitable compromise.
Of course, I asked if you've been to those places BEFORE I read your profile. Haha.
BTW, let me clarify...I am not saying you have an inferiority complex about MLS...I meant that it *seemed* that way to someone who had no idea about you. This piece just seemed to have real embarrassment quality. I don't think MLS has anything to be embarrassed about.
V. Gallagher, the playoff final was a major disappointment, embarrassing to those promoting the League, and there will be many meetings to avoid the same mistakes in the future. TV viewership was down 44% and that translates to future sponsor investment. The League is young and mistakes will be made - progress is not linear - the only danger is denying their existence and repeating them.
Toronto was the wrong location - wrong country, wrong climate, wrong club. Democratic choice maybe, or was it a special interest, or did they think the fans would support whatever teams showed up and create the desired atmosphere?
FC Dallas most definitely was the underdog. At the beginning of the season Kevin Hartman didn't even have a job, very few knew who David Ferriera (2010 MVP) even was, their fan support was poor, and the media was projecting that Hyndman would be replaced and that the team would fold or be re-branded. In 2009, Dallas finished the season 11th in the 15-team league and didn't make the playoffs. In 2010, Hyndman, like Arena did with the Galaxy in 2009, coached his team not to lose (as opposed to coach to win), hence they tied 14 games, more than any other team and thus climbed the ladder. Remarkable yes, beautiful no.
From a marketing perspective, the League simply needed designated players on the field in the final to attract mass media interest (the general public, not the dedicated MLS fan) and use them as talking points to demonstrate the growth of the League. So the Rapids' ugly soccer beat better teams somehow, what's the point? Part of the problem with American soccer is the mentality and that's one of the reasons it's often not respected - it's not how you win, it's not about quality, it's about "grinding out results." I like to believe that' mentality is changing, but the 2010 playoffs did nothing to support that.
Hmm...good points. I am not a Dallas fan either, but I never thought much about the anti-football aspect of their tactics. I still don't buy that they were the underdog, however. Dallas was considered one of the leagues "hotter" teams going into the playoffs, more so than Colorado was.
As for Toronto, Garber promised them an MLS Cup when they were awarded a franchise. I think it would have gone better, however, if Toronto FC's front office had been more competent. But, supporters were already staging protests at games, and many TFC season ticket holders chose not to buy a ticket to the Cup. Add to that the weather (I actually like cold weather for sports, but I'm from Buffalo), the distance, etc., it was a "perfect storm" of circumstances.
I personally was hoping to see Galaxy take on RBNY in the final, just for the sake of the league. I'm a pretty die-hard lover of MLS, warts and all, but I was definitely bummed to see Dallas and Rapids in the final game, if only because they have terrible home support. I was actually kind of blown away that over 17 thousand showed up to watch Colorado's semifinal.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!