Why The Chicago Riot Will Fail: Special Commentary

The Major Indoor Soccer League (MISL) Forum.
Soccer-Man
Site Admin
Posts: 97
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 11:09 pm

Why The Chicago Riot Will Fail: Special Commentary

Post by Soccer-Man » Sat Dec 04, 2010 3:52 pm

So tomorrow (12/5/10) is the day that so many has been waiting for. It’s the beginning of the end in a strange kind of way. Tomorrow is the day that the Great President Peter Wilt will debut his Chicago Riot at the Odeum Expo Center. Yet I would be lying to myself and the MISL Universe if I said, I believe this franchise will make it. We have been down this road before only to end up with another Chicago team folding and the MISL taking a black eye for it. There was the Power, Vultures, Sting, and who could forget the Storm. A few months back, I wrote an OP-ED entitled DOES THE CITY OF CHICAGO DESERVE AN MISL EXPANSION TEAM. It listed my objections to going down this road again in a city that doesn’t really support professional sports (unless they win of course). Nevertheless, the Riot is suppose to represent a new day. Notwithstanding, this is why they will fail.

1) They play in the City of Chicago. For reasons that I can’t explain, Chicago doesn’t have passion for sports teams unless they win and are from one of the big leagues.

2) Late start. Two weeks before the season starts, the MISL expands to Chicago. I get that fact that they wanted a fifth team, but this is ridiculous. They tried the same thing with the Twisters and we all know how that turned out. Now don’t get me wrong, even with ample time, I still don’t think the Riot franchise would work, but if you’re going to do, at least do it the right way.

3) Odeum Expo Center is not a real arena. The many indoor soccer Chicago teams has played musical chairs with the arenas they’ve played in and none has work. Who could forget the UIC Pavilion? Sears/Kmart Center? All State Arena? The Expo seats 3,500 and the Riot SHOULD have no trouble selling it out. However, this is Chicago and we all know that that won’t happen.

As much as I would like to see a viable MISL team in Chicago, I can’t see the Riot being successful. Maybe one of these days, the MISL will see that Chicago is just not worth the headache.

CorA
Site Admin
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 10:10 pm

Post by CorA » Sun Dec 05, 2010 7:30 pm

Soccer-Man:
1) Does not know anything about Chicago sports becuase the teams do get supported even if they don't win. Chicago teams might not sell out every game if they don't win but Chicago is very passionate about many teams (Bears, Cubs, Blackhaawks, Sox, Bulls, and even sometimes the Fire). So don't say Chicago isn't a sports city or area because you don't know what you are talking about. Chicago is one of the most passionate for their sports teams.
2) The Expo Center is not a real arena. I agree with you on that.
3) The Riot won't make it, we all know.
4) I come from Chicago and it is as great a sports city as any other.

wasteland
Site Admin
Posts: 402
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 5:29 pm

Post by wasteland » Sun Dec 05, 2010 10:13 pm

[quote=""CorA""]Soccer-Man:
1) Does not know anything about Chicago sports becuase the teams do get supported even if they don't win. Chicago teams might not sell out every game if they don't win but Chicago is very passionate about many teams (Bears, Cubs, Blackhaawks, Sox, Bulls, and even sometimes the Fire). So don't say Chicago isn't a sports city or area because you don't know what you are talking about. Chicago is one of the most passionate for their sports teams. [/quote]

Couldn't of said it better myself. And for minor league support look at The Wolves of the AHL and the Rush of the AFL (though both play in Rosemont). Most minor league teams are located in the burbs anyways, and yes the support varies greatly

Soccer-Man
Site Admin
Posts: 97
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 11:09 pm

Post by Soccer-Man » Tue Dec 07, 2010 11:50 pm

[quote=""CorA""]Soccer-Man:
1) Does not know anything about Chicago sports becuase the teams do get supported even if they don't win. Chicago teams might not sell out every game if they don't win but Chicago is very passionate about many teams (Bears, Cubs, Blackhaawks, Sox, Bulls, and even sometimes the Fire). So don't say Chicago isn't a sports city or area because you don't know what you are talking about. Chicago is one of the most passionate for their sports teams.
2) The Expo Center is not a real arena. I agree with you on that.
3) The Riot won't make it, we all know.
4) I come from Chicago and it is as great a sports city as any other.[/quote]


I do know Chicago and Chicago area teams.

I know that the White Sox was going to move to Tampa Bay in the early '90s.

I know that the Black Hawks only draw fans when they win; like last season.

I know that the Fire can't sell out 20,000 seat Toyato Park.

I know that the Olympics said NO.

I know that any indoor soccer team is doomed there.

I know that the Chicago Rush folded a few years back.

I know that the NEW Sears Center has been an absolute failure.


I could go on and on but you get the point. By the way, there were only 1,094 fans at the Riot game. That's embarrassing. My point is valid.


SHAME

wasteland
Site Admin
Posts: 402
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 5:29 pm

Post by wasteland » Thu Dec 09, 2010 3:56 am

The white sox used the threat of the move to gain funding for a new stadium, and that was late 80's, not the 90's.

Except for a 4 or 5 year span ending about 3 years ago, The BH have been near or at the top for attendance. When they moved to the United Center attendance was through the roof thansk to the additonal seating.

Chicago and Illinois is broke and couldn't afford the Olympics.The United States Olympic Committee did select Chicago over Houston, Los Angeles, Philadelphia and San Francisco, as its candidate city. The summer games have only been hosted 4 times in the US, so this is really a silly arguement for this subject.

The Rush never folded, the league did. When the league was reborn, the Rush was waiting.

The Fire averaged almost 15k fans a game, not the top, but no where near the bottom. 75% capacity in this economy is nothing to be ashamed of.

The Sears Center is located about an hour drive from downtown Chicago, in other words it ain't Chicago.

Didn't know as much as you thought.

Soccer is a niche sport for kids in the eyes of many. Until it comes off as exciting, it will remain so. When going up against the Bears, Bulls, Hawks, Wolves etc, an indoor team with no history has little chance.

You made no point, so what do you think is valid?
Last edited by wasteland on Thu Dec 09, 2010 4:03 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Sam Hill
Site Admin
Posts: 4142
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2003 3:29 am
Location: Denver, CO

Post by Sam Hill » Thu Dec 09, 2010 8:53 pm

[quote=""Soccer-Man""]So tomorrow (12/5/10) is the day that so many has been waiting for. [/quote]

Rarely is the question asked, "Is our children learning?"
Old enough to remember when bashing the ABA was fun.

User avatar
Pounder
Site Admin
Posts: 2736
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 7:01 pm
Location: Portland freaking Oregon!

Post by Pounder » Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:16 am

Memo to S-M:

Beggars can't be choosers. The league is a beggar, or else they wouldn't have had to accept Chicago.

Peter Wilt has a LOT of appreciation... among MLS fans. I don't think that translates to indoor attendance, and I think the reasons why are clear.
Mean Spirited Blogger #107

Soccer-Man
Site Admin
Posts: 97
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 11:09 pm

Post by Soccer-Man » Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:01 am

[quote=""wasteland""]The white sox used the threat of the move to gain funding for a new stadium, and that was late 80's, not the 90's.

Except for a 4 or 5 year span ending about 3 years ago, The BH have been near or at the top for attendance. When they moved to the United Center attendance was through the roof thansk to the additonal seating.

Chicago and Illinois is broke and couldn't afford the Olympics.The United States Olympic Committee did select Chicago over Houston, Los Angeles, Philadelphia and San Francisco, as its candidate city. The summer games have only been hosted 4 times in the US, so this is really a silly arguement for this subject.

The Rush never folded, the league did. When the league was reborn, the Rush was waiting.

The Fire averaged almost 15k fans a game, not the top, but no where near the bottom. 75% capacity in this economy is nothing to be ashamed of.

The Sears Center is located about an hour drive from downtown Chicago, in other words it ain't Chicago.

Didn't know as much as you thought.

Soccer is a niche sport for kids in the eyes of many. Until it comes off as exciting, it will remain so. When going up against the Bears, Bulls, Hawks, Wolves etc, an indoor team with no history has little chance.

You made no point, so what do you think is valid?[/quote]

Your defense of Chicago as a sports town, while admirable is still in uncharted waters.

Outside of the big four they won't support sports. Inside of the big four, the Bulls, and Hawks get support only when they win. Look, Chicago is a big city that acts like a small town. More is expected of a city the size of Chicago. I'm sorry if that offends you, but it's true.

I mean for crying out loud, Chicago is the 3 most populated city in America.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Un ... population

When a city this size can't (or won't) support the UIC Pavillion, Sears Center, All State Arena, White Sox etc something is wrong.

As my good Friend Lawrence O'Donnell once said, "You're entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts."


SHAME

User avatar
Sam Hill
Site Admin
Posts: 4142
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2003 3:29 am
Location: Denver, CO

Post by Sam Hill » Mon Dec 27, 2010 10:59 pm

[quote=""Soccer-Man""]Inside of the big four, the Bulls, and Hawks get support only when they win.[/quote]

Which is why, from 1998-2002, post-Jordan et al, the Bulls were only able to average 21,162 people per game while going 66-230 on the court.

Whose own facts again?

The Blackhawks' problems were more systemic than anything else. When Wirtz died and McDonough came in and started marketing the team like it should have been and bringing it into the late 20th century in terms of procedures, Chicago responded.

But it's easier to just make a dumb blanket statement when you don't know anything about the situation.
Old enough to remember when bashing the ABA was fun.

wasteland
Site Admin
Posts: 402
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 5:29 pm

Post by wasteland » Tue Dec 28, 2010 5:47 pm

[quote=""Sam Hill""]Which is why, from 1998-2002, post-Jordan et al, the Bulls were only able to average 21,162 people per game while going 66-230 on the court.

Whose own facts again?

The Blackhawks' problems were more systemic than anything else. When Wirtz died and McDonough came in and started marketing the team like it should have been and bringing it into the late 20th century in terms of procedures, Chicago responded.

But it's easier to just make a dumb blanket statement when you don't know anything about the situation.[/quote]

beat me to it.

Post Reply

Return to “MISL”