Why SoundersFC is looking to Starfire for CCL match

Posted by jt on March 14, 2010 · Under Champions League, Front Office · View Comments 

Well, in addition to the Portland match last week, there was one other match you all should be aware of.  The Columbus Crew played Mexican team Toluca to a 2-2 draw in the first leg of their Quarterfinal play of the CONCACAF Champions League.  The weather was min 50′s during the match, but only drew 4,402 fans to the CCL match.  Last season Columbus averaged 14,175 fans in MLS games, so to only have 1/3 of them show up for this match makes me worry.  Starfire should be able to seat 4,000 fans (no standing room only), but how many of the 18,606 there for Portland would show up for a mid-week game against another at-large Central American team in the end of July?  Remember, there are two things that have to be considered, first being the cost increase of opening a stadium like Qwest compared to Starfire, then the whole scheduling issue with Safeco and the Mariners.

Granted, the overall turnout for the Portland game helps, and we should get a few more sell-outs in Qwest MLS play before they have to decide.  Too bad the CBA is holding up so much.  I expect the flood gates to open soon after that issue is resolved.

  • Oh_yeah

    Hopefully, the cba is resolve very soon.

  • bud

    Just a few contrary ideas:
    A July or August game will outdraw a March game.
    A game which means something will outdraw an exhibition.

    There are steps the team can take to increase attendance at CCL matches at Qwest.  Making the CCL tickets part of the season ticket package, for one.

  • Gee

    $10-$15 GA should also help.

  • jt

    Burning a friendly on this would be nice for a number of reasons:
    - play on the existing pitch instead of importing a grass one for a single game
    - SSFC isn’t paying for the team ala Barca and Chelsea
    - Stadium issue is null if played at Qwest

    The flip is the owners would loose money due to minimal single game ticket sales due to existing STH’s deciding to sell their seats instead of going.  The CCL isn’t going to draw 60K+ fans, until we get to much later rounds.  The CCL game here would be between July 26th and 28th, from what I have seen.

  • TL

    If the team sends out e-mails about the game and gives people the ability to buy there seats for a $10-$15 price tag, then I don’t see why it would not draw a large number of fans.  I think fans would be excited to support whatever the game, if it meant something. I know other teams, like Columbus have not, but Seattle will.  I think it is a mistake, not to play the game at Qwest.  I had no interest in going to the Portland Game.  I travelled to the Portland game last year.  I would absolutely go to the Champions League game.  Meeningfull games draw fans.  Especially our kind of fans.  That is a relevent thought for more than just me.

  • Anonymous

    A friend of mine was saying they can’t use season tickets for CCL as it is against the rules. But I did not see anything here:
    http://www.concacaf.com/staticFiles/bc/41/0,,12813~147900,00.pdf

    It would make sense though since it would allow a team to keep the away team from buying any tickets. 

    10.8a also makes it seem like they would have to remove all the ads around the field. 

  • Tim

    I believe QWest would work well for Concacaf and Seattle.  We should NEVER gauge our fan turnout based on other teams.  Columbus, San Jose, Kansas City – please – we are the Sounders.  The Portland match is a great example; 18,600 fans mid-week!  Plus, look at the turnout for the Gold Cup last July 4th at QWest.  There were tons of Central and South American fans.  The Sounders FO should not sell their supporters short. 
    Promote the events better.  Keep it General Admission at a great price (Season Tickets should not be involved with Concacaf).  Fan appreciation functions pre-game would draw folks too.  Maybe this is the events for Drew Carey’s giant BBQ idea?  Just start it early enough that ECS and other Supporter Groups can get their desired sections.

    Regarding the pitch;
    A comment above mentioned grass.  Is Concacaf required to be played on grass?
    I would like to here the Pro/Cons for the installation of a grass pitch at QWest for during the Sounders seasons.   I realize the natural pitches cost $55,000+ for the Chelsea and Barca matches, but if we do that at the beginning of our season and maintain it well, I don’t see an immediate issue.  The issue will come when we start over-lapping with the Seahawks in the Fall.
    I feel the cost is justified and would be welcomed by most

    What about Husky Stadium as a venue if needed?  It needs to be verified and tested for the 2018/2022 World Cup bid anyway.  If Starfire is too small (both in fan seating and pitch size) then the Sounders FO should surely be able to strike a deal with the UW.  If Husky Stadium was setup as soccer specific in the summer months they could bring in all kinds of matches, playoffs, and championships from MLS, NASL/USL on down.  More events, more fans, more football – I’m getting goose-bumps!!! 

    Main point – we are not Columbus. 
    We are Seattle and we are Sounders ’til we die!

  • jt

    Well, I’ll keep it short:

    There is no grass requirement – many teams play on turf, and most turf isn’t as good as ours.

    Husky stadium would work – post remodel.  Think your seats are great now – add in a track and put you 100′ away from the pitch.  The idea for the remodel is to dig it down and run the seats much closer to the actual playing surface.  UW also uses the field in the summer for training camp, so the time that things get interesting in USL/etc, NCAA Football is ramping up.

    Yes, we are not Columbus, and the 18,606 last week proved that we can draw for a game that doesn’t mean anything.  But the Gold Cup last year was ~15,000 – and it felt empty (so did the Timbers game, but that was because we were spread out).

blog comments powered by Disqus

GoSOUNDERS.com on Facebook

Recent Comments

Sounders FC News