NYCFC in the Media Thread - 2024
- Thread starter LionNYC
- Start date
He's a bit of a strange cat. I met him once when he was with the Devils. He's just a strange cat. No two ways about it.
He's called this match before for national tv, but it's clear he's still biased towards the Red Bulls.
And never have I heard this club being referred to as "FC", that was like a Twilight Zone moment.
And never have I heard this club being referred to as "FC", that was like a Twilight Zone moment.
I’ll betcha he is unsure what FC stands forI had to rewind to make sure .. thought maybe he said city in a weird accent.. but nope. FC..
Well if you thought the FC was bad, don't even think about reading the NY Times article on the game today.
I will put that article here (no paywall). I like David Waldstein, but this is not a good article.
www.nytimes.com
In fact, I think our old companion on these boards said it best.
bsky.app
New York’s Soccer Clubs Meet in a Playoff, and the Loathing Is Mutual
The Red Bulls and the New York City Football Club face one another on Saturday. Much of the metro area is blasé, but the fan bases are frothing.
In fact, I think our old companion on these boards said it best.
John Muller (@johnspacemuller.com)
Once every three or four years the New York Times remembers the city has two MLS teams and proceeds to cover them like a foreign correspondent reporting from Mars
bsky.app
I will put that article here (no paywall). I like David Waldstein, but this is not a good article.
New York’s Soccer Clubs Meet in a Playoff, and the Loathing Is Mutual
The Red Bulls and the New York City Football Club face one another on Saturday. Much of the metro area is blasé, but the fan bases are frothing.
In fact, I think our old companion on these boards said it best.
John Muller (@johnspacemuller.com)
Once every three or four years the New York Times remembers the city has two MLS teams and proceeds to cover them like a foreign correspondent reporting from Mars
The league has been around for 30 years. NYCFC has been around for 10 years. The team averages over 20,000 fans a game. People may not follow MLS, but the fanbase is larger than the Times thinks it is and, at the very least, people know what NYCFC is at this point in its history.
Failing New York Times strikes again. The author likely won't even be coming to the match to cover the game.I will put that article here (no paywall). I like David Waldstein, but this is not a good article.
New York’s Soccer Clubs Meet in a Playoff, and the Loathing Is Mutual
The Red Bulls and the New York City Football Club face one another on Saturday. Much of the metro area is blasé, but the fan bases are frothing.
In fact, I think our old companion on these boards said it best.
John Muller (@johnspacemuller.com)
Once every three or four years the New York Times remembers the city has two MLS teams and proceeds to cover them like a foreign correspondent reporting from Mars
Feels this was written just to hit the quota of two articles from NYT about NYCFC, or MLS in New York, each year.
New York City Football Club (Soccer Team) - Page 2
News about New York City Football Club (Soccer Team). Commentary and archival information about New York City Football Club (Soccer Team) from The New York Times.
Last edited:
Well, they don't even have a sports department anymore. Not sure what Waldstein's beat is at this point. He used to be the college football writer. Andrew Das, who was the soccer writer and authored a few articles about us over the years, is now on some international desk out of London.
I will put that article here (no paywall). I like David Waldstein, but this is not a good article.
New York’s Soccer Clubs Meet in a Playoff, and the Loathing Is Mutual
The Red Bulls and the New York City Football Club face one another on Saturday. Much of the metro area is blasé, but the fan bases are frothing.
In fact, I think our old companion on these boards said it best.
John Muller (@johnspacemuller.com)
Once every three or four years the New York Times remembers the city has two MLS teams and proceeds to cover them like a foreign correspondent reporting from Mars
chatgpt probably could have churned out a better article with a simple prompt.
I don't really get the hate here.
So you want the NYT to cover this match and not mention that MLS is a smaller, less known draw than other sports leagues in the US or other football leagues around the world. But it is a smaller, lesser known draw. Our derby is a lesser version of what exists in London or Glasgow. I actually thought he did a nice job of covering that while also talking about the growth of the league and how NYCFC and NJRB draw more fans than at least a handful of Serie A clubs.
I guess he could have written about the history of the rivalry more, but then people here would be complaining about hearing about the Red Wedding. He did review the Cup titles comparison of the teams which I would think would make people here happy.
I didn't see anything that was factually inaccurate. Were you expecting a detailed tactical analysis? A couple of more intimate player profiles beyond Morgan and Haak? Can someone give me a substantive answer of why y'all hate this article?
ETA: Wifey gets a top 10 articles daily email from NYT and it included this article today. Maybe that is tailored to her. Maybe not.
So you want the NYT to cover this match and not mention that MLS is a smaller, less known draw than other sports leagues in the US or other football leagues around the world. But it is a smaller, lesser known draw. Our derby is a lesser version of what exists in London or Glasgow. I actually thought he did a nice job of covering that while also talking about the growth of the league and how NYCFC and NJRB draw more fans than at least a handful of Serie A clubs.
I guess he could have written about the history of the rivalry more, but then people here would be complaining about hearing about the Red Wedding. He did review the Cup titles comparison of the teams which I would think would make people here happy.
I didn't see anything that was factually inaccurate. Were you expecting a detailed tactical analysis? A couple of more intimate player profiles beyond Morgan and Haak? Can someone give me a substantive answer of why y'all hate this article?
ETA: Wifey gets a top 10 articles daily email from NYT and it included this article today. Maybe that is tailored to her. Maybe not.
Last edited:
At what point in its history will MLS be treated as a league that's been around for a long time and is worth covering the way the other US leagues are covered? It's been 29 years. The idea that no one knows it exists is farcical. The NYC team averages 20,000 fans/game. If they're still treating us like some foreign concept it's because of the bias of the writer thinking it's not "worthy" of real, substantive coverage.
TL;DR: If you're still explaining what MLS is 29 years into its existence, that's your problem. American sports fans may not follow MLS writ large, but sports fans know it exists, and know what it is. American sports fans don't need to be "introduced" to MLS every time the Times thinks to write about it.
This article, plus the video segment up thread, plus a discussion I saw on Reddit this week, together led me to consider a new twist on something I’ve always believed (so yes, it’s confirmation bias but sometimes even the paranoid are followed): the us soccer culture choice to mimic British and euro and LatAm soccer culture has set soccer development back in the USA. The news guy doesn’t know what to make of FC. The NYT believes it still needs to explain what the league is. And the Reddit discussion was a perfect representation of the disdain that soccer traditionalists have for MLS.
Football in this country is played with pads and helmets. Sports teams have actual names. We have fans and super fans, not supporters or ultras.
Americans like American shit. You know who else likes American shit? People all over the world. Who likes naming MLS teams FC? A tiny niche. And that niche is the core of MLS support but catering to that preference is a liability . We’ll never win over the America sucks or pro rel communities by recycling FC and United over and over, but it keeps 80% of potential US fans at arms length. Go all in on Timbers Loons Burn Wizards and “it’s called soccer” and flip the bird to anyone who calls it cringe. And maybe the US mass market stops feeling like the sport doesn’t want them. And as a bonus the rest of the world will mostly find it charming cool and endearing, because it’s authentic.
i agree MLS teams should have gone all in and gave their teams fun, mascot-y names like Timbers and Loons. I do appreciate that garber came in and adopted international rules and customs when it comes to gameplay (clock that counts up and no stupid 1v1 keeper shootout).
I agree that sometimes the "snobbery" about soccer/MLS in the US is what holds it back a lot of the time. It's almost a 3 tier snob fest. 1st tier of american fan who think soccer is not a good sport for one reason or another (have met plenty of those over the years), 2nd tier of MLS fan who thinks it's great and can't hype it enough, 3rd tier of euro snob who thinks MLS is sub-par and won't give it the time of day.
In any case, I think a local newspaper should cover the local team with more gusto and hype. to me, the article sounded like someone who had no idea what they were talking about and did a 5 minute google search or chatgpt prompt (i did this and it gave me very similar information as in the article). I would appreciate the local media hyping it up more instead of writing about it like they are from another country doing their research on the league for the first time.
it is what it is at this point. the world cup in 2026 will be make or break for the league as far as growth. messi coming has helped tremendously on the world stage, but having the world cup on home soil is either going to give MLS the eyes it needs domestically, or it's going to prove that americans, en masse, don't want what MLS is selling.
And the league name, of course. Plus they are committed to playoffs which is very American. But over 20 years or so the direction is away from that, likely because their research is clear that on the whole MLS fans want it. But I think the disconnect between what existing fans want and what it takes to broaden the fan base is a problem.
To be fair, this is guess work, and maybe just aligning theories to my preferences. I've no real evidence.
To me, this is the most shocking thing you've ever posted LOL
I have a longstanding belief that the American Sports Fan writ-large will never support soccer and MLS, and we should stop trying to attract them.
The league does very well with attendance and needs to improve its TV numbers, but this league will never become the NBA, NFL, or MLB. It's much more similar to the NHL -- and that's OK. The NHL has over $5 billion in revenue every season, and I think that's what MLS should strive to become. Don't try to be the next NFL, it's never going to happen.
I mostly agree, and yes NHL is still niche in the US. But it's also more than 3x the revenue of MLS and did not have to convince US hockey fans to watch it instead of or addition to better hockey leagues worldwide when it grew to the size it is now. So I think MLS does need to adjust to grow in the US market.
BTW, I never before looked at the Wikipedia list linked above. It's kind of weird to think that the NHL is niche in the US but the fifth biggest league by revenue worldwide. I also was a bit taken aback to see MLS is placed as high as 10th on that list, but when I saw where it was placed among the competition it made sense.
Similar threads
