3.5.2013: The Chivas USA Debacle

7,100? Looks like 100. Go ahead and count the specks.

3.5.2013: The Chivas USA Debacle
What are the present options for Chivas USA? Relocation, rebranding, or will their new direction bear results?

Chivas USA may have one year.

One year to bring back their fans (if they ever had many), one year under El Chelis with their now Mexican dominated lineup.

But, the decision could've already of been made; as MLS Commissioner Don Garber and his group of owners cannot take the embarrassment of an "announced" 7,000 home opener, in beautiful conditions, and think there is any viability left to Chivas. Or can they?

Chivas USA has been on a downward spiral for the last few years. Their 13,000 average last season was likely buoyed by about 5,000 empty seats counted each game, and their 7,100 home opener is far under the 19,400 average for week 1, click here.

For the first time, this past weekend, Garber actually acknowledged his concerns about low attendance and the general situation at Chivas USA:

"We believe in a second team in Los Angeles. Originally in 2005 we came up with this concept of having a club that was connected with Mexico. It hasn't turned out quite the way we had hoped. I have not seen a final report on what the attendance is down there, but certainly if it doesn't grow beyond what I've heard their ticket sales have been, I would be concerned about that."

Currently for Major League Soccer there's a plethora of more suitable candidates for a team. Leading that race is Orlando City and perhaps San Antonio. But, other places like Charleston, SC, St. Louis, Rochester, etc. are also more deserving.

And it appears that Miami has also re-entered the discussion, although both sides have tempered that talk for now.

In my opinion, Chivas USA will no longer exist in 2014 and will move somewhere with a more organic setup, somewhere where that cities fans can get behind the team. 

Mainly I think that way because the home opener is usually the highest attended game (except if it's cold out), the game all the teams fans have been waiting the last five months for.  And 3,000 showed up in reality. Therefore, it's just going to get worse for Chivas (like 1,000 per game announced) especially if 3-0 defeats continue.

As a result, the best decision by MLS would likely be no more Chivas, even if MLS's group of investors have to buy out Vergara.

But, there's several options:
1. Move Chivas USA to San Diego or some other part of Los Angeles County, give them their own stadium. Or move them to Miami or Arizona, where there is no MLS franchise.
2. Keep them as is and hope Vergara figures something out (good luck with that).
3. Vergara rebrands them to Los Angeles Aztecs or FC Mexico or something, so all Mexican-Americans in Los Angeles can get behind the team (not just Chivas de Guadjalara fans).
4. MLS buys out Vergara and moves the team to Orlando City or elsewhere.

First let's talk about Vergara and the whole 2005 adventure.

I never understood how even Vergara would think that Chivas USA would help the Chivas brand? Because Chivas USA could never play the soccer that Chivas de Guadjalara plays or buy the players that they have. Even Chivas de Guadjalara has trouble today playing how Guadjalara is supposed to play. But, Chivas USA just de-values their brand when their brand is winning trophies.

Further, not even Manchester United USA or Chelsea USA would make sense; because Chelsea fans would likely realize that the person donning the Blues jersey isn't Didier Drogba.

On the other hand, MLS fans are going to see even a Manchester United USA for what it is, phony.

So, how would Chivas USA, who are not at all a worldwide brand or brand anywhere except in Mexico (more specifically Guadjalara) think that this could possibly work?

The best thing Vergara could've done is make the name Los Angeles Aztecs, FC Mexico, or something that all Mexicans can get behind from the beginning. He should've right away distanced the team as much as possible from his Guadjalara product, because that's just smart business. You want your product to be as attractive to as many people or rather Mexicans as possible (fine you have no other Mexican teams to compete with in MLS); They could've went after just Mexican players and Mexican fans successfully, but they killed that by calling the team Chivas USA.

If they would've changed the name to something new and organic, even Los Angeles FC or Los Angeles Latinos FC, and marketed the club as the club for all Mexicans, Latinos in the US in the beginning they might of found success. 

And it wouldn't of been seen as a racist thing, just perhaps a different style of soccer. Like in an indoor soccer tournament, where you always have that one Mexican team. No one gets mad they play together, in their style, and it wouldn't of been racism because, at this point, eight years later everyone would've got over it a long time ago anyways. Especially, if they were attracting 30,000 fans a game. Which I think they could of done, if they would've been Los Angeles Aztecs, with all Mexicans, and signed some Mexican DP's like Marquez and Blanco.

And they could of been a big ticket, big draw item because every time they go on the road, it's like a little USA vs. Mexico. But, even a rebrand under Vergara wouldn't work, another Mexican would have to buy the team or takeover the team and go that route.

There was some promise there, that was killed by the name. Simply Blanco or Marquez are not going to alienate their former Mexican clubs, such as Club America fans, by putting on the Chivas strips in the United States.

It's Not Just Chivas

But, that was a year where branding wise MLS just got it wrong. Real Salt Lake hasn't been a failure, but they could still use a rebrand to Salt Lake FC or Salt Lake City. Come on your in Utah, what does Utah have in common with Spain, Real Sociadad, or Real Madrid?

If your going to rebrand Chivas or any team go simple. You cannot go wrong with a team name with City, FC, or even in Kansas City's case, Sporting Kansas City works because Sporting doesn't sound so ridiculous in the English language. If your going to rebrand in MLS, it might be a good idea to talk to Kansas City because once they were a floundering franchise;  but, since they got rid of the ridiculous Wizards name and moved into their new home, revived the whole operation.

Even the light powdered blue look was something different in MLS. New England Revolution need to have a conversation with Kansas City before they're next on the docket after Chivas.

Overall, the simpler the name, the better. Any city can get behind City or FC, then if you want a team name, let the fans develop it naturally over the next five to ten years. Organic (where the fans play a role in the team) always works better.

Not slapping a Chivas label that works in Guadjalara, on a team in Los Angeles where it makes no sense.

New York May Have Similar Problems Some Day

New York Red Bull  is perhaps another example of questionable branding. It's not bad money having them in Major League Soccer, but they'll never sell out being named after an energy drink.

Especially if they have competition.  For example, Chivas would do a lot better in Los Angeles if Chivas were the only professional soccer show in town (unfortunately for them there's another team in their building that has won consecutive MLS Cups).

Therefore, if the New York Cosmos ever come back and eventually establish a second NY MLS team, they'll be able to get 30 K and Red Bull will eventually flounder to 10K. Red Bull's other soccer franchises (like Salzburg) are not as attractive as their rivals either. That's because it was sort of a forced establishment (like when the Soviet Union would take over Eastern bloc countries and change all the soccer team names, and then force all the best players to play for the army or party team). Yeah the fans didn't keep coming out for their team renamed after the communist party. 

In a different way New York fans continue their previous identity,  they support New York Red Bull but still at times refer to the team as "the Metro" or "Metrostars" because that was the team name before Red Bull was forced onto them.

That franchise may survive if there the only MLS team in town (or if they spend more than any future town rivals). But, you put something more organic as competition in that city, in the New York Cosmos brand, and that makes a decision on who to support tougher for New York fans (even if Red Bull has more star power).

Star power would've helped Chivas. The biggest difference between fans accepting Chivas and fans accepting Red Bull is Red Bull has spent money and put Thierry Henry and some other star power in front of their fans.

Chivas hasn't put much of any star power in front of LA fans in the past eight years.

The More Organic, The Better

But, the more organic team, that has more roots in the city always appears to win out.

It's no secret, in contrast to Red Bull and especially Chivas then, why the Portland Timbers and the Seattle Sounders are the most successful franchises in MLS; because it's a part of the city, it has been for many years, and no one doubts that the Portland team should be known as the Timbers or Seattle's the Sounders.

And even if Chivas is going back to this 90% percent Mexican roster route, most of the players are just Chivas reserves (Mexico isn't that superior of a league that their bottom level reserves can compete, and Chivas won't compete if they're getting the nod over talent such as Bilanos and Agudelo). Also, isn't the entirely Latino roster what Chivas did in the beginning in 2005? How well did that work for them then?

Further, even if it's a completely Mexican roster, there still called Chivas, that's enough for 90 percent of Mexicans in Los Angeles to never want to show up.

What Did He Say?

I do find this El Chelis character amusing though.



The daughters reference in the above link is amusing, where he says that Mexican-American players that are not playing for Chivas USA and play for other MLS teams are like having your daughter sleeping around and you not knowing about it, and then finding them with many kids eight years later?

What the heck? Quite the elaborate metaphor. And that's the only thing that can work for Chivas USA this year, spinning elaborate metaphors and hoping that they say something that sticks and works for Los Angeles Mexican fans.

As in the above video it looks like El Chelis is struggling trying to tell the FutbolMLS guy that "this orange in my hand, is actually a tomato."

Also, I don't get what El Chelis's point is with his comment? So, Vergara wants Mexican-Americans playing for Chivas USA so that they can eventually groom them for Guadalajara and then the Mexican national team? First off they might not be Chivas fans (or Mexico or Mexican league fans), they might just be Mexican-AMERICANS who dream of playing for the United States of America and perhaps the Los Angeles Galaxy or Manchester United someday.

If that's really the new goal of Chivas USA, to get their players to play for Guadjalara and Mexico, how can Garber think that is good for Major League Soccer? Major League Soccer is supposed to develop talent for the US National team, not Mexico's (even if it's just one team).

Therefore, they got to go.

Not only can they not draw attendance at all, their mission is completely at odds with the rest of MLS.