Livestrong Sporting Park to host World Cup Qualifier


LiveStrong Sporting Park in Kansas City will host the World Cup qualifier between the USMNT and Guatemala on Oct. 16th, Sporting Kansas City announced on Monday.

The qualifier will be the second U.S. Men's national team match to be played at LSP, following last year's Gold Cup match between the United States and Guadeloupe.

What do you think of this news? Plan on making the trip to KC for the match? Still hoping Livestrong Sporting Park scores one of the home qualifiers during the Hexagonal Round in 2013?

Share your thoughts below.

This entry was posted in U.S. Men's National Team. Bookmark the permalink.

54 Responses to Livestrong Sporting Park to host World Cup Qualifier

  1. Good to see MLS stadiums hosting WCQ matches. Seeing 14,000 people in a large NFL stadium in Tampa is just sickening to me.

  2. ricecloudnine says:

    Would have thought that Columbus or KC would be in line to host the Mexico match in the Hexagonal. Suppose there isn’t a reason one couldn’t host this round and the hexagonal, but if not, where is there to go? Salt Lake? Colorado?

  3. Kevin_Amold says:

    This can’t be the only game Livestrong gets during qualifying, can it? I thought this would be a possible venue for Mexico during the hex.

  4. Jamie says:

    Seriously. Kind of lame on US Soccer’s part. I get it, notions of ‘fairness’ should be secondary to establishing the best home field advantage, but why use stadiums like Crew Stadium against opponents like Jamaica who you don’t need it for? You could easily establish a very pro-American crowd outside of New York, DC, and Florida. Would have been a great game for a city like Chicago who show great support but sometimes don’t do it in the most partisan way(as could be said about almost every city bar a few). Does this mean no KC or Columbus for Mexico? In 02 and 06 Columbus hosted multiple games but there were fewer SSS’ back then. My guess would be Salt Lake City. Maybe a non-MLS city? Maybe Safeco in Seattle?

  5. Yellow Submarine says:

    In terms of:

    -Quality of the pitch
    -Quality of the stadium
    -Fan Support

    This is our nations best soccer specific stadium and I hope to see more USNT matches there in the future.

    Until Seattle implements permanent grass and Portland increases the size of the pitch, they aren’t in the discussion.

    Notice I didn’t even mention RBA? Not a mistake.

  6. DCUPedro says:

    I think the Mexico match has to be in an MLS market. You need to be able to leverage the supporter’s clubs to sell enough tickets to keep Mexico fans from dominating the park.

    RSL and Colorado are at altitude, which is not where we want to play Mexico.

    This is one case where a DC United SSS would really, really help. There are lots of Salvadoreans, Hondurans who are DCU ticket holders and Barra Brava/La Norte members that would snap up tickets in a heartbeat and root for the USA.

    My guess is they put Mexico in Columbus again. Of course, I’m not sure it really matters that much. I don’t believe that we’ll be able to beat them, even at home.

  7. pd says:

    Liable to be a rocking sell-out pro USA atmosphere. Can’t wait! If it’s so it’s sure to promise future fixtures.

    And I’m beginning to wonder if there is nothing sone poster’s won’t gripe about…

  8. pd says:

    Until/unless they lay grass in I think Seattle will have problems. In all other respects it’s an ideal location.

  9. Jamie says:

    Pretty sure Safeco(where the baseball team plays) is grass. Could be wrong.

  10. Chris says:

    Any chances for USA/Mex in LA or Dallas at Cowboys Stadium? considering location and venues? Thoughts?

  11. fischy says:

    Normally, the October game would be in DC, but it’s a good idea to avoid hosting Guatemala there again. Hopefully, we will have a chance to play in DC later on…

  12. fischy says:

    Jamaica maybe? Or, maybe Canada or Panama in the hexagonal….

  13. Pez says:

    For a friendly, sure… but not in a meaningful game. You don’t really have a home game for the US if you play Mexico in LA or Dallas.

  14. bigprof says:

    Portland fans would buy US tickets quicker then mexican fans can…studies have shown that.

  15. KP1935 says:

    Never say never, but I don’t see that happening in the foreseeable future – a WCQ against Mexico in LA or Dallas. The US is looking for the most remote location that can hopefully give them a homefield advantage. I was in Columbus in 2001, 80-90% pro US, and in 2009, closer to 50-50%. Both wins, why mess with a good thing, but I agree with DCUPedro, Mexico looks impressive right now.

  16. Zach says:

    I have a legit question for Ives, one that ive been holding on to for awhile. Is it still realistic to consider Holden as the great CM he once appeared to be at Bolton? Leading the EPL in tackles and such key areas? Or is he just a forgotten thought. With Holden at that level the U.S could really have a strong trio of Bradley, Jones and Holden and with Donovan and Dempsey on the wings that makes for a very solid midfield i would imagine.

  17. Dudinho says:

    link please because if have a feeling the mexican fans from Seattle would buy up tickets within hours

  18. Gnarls says:

    Hmmm, maybe, but I think BBVA Compass might share that distinction.

  19. Seriously says:

    No, BBVA is one of the nicer stadiums, but it trails RBA and LSP with LSP being far and away the best venue. That place is gorgeous on the outside and inside.

  20. Kejsare says:

    Make it offered exclusively to Timbers STH first, apply the same across most MLS cities. Guaranteed WIN.

  21. pd says:

    Sorry, I was referring to where the Sounders play….

  22. RLW2020 says:

    they should play Mexico in Maine or Idaho.. Think about the Boise Blue Turf..

  23. pd says:

    Or Chicago or New York…

  24. JRP says:

    Best? Pitch? Stadium? Accessibility? Fan Support? Not taking anything away from your statements but they are very subjective. There are at least 5 other competitive stadiums in the US right now. But be a homer. Feel free.

  25. JRP says:

    Rocking! Is that how they do it in KC? Def Leopard style? Where is your one-handed keeper? That I would pay to see.

  26. JRP says:

    Or, maybe, we will just admit that we can’t compete against Mexico right now as they are far superior to the current US squad. We could play them in a KKK clan meeting and still lose by three goals.
    Did you see the Brazil games?

  27. pd says:

    I’m no Ives, but after a 2 year layoff I think it’s a clean slate. Look at how long has taken Onyewu to come back to form. I know they a different players at different positikns, etc., but Holden needs to get into game shape, start and remain injury free until we can even do more than guess at where he in in the depth chart or until it’s more than wishful thinking to think he’s in the running for Brazil. I’m rooting for the guy, but I am still rooting for Onyewu and his recovery is not done.

  28. Edwin in LA says:

    Well the Florida folks stepped up, It’s still a number that leaves the upper bowl empty but 44K+ at Jacksonville for a record breaking attendace for a match in ALL OF THE SOUTHEASTERN Unites States may be a sign that they’ll start supporting the national team better….I think 8K at Philly about a year and a half ago when they played Colombia at recently opened PPL park was a shame, something about outrageous prices on the tickets was brought up and the Philliies in the middle of a playoff series but still…

  29. Edwin in LA says:

    When there’s about 40K fans at Sounders games do you really need proof? Plus when they played Chivas there was a spike in attendance and a slight presence in Goat fans but it was a solid blue and green crowd!

  30. Edwin in LA says:

    Seattle’s only problem is grass and honestly we should use it to our advantage, I know it’s not ideal but players from our national team area lot more used to it than Mexico or other Concacaf teams except maybe Costa Rica….

    Portland’s field is regulation size in fact MANY big name Euro teams, I know for a fact EPL teams have fields similar in size….It is only a couple of yard shorter than the full 115 x 75 fields in width and I think it’s close to 115 but might be 112 or 110….

    People just complain…and as for Houston’s BBVA Compass Stadium, it is FULL size regulation and only 70 meters instead of 75 and there is MORE than enough space to accommodate a USMNT game for 1 week by widening the field 2.5 meters on each side of the posts….

  31. Eurosnob says:

    We can certainly compete against Mexico. You are forgetting the result of the only game they played against each other under Klinsmann regime. Mexico played their A team against essentially a B team from the US, many predicted a 5-0 blowout, but the game ended in a tie and the US clearly outplayed Mexico in the second half.

  32. Yellow Submarine says:

    It’s not a complaint, it’s a fact.

    The lack of matches in Seattle/Portland highlight this.

    I have all the respect in the world for the Pacific Northwest and feel our national team would receive support unlike anywhere in the country there.

    However, what I’ve stated remains true. Whether or not you agree with it is fine but the reality does not lie.

  33. Yellow Submarine says:

    A match in Chicago would be 90% Mexican/10% USA.

    …and that’s coming from a Nats supporter IN Chicago.

  34. Yellow Submarine says:

    Far superior?

    Mexico plays the more attractive soccer but absent of Johnny Bornstein, we win the Gold Cup.

    Additionally, when these two teams play — all bets are off. No matter the individual talent each team has.

  35. hogatroge says:

    The problem is, USSF is two-faced. They want a good venue for US fan support, but they also like the $$$ Mexican fans spend. Livestrong doesn’t have enough seats for those moneygrubbers.

  36. hogatroge says:

    LSP is supposedly nicer, but it seats 4k fewer people.

  37. hogatroge says:

    Those missing yards make a BIG difference. That’s 7.5 feet of area cut out on either side of the 18. That area’s very important when attacking in order to send in crosses. It also gives an opponent a larger percentage of the pitch in which to draw a PK.

    Lengthwise, the missing space cramps the midfield even more. It also gives opponents less space to cross to get into the 18.

    I’m a Dynamo and USMNT fan, and I would like nothing more than the USMNT to play in the Pacific Northwest away from the rabid Central American fans. (Note to USSF… Stay the F away from BBVA unless we’re playing Canada, Jamaica, or some other non-Hispanic team). Until the PNW stadiums have suitable pitch size and surface, however, it’s a no-go.

  38. hogatroge says:

    Draw it out on graph paper to get a visual reference, and you’ll see where I’m coming from.

  39. hogatroge says:

    Mexico had 1/3 of the possession against Brazil.

    Did they look good? Yes.

    Did they frustrate Brazil’s attack? Yes.

    Did they dominate Brazil? No.

    Are they better than the US? Probably, but…

    Is the sky falling? No.

  40. hogatroge says:

    Especially if you put in the right referee.

    Some CONCACAF officials dislike Mexico even more than they do the USA.

  41. Kevin_Amold says:

    Qualifying is a different animal though. Grab cash through friendlies, but when qualifiers come we mean business.

  42. Good Jeremy says:

    Hyperbole much? We’ve dominated in meaningful games outside of Mexico City over the last decade and led 2-0 with our coach who just got fired before an injury forcing Bornstein in.

  43. Yellow Submarine says:

    Nice post and spot on.

  44. Edwin in LA says:

    Yeah YOU are wayyyyy off there IS MORE THAN ENOUGH ROOM at BBVA and if you’re a Dynamo fan than you need to get your eyes adjusted because there’s about 9 or 10 yards of space between the sidelines and the ad boards.

    And since you bring up Portland which is what I had mentioned, not necessarily Seattle I’ll school you on that too….

    Okay 1st of all you logic as to why it’s important to keep a field wider and longer in international matches are duly noted….HOWEVER….the point is that someone, in this case it was Yellowsubmarine, that the pitch size is not big enough in Portland, notice he said Portland had to increase the size of the pitch, so he doesn’t say they should ALSO get grass the way he proposes Seattle should, most of us would say they need grass before they need to increase the pitch size..

    I also brought this up because it sounds just like the player from Chicago I think, who recently complained about the advantage Portland has…which is just dumb compared to other MLS Stadiums.

    Fact is this….for International Matches the WIDTH of the field needs to be a minimum of 70 yards to a maximum of 80 yards….
    Jeld-Wen is 70 yards wide….most places like Wembley, Camp Nou, San Siro and even South Africa’s Soccer City wher the final took place are 75 yards wide….is that not wide enough for you? YOu want the extra 5 yards FIFA’s rule book say it allows? Or would you do something similar to those places???? They can most certainly widen Jeld-Wen by 2.5 yards on each side of the WIDTH of the field meaning the distance from teh posts to the touch lines are expanded by 2.5 yards….there’s MORE than enough room there, and at your teams’s home stadium there’s enough and you’d probably still have about 7 or 8 yards worth of space to run into…

  45. Edwin in LA says:

    You do realize that Jeld-Wen hosted not just World Cup Qualifiers, back in Sept of 97, but also games for 2 different Women’s World Cups??

    Like I told your back up support below, the international matches need to be played in a MINIMUM of 70 yards, which Jeld-Wen has, and MAXIMUM of 80….I’ve yet to find a stadium that goes past 75 yards or 68 meters in width…the stadium you agree is the best in MLS…guess what? It’s 75 yards wide and that like I said is only 2.5 yards wider on each side of the WIDTH….there’s more than enough space at Jeld-Wen to widen it by 2.5 yards…

    Here go to this link:

    link to

    Scroll down to the 9th page and you’ll see the requirement guidelines for International matches and on top of them the ones for general field dimensions….

    Look up places like Wembley, Camp Nou, San Siro, Soccer City (SA 2010 Final and opening game stadium) and you’ll see they are all 75 yards the place where they just played the UEFA Champions League Final…you know the most lucrative tournament in the world, yeah that stadium is 105 meters by 68 meters….which translates to 115 yards and 75 yards wide…

    You see how it’s not really SO FAR as you say? In fact MOST of the best known stadiums usually adhere to the 115 yards by 75 yards wide….

    There’s a youtube video of the game US played vs Costa Rica, it was a 1-0 win with a goal around the 72-75th minute…it was a Tab Ramos scorcher of a long kick….

    Again the SIZE is only a made up obstacle…
    I would agree grass stops them from scheduling in Seattle even tho technically it’s good enough for a WC qualifier..according to FIFA rules…the turf CR played in for years, where we lost 3-1 in 2009 was horrible…and they played there all the time

  46. Edwin in LA says:

    This is just straight laughable…how in the world does the pitch being wider somehow increase the percentage of area in the pitch in which to draw a PK?? lol

    If anything it becomes less as the size of the pitch is increased but despite what you think is done when a field is marked, the goal and penalty area as well as the goal itself STAY THE SAME….lol

    This isn’t Pewee Football or U-9 or U-13 where you increase the size of goals and the over all playing surface gradually as kids get older…

    Goals are ALWAYS 7.32 meters or 8 yards WIDE and 2.44 meters or 8 feet tall…and the space between the goalposts and the penalty area is ALWAYS 16.5 meters or 18 yards it never changes…lol the field size increases but not those dimensions of the goal and penalty area…I think you need to look at a graph, and check this out

    link to

    9th page is where you see the field dimensions and the International matches ones are on the bottom, if you go to the 9th page of the PDF pages not the FIFA rule book pages, you’ll see them. On the 13th you’ll see a diagram with dimensions of all the measurements to lay out a field…and in the 10th page they talk about the penalty box measurements….

  47. really fantastic news , i am ready to go there , i will go and see superb qualifiers on this sporting park , it will really very good news for every sports lover .

  48. away goals says:

    These statements can be true at the same time:

    Mexico are far superior to the usmnt.

    The usmnt can beat mexico in a home qualifier.

  49. 2tone says:

    Not that hard to lay grass over the turf for a qualifying game. So to say the Seattle’s problem is turf is false.

  50. The Imperative Voice says:

    Amen. Our aim should be to create an unfriendly environment with the largest pro-American crowd possible, and all due respect to the SSS phenomenon, the capacities are limited. MLS can reward their SSSs with all star games, we want home field advantage.

    I still think Antigua should be made to travel to California, etc. People suggested LA would be a long flight for European players, but isn’t it offseason? Haven’t they been in camp for weeks anyway? Whereas Antigua has to fly cross country and set up camp way away from the Carribean.

    I actually thought Columbus for Mexico was inspired because it was the cold weather inversion of them making us play at altitude in Azteca.

    No turf!

  51. The Imperative Voice says:

    What? Have you watched one of the fake “ball stops dead” games on the roll out grass? It’s barely soccer, made for TV bull.

  52. Allen23 says:

    My guess for the Hex…

    1. Portland (vs Mexico)
    2. Toyota Park / Soldier Field – Chicago
    3. BBVA Compass – Houston
    4. Home Depot Center – Carson
    5. LP Field – Nashville

  53. ricecloudnine says:

    One of the problems with Portland and/or Seattle hosting (in addition to the turf issue) is the distance from Europe and concern for European players making the long trek.

  54. hogatroge says:

    You must have been drunk when you wrote this, because your reading comprehension doesn’t appear to be working at full capacity. Your mathematical skills also seem to be a bit underdeveloped, so let ME school YOU for a minute.

    The penalty area/18-yd box stays the same size, regardless of the size of the pitch. If the field is 5 yards narrower, that’s 2.5 yards’ worth of area that disappears adjacent to either side of the penalty area. Thus, the relative size of the penalty area increases with smaller pitch size. That’s just a mathematical fact.

    On another point…BBVA Compass Stadium is full size regulation? You don’t say! I’ve only attended every MLS match that’s been held there since it opened! My comments on BBVA had to do with the fact that it’s a horrible place for the USMNT to play since the vast majority of the fans that turn out will be supporting our opponents.

    Moreover, BBVA Compass has a pitch that’s narrow too, by design. It’s only 70 yds wide, just like Jeld-Wen. Unlike Jeld-Wen, there’s space to expand the pitch if necessary. Top notch stadia in the world are 74-75 yds in width. That includes San Siro, Wembley, Santiago Bernabeu, etc.

    You must not have a conception of what 15 feet is. Get a yardstick.

    The USSF and the players prefer this pitch width. Your willful ignorance doesn’t change the fact that shortening the width of the pitch does impact critical areas of the field, primarily for defenders.

    The USSF and the players prefer real grass as well. ’97 WCQ was a long time ago.

    Your points aren’t valid. Stop arguing and go home.