Talk:Fort Lauderdale–Tampa Bay rivalry

Fusion-Mutiny

The Fusion and Mutiny played more games than are listed on this page. Their rivalry lasted from 1998-2001. KitHutch (talk) 19:10, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Rowdies vs Miami Toros?

Any thought to expanding this rivalry to include its pre-history, the 1975 and 1976 NASL Seasons when the Rowdies played against the Miami Toros, who would become the the Strikers? If we are including MLS matches, this notion would also seem logical to me. Cheers to all! -Creativewill (talk) 20:05, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Original research

I know there's been a lot of earnest work here, but the premise appears to be entirely original research. It combines information and scores for every team from the two metropolitan areas, whether there was any real connection or not. The original Tampa Bay Rowdies were not related to the Tampa Bay Mutiny or the modern Tampa Bay Rowdies/FC Tampa Bay. The original Fort Lauderdale Strikers/Miami Toros were not related to the second Fort Lauderdale Strikers, the Miami Fusion, or the third Fort Lauderdale Strikers/Miami FC. And of course several of those were named for or played in Miami rather than Fort Lauderdale. I doubt that any source outside of Wikipedia has ever pulled them all together like this. Most of the sources used here are either self-published blogs, or they just give information on individual teams or games; they don't make a claim about an overall rivalry lasting since the 1970s. Unfortunately, this article may need a total reshifting in focus to keep it.--Cúchullain ^t/c 15:29, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Allow me to address your areas of concern about this page:

THE EARLY YEARS: 1975–1993: Perhaps you did NOT read the newspaper accounts cited in this page of the very first meeting between the original clubs in 1975? Four minutes into the match and the players began to brawl! Yup, no rivalry, that. The Toros moved to Ft. Lauderdale in 1977, so from 1975–83, it was always the same two teams playing. The original Rowdies lasted until 1993 and all of the subsequent Striker teams in that era had numerous NASL-era Strikers playing for them. That is part of what carried the rivalry on during those lean ASL/APSL years. The other cited references span the years right up to the two franchises that play under the names Rowdies and Strikers in the NASL of today. Many were published by the local media in the two markets, some were done by the MLS and some by the new NASL. Are these not varied and reliable enough for your tastes? Or are you suggesting that every single article on the rivalry topic over the past 38 years needs to be cited to prove a rivalry existed and continues to exist?

BLOGS AS A SOURCE: A quick count of the sourcing shows 37 of the 91 cited sources are from blogs, etc. Even by the broadest of definitions (i.e. 50% + 1), this is not "most of the sources" as you state. It would be more accurate to say many of those blog citations are used only to verify final scores or attendance figures. Again are you suggesting that every np article on every match be unearthed to confirm the scores? Until the USSF sees fit to publish the recap of every sanctioned match in US history online, resources will remain a hodge-podge. Nearly all of the narrative of the page in question is supported by information published by reliable media outlets. Closer examination will further show that even some of the blog sourced material happens to be previously published np photos and/or articles that were scanned and posted in the blogs.

MLS era: In the MLS years, the Mutiny had several former Rowdies working in their front office staff, one of whom, by the way now happen to work for the current Rowdies. Both they and the Fusion had former NASL-era Rowdies and Strikers as their head coaches at one time or another. The Miami Ultras were originally the Fusion's supporters. They now follow the Strikers. The connections were always there. As a matter of fact, inclusion of the Mutiny/Fusion era was a topic of some debate, but due to the previously mentioned reasons they were kept in.

LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION: As for where the South Florida games were played, your argument on that matter does not hold any water whatsoever. Take a closer look; all but 5 (out of 42!) of the TB/FtL outdoor matches played in SoFL cited were contested in Ft. Lauderdale's Lockhart Stadium. Of those five, two were Toros games in 75 & 76, one was part of a 1992 "all-Florida" APSL doubleheader night in Miami, and one was a 2012 preseason friendly played in Auburndale, Florida. My obvious point being, no matter the team name in any given era nearly all of the SoFL ties in the rivalry have been played in one venue, and presumably before many of the same fans.

EVERY CLUB? HARDLY: The page does not include every pro team from the two markets and/or every league as you imply. SoFL has had numerous soccer clubs: Coral Springs Kicks, Florida Stars, Fort Lauderdale Kicks/Strikers/Florida Strikers to name a few, and Tampa had the Tampa Bay Cyclones and the Tampa Bay Terror among others. But after discussion among the regular contributors to this page, none of those clubs were included in the rivalry's history.

CONECTION TO THE PAST: No one claims that the original Rowdies are DIRECTLY related to the Mutiny, or to the current Rowdies by anything other than location, name, fans, fight song, logo, club culture and employees (insert sarcastic eye-roll here), likewise with the South Florida clubs. This situation is not unlike the fact that many of the New York Mets fans were originally Dodgers or New York Giants fans who were left empty handed when their teams moved west. The only connection was a love of the sport and a dislike of the Yankees, so they adopted the Mets. Even the Mets' colors were chosen as a tribute to the Dodgers and Giants, as was the logo type on their hats ...but I digress. Attend a match of either Florida NASL team and you'll see what I'm referring to first hand. Miami FC (who has played in FtL since 2009) rebranded themselves as the Strikers once they saw the success of Tampa Bay's efforts in recreating a connection to the past for their fans. The revival of the rivalry was merely a natural progression of the rebranding process. Moreover, whether it was done to sell newspapers or the reporters actually felt the palpable connection I don't know. However, both regions' media outlets picked up on it almost immediately, and began to wax nostalgic in the build up to matches. As I mentioned earlier, both the MLS and current NASL websites also felt the need to post articles regarding the rivalry's historical context and are cited on this page.

IN CONCLUSION: The bottom line is this, the rivalry has everything to do with Florida's 40 year heritage of association football at the professional level. It is no different than the Portland-Seattle rivalry in MLS which also happens to have a page of its own that includes NASL-era matches and players. Or perhaps you would suggest to their supporters that that page be taken down for the exact same reasons? Kind regards -Creativewill (talk) 21:13, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the response, Creativewill. What I'm saying is there appear to be no reliable sources that specifically have as their topic a "Fort Lauderdale-Tampa Bay rivalry", let alone that define it as this article does (as continuing through several unrelated teams in different leagues). The sources that do discuss the rivalry appear to be blogs or self-published sources from the teams or fans. We have reliable sources for particular facts or individual games, but they don't support the overall claims that there is a rivalry that has existed through these various teams. This is a form of original research, specifically synthesis of material to advance a claim not directly stated in the sources.--Cúchullain ^t/c 19:08, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

NO RELIABLE SOURCES, YOU'RE KIDDING RIGHT? Since when are the Sun Sentinal, Evening Independent, Lakeland Ledger, Boca Raton News, Miami Herald, St. Pete Times, and NASL.com considered blogs and/or unreliable? Specifically, please review the following articles: http://nasl.com/index.php?id=3&newsid=5582 - http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2001-05-18/sports/0105180140_1_fusion-tampa-bay-mutiny-florida-derby - http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=L0xQAAAAIBAJ&sjid=rlgDAAAAIBAJ&pg=7005,1868793&dq=striker+likers+soccer&hl=en - http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=9cUxAAAAIBAJ&sjid=jo0DAAAAIBAJ&pg=6578,1728637&dq=striker+likers+soccer&hl=en - http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=MH&s_site=miami&p_multi=MH&p_theme=realcities&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_topdoc=1&p_text_direct-0=0EB337A6B03FC5B9&p_field_direct-0=document_id&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&s_trackval=GooglePM - http://www.tampabay.com/sports/soccer/tampa-bay-rowdies-beat-fort-lauderdale-strikers-3-1/1227584 -I forgot to mention, that the current coach Ricky Hill was also an APSL Rowdie who in the lead-up to each tie, talks about how the rivalry was in his playing era. I can tell you that I began working to clean up this page last August after realizing that some of the info was obviously inaccurate. As I began making those corrections with citations, I stumbled upon more information that ran contrary to the wiki-article's content and needed either correcting, verifying or clarifying. In general the article needed polishing, so I polished. Again I will refer you to the Portland-Seattle rivalry page which is almost identical in scope and nature, yet no one seems to be questioning its validity as a derby. The only difference that I can see is that since it's now in MLS, it currently occupies a bigger stage. By the way, it has only been played 84 times to the Florida Derby's 98 meetings. Regards -Creativewill (talk) 15:34, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

This is just what I'm talking about. Of the reliable sources you mention, none are about a rivalry that spans all these years and unrelated teams. This is about the MLS rivalry between the Tampa Bay Mutiny and the Miami Fusion. These from the 70s and 80s[1][2][3] are about games between the original Strikers and Rowdies; they obviously don't say anything about a rivalry decades later. This is about a game between the modern Strikers and Rowdies and only mentions the historical teams in passing. This is the only one that talks about a cross-team rivalry, but its a self-released statement by the league, not an independent, reliable source. And even that doesn't include the MLS teams. None of the sources back up claims the article makes, such as the fact that there's an "ongoing soccer rivalry that currently involves the Fort Lauderdale Strikers and the Tampa Bay Rowdies", that it has "spanned nearly one hundred matches across seven soccer leagues, and involved eight different franchises", that it "can actually trace its roots to June 1975, when the upstart Tampa Bay Rowdies first played the Miami Toros in the original North American Soccer League", etc. This is WP:SYNTHESIS of published material to advance novel claims not stated directly in the sources. The article is going to need some major changes to fix these problems.--Cúchullain ^t/c 02:39, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

• the first part of the statement below was extracted from the Wikipedia:RS that you linked to

Biased or opinionated sources

Wikipedia articles are required to present a neutral point of view. However, reliable sources are not required to be neutral, unbiased, or objective. it also states Sometimes non-neutral sources are good sources for supporting information about the different viewpoints held on a subject.

While a source may be biased, it may be reliable in the specific context. On the other hand, an opinion in a reliable source is still an opinion, rather than a fact. When dealing with a potentially biased source, editors should consider whether the source meets the normal requirements for reliable sources, such as editorial control and a reputation for fact-checking. Editors should also consider whether the bias makes it appropriate to use...

The only bias in the NASL article is that they are talking about teams from their own league, that's it (and that's probably why they barely mentioned one of two the MLS teams in the piece). I assume they didn't make up those stats or those quotes. The stats are facts, the quotes from Hill and Hudson are the opinion of the two former players/coaches, not the league. Of course NASL.com is going to discuss topics germane to their own league, but that's not a bias that would make the story unreliable. Or -by that convoluted logic you are could also suggest that any sports league's coverage of a trade, a game, or a player signing w/in that league would also be biased and there-by unreliable. How is that any different than a bias shown by any local reporter giving his team/local stories more coverage than a stories in another market? Most of the other articles that I mentioned in my last post were written within the context of "the match at hand" and added things to the effect of ...it's no different than when Team A and B played 5 years ago... or back when his father played in the rivalry... or back when the coaches were players in the rivalry, etc.

If as you seem to infer, this rivalry doesn't exist, then why do journalists keep mentioning it? Why do so many reporters include it in their stories when teams from these two regions of Florida play soccer? All of these people (who lived it) sure seem to remember something having happened relative to the game-day intensity level compared to other matches. So either it's an ongoing rivalry from the mid 1970s or 38 years of intensely fought coincidences, in association football, between several different squads from the same two regions of Florida, that keeps getting brought up by media types and former players from the two regions. Finally I'll ask you again to comment about the difference between this page and the alleged (by your standards) Portland-Seattle rivalry, because most everything I read about that derby, seems to stem from the two local media markets or the "biased" MLS. Moreover that page discusses their rivalry in almost the exact same context as FtL-TB (i.e. NASL, ASL, MLS, etc.) including the gaps. Even their opening reads nearly identical to the FtL-TB page. -Creativewill (talk) 08:48, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

The problem with the nasl.com release isn't (necessarily) that it's biased, it's that it's self-published by the league, not an reliable independent, source. Third-party sources are required to show the article's claims can be verified and that the subject is notable enough for inclusion. And of course, the sources need to directly support the material. In this case, the article doesn't support your claims about a "Fort Lauderdale-Tampa Bay rivalry" that spans all these years and includes all these teams (among other things it excludes the MLS rivalry). None of the independent sources discuss do either. Once again, the problem is there are no sources that define the subject as you do or back up some of the central claims.

I don't know anything about the Portland Timbers–Seattle Sounders rivalry article, but at a glance it appears to have multiple sources that do indeed discuss the rivalry as predating the MLS going back through several different incarnations.[4][5] That's what's missing here. Without that, I'm sorry, but it's original research.--Cúchullain ^t/c 06:01, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps I misread this bit:

...reliable sources are not required to be neutral, unbiased, or objective. While a source may be biased, it may be reliable in the specific context... When dealing with a potentially biased source, editors should consider whether the source meets the normal requirements for reliable sources, such as editorial control and a reputation for fact-checking. Does NASL.com have a reputation/history of NOT fact-checking that you're unaware of?

As far as this page being "MY CLAIMS" about a rivalry. I would kindly ask you to remember that I DID NOT create this page. I only improved an existing page by citing sources and correcting errors as I discovered them, as would any other editor. To be honest, I resent such a dismissive and condescending choice of words. All of that not withstanding, am I to understand that you're saying that the NASL.com article needs some sort of all-inclusive reference (rather than the numerous smaller ones it clearly already has) to back up ITS assertion of an ongoing rivalry between the clubs of the 2 regions over time... else it just stands as hyperbole put out by the league's PR machine? As I see it, the numerous np stories that have brought up the rivalry as it pertained to now (whenever "now" was at press time) and its past (before "now" at that particular press time) lend a lot more support to NASL.com's claims than yours. There are youtube videos of people discussing the rivalry, in great detail in terms of then and now. and Alas, since Ken Burns clearly wasn't the director of these, how can they be trusted?

The fact of the matter is that most of your initial claims (like game locations) have been debunked. Your claim that this was ENTIRELY original research is also wrong. I will agree that there is probably no source outside of wikipedia that covers this particular topic in this much detail, but the same could be said of a great many other wikipedia pages (the Portland-Seattle rivalry page comes to mind). As I'm sure you know, because editors build on the work of previous editors, this becomes a defacto aspect of wikipedia in general. It is not unique to the page in question, nor should it indict the page. As for the original research (match results, and attendance, etc.), I would say that the Portland-Seattle rivalry page contains much more original research within the context of your claim. Not only does that page have all of the match results from games between several different UNLINKED teams, from several different UNLINKED leagues, over the EXACT SAME 36 YEAR TIME FRAME as FtL-TB, the Ptld-Sttl page also contains a list of players who have played for both teams. After a quick glance through the web, I found no such list of Timbers-Sounders players anywhere other than at wikipedia.

By the way, here's a different NASL.com article than the one previously discussed, that does talk about the MLS era of the derby.

I'll state it again as plainly as possible: Either plenty of evidence exists in the press/media coverage over time to give testimony to the rivalry's existence, or there's been quite an impressive conspiracy over the course of 36 years to make it appear that a derby exists. -Creativewill (talk) 16:14, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

References

Separate Coastal Cup as its own article

If someone could separate the Coastal Cup (soccer) from this page so it may become a separate article, that would be great. Jacksonville Armada FC is joining the Coastal Cup next season, so it wouldn't make sense to include them on this page.

There is precedence for this, as Portland Timbers–Seattle Sounders rivalry and Cascadia Cup are two separate articles as well.

66.253.133.114 (talk) 00:55, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

I totally agree and I was planning to do that very thing once matches involving Jacksonville actually start up. I just figured I'd wait, otherwise a separate Coastal Cup (soccer) page would look like nothing more than a superfluous repeat of the final portion of this page. Cheers! -Creativewill (talk) 16:57, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

NEW COASTAL CUP PAGE IS UP!!! Please take a look and help to make it even better! cheers. -Creativewill (talk) 17:20, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Fort Lauderdale–Tampa Bay rivalry. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140203153431/http://worldcup.si.com/soccer/mls/news/1999/07/29/mutiny_fusion_ap/ to http://worldcup.si.com/soccer/mls/news/1999/07/29/mutiny_fusion_ap/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:27, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fort Lauderdale–Tampa Bay rivalry. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://archive.is/20140113103826/http://174.129.77.10/sports/soccer/rowdies-beat-rival-strikers-capture-coastal-cup-again/2146985 to http://174.129.77.10/sports/soccer/rowdies-beat-rival-strikers-capture-coastal-cup-again/2146985

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:14, 4 October 2017 (UTC)