Talk:U.S. Open Cup

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the U.S. Open Cup article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Football: American & Canadian Mid‑importance

	Association football portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the American and Canadian soccer task force (assessed as High-importance).

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Dewar Cup Trophy Photo

Hey, can we get a pic of the Dewar Cup trophy here, anybody? Mine was removed cuz of unknown copyright status. I don't know about licensing, I just googled and pasted a pic. Can anyone help? Thanks!da bum 18:30, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I only have black & white photos of the trophy but I can provide the trophy info. A solid silver trophy, with suitable engravings, emblematical of a soccer football, with a player mounted on top and surmounted on a pedestal formed by four Corinthian pillars, standing, in all, thirty-three inches high. It was manufactured by Read and Barton of New York City. Libro0 (talk) 22:32, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

American equivalent

"As it is the top knockout competition open to all U.S. clubs, one could say that it is the American equivalent of England's FA Cup." <--- Nicely done! da bum 18:22, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:ChicagoFire.png

Image:ChicagoFire.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 18:56, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:LAgalaxy.PNG

Image:LAgalaxy.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 08:28, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:LAgalaxy.PNG

Image:LAgalaxy.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 17:29, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

State flags?

Are the state flags really needed? I don't think so.Greecepwns (#1 Red Bulls Supporter) (talk) 19:45, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Use of state flags are strongly discouraged where they are not directly relevant as in this guideline: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (flags). I'm going to remove them. —D. Monack ^talk 19:15, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the removal of state flags, but I have another idea. Over the course of history most of teams that have competed for the Open Cup have been amateur. Would anyone think it appropriate to create a list of wins by state in the same way the other sports tournaments have lists about wins by country? See: Copa Libertadores, UEFA Champions League. JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 19:31, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I definitely would like to see something like that. I personally like having the flags in the first place, but I understand why they were removed. Still, an overall tally of wins/final-match appearances would be nice. CyMoahk (talk) 20:33, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think that is excessive. This is not an international tournament. The FA Cup doesn't have a table of wins by county, so I don't see why the state table adds anything to the article. -- Grant .Alpaugh 21:02, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It appears as though municipal flags are there now, except for Colorado and New York Red Bulls. Could I suggest that, in keeping with the Colorado Rapids precedent, the Foxborough Town Seal be replaced with the Flag of New England —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.96.87.102 (talk) 13:03, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done I've removed them all, per consensus here. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 17:47, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

MLS team in Open Cup

Open Cups won: 4 Chicago Fire, 2 Los Angeles Galaxy, 1 Columbus Crew, 1 FC Dallas, 1 D.C. United, 1 Kansas City Wizards —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.164.248.150 (talk) 13:42, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any reason that the MLS teams are bolded? There doesn't appear to be a functional purpose for this. If anything should be bolded it seems to me that is should be teams or clubs that are still active. JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 19:17, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Name Change National Challenge Cup to US Open Cup

This event was originally named National Challenge Cup. The name appears to have been changed in 1959, as determined by comparing the year-to-year records at two soccer archives, one of which is the official site for the Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup. I changed the text accordingly, as this information seems more accurate and useful than leaving it to say "at some point" the name changed. The previous text was: "The competition dates back to 1914, when it was known as the National Challenge Cup. At some point, the competition became known as the U.S. Open Cup though the date and reasons for the name change are unknown." In researching the cup, I found that the name change went into effect in 1959, with the 1958 tournament being that last time it used the name "National Challenge Cup." The source archives I used were the official web site for the Cup, which changes the name starting with the 1959 page (compare http://www.usopencup.com/4666/1958/index_E.html to http://www.usopencup.com/4666/1959/index_E.html) and the American Soccer History Archives which shows the same change at the same date (compare http://www.sover.net/~spectrum/year/1958.html to http://www.sover.net/~spectrum/year/1959.html). Interestingly average (talk) 20:05, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I want to make a note about sources. The site usopencup.com is not an official site and most of that information is drawn from the American Soccer Archives. Both and for that matter even the hall of fame are web sources and therefore secondary. It is always better to check their primary sources which for the most part are Spalding's Guides and federation yearbooks which offer articles that were direct correspondence with committee officials. The name NCC was used well into the fifties by the federation. However the confusion sets in because newspaper sports writers from the various districts were using the term 'open' as early as the 20's to differentiate from the Amateur Cup. If you use newspapers as the primary sources then there are anywhere from 5 to 10 variations of the name to choose from. The USSF site could be considered primary since they run the tournament however they are lacking in the historical info and that goes for the USASA site as well since they ran it for a period. Libro0 (talk) 18:43, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am removing the statements about the name changes because of questionable sources. I will provide an official source which is indicated in its own title, that being the "1968-1969 Official United States Soccer Football Association Annual". In the 1969 soccer year book the name National Challenge Cup is still used. The year books are full of articles and essays by soocer writers and officials from around the country. As I pointed out above different writers had their own variations which is also evident in the year books for successive years; 70, 71, 72, etc. In fact the full title- U.S. Open National Challenge Cup- also appears. It is clear that now the tournaments is the Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup. My observations with the year books is that 'U.S. Open Cup' became the reduction of choice with 'U.S.' being more favorable than 'National' and 'Open' more than 'Challenge'. Libro0 (talk) 02:29, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not certain how to classify the tournament trophies and awards as far as sourcing is concerned but I will make a note of it here regarding the names used on the hardware. The 1992, 93, and 94 trophies say U.S. National Open Cup. Another medal in posession of the Greek Americans owner said USSF National Challenge Cup. I am not certain what year the medal was but the Greek Americans won in 1985 and 94. Libro0 (talk) 00:27, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FA Open Cup reference

Adding a large amount of text talking about another country's open cup is not appropriate to this article. This article makes no mention of the any of the other open competitions held in the United States, nor does it mention the Coupe de France, Coppa Italia, or the Emperor's Cup. This text, "It may help many readers to understand what this tournament is to say that it is completely analogous to The FA Cup in England, except that it is in the United States, features only American clubs, and is not as well known with soccer fans around the world as The FA Cup." implies that the FA Cup is the only signicant national open cup and no reader could possibly understand the U.S. Open Cup without using the FA Cup as reference. This is not appropriate. Mohrflies (talk) 13:19, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

US Men's Team

I don't see anything in the article that would prohibit the US Men's National team from competing in the cup, so is there actually a rule against it, or does the USMT see this tourney as 'beneath them'? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.16.219.199 (talk) 05:05, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The USOC is open only to USSF affiliated club teams, in 2011 that means MLS, USL, and USASA. USMNT doesn't play in any of those organizations, and are therefore ineligible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.96.87.102 (talk) 13:01, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New Article Needed?

The list of Open Cup finalists is becoming a bit cumbersome on this page. Perhaps someone could start work on an article for the U.S. Open Cup finalists, oriented in the manner most soccer listings of that sort are (most recent on top), and get rid of the list here? Che84 (talk) 07:00, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Upcoming WP:TFA

I thought some of the contributors here might be interested that 2009 Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup Final has been scheduled to appear as Today's Featured Article on the Main Page this coming Sunday, September 26. It will appear on the main page 10 days prior to this year's Open Cup final. Hopefully this will raise awarness of the tournament. --SkotyWA^T_C 01:28, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

I propose that List of U.S. Open Cup broadcasters be merged into Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup. The content of the broadcasters article is 2/3 the same information listed in the main article and 1/3 an outdated chart of broadcast specifics for the event. All of it is unsourced. Chris1834 (talk) 16:56, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup. 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 http://www.webcitation.org/5vDj5rMKE?url=http://www.rsssf.com/tablesu/usacuphist.html to http://www.rsssf.com/tablesu/usacuphist.html

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) 02:00, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 5 April 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: consensus to move the pages as proposed at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 00:12, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

– Although the official title of the cup is "Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup", it is far more common for it to simply be called the "U.S. Open Cup." Secondary news sources like ESPN, SBNation, and many/most others seem to almost exclusively use "U.S. Open Cup." The websites of MLS and USL (which are semi-primary sources since they're affiliated with USSF and with the teams competing) include "Lamar Hunt" sometimes, but still favor the shorter form. Even the USSF's official website for the cup only includes "Lamar Hunt" about half the time. There is no disambiguation reason for "Lamar Hunt" to be included; although there are countless "U.S. Open"s and a "U.S. Cup", there is no other "U.S. Open Cup." Right now, all the target pages that aren't red links are just redirects to the current page titles anyway.

To sum this up (and to explicitly reference WP:NAMINGCRITERIA), removing "Lamar Hunt" from all of these article titles would make them more recognizable, natural, and concise, and would not be any less precise or consistent than the current title is. IagoQnsi (talk) 02:47, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support per WP:NAMINGCRITERIA. Comparable tournaments like the FA Cup, Copa del Rey and Scottish Cup use the short, common form of their name instead of the official name. The Lamar Hunt prefix should remain used within the lead and infoboxes of these articles, but otherwise are fine to trim off. Sounder Bruce 03:03, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Here's another to add: 2011 Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup qualification (NPSL). And qualifications from years before 2013. Dekimasuよ! 03:10, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Ah, good catch; I missed the ones that weren't categorized the same way as the others. I'll list them all:

–IagoQnsi (talk) 04:43, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 12:14, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support all per nom. Giant Snowman 12:20, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support all moves. The common name is U.S. Open Cup. ONR (talk) 19:08, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support all 44 moves per above. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 02:17, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support all per common name and for no conflict with the various other U.S. Open competitions. –BLAIXX 04:35, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

2022 format

The article is inaccurate about the format in 2022. Probably because the MLS season is ending early this year due to the World Cup being during North American/European fall/winter rather than summer, matches between pro teams are taking place during the second week in May rather than not starting until June. 2600:1004:B16A:1A4C:0:50:C134:A501 (talk) 19:23, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you have sources, correct it. NewkirkPlaza (talk) 01:49, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]