It’s U.S. Open Cup season again, which means it’s also open season for Open Cup reform ideas and lamentations over its lack of popularity.

Like England’s FA Cup, the U.S. Open Cup has a proud history that predates the formation of a viable national league. The biggest difference is that the USA’s viable national league — the old American Soccer League — was only viable for a little more than a decade, so the Open Cup had another long period of giving the only national trophy at stake.

But the Open Cup has had a rocky run through the last 40 years. It suffered an outrageous insult when the NASL (the original, not the new one) ignored it. The pros came back in 1995, with APSL and USISL teams battling for league pride as much as anything else. MLS teams entered the Cup in the league’s first year, with D.C. United winning the “double” of League and Cup in 1996.

So it’s still around, but it’s really a tournament for hard-core fans only. Games at MLS sites usually draw a couple thousand.  The lovingly maintained quasi-official site USOpenCup.com was compelled to change its name to thecup.us for complex reasons.

And so we hear ideas each year — spend more money on marketing, move games in the schedule, etc. Most of these run afoul of a couple of logistical realities:

1. Teams in the PDL and other amateur leagues are often reliant on college talent, and they play a compressed league schedule while those players are available. That leaves little time to play around with scheduling Cup games. (1a. Those who are not in college have jobs.)

2. Many teams are not the primary tenant in their stadiums, again creating difficulties in scheduling. Weekend dates are often unavailable.

3. Where would all this marketing and operational money come from?

Still, the Cup is ripe for tweaking. You may not know this, but MLS teams played qualifiers this week. Real Salt Lake advanced on penalties after a back-and-forth 3-3 draw at San Jose. Wells Thompson scored twice as Colorado beat Kansas City 2-1.

Combined attendance: 3,944.

And who could blame the no-shows? These are play-in games to reach more play-in games to reach the actual tournament. The romance of the Cup is in minnows vs. giants. Not MLS reserves vs. MLS reserves to face more MLS reserves. And don’t claim you’d actually start all your starters in these games if you were the coach. You wouldn’t. Or you wouldn’t have the job.

The best time to play these games might be during the World Cup and other international tournaments. You’ll have MLS teams missing a couple of big-name players who can still field competitive teams. Why not have them play Open Cup games rather than league games? It’ll be something different to go along with a major televised event like the World Cup.

Or, if you somehow believe the NCAA can change, play it in the spring … with college teams facing the pros.

Realistically, the first option is more likely. Get rid of these MLS play-in games. Let the amateurs and lower divisions take their shots at the big boys. Otherwise, it’s just a long, dull MLS event.

Clarification: Technically, these MLS games are not part of the Open Cup itself. These games are set up by the league to determine its entries into the Cup. Maybe a small distinction, but worth making.