PDA

View Full Version : Questions about the MLS setup



PRB
11-13-2009, 07:31 PM
I was talking to my Dad back in the UK this evening and since he doesn't know much about the MLS I was explaining the set-up to him and he found two things pretty strange:

-Why the league leaders do not win the title as the best team/most consistent over a knockout competition for over 50% of the teams at the tail end of a long season?

-Why not promotion and relegation?

I explained that both were because of the North American sports culture with the second especially being because the fan base of a lot of teams is probably not strong enough for them to survive a relegation.

So then I looked at the TFC schedule and noticed that we played each team twice except for NY and Columbus who we played three times. Anyone know why that is?

I like the idea of complete parity in games played against opposition and don't see why the leaders at the end should not be the champions. The playoffs certainly are exciting and give the teams from 7th-10th say, something to go for. But Columbus this year were the best team in the MLS but in the first round against the 8th best Salt Lake they lost two games and are done... They could have had a few injuries and their season of being the best is done in two games?

The promotion and relegation and lack of it is probably understandable but one day it would be a great thing to see. Whether the league expanded enough to become an MLS1 and MLS2 or whether it just linked up with the league below. It would certainly give the fans of teams near the bottom something to be on the edge of their seats about in the final games of the season. Even if it was just one down, one up. I tend to think one of the things that makes soccer great is that fans of any team from any division can aspire to one day see their team go to the top and that any team playing bad can go down the leagues.

Thoughts? Especially regarding the 2 games against all but NY and Columbus!!

flatpicker
11-13-2009, 08:00 PM
Well, MLS does have a league champ at the end of the season.
They win the Supporters' Shield... it just doesn't get the exposure that the MLS Cup gets.

As for the scheduling...
Well, the number of teams in the league is constantly fluctuating during these expansion years.
It's tough to keep the schedule balanced... so the odd games get played against what the league considers "rivals".

As for promotion/relegation...
Sure, it would be exciting, but like you said, it would be tough for relegated teams to survive in the North American soccer climate.
I'm sure there is some clever way of making it work, plenty of options have been discussed in this forum in the past.
But obviously MLS has not seen any reason to move away from the typical North American sports setup.

Cashcleaner
11-13-2009, 08:07 PM
As far as I know, the league just wanted to squeeze in as many games as they could before the weather was too cold for soccer. More games means more cash, so its strictly a business decision, I suppose.

Once we get up to 18-20 teams in the league, I think we'll stick to a proper home-and-away schedule.

flatpicker
11-13-2009, 08:09 PM
^ wasn't there some announcement not long ago that next season was going to be a balanced schedule?
Or did I dream that?

MUFC_Niagara
11-13-2009, 08:54 PM
No, you are right flatpicker. The announcement is below.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/soccerinsider/2009/09/mls_will_take_world_cup_break.html

flatpicker
11-13-2009, 09:01 PM
No, you are right flatpicker. The announcement is below.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/soccerinsider/2009/09/mls_will_take_world_cup_break.html


Which makes me wonder, why the hell are they keeping the conference setup?
I can't think of a single good reason.

MUFC_Niagara
11-13-2009, 09:03 PM
Which makes me wonder, why the hell are they keeping the conference setup?
I can't think of a single good reason.

I think the next thing you'll see is the conference setup scrapped. I agree, there is no point anymore. I say go to a single table and put more emphasis on the league winner. You can still have the top 8 teams play for the MLS cup.

flatpicker
11-13-2009, 09:03 PM
^ exactly.

shaggingscot
11-13-2009, 09:12 PM
Which makes me wonder, why the hell are they keeping the conference setup?
I can't think of a single good reason.

Travel costs more than anything I think, I also think it's to ease the wear and tear on players from all the travel. When you think about the travel our teams put up with compared to teams in Europe it's staggering!

MUFC_Niagara
11-13-2009, 09:15 PM
Travel costs more than anything I think, I also think it's to ease the wear and tear on players from all the travel. When you think about the travel our teams put up with compared to teams in Europe it's staggering!

I was thinking about that too, but, we already travel a lot anyway to the west coast. To ease the burden, you can still have TFC play Chivas on a saturday and LA on the wednesday and then play on the sunday of the following week instead of the saturday. Its not ideal but its a way to make things easier.

shaggingscot
11-13-2009, 09:20 PM
I was thinking about that too, but, we already travel a lot anyway to the west coast. To ease the burden, you can still have TFC play Chivas on a saturday and LA on the wednesday and then play on the sunday of the following week instead of the saturday. Its not ideal but its a way to make things easier.

You're right, on the surface it would appear to be an easy thing to do so there must be a reason they don't. Maybe the players don't want to do it or the league doesn't like paying hotel costs for that length of time?

They also might think the american sports fans need the conference set up? They're so used to it in the other sports, it might confuse the poor bastards? :canada:

MUFC_Niagara
11-13-2009, 09:27 PM
You're right, on the surface it would appear to be an easy thing to do so there must be a reason they don't. Maybe the players don't want to do it or the league doesn't like paying hotel costs for that length of time?

They also might think the american sports fans need the conference set up? They're so used to it in the other sports, it might confuse the poor bastards? :canada:

LOL....ya, we don't want to confuse them. There must be some reason. I wish they would put more emphasis on the league title though. The champion for me is who can endure the strain of the season. Football is a squad game, the true test is which team can most effectively use their players over the course of the season.

shaggingscot
11-13-2009, 09:31 PM
LOL....ya, we don't want to confuse them. There must be some reason. I wish they would put more emphasis on the league title though. The champion for me is who can endure the strain of the season. Football is a squad game, the true test is which team can most effectively use their players over the course of the season.

Preaching to the choir here, single table is the way it should be. I've never been able to come to grips with the whole playoff thing for football. But when in Rome....

Cashcleaner
11-13-2009, 09:32 PM
My predictions:

1) Once we're at 16 teams we'll have a regular 1-home, 1-away schedule.

2) When we get 18 teams we'll drop the conferences and play as a single table.

3) League halts expansion at 20 clubs.

Don't know about you guys, but that's a plan I can get behind.

MUFC_Niagara
11-13-2009, 09:36 PM
My predictions:

1) Once we're at 16 teams we'll have a regular 1-home, 1-away schedule.

2) When we get 18 teams we'll drop the conferences and play as a single table.

3) League halts expansion at 20 clubs.

I agree, and hope it comes to fruition!

Smokecell
11-13-2009, 09:51 PM
My predictions:

1) Once we're at 16 teams we'll have a regular 1-home, 1-away schedule.

2) When we get 18 teams we'll drop the conferences and play as a single table.

3) League halts expansion at 20 clubs.

Don't know about you guys, but that's a plan I can get behind.

1 we already know is true, as for the other 2 i couldn't agree more and the way things are going it's looking like we're in line for exactly that

flatpicker
11-13-2009, 09:54 PM
Travel costs more than anything I think, I also think it's to ease the wear and tear on players from all the travel. When you think about the travel our teams put up with compared to teams in Europe it's staggering!

I must be missing something...
What does travel have to do with anything if the league has a balanced schedule?
Conferences are put in place because of geography.
But teams are meant to play conference rivals more than teams from outside the conference.
And in that situation, travel plays a part in a league's schedule and setup.

But if MLS is using a balanced schedule, then none of that applies.
Correct me if I'm wrong...

james
11-17-2009, 01:08 AM
I must be missing something...
What does travel have to do with anything if the league has a balanced schedule?
Conferences are put in place because of geography.
But teams are meant to play conference rivals more than teams from outside the conference.
And in that situation, travel plays a part in a league's schedule and setup.

But if MLS is using a balanced schedule, then none of that applies.
Correct me if I'm wrong...

they havent been using balancing schedules in the passed, but like they say next year we will have a balanced schedule. So no your not missing anything there is no reason why we have Eastern conference and a Western conference anymore, we are guessing that MLS just thinks every other sporting event like NFL, NHL, NBA and MLB all use East and West and conference so we need do the same as them or else the casual fan wont understand a single conference table. Which is pretty stupid really.

Nazzer
11-17-2009, 01:24 AM
Which makes me wonder, why the hell are they keeping the conference setup?
I can't think of a single good reason.

They keep the conference setup because MLS has expressed a desire to maintain a 30 game schedule. So with conferences it will be easier to pick a way to decide what teams you play more than others.

It's hard enough as it is for the league to fit their schedule around the whether. Adding 8 more regular season games, I don't htink that would work.

Ossington Mental Youth
11-17-2009, 01:37 AM
I think the next thing you'll see is the conference setup scrapped. I agree, there is no point anymore. I say go to a single table and put more emphasis on the league winner. You can still have the top 8 teams play for the MLS cup.

exactly what id like to see, only makes sense

Oldtimer
11-17-2009, 07:55 AM
Keeping conferences for now gives the league more flexibility. If you ended up with, say, 24 teams, you could run each conference independently, with the champions of each conference meeting only in the MLS Cup.

If the league indeed stops at 20 teams, then the conferences can and should be scrapped.

Mark in Ottawa
11-17-2009, 08:13 AM
Conferences serve two purposes... they allow for more games to be scheduled within your conference and therefore cut down on travel costs.

Playing the teams in your conference, closer geographic rivals, is supposed to help generate rivalries between teams and make for a battle for fans hearts in your geographic area.

Promotion/relegation will not work in North America because of one simple fact... expansion fees. Who in his right mind is going to cough up big bucks to step into the top flight with a chance they might get relegated in a few years and devalue the franchise??

Unlike european leagues where you join the "association" at a lower level and prove yourself via successive promotions we have the "money talks" promotion scheme.

flatpicker
11-17-2009, 08:16 AM
Keeping conferences for now gives the league more flexibility. If you ended up with, say, 24 teams, you could run each conference independently, with the champions of each conference meeting only in the MLS Cup.

If the league indeed stops at 20 teams, then the conferences can and should be scrapped.



that has always been my hope (assuming a single table is out of the question).

I see Conferences as true geographical divides.
A set-up more like MLB would be great.
East champ vs West Champ.

But single table would still be my first choice.

Beach_Red
11-17-2009, 08:26 AM
Unlike european leagues where you join the "association" at a lower level and prove yourself via successive promotions we have the "money talks" promotion scheme.


Everyone has the "money talks" promotion scheme - until those top 2-3 richest teams in every league face some realistic chance of relegation I have to say from a North American perpsective it seems like an idea whose time has passed. If ManU or Celtic or (fill in top team here) is never in any real danger of it because they can always simply buy better players, what's the point?

But another reason it isn't in North America is there just simply aren't enough teams nor enough fans who would care. Look at Toronto, if TFC got relegated this city would simply return to the way it was with the Lynx. Other than maybe 4000 people no one else in the city is invested enough in soccer (especially at an even lower level than MLS) to really bother with it.

A few owners are actually spending a lot of money on soccer in North America, but it's still on pretty shaky ground. There's a lot of potential and I hope it works out, but it has a ways to go.

Mark in Ottawa
11-17-2009, 08:32 AM
Everyone has the "money talks" promotion scheme - until those top 2-3 richest teams in every league face some realistic chance of relegation I have to say from a North American perpsective it seems like an idea whose time has passed.
True.
I wrote my comments thinking of the NHL selling of franchises and diluting their product as a sample of North American thinking.

And of course of the Toronto Maple Leafs as an example of a rich club that doesn't have to succeed on the field of play as long as they succeed financially because relegation is not a risk.

Oldtimer
11-17-2009, 08:48 AM
Everyone has the "money talks" promotion scheme - until those top 2-3 richest teams in every league face some realistic chance of relegation I have to say from a North American perpsective it seems like an idea whose time has passed. If ManU or Celtic or (fill in top team here) is never in any real danger of it because they can always simply buy better players, what's the point?


It's hard to argue against this. Man United, Liverpool, Celtic, Inter, Barcelona, Real Madrid, Bayern Munich etc. are closer to North American "franchises" in reality as there is zero chance that any of these clubs would ever have to fight to keep in top flight. It wasn't always that way, but in the modern world with the disparity between the top clubs and the bottom-feeders these clubs are guaranteed to be in the top league.

Beach_Red
11-17-2009, 10:10 AM
True.
I wrote my comments thinking of the NHL selling of franchises and diluting their product as a sample of North American thinking.

And of course of the Toronto Maple Leafs as an example of a rich club that doesn't have to succeed on the field of play as long as they succeed financially because relegation is not a risk.


You're right about the NHL and what happened to them should be a good warning to MLS. The NHL had a good product but, as you say, they diluted it too much and tried to enter markets where there was no grassroots at all.

Lately MLS seems to be doing a better job of expanding at the right rate and only into markets where it looks good like Toronto, Seattle, Philly etc. If they keep going in the right way and increase the salary cap at the right rate MLS will pass the NHL and be a major sport in Norh America soon.

Let's face it, if there was a good 60,000 seat stadium in New York and the owners of say (just for this hypothetical discussion) Liverpool moved the team there, it would sell out every game. The question is how to build up to that level?

Globetrotter
11-17-2009, 10:53 AM
I think Im one of the few that hope that we don't go to the European style single table (no playoff system). We're north american, and I think we need to keep it our style. Just because England (and others) is doing it single table doesn't make it "the right way" or "proper". Keep it in line with all other N.A. sports leagues. This is our soccer league.

I like the East/West (north/south) divide. It adds 2 more (useless) cups or championships to the mix. They don't mean anything, but it's fun and has bragging rights. It's not like we need to have conferences, but that's how we do things HERE and im in favor of keeping it like that.

There's a lot associate to winning the Supporters shield, but it's not glamorous, and there's no hype, but it's still important...and it can still be played for whether we have conferences or not. As far as the playoff system... it's great. It's what we do here. If people would open their eyes, it's also what "they do over there". Name the 3 biggest soccer showcases... world cup, euro, champions league? All playoff style knock out. They could do a single table world cup. They could do a single table euro. but they dont!!!! They could, but it just can't compare to a knockout style playoff system.

It's up to Europe and the world to wake up and realize that what we have here, a playoff system, is great, and MLS is doing it right. They can keep your single table "thrills", I prefer my knockout playoff system. :)

flatpicker
11-17-2009, 12:18 PM
I think Im one of the few that hope that we don't go to the European style single table (no playoff system). We're north american, and I think we need to keep it our style. Just because England (and others) is doing it single table doesn't make it "the right way" or "proper". Keep it in line with all other N.A. sports leagues. This is our soccer league.

I like the East/West (north/south) divide. It adds 2 more (useless) cups or championships to the mix. They don't mean anything, but it's fun and has bragging rights. It's not like we need to have conferences, but that's how we do things HERE and im in favor of keeping it like that.

There's a lot associate to winning the Supporters shield, but it's not glamorous, and there's no hype, but it's still important...and it can still be played for whether we have conferences or not. As far as the playoff system... it's great. It's what we do here. If people would open their eyes, it's also what "they do over there". Name the 3 biggest soccer showcases... world cup, euro, champions league? All playoff style knock out. They could do a single table world cup. They could do a single table euro. but they dont!!!! They could, but it just can't compare to a knockout style playoff system.

It's up to Europe and the world to wake up and realize that what we have here, a playoff system, is great, and MLS is doing it right. They can keep your single table "thrills", I prefer my knockout playoff system. :)

I've used the examples of World Cup etc. to show why conferences and divisions are ok.
But the problem I have is when you use a conference system, yet have a balanced, or near balanced, schedule.
It should be one way or the other.
Conferences should mean that teams play the majority of their games within their own conference.
Right now, that isn't happening.

I'd be happy with either setup... but it needs to be done right... no "in between".

Super
11-17-2009, 12:41 PM
It's up to Europe and the world to wake up and realize that what we have here, a playoff system, is great, and MLS is doing it right. They can keep your single table "thrills", I prefer my knockout playoff system. :)

I disagree completely. The world is not going to wake up to anything. Football is the biggest sport in the world, and our little league is not going to change their minds any more than a 1% political party is going to grab power in the next election. If we want the MLS to be more respected internationally then we should conform to the way the game is played, managed and run internationally. Far too many people choose to ignore the MLS because they simply don't understand our system - nor do they care to invest time in learning it. It's seen as an inferior league, and we should make steps towards earning the respect of the world - which would benefit us not just in TV money and such, but also help us in bringing better players to the MLS.

Beach_Red
11-17-2009, 01:00 PM
^ What may change the most is the structure of leagues. People here have said that most European teams are "clubs" and the teams here are "franchises" but as Oldtimer has pointed out, the big European teams look a lot more like franchises now.

If that's true then they'll likely start acting more like franchises and there'll be a meeting in the middle.

Globetrotter
11-17-2009, 01:50 PM
I disagree completely. The world is not going to wake up to anything. Football is the biggest sport in the world, and our little league is not going to change their minds ...

World soccer = world population in 1609
MLS today = Galileo in 1610

The world can adapt to a novel idea. :)

The arguments for which system is more exciting (single table vs playoff) is COMPLETELY subjective, so no one is right or wrong, but it's my belief that a playoff system is and always will be more exciting than single table.

If you are lucky, a single table might have 5 teams vying for the championship. A playoff, it's anybodies game. RSL #8 this year in the finals. NY (horrible) #8 last year in the finals. It speaks volumes when a supposed "best team in the league" can't compete when it really matters.

Another common factor with almost every single sport on the planet, whether it's baseball, soccer, running, bowling... YOU HAVE TO WIN YOUR LAST GAME. Theoretically, a team could build up a huge lead in a single table only to lose the last 3? 4? 5? 6? games of the season. Exciting stuff that single table.

Maybe playoffs should be a best of three (none of this stupid 2 game away goal none sense). Maybe things like the NCAA march madness or the superbowl are "to easy" because if it's just 1 game, anything can happen and upsets are more likely. No matter how you say it, whether it's the World Cup, Olympics, March madness, Stanley Cup, so on, there is nothing more exciting than a knockout playoff system. Single table can stay on trapped on that island along with their tea and crumpets. :canada:

flatpicker
11-17-2009, 01:55 PM
^ well, don't forget there is a "knock-out" competition in England.... it's called the FA Cup.

So, I would argue that the concept is similar on both sides of the ocean.
But the difference is in the details.

MLS has a regular season, and at the end they award the league champ the Supporters' Shield.
Then they have another round round of "knock-out" games for the MLS Cup.

England has a regular season, and the first place team is also crowned champ.
But their FA Cup happens to invite more than just the top group of teams... everyone gets a crack at it.
So maybe England is actually more exciting because they have more opportunity for big upsets by little teams.

Whereas MLS puts more emphasis on the MLS Cup, England puts more emphasis on league champions.
The differences are only as big as you imagine them to be.

Globetrotter
11-17-2009, 02:04 PM
^sounds good, but they're using a knock out system at least :)

You're right, we do the same thing as in several leagues (a top prize for first overall), but I think there's too much hype in the other parts of the world, or maybe not enough hype for our shield here. No doubt there's significant implications for winning it, but to me it's just not exciting.

Oldtimer
11-17-2009, 02:24 PM
So maybe England is actually more exciting because they have more opportunity for big upsets by little teams.


In theory, that is correct. In practice, the big clubs field their "B" and "C" sides, so there is little glory in an upset.

This thread has become a typical post-season thread:

TFC season over? Check.
Single table discussion? Check
League table vs. playoffs? Check
Promotion/relegation? Check.

Globetrotter
11-17-2009, 02:30 PM
Promotion/relegation? Check.

Hey, nobody is going there, not this thread!

You're right, it's off season. What should we discuss? How many people have DD pictures under their names? How about how long until those people replace it with active players? :rolleyes:

flatpicker
11-17-2009, 02:50 PM
TFC season over? Check.
Single table discussion? Check
League table vs. playoffs? Check
Promotion/relegation? Check.

Oldtimer's participation in this discussion? Check

:D

RicoSuave44
11-18-2009, 01:58 AM
-The USL's future is looking shaky.
-The MLS could soon have a single-table system.
-There seem to be many business people interested in owning new pro footy franchises across North America (Hamilton, Detroit?, Edmonton, St. Louis, Miami, NYC2 to name a few)

My question is: When will MLS buy USL and turn it into MLS2?

How would you organize the switch? What happens to USL2, USLDL? Could 2nd/3rd division teams move up (and vice versa) through consistent success in performance, revenue and attendance?

It makes sense in my mind that this eventually happens. If the USL folded it would leave MLS as the only pro circuit in NA. This would be a bad thing for MLS. Will we see them step in and make an offer if no new big money ownership comes to replace Nike?

Ossington Mental Youth
11-18-2009, 04:27 AM
USL has already been bought, its not going to be sold again.
Several teams have yet to resign with the new USL which may result in a new league (theyve applied to be a tier 2 division in the states). Its not out of the question that it turns into MLS2