2011 Divisional Alignments

[twistedchinaman]

I can't seem to find a thread like this anywhere on this board yet, and since it's getting close...maybe it was time for us to talk about Division alignments in 2011.

So what do you guys think? There is zero chance that a 30 game schedule will work -- that would mean an unbalanced schedule. Or is it in the cards with more teams? Personally, I don't mind the home-and-away format, but with more teams and the "single table" idea still a non-starter, the unbalanced schedule seems to be the way to go.

So...what do we do here? Perhaps it is time to rejig the conferences (as opposed to reopening the Central Division, which so far I have yet to be able to figure out a good scheduling formula for this one year, before Montreal crashes the party in 2012):


WESTERN
Vancouver
Seattle
Portland
San Jose
Los Angeles
Chivas
Salt Lake
Colorado
Kansas City (was originally in the West)

EASTERN
Dallas
Houston
Chicago
Columbus
Toronto
DC
Philadelphia
New York
New England


The top two teams from each conference qualifies for the playoffs, followed by a free-for-all for eight slots (10-team playoffs). The playoffs would then go as follows, again divided by conference:

Week 1 (first round, 2 legs): 2s vs. 5s, 3s vs. 4s
Week 2 (semi-finals, 2 legs): Winners of week 1
Week 3 (conference finals, 2 legs): 1s vs. Week 2 winners
Week 4 (MLS Cup, 1 leg): Eastern champ vs. Western champ

SO...that's one idea. Anyone?

[boban]

uhmmm .. how about a 34 game schedule??

[TFCRegina]

How about a single table. The conferences serve no purpose in the current format. Single table, play each team twice. Top 8 qualify, regardless of geographic location.

Simple.

[Blizzard]

How about a single table. The conferences serve no purpose in the current format. Single table, play each team twice. Top 8 qualify, regardless of geographic location.

Simple.

I agree with the single conference league table.

I have mixed feelings about a top eight but heck, what choice is there.

I would love to see a straight knockout league cup that starts at the top of the season and that is spread out through the rest of the year.

[Phil]

Great thread but its not news so moving it to the other forum.

[James Oliphant]

The conferences serve the purpose of ensuring that west or east coast viewers will continue to watch the playoffs. If all teams from the west or east are knocked out in the regular season, the rooting interest on that side of the country dwindles.

At least, that seems to be the mentality of MLS. And while it may be somewhat true, I don't agree with it enough to support this outmoded system once we've expanded beyond our current numbers.

[twistedchinaman]

uhmmm .. how about a 34 game schedule??


I think that's what I said...34 game season to preserve the home-and-away balance.

[twistedchinaman]

But now it begs the question...how are they going to fit a 34 game schedule into an already congested schedule?

- Regular season
- Friendlies
- US Open Cup/Canadian Championship
- CCL
- Playoffs

If we assume:

- Regular season = 34
- US Open Cup = 7 (max. if qualifying is required)
OR
- Canadian Championship = 6 (if current format is preserved with Edmonton added)
- CCL = max. 16 (per calendar year, assuming a team goes all the way to the final the year before, and gets through to the quarters the next)
- Playoffs = 4 (max.)

And not including pre-season and friendlies, a team could be looking at northwards of 70 games a year. And if things start from March and go to November...that's a lot of games.

Maybe that is an argument for an unbalanced schedule, even if it is in an off-topic way...

[TFCRegina]

But now it begs the question...how are they going to fit a 34 game schedule into an already congested schedule?

- Regular season
- Friendlies
- US Open Cup/Canadian Championship
- CCL
- Playoffs

If we assume:

- Regular season = 34
- US Open Cup = 7 (max. if qualifying is required)
OR
- Canadian Championship = 6 (if current format is preserved with Edmonton added)
- CCL = max. 16 (per calendar year, assuming a team goes all the way to the final the year before, and gets through to the quarters the next)
- Playoffs = 4 (max.)

And not including pre-season and friendlies, a team could be looking at northwards of 70 games a year. And if things start from March and go to November...that's a lot of games.

Maybe that is an argument for an unbalanced schedule, even if it is in an off-topic way...


MLS has already pissed in the eye of FIFA dates, so once this world cup is over, we have an extra two weeks in order to schedule games. It also means MLS clubs need to start carrying more roster spots.

[boban]

But now it begs the question...how are they going to fit a 34 game schedule into an already congested schedule?

- Regular season
- Friendlies
- US Open Cup/Canadian Championship
- CCL
- Playoffs

If we assume:

- Regular season = 34
- US Open Cup = 7 (max. if qualifying is required)
OR
- Canadian Championship = 6 (if current format is preserved with Edmonton added)
- CCL = max. 16 (per calendar year, assuming a team goes all the way to the final the year before, and gets through to the quarters the next)
- Playoffs = 4 (max.)

And not including pre-season and friendlies, a team could be looking at northwards of 70 games a year. And if things start from March and go to November...that's a lot of games.

Maybe that is an argument for an unbalanced schedule, even if it is in an off-topic way...
There is no crowded schedule. That's the biggest misconception out there.
How many times do I see 5 teams on bye weeks I can't remember. yes the league is playing but 1/3rd are jerking off at home at almost any given week.
Just play week in week out every team.

[James Oliphant]

There is no crowded schedule. That's the biggest misconception out there.
How many times do I see 5 teams on bye weeks I can't remember. yes the league is playing but 1/3rd are jerking off at home at almost any given week.
Just play week in week out every team.

You don't. You may think you do, but you don't. Between league play, US Open Cup, Canadian Championship and SuperLiga, there are very few down weeks for MLS teams.

Houston, for example, are playing 8 meaningful games in July. Columbus, 7. L.A. and Seattle, 6....

[rocker]

what about doing away with the friendlies? or at least limit it to 1 big friendly each year. Chicago played some polish team recently and attendance wasn't that hot.

[Redpunkfiddle]

Maybe Columbus will explode or sink into the earth before next season and problem will be half solved.

[Carts]

The conferences serve the purpose of ensuring that west or east coast viewers will continue to watch the playoffs. If all teams from the west or east are knocked out in the regular season, the rooting interest on that side of the country dwindles.

At least, that seems to be the mentality of MLS. And while it may be somewhat true, I don't agree with it enough to support this outmoded system once we've expanded beyond our current numbers.

James you're pretty much bang on...

The divisional makeup of North American sports is always "said to be" to reduce travel, as teams play within their divisions more often... In MLS this doesn't matter, as each team plays each team twice (although as the league grows, this will become an issue/reason etc)...

As for now...

Your TV thought, about markets in the East or West being out of the playoffs limits the audience is also correct...

But the real reason is that they want to keep as many teams "in the hunt" as long as possible... In the single table, several teams may be "out of it" with quite a few games left - and that doesn't help...

Much like when Major League Baseball changed a century of tradition and added the 'Wild Card', older fans and traditionalists hated it - but the new era and money people of MLB LOVED IT... It caused a few things, one being more playoff games - which is bigger TV money and attendance. But even more so, it kept teams in the 'playoff hunt' longer...

Nobody cares about a 3rd place team who's 10-games back with games running out - but if that 3rd place team is only 2-games out of the "wild card" suddenly attendance and TV numbers rise...

Its the 'North American' way unfortunately...

I'd love to see a single table - and to be honest, I think one day we might as Garber & the MLS have been fairly decent in walking that fine line of keeping the pure part of the game, while bringing it to the North American audience...

Carts...

[Cashcleaner]

How about a single table. The conferences serve no purpose in the current format. Single table, play each team twice. Top 8 qualify, regardless of geographic location.

Simple.

We have a winner. We'll go one step further and cut down the number of friendlies to just one a season. Boban is right in that there is a misconception that we've got an over-crowded schedule as it is. It can get a little busy, but if you take away the bye weeks and maybe reduce the preseason matches we should be okay. Heck, if we really needed to we could re-work the playoffs as well.

[Beach_Red]

James you're pretty much bang on...

The divisional makeup of North American sports is always "said to be" to reduce travel, as teams play within their divisions more often... In MLS this doesn't matter, as each team plays each team twice (although as the league grows, this will become an issue/reason etc)...

As for now...

Your TV thought, about markets in the East or West being out of the playoffs limits the audience is also correct...

But the real reason is that they want to keep as many teams "in the hunt" as long as possible... In the single table, several teams may be "out of it" with quite a few games left - and that doesn't help...

Much like when Major League Baseball changed a century of tradition and added the 'Wild Card', older fans and traditionalists hated it - but the new era and money people of MLB LOVED IT... It caused a few things, one being more playoff games - which is bigger TV money and attendance. But even more so, it kept teams in the 'playoff hunt' longer...

Nobody cares about a 3rd place team who's 10-games back with games running out - but if that 3rd place team is only 2-games out of the "wild card" suddenly attendance and TV numbers rise...

Its the 'North American' way unfortunately...

I'd love to see a single table - and to be honest, I think one day we might as Garber & the MLS have been fairly decent in walking that fine line of keeping the pure part of the game, while bringing it to the North American audience...

Carts...


It's what happens when you have so many sports competing for viewers. Baseball was losing fans to other sports (including college sports). North Americas sports is just a very, very competitive market and needs to keep as many teams involved as long as possible.

Still, you're right, we may one day see a single table. I think it's interesting that even on the NFL website you get the option to see the standings as a single table (AFC and NFC anyway) and most newspapers show the standings by conference with asteriks to show division leaders. The NHL standings look like a mess that way, so the move to a single table doesn't seem that far off.

[profit89]

How about a single table. The conferences serve no purpose in the current format. Single table, play each team twice. Top 8 qualify, regardless of geographic location.

Simple.

Bingo.

And just add more roster slots for the extra games.

[James17930]

James you're pretty much bang on...

The divisional makeup of North American sports is always "said to be" to reduce travel, as teams play within their divisions more often... In MLS this doesn't matter, as each team plays each team twice (although as the league grows, this will become an issue/reason etc)...



In the regular season, you're right, maybe the whole notion of reduced travel doesn't matter so much, but it does in the play-offs (remember when the Leafs were in the Western Conference? I realize the NHL plays way more games in their playoffs, but still . . .).

Because if they went to a single table, then you could potentially have something like, for example, NE vs. LA in the first round, then say LA wins and they play NY in the second round. That's still a lot of travel for three games in two weeks.

I'm not saying single table isn't a good idea -- I'm just trying to point out what I think their reasoning is (although all the stuff about TV and maintaining interest is certainly part of it to.

Edit:

Ah, well -- actually, with the Conference championship game being a one-off, maybe it's not so bad. But -- if there are no conferences, you'd have to believe that the 'play-off semi-final' would have to be two-legs, because what rationale would they have to put it at one team's stadium if it's not for the 'conference championship'?

[nfitz]

I'd have thought the obvious answer was 3 divisions of 6:

WESTERN
Vancouver
Seattle
Portland
San Jose
Los Angeles
Chivas

CENTRAL
Salt Lake
Colorado
Kansas City
Dallas
Houston
Chicago

EASTERN
Columbus
Toronto
DC
Philadelphia
New York
New England

When Montreal comes, there will be 19 teams, and nothing will be even, so just add it to the Eastern group.

Next year, for 30 games you do home and away against your division (10 games) and then play 10 games with each of the other divisions; so there are 2 teams in each of the other divisions you only play once.

[james]

I agree with the single conference league table.

I have mixed feelings about a top eight but heck, what choice is there.

I would love to see a straight knockout league cup that starts at the top of the season and that is spread out through the rest of the year.

id agree except we kind of already have that, they have the US Open Cup which more or less is the same as the FA Cup in England. Only problem we arent part of it, however i would like to see Canada add a few more teams to the Canadian Championship then it would be good.

Also with the season only running march-November we have to cram in alot of games, with US Open Cup and Canadian Championshp and Concacaf Champions League plus 30 game season with a few friendlies we cant really fit in any more tournaments then we already have.

[Keystone FC]

id agree except we kind of already have that, they have the US Open Cup which more or less is the same as the FA Cup in England. Only problem we arent part of it, however i would like to see Canada add a few more teams to the Canadian Championship then it would be good.
Well, Edmonton FC should be in it next season, and there should be another Quebec club to take the Impacts place once they come into the league in '12. Other than that the NCC should open up to the Canadian USL/PDL clubs and CSL teams to come in as well. Then we have a proper tournament.


Also with the season only running march-November we have to cram in alot of games, with US Open Cup and Canadian Championshp and Concacaf Champions League plus 30 game season with a few friendlies we cant really fit in any more tournaments then we already have.
This is why I don't see the Superliga tournament to stay around much longer. As MLS expands with clubs the season also expands and I can only assume that the playoffs would expand as well. MLS is also growing in acceptance as a legit league in the eyes of soccer world and more and more clubs want to come over and bask in the limelight and buy cheap American jeans. This will add to, like you said, an already tight schedule if MLS tries to keep the league playing within the March-November time frame.

[Oldtimer]

I prefer this, with 4 divisions:

WESTERN
Vancouver
Seattle
Portland
San Jose
Los Angeles
Chivas

CENTRAL
Salt Lake
Colorado
Kansas City
Dallas
Houston
Chicago

EASTERN
Columbus
DC
Philadelphia
New York
New England

NORTHERN
Toronto

Top team from each division gets in plus 4 wild-cards.













:lol:

[Redcoe15]

^^ And even then, our side would find a way to fuck that up.