PDA

View Full Version : Garber confirms 2012 season will have unbalanced schedule



LittleOzzy
11-10-2011, 06:07 PM
MLS Commissioner Don Garber announced on Thursday that despite the addition of a 19th team, the 2012 regular season will not feature any additional matches. “We will a have a 34-game schedule and it will be unbalanced,” Garber said in his 2011 State of the League teleconference.
Garber insisted that a balanced, 36-game schedule for each team would simply ask too much of the league as it continues to balance the regular-season schedule with international dates and other restrictions unique to the league. The Montreal Impact will debut as the 19th team in the league in March.
"It’s simple math: 389 games would almost be impossible for us to execute with the other competitions we’re required to play, the weather issues we have … the challenges in a handful of markets, the FIFA dates," he said. "All the thing we have to do differently in the United States from a competitive standpoint, just the travel impact that exists in our country."
http://www.mlssoccer.com/news/article/2011/11/10/garber-insists-2012-season-will-have-unbalanced-schedule


Not a fan of this decision, makes the supporters shield pretty pointless too.


I wonder what teams we won't be playing next season.

kodiakTFC
11-10-2011, 06:32 PM
I'm not shocked because I knew this was an inevitable reality but I'm curious to see how this is executed. If its merely not playing one team at home and another away, i'll live. If its us playing regional teams more than twice and missing out on many western opponents I'll be livid.

habstfc
11-10-2011, 06:44 PM
http://www.mlssoccer.com/news/article/2011/11/10/garber-insists-2012-season-will-have-unbalanced-schedule


Not a fan of this decision, makes the supporters shield pretty pointless too.


I wonder what teams we won't be playing next season.

L.A. will not play a team in the east with great support. That makes us and Philly. My guess is it will be us that won't see them.

Kooper
11-10-2011, 07:22 PM
L.A. will not play a team in the east with great support. That makes us and Philly. My guess is it will be us that won't see them.

Except in March in the CCL. But I take your point. Someone is going to lose out.

Globetrotter
11-10-2011, 09:37 PM
I think Garber got it spot on. We are not the other leagues. We do things our way. Going from Montreal to Los Angeles is quite different from going from Berlin to Munich, Newcastle to London, or Marseille to Lille. We along with the United States have a massive country, that covers several time zones. We have very different weather systems from place to place, and so many other quirks. I like how we are unique and not copying the old boys simply because of the attitude "that's the way it truly should be". Good for Garber.

werewolf
11-10-2011, 09:46 PM
Sad times. Just like when the league wanted to have breakaway shootouts. Top two teams in the league were in the Pacific timezone and amongst the most-traveled. Hard for the world to take MLS seriously when it tries to copy other NA leagues, though at least with those leagues those are the top leagues in the world.

Ossington Mental Youth
11-10-2011, 09:52 PM
ill see how its arranged before i make up my mind.
My first instinct is to say its stupid especially if it means playing the same teams 4 times in one year or some stupid shit like that. Curious to see who the 20th team is. How do other leagues of that size deal with it?

Whoop
11-10-2011, 10:03 PM
Sad times. Just like when the league wanted to have breakaway shootouts. Top two teams in the league were in the Pacific timezone and amongst the most-traveled. Hard for the world to take MLS seriously when it tries to copy other NA leagues, though at least with those leagues those are the top leagues in the world.

I wouldn't go that far.

I'm sure it's only temporary until they add the 20th team.

And like OMY says, I'll wait and see how it looks.

prizby
11-10-2011, 10:24 PM
L.A. will not play a team in the east with great support. That makes us and Philly. My guess is it will be us that won't see them.

i agree it will be us, but for a different reason (because we in fact do see them for CCL)

Cashcleaner
11-10-2011, 10:53 PM
L.A. will not play a team in the east with great support. That makes us and Philly. My guess is it will be us that won't see them.

That would not surprise me in the least. Obviously, they'll face off against New York and Chicago, but I think you're right in that the "optics" of a match-up will likely determine who plays who. Which, of course, is fucking shameful if true, but there you have it.


I think Garber got it spot on. We are not the other leagues. We do things our way. Going from Montreal to Los Angeles is quite different from going from Berlin to Munich, Newcastle to London, or Marseille to Lille. We along with the United States have a massive country, that covers several time zones. We have very different weather systems from place to place, and so many other quirks. I like how we are unique and not copying the old boys simply because of the attitude "that's the way it truly should be". Good for Garber.

I'm usually share the exact sentiments, but not in this case. Yes, I think MLS supporters do tend to get hung up over concepts and procedures that take place elsewhere (ie: promotion and relegation), but this is one instance where I think the league totally has it wrong. An unbalanced schedule boils down to inherently flawed or unfair competition.

For anyone interested (and it really is a good read), someone on the MLS page Ozzy linked to put up to a document drafted by a Southsider that sorts out a balanced MLS schedule: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1H_0N9a8au-JUovPbFlSwM84jqWoiOqBEwJA5DhHcysg/edit?pli=1

Again, if you're into scheduling and math porn, take a look.

Couchy81
11-10-2011, 11:02 PM
If the NHL and NBA can do it, what's the matter with MLS? Travel can't be an excuse when you play one game a week most weeks.

menefreghista
11-10-2011, 11:13 PM
If the NHL and NBA can do it, what's the matter with MLS? Travel can't be an excuse when you play one game a week most weeks.

The NHL actually doesn't do it.

They use to, but they stopped post-lock out to help out the cheapskate Eastern teams that didn't want to travel as often.

---------------

I can live with an unbalanced schedule I always expected it as the number of franchises increased.

But if they were going to do this, why not drop back to a 30 game season if you have a supposed fixture congestion problem? But I guess the owners enjoyed the extra revenue from 2 more home dates, but couldn't push the league to 36 games?

ag futbol
11-10-2011, 11:27 PM
I'm not shocked because I knew this was an inevitable reality but I'm curious to see how this is executed. If its merely not playing one team at home and another away, i'll live. If its us playing regional teams more than twice and missing out on many western opponents I'll be livid.
Yeah I agree. If we play each of Vancouver and Mtl three times in league play plus another two times in the V's cup, it starts to get damn repetitive and uninteresting.

I'm also tired of the league contriving the schedule in such a way that disadvantages TFC fans and fans of successful teams but rewards franchises that nobody cares about.

Tell Bob Kraft and the rest of those cunts who won't invest in their teams to get it in gear, because we're not going to be pulling that deadweight.

LesH
11-10-2011, 11:53 PM
http://www.mlssoccer.com/news/article/2011/11/10/garber-insists-2012-season-will-have-unbalanced-schedule



IDIOTS! :mad:

Yohan
11-11-2011, 12:12 AM
If the NHL and NBA can do it, what's the matter with MLS? Travel can't be an excuse when you play one game a week most weeks.
NCC, USOC, CCL plus weekday MLS games and most games play 2 games a week.

Ossington Mental Youth
11-11-2011, 12:28 AM
Yeah I agree. If we play each of Vancouver and Mtl three times in league play plus another two times in the V's cup, it starts to get damn repetitive and uninteresting.


me three.
someone did set it up that we only play most people twice then one or two western opponents once or something to make an even 30 game schedule

Ossington Mental Youth
11-11-2011, 12:32 AM
i really dont wanna play Montreal more than twice in league and obviously twice in V cup

Shway
11-11-2011, 01:39 AM
watered down derbies^
and forced rivalries
coming to a field near you

james
11-11-2011, 02:01 AM
I wouldn't go that far.

I'm sure it's only temporary until they add the 20th team.

And like OMY says, I'll wait and see how it looks.

according to garber it wont change anytime soon, the schedule is unbalanced because they do not want to play more then a 34 game season do to travel distance, weather restrictions and World Cup qualifiers. This means the schedule is not going to get balanced out once a 20th team joins, a 20th team joining with a balanced schedule would be 38games, 4 more then they already want.

james
11-11-2011, 02:14 AM
I think Garber got it spot on. We are not the other leagues. We do things our way. Going from Montreal to Los Angeles is quite different from going from Berlin to Munich, Newcastle to London, or Marseille to Lille. We along with the United States have a massive country, that covers several time zones. We have very different weather systems from place to place, and so many other quirks. I like how we are unique and not copying the old boys simply because of the attitude "that's the way it truly should be". Good for Garber.

depends how they do it. If we end up playing teams like Montreal/columbus/NY say 3 or 4 times this season and playing teams like Portland/seattle//LA 1 or even 0 times in the season then its not a cool model, we get sick of seeing the same teams playing so often while not even seeing other teams in the League (much like the NHL) , just because its our own "unique" doesnt mean its better.

james
11-11-2011, 02:20 AM
my question....going from 34 games to 36 to keep a balanced schedule is that really that big of a problem??? other sports in this country play way more games. Also many teams in MLS have played friendlies over the years, why dont they just not have them anymore (i know MLS teams probably want to keep it so its a chance to grab fast cash)

Roogsy
11-11-2011, 03:07 AM
my question....going from 34 games to 36 to keep a balanced schedule is that really that big of a problem??? other sports in this country play way more games. Also many teams in MLS have played friendlies over the years, why dont they just not have them anymore (i know MLS teams probably want to keep it so its a chance to grab fast cash)

Other leagues play 38 games don't they? I would've thought boosting games to 36 would be something the league would like considering the extra revenue. I guess the distance really is a drag and the weather does not cooperate. Still...I'd prefer a balanced schedule. If you eliminate the stupid mid-season "friendlies" that TFC and other teams embark on and make the games meaningful league games, does it change much?

Cashcleaner
11-11-2011, 04:50 AM
Other leagues play 38 games don't they? I would've thought boosting games to 36 would be something the league would like considering the extra revenue. I guess the distance really is a drag and the weather does not cooperate. Still...I'd prefer a balanced schedule. If you eliminate the stupid mid-season "friendlies" that TFC and other teams embark on and make the games meaningful league games, does it change much?

Exactly. And this is what bothers me the most about the whole thing. The league is still going to go the distance to continue playing friendlies and have no intention to reduce the number of post-season matches. A balanced schedule is actually quite achievable, if MLS motivated to do so, of course.

sidvan
11-11-2011, 04:51 AM
lose the mid season all star game

NBS
11-11-2011, 05:01 AM
If it just means losing one game vs two different opponents, I really don't care at all. I understand the league's challenges.

james
11-11-2011, 05:10 AM
i guess the only bad side about having more season games for me is seasons tickets would go up then. And to be honest ive paid enough as it is.

Gazza_55
11-11-2011, 05:47 AM
That would not surprise me in the least. Obviously, they'll face off against New York and Chicago, but I think you're right in that the "optics" of a match-up will likely determine who plays who. Which, of course, is fucking shameful if true, but there you have it.



I'm usually share the exact sentiments, but not in this case. Yes, I think MLS supporters do tend to get hung up over concepts and procedures that take place elsewhere (ie: promotion and relegation), but this is one instance where I think the league totally has it wrong. An unbalanced schedule boils down to inherently flawed or unfair competition.

For anyone interested (and it really is a good read), someone on the MLS page Ozzy linked to put up to a document drafted by a Southsider that sorts out a balanced MLS schedule: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1H_0N9a8au-JUovPbFlSwM84jqWoiOqBEwJA5DhHcysg/edit?pli=1

Again, if you're into scheduling and math porn, take a look.

How is it inherently flawed? Are you saying the NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL and UEFA Champions League are all unfair competitions?

Good research on the Southsider's part. However, he has the season ending on Nov 3rd. With the FIFA date in mid-November the MLS Cup Final would be December 3rd. Given that the team with the most points will host the Cup Final in 2012 that could pose a problem in many cities.

Fort York Redcoat
11-11-2011, 07:17 AM
I think Garber got it spot on. We are not the other leagues. We do things our way. Going from Montreal to Los Angeles is quite different from going from Berlin to Munich, Newcastle to London, or Marseille to Lille. We along with the United States have a massive country, that covers several time zones. We have very different weather systems from place to place, and so many other quirks. I like how we are unique and not copying the old boys simply because of the attitude "that's the way it truly should be". Good for Garber.

No we're copying the rest of NA sports. I see why but tough cookies, supporters don't like the unbalanced schedule. It means an untrue regular season of competition as mentioned early on above and more trivializing the league by pimping fake rivalries. Just because it mirrors our ridiculous playoffs of "East" and "West" doesn't make it alright.

Try harder Garber.

Stugatzo
11-11-2011, 08:05 AM
I'm pissed but I also totally get it.
Look at it this way, when the league continued play during international comps (Euros, World Cup) and the top players go missing, people get pissed.
If they take the breaks and let those players compete for their country, people get pissed and it also backs up the schedule into early spring and late fall. We are not Europe and have unique challenges with weather (meaning we can't play in the winter) and distance.
If it means breaking the backs of the less revenue-rich teams to play two extra games, it could be bad for the league overall.
Plus the CDN teams have to leave room for the NCC and (potentially) CCL games so...
I TOTALLY agree with the sentiments that suggest ditching the "all-star" game to open up the schedule a bit.

London
11-11-2011, 08:09 AM
I realy dont care, win the games put in front of you

ag futbol
11-11-2011, 08:35 AM
No we're copying the rest of NA sports. I see why but tough cookies, supporters don't like the unbalanced schedule. It means an untrue regular season of competition as mentioned early on above and more trivializing the league by pimping fake rivalries. Just because it mirrors our ridiculous playoffs of "East" and "West" doesn't make it alright.

Try harder Garber.
Personally, I don't care if it's 100% balanced but at the least we should move away from a feeling that the schedule is contrived and a pure marketing tool that is unconcerned with the equality of competition.

mowe
11-11-2011, 09:23 AM
The linked fan schedule proposal was a good read and well researched, but I don't think it is viable. Aside from the fact that it would be even more cramped when there are 20 MLS teams, arena availability could be a big issue as the schedule relies on regional travel: Philly has to be available after NY and DC has to be available after that etc. This cramped schedule would be hell for teams participating in more than one competition. There would be tons of midweek games and a team like Seattle already has March CCL, US Open Cup, and July CCL to deal with. By the time postseason rolls around they would be wiped out. Which brings me to my next point; this document does not take into account playoffs. It actually pushes the end of the season back two weeks. The league's best teams (who advance in multiple competitions) would be the most worn out by this point.

An unbalanced schedule is a necessity in MLS if there continue to be playoffs (which are also necessary and not going anywhere). This is not a European league. The distance between teams is FAR greater without even considering regional competition. It is unfair to the players to keep adding games and the quality on the pitch will suffer. But the concerns are valid, more "rivalry" games would suck major balls. Playing a team more than twice in the league is silly and would dilute the meaning of a derby. It would also be unfair: TFC might get to play the expansion Impact three times in a season while Vancouver would have to play Seattle. My solution would be to play every team home and away except for two inter-conference teams who would only be played once. This keeps total games at an optimal 34 and no team plays each other more than twice. When NY #2 joins in a couple years a team wouldn't play 4 of the other 19 teams either home or away. Chosen on a rotational basis, this is not too unreasonable. Plus there is always the possibility of meeting in the playoffs or other competitions.

Bring on the inevitable unbalanced schedule, just don't fuck it up MLS.

Detroit_TFC
11-11-2011, 09:56 AM
I realy dont care, win the games put in front of you

Yep, that's my feeling too.

nascarguy
11-11-2011, 10:03 AM
lose the mid season all star game
yeah it's sould be move to the end of the season

ManUtd4ever
11-11-2011, 10:25 AM
Even with an unbalanced schedule, TFC should theoretically play every team in the league, so it might not be a drastic change at all.

If TFC plays every team in the Eastern Conference twice (home and away), that would require 16-18 matches. If TFC plays every team in the Western Conference once (home or away, alternating ever year), that would require 9-10 matches.

The question is, how will MLS allocate the remaining handful of fixtures?

If MLS wants to try to generate regional rivalries, certain clubs might play each other 3 times to fill out the schedule. For example, TFC might end up playing an extra game against the likes of Montreal, Columbus, New York, DC United, New England, and Philadelphia, with the venue for the additional match against each club alternating between the two teams every season.

T-boy
11-11-2011, 10:39 AM
You just have to think of non MLS fans/non North American's and see how they view this. They already all think that the MLS is a mickey mouse competition, full of north american gimmicks. An unbalanced schedule will just back up this thinking!

The MLS needs to try and appeal to the soccer world, not JUST north american sports fans. Creating an unbalanced schedule just shows that the MLS doesn't care about conforming to the rest of the soccer world...they kind of want to make a sport all of their own!

If it wasn't for TFC's involvment in the MLS, I would just laugh at this news and give myself another reason not to take any notice of this mickey mouse league!

Ossington Mental Youth
11-11-2011, 10:39 AM
watered down derbies^
and forced rivalries
coming to a field near you

yeah a big concern for me

Technorgasm
11-11-2011, 11:06 AM
Give us weekend games away at Chicago, NY adn Crew so we can fucking batter them.

That all I care about.

Redcoe15
11-11-2011, 11:12 AM
Get used to it. This isn't Europe where countries are no bigger than the state of Texas. MLS, covering both the United States and Canada, is a huge, huge area the league has. Travel will always be a main concern both for the players and the league's budgets.

With the league adding more teams in its future - and they will - and east and west conferences being the closest you're going to get to a single table, an unbalanced schedule is going to be the reality.

T-boy
11-11-2011, 12:02 PM
By the time the MLS gets to add 3 or 4 more teams, they should definitely have an East and West league, and not have the teams travel all over the country playing out of league. You could then have a cup competition where you play out of league teams, if you really want to see a west and east team playing each other. That would make more sense than having to play only two thirds of the entire leagues teams.

Can you imagine Montreal NOT playing LA next season, in their first season?! It would just be a farce! In fact, I can't imagine ANY of the east teams being happy about not playing LA at home. And equally I can't imagine any west team not playing NYRB at home!

With an unbalanced schedule, you are going to end up with an east and a west team missing out on the biggest crowd puller of the season!

jimiv
11-14-2011, 06:43 AM
Even with an unbalanced schedule, TFC should theoretically play every team in the league, so it might not be a drastic change at all.

If TFC plays every team in the Eastern Conference twice (home and away), that would require 16-18 matches. If TFC plays every team in the Western Conference once (home or away, alternating ever year), that would require 9-10 matches.

The question is, how will MLS allocate the remaining handful of fixtures?

If MLS wants to try to generate regional rivalries, certain clubs might play each other 3 times to fill out the schedule. For example, TFC might end up playing an extra game against the likes of Montreal, Columbus, New York, DC United, New England, and Philadelphia, with the venue for the additional match against each club alternating between the two teams every season.

Just speculation, however, 34 games could be played if we play everyone in the East three times and those in the West just once.

SilverSamurai
11-15-2011, 01:23 AM
At 1st I thought it was stupid, but at long as TFC plays every team one (be it home or away), I'll live with it.
But this is making me wonder, COULD the league not want more games because this would leave them with some wiggle room for CCL matches or possibly (ok I'm dreaming here) a break for the Gold Cup and World Cup? Even a 1 week break would be SOMETHING!

Although if the league is so concerned with travel why not allow teams to book their own flights? MLSE has their own jet. May as well use it when the leafs and raptors aren't.

james
11-15-2011, 02:46 AM
By the time the MLS gets to add 3 or 4 more teams, they should definitely have an East and West league, and not have the teams travel all over the country playing out of league. You could then have a cup competition where you play out of league teams, if you really want to see a west and east team playing each other. That would make more sense than having to play only two thirds of the entire leagues teams.

Can you imagine Montreal NOT playing LA next season, in their first season?! It would just be a farce! In fact, I can't imagine ANY of the east teams being happy about not playing LA at home. And equally I can't imagine any west team not playing NYRB at home!

With an unbalanced schedule, you are going to end up with an east and a west team missing out on the biggest crowd puller of the season!

i could see them choosing a team that draws good attendence with or wothout LA and Beckham comming to town. And for some reason i could just see them deciding TFC or Montreal will miss out on the LA game, seems TFC missed out on Beckham comming to town just about every year in the passed anyways. While in the west i could see Portland or Vancouver missing out on NY comming to town.

Cashcleaner
11-15-2011, 02:49 AM
How is it inherently flawed? Are you saying the NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL and UEFA Champions League are all unfair competitions?

Good research on the Southsider's part. However, he has the season ending on Nov 3rd. With the FIFA date in mid-November the MLS Cup Final would be December 3rd. Given that the team with the most points will host the Cup Final in 2012 that could pose a problem in many cities.

Yes! Yes I am! Fundamentally, it's the very definition of unfair when one team is arbitrarily given an advantage over another in any way. If we have a situation where Team A faces tougher opponents than Team B over the course of a the season due to an arbitrary decision made by the league, that's the very epitome of an unfair competition. Obviously, we'll never have a situation where we can ensure a 100% level-playing field for teams, but the least we can do is ensure a simple home-and-away schedule against every opposing team.

Oldtimer
11-15-2011, 07:38 AM
Just speculation, however, 34 games could be played if we play everyone in the East three times and those in the West just once.

That would make a lot of sense.

If you're going to have divisions, the emphasis should be on play within the division.

I always thought that MLS was thinking of this for when they got bigger. That would be the only reason to keep divisions when you have a balanced schedule (like we had for 2 years), so that you would have the possibility of doing this in the future.

If you had a 24 team MLS some day (not outside the bounds of possibility), you could eliminate all play between divisions and have each team in each division play each other 3 times. That would result in 33 games.

Then have the east and the west champions meet in the playoffs.

maninb
11-15-2011, 08:35 AM
Sounds like a bunch of whining for nothing...If and when we get 20 teams and have a unbalanced 38 game schedule...THEN you can start whining...

menefreghista
11-15-2011, 08:42 AM
Sounds like a bunch of whining for nothing...If and when we get 20 teams and have a unbalanced 38 game schedule...THEN you can start whining...

But it looks like they won't move past 34 games.

PAOK17
11-15-2011, 09:07 AM
How is it inherently flawed? Are you saying the NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL and UEFA Champions League are all unfair competitions?

Good research on the Southsider's part. However, he has the season ending on Nov 3rd. With the FIFA date in mid-November the MLS Cup Final would be December 3rd. Given that the team with the most points will host the Cup Final in 2012 that could pose a problem in many cities.
Considering how the NFL and MLB give out playoff spots based on winning a regional division without even playing every team equally then yes they are unfair leagues. I'd like to see how the Jays would do if they played in a division that didn't have Boston, New York and Tampa. Sometimes their record is still close to a division winner's in the NL despite playing more games against the toughest teams.

The NHL gives out an automatic top 3 seed for winning your division. I remember Carolina being the only team making it out of the South East with the 7th best record in the East...but still rewarded for beating up on Atlanta, Washington and Florida. Meanwhile the North East would have 4 out 5 teams making it with the 5th in 9th or 10th place. I believe that was 2002. Would have been nice for the Leafs to have had home-ice advantage against Carolina that year. In fact I think the Leafs had the second best record in the East that year and third overall! (Just confirmed it was Boston 101, Philly 97, Carolina 91, Toronto 100...the only team worse in the playoffs was Montreal at 87 only 5 points ahead of 10th placed Buffalo). Yet they were given a fourth seed!

The NBA slightly better than the NHL only grants a top 4 seed and gives the team with the better record home-court advantage. However, the Raptors won the Atlantic division because again they were in the weakest division in the league.

Champion's League is flawed in the sense that you don't play all 32 teams. However, who you end up playing is based on a draw with seedings that are based on past performances. Furthermore the schedule is also drawn.

menefreghista
11-15-2011, 09:25 AM
However, who you end up playing is based on a draw with seedings that are based on past performances. Furthermore the schedule is also drawn.

Seeding is totally unfair. Its designed to make it easier for strong teams to advance and do well.

ag futbol
11-15-2011, 10:31 AM
But hold on a second, I think a lot of people hold up the balanced schedule with a league winner and say "that's equality" but it has flaws as well. Depending on when you face teams within the season there are different things going on. Is someone going to send out their best lineup a day or two ahead of a UCL match? or what about before a league cup final? What about if their season is shot, but they aren't a threat to be relegated? Is that the same test for their opponents as if they had to play them at the beginning of the year?

Personally, I favor a balanced schedule but then a small playoff-type format at the end with maximum four teams in total.

But frankly we're all having this conversation in vein because worldwide everything is trending towards whatever generates the most dollars whether that be playoffs, unbalanced schedules, no relegation, etc... People keep saying no but it continues to pop up.

rocker
11-15-2011, 11:24 AM
yeah, agfutbol is right... the balanced schedule is balanced in theory.. but in practice, teams don't have the same number of days of rest, teams change players during the season, great players get injured and teams don't have to face those guys later etc. It's not perfect.

So we shouldn't say that simply because of balance, it means the schedule is perfect and has no biases. Even the transfer window effects the fairness of the balanced schedule (I'm sure some teams wished they'd faced TFC in the early season rather than later, when TFC got Frings and Koev).

I think people will just have to get over their dislike for the unbalanced schedule.

As a growing league, MLS probably won't stop at 20 teams. I've heard Garber talk about 24-28 teams someday. At that point it's not just feasible to squeeze in 46 to 54 league games (plus CCL, Nutrilite, playoffs, MLS Cup final, days off for FIFA etc). As a result, some unbalanced schedule will have to come into play. It's inevitable.

And I know some people say "ditch the playoffs" but man, even without playoffs, that's an extra 12-20 games on the schedule... the playoffs right now only add a max of what, 5 games to the schedule of a team that played 34? It'll be impossible to find the room for 7-15 more games given weather problems etc.

habstfc
11-15-2011, 11:34 AM
I don't think the balanced schedule would be hard to do as long as every west division trip was paired up with another game. If we play in vancouver then we should also play another game against a western team ex. seattle rsl or whoever. It would ultimately make every west coast trip a mini road trip. This would gretaly cut down on travel which is a big factor. It would also be done with western teams coming east to play. You might not have to do it with every trip out west but it makes sense certainly for the west coast teams, vancouver, seattle, portland, and both L.A. teams. Get rid of the all star game as well.

Yohan
11-15-2011, 11:38 AM
All star game won't be gone. I believe it's part of CBA that players picked for all star game gets a bonus

habstfc
11-15-2011, 11:44 AM
I think people will just have to get over their dislike for the unbalanced schedule.

As a growing league, MLS probably won't stop at 20 teams. I've heard Garber talk about 24-28 teams someday.

Does anyone believe that. Where are they going to put these additional teams? MLS already have about 5 or 6 problematic teams. They need to move some of these franchises or fix them before they think of adding anymore teams. For this league to get better there is inevitably going to be a significant increase in the salary cap, I'm not sure there are any more cities that can support mls to generate enough revenue to keep up with an increased salary cap.

troy1982
11-16-2011, 07:20 AM
Does anyone believe that. Where are they going to put these additional teams? MLS already have about 5 or 6 problematic teams. They need to move some of these franchises or fix them before they think of adding anymore teams. For this league to get better there is inevitably going to be a significant increase in the salary cap, I'm not sure there are any more cities that can support mls to generate enough revenue to keep up with an increased salary cap.

There is about 30 cities over a million people in the U.S. that don't have an MLS team.
Most are larger than Salt Lake who support their MLS team very well.
an MLS team only need to have an attendance of 12-14K to be profitable.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_of_United_States_Metropolitan_Statistical_Ar eas

Oldtimer
11-16-2011, 08:02 AM
All star game won't be gone. I believe it's part of CBA that players picked for all star game gets a bonus

That's correct.

Plus, all-star games are a North American tradition in many different sports. Just because it isn't done elsewhere doesn't mean that we can't have our own organic traditions.

maninb
11-16-2011, 09:05 AM
Does anyone believe that. Where are they going to put these additional teams? MLS already have about 5 or 6 problematic teams. They need to move some of these franchises or fix them before they think of adding anymore teams. For this league to get better there is inevitably going to be a significant increase in the salary cap, I'm not sure there are any more cities that can support mls to generate enough revenue to keep up with an increased salary cap.

Totally agree....When they get to 20 times they should sit tight for 5-7 years and stabilize any troublesome franchises, and move them if necessary...Nothing hurts a league's standard and reputation more than folding franchises...just ask the NHL which has lost at least a dozen teams over the years...

prizby
11-16-2011, 09:51 AM
here is how they can make it more balanced.

Expand the league to 24 teams (2 divisions of 12).

You play every team in your own division twice (22 games)
You play every team in the other division once (12 games)

Voila, 34 games.

Get the 2nd NYC team
Team in Atlanta
Team in Florida
Team in St. Louis
Team in Detroit or Las Vegas

Get off your high horse Garber

sidvan
11-16-2011, 10:02 AM
That's correct.

Plus, all-star games are a North American tradition in many different sports. Just because it isn't done elsewhere doesn't mean that we can't have our own organic traditions.

So put it at the end of the season (a week after the MLS Cup) similar to NFL Pro Bowl. Warm vacation location that the players can bring their families to.

SilverSamurai
11-16-2011, 12:41 PM
So put it at the end of the season (a week after the MLS Cup) similar to NFL Pro Bowl. Warm vacation location that the players can bring their families to.
With MLS salaries the players won't be able to afford to bring their fams.

PAOK17
11-16-2011, 01:33 PM
They also won't be able to bring big name teams either during the European season.

I really hope this doesn't become a 30 team league like every other league in NA. They really need to look into making promotion/relegation financially feasible.

prizby
11-16-2011, 01:58 PM
That's correct.

Plus, all-star games are a North American tradition in many different sports. Just because it isn't done elsewhere doesn't mean that we can't have our own organic traditions.

doesn't the two irish leagues have an allstar game and an allstar u21 game every 2 years or something?

pretty sure the j-league also has an allstar game

pretty sure their are rugby allstar games too

habstfc
11-16-2011, 04:29 PM
There is about 30 cities over a million people in the U.S. that don't have an MLS team.
Most are larger than Salt Lake who support their MLS team very well.
an MLS team only need to have an attendance of 12-14K to be profitable.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_of_United_States_Metropolitan_Statistical_Ar eas

Just because a city has a million people doesn't mean they will support it. Look at dallas, huge city, shit support. Salt lake may have respectable attendance but what about columbus, dallas, chicago, boston, chivas, even when the dust settles in K.C. I'm not conviunced they will be drawing like they did this year with a new rebranding and new satdium. D.C. is having problems now. Like I said in my original point, this league needs to get better and the only way to do that is to increase salaries which means higher ticket prices. Let's get 19 teams in good financial shape first before we think about 24 or 28 teams.

Even if a city has the population you still need an owner willing to shell out 40 million bucks first before you can even think about giving them a franchise.

troy1982
11-16-2011, 11:02 PM
Just because a city has a million people doesn't mean they will support it. Look at dallas, huge city, shit support. Salt lake may have respectable attendance but what about columbus, dallas, chicago, boston, chivas, even when the dust settles in K.C. I'm not conviunced they will be drawing like they did this year with a new rebranding and new satdium. D.C. is having problems now. Like I said in my original point, this league needs to get better and the only way to do that is to increase salaries which means higher ticket prices. Let's get 19 teams in good financial shape first before we think about 24 or 28 teams.

Even if a city has the population you still need an owner willing to shell out 40 million bucks first before you can even think about giving them a franchise.

Dallas problem has everything to do with the location of their stadium, they use to have big crowds when they were more centrally located. Also If you want MLS to fix all it's problem before expanding you would never have gotten, Toronto, Seattle, Portland, Montreal, Philadelphia into the league. I believe any of the top 60 largest metro in North America can support an MLS team once an interested owner is found. Salt Lake is the 53th largest metro by the way.

rocker
11-16-2011, 11:54 PM
Dallas problem has everything to do with the location of their stadium, they use to have big crowds when they were more centrally located. Also If you want MLS to fix all it's problem before expanding you would never have gotten, Toronto, Seattle, Portland, Montreal, Philadelphia into the league. I believe any of the top 60 largest metro in North America can support an MLS team once an interested owner is found. Salt Lake is the 53th largest metro by the way.

Dallas never had big crowds. This is their attendance over the years:

Cotton Bowl:
1996 -- 16011
1997 -- 9678
1998 -- 10947
1999 -- 12211
2000 -- 13102
2001 -- 12574
2002 -- 13122
2003 -- 7906
2004 -- 9088
2005 -- 11189
2006 -- 14982
2007 -- 13024
2008 -- 13024
2009 -- 9883
2010 -- 10617
2011 -- 11954

They moved into Pizza Hut in 2005, but you really wouldn't know the difference by the attendance numbers. Whichever stadium they play in, they've never been one of the better attendance teams in the league.

rocker
11-20-2011, 02:26 PM
New schedule format:

http://www.mlssoccer.com/news/article/2011/11/20/mls-reveals-2012-conference-based-schedule-format

I'm still trying to wrap my head around this... so in the east, teams don't play each other equally. hmmm.. And we won't face 5 western teams at BMO this year? hmmm.

rocker
11-20-2011, 02:34 PM
Also changes to the playoff format:

http://www.mlssoccer.com/news/article/2011/11/20/big-changes-mls-cup-playoffs-format-2012

These are good. Top five in each conference make the playoffs. 4th and 5th place teams in each conference play-in. Then next two rounds are in conference, 2 game series. The final pits the west versus the east, played at the home of the team with the higher # of regular season points. No more neutral site finals.

mowe
11-20-2011, 02:42 PM
New schedule is terrible. West clubs play each other 3 times, play East clubs once. East clubs play seven intra-conference clubs 3 times, the other two twice. Total number of games remains at 34. Which club plays home/away rotates the next year.

I don't see why they couldn't have kept the same format with each team playing two inter-conference clubs once instead of twice for everyone else. Would have been closer to a balanced schedule while staying at 34 games. This format does reduce travel though. TFC would only have to travel west four or five times for the season. Let's see if it has any impact on the quality of play. Also, it seems like Houston is staying in the Eastern conference. I would have thought they would switch back after Montreal joined.

http://www.mlssoccer.com/news/article/2011/11/20/big-changes-mls-cup-playoffs-format-2012

Playoffs format also changed. No more wild cards, top 5 from each conference automatically qualify. #4 hosts #5 in a single-elimination game, and each subsequent round is now two-legged (including conference championship, but not MLS Cup). MLS Cup now hosted by higher seed.

I like the new playoff format, because there was no point in having conferences if a wild card from the West could win the East. This also gives TFC a much better chance to qualify. Only problem is teams from the West could miss the playoffs despite having more points than some East playoff teams.

Yohan
11-20-2011, 03:14 PM
Also, it seems like Houston is staying in the Eastern conference. I would have thought they would switch back after Montreal joined.

Probably to balance out the level of strength of good squads in each conference. Houston back in Western Conference would make the West too strong

habstfc
11-20-2011, 03:23 PM
I like the team with the higher points getting the mls final and the top 5 in each conference making the playoffs, but hate everything else.

Yohan
11-20-2011, 03:32 PM
I like the team with the higher points getting the mls final and the top 5 in each conference making the playoffs, but hate everything else.
bye bye supporter's summit. because who can afford to book time off and flights on a week (maybe two) notice?

Ossington Mental Youth
11-20-2011, 03:36 PM
Hate that we're playing teams in our conference 3 times, gonna be hard to get worked when it feels like we're playing the same teams day and day out, not to mention less exposure to other teams/players, hope this doesn't stick because i can't see it being good for the league

Yohan
11-20-2011, 03:41 PM
why? it's just one more game. now if it was like NHL I'd be more peeved but 3 times a year? meh. not a big deal

Ossington Mental Youth
11-20-2011, 03:49 PM
Means we could play montreal 5 times this year, for me part of watching the game is seeing the diff styles/players coupled with the intensity that accomapnies infrequent meetings between teams. I do like the new play off system and feel rockers suggestion on the other page makes the most sense(playing each conference team twice then playing 6-8 wetern teams once)

prizby
11-20-2011, 04:21 PM
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1H_0N9a8au-JUovPbFlSwM84jqWoiOqBEwJA5DhHcysg/edit?pli=1

how about a balanced schedule with a 30% reduction in travel?

prizby
11-20-2011, 04:22 PM
funny thing is...for a league that was talking about hyping up their rivalries, either dallas or houston won't have a home game against each other

nfitz
11-20-2011, 05:23 PM
bye bye supporter's summit. because who can afford to book time off and flights on a week (maybe two) notice?Surely the supporters summit would work well at the All-star game ... perhaps better given that it might be easier to take vacation in the summer.

Yohan
11-20-2011, 05:29 PM
Surely the supporters summit would work well at the All-star game ... perhaps better given that it might be easier to take vacation in the summer.
not really. having the SS at MLS Cup gives it more... legitimacy IMO. pushing it to MLS Cup makes it seem less important.

All Star game is a gimmick anyways. how many people would travel for AS game? certainly less than people would for MLS Cup

Gazza_55
11-20-2011, 05:57 PM
funny thing is...for a league that was talking about hyping up their rivalries, either dallas or houston won't have a home game against each other

That's because Houston asked to stay in the East until the 20th franchise is awarded - most likely to NYC. So you really can't blame the league for doing what the clubs want.

mowe
11-20-2011, 06:35 PM
That's because Houston asked to stay in the East until the 20th franchise is awarded - most likely to NYC. So you really can't blame the league for doing what the clubs want.

Interesting, you have the source on that? No-brainer for them, they would have been in a wild-card spot if they were in the west.

pdogg
11-20-2011, 09:44 PM
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1H_0N9a8au-JUovPbFlSwM84jqWoiOqBEwJA5DhHcysg/edit?pli=1

how about a balanced schedule with a 30% reduction in travel?

That's a lot of words. I was quickly flipping through the mileage info and something odd caught my eye. They had distances for Toronto and Chivas/Galaxy at 2183 miles, TFC and Portland at 2328, TFC and Vancouver at 2718. That seems a little high - I did a quick check and came up with 2170, 2100, and 2080, respectively

Maybe the Southsider who wrote it is trying to discourage coming out more often :) I'd imagine the flight home seems longer when you've lost another V-Cup! :scarf: