Monday Nov 17's News evolved into Single Table/Relegation/Playoffs discussion

[denime]

It's time MLS jumped on board with the rest of the soccer world, adopted relegation and got rid of its ridiculous playoff system

By GARETH WHEELER

Ten wins in 30 games. A goal differential of minus-6. A team with only one road win in the regular season.
Your 2008 MLS Cup winner? It might just be the New York Red Bulls.
After disposing of Real Salt Lake 1-0 Saturday, the Red Bulls' fairy tale playoff run moves on to the MLS Cup against the Columbus Crew on Sunday.
The Crews' credentials speak for themselves: The top team in the league, finishing six points ahead of and winning four more games than any other team. If Columbus wins the MLS Cup, it will be deserved.
If the Red Bulls are victorious in the final, can we really call them the league's best team?
Not a chance!

Read more (http://www.torontosun.com/sports/soccer/2008/11/17/7434931-sun.html)


Canadian Hume feared the worst
Agence-France Presse

LONDON — Barnsley striker Iain Hume feared he might die after being hospitalised by an elbow from Sheffield United defender Chris Morgan.
Hume, of Brampton, Ont., needed emergency surgery for a fractured skull and internal bleeding after Morgan caught the Canada international with a sickening blow during his Championship club's 2-1 defeat at Oakwell on November 8.
Morgan was only booked for the foul and Hume is furious that referee Andy D'Urso failed to protect him even though he warned the official that Morgan had caught him with his elbow in previous matches.

Read more (http://www.globesports.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081116.wspt-soc-hume-16/GSStory/GlobeSportsSoccer/home)



Your Questions: Toronto FC head coach John Carver

Curious about Toronto FC's prospects for next season? Wondering who was the team's most valuable player or what head coach John Carver thinks of coaching in North America?
Now's your chance to find out.
CBC Sports will be interviewing Carver next week as part of our pre-show coverage of the MLS Cup final and we want your questions.

Ask Questions (http://www.cbc.ca/sports/soccer/story/2008/11/14/questions-mlscup-carver.html)


SUNSHINE (http://www.torontosun.com/sunshinegirl/)

[The Kingpin]

NSFW

There ya go JDG... ;)

A step in the right direction....: http://www.page3.com/index3.shtml#main-image

[StandUpIfYouHateChelsea]

good first article , good read

[The Kingpin]

All that needed to be written in the Sun article re: MLS: "It's time MLS got on board with the rest of the world."

Done and Done.

[keem-o-sabi]

pretty much none of that article is ever going to happen. I would agree the playoffs are silly, but there is never going to be promotion/relegation. Unless MLS decides to have a 2nd division where teams pay just as much to join the league. Do you really think MLS owners are coming in paying (40million now) and want to go to USL1 where the owners have to pay a whopping 750k now?

I never have liked the MLS playoff structure, basically because it allows way too many to get in and shortens the season by 3 weeks, especially now that MLS has fixture congestion with all the things they do, those 3 weeks would come in mighty handy.

[Steve]

All that needed to be written in the Sun article re: MLS: "It's time to rehash arguments that have been going on for years"

Done and Done.

fixed.

Also, that article does nothing but show how little knowlege he has of the MLS financial structure. There will never be relegation/promotion. Full stop. It does not, and will not, make sense to the owners. In other systems, the teams themselves are the entities that have to compete for dollars and viewership. That's great and works well when you have, essentially, no competition. In North America we have sporting competition everywhere. That means it is the leagues that are competing with each other for your revenue, not the teams (especially with how difficult it is to switch teams over here because of the distance). What good would it do for the MLS to adopt relegation? All that would happen is we would risk losing top teams from the biggest markets, and gaining teams from smaller markets. Sounds like a great plan, we didn't need fans and television coverage anyway.

[ensco]

Edwards and Barrett didn't make the USMNT roster for Wednesday's game

http://mnt-ussoccer.blogspot.com/2008/11/us-roster-for-guatemala.html

[The Kingpin]

fixed.

Also, that article does nothing but show how little knowlege he has of the MLS financial structure. There will never be relegation/promotion. Full stop. It does not, and will not, make sense to the owners. In other systems, the teams themselves are the entities that have to compete for dollars and viewership. That's great and works well when you have, essentially, no competition. In North America we have sporting competition everywhere. That means it is the leagues that are competing with each other for your revenue, not the teams (especially with how difficult it is to switch teams over here because of the distance). What good would it do for the MLS to adopt relegation? All that would happen is we would risk losing top teams from the biggest markets, and gaining teams from smaller markets. Sounds like a great plan, we didn't need fans and television coverage anyway.

You basically don't have it now. Everyone is focusing on the relegation element as this is the simplest to argue. Take on the deep argument and consider first the single schedule and how this would first perpetuate a new idea in North American sport and thus eventually lead to the relegation argument once the mentality has developed. Every good strategy has multiple tiers, this could all work in conjunction withy expansion as has been suggested, once at 16 teams you have a single schedule. That's 30 games of one at ho,e and one away against the whole league. Execute this for a period of time and develop a strategy to have a stronger supporters union and relegate the "soccer mom" strategy and eventually you can implement a two tiered system. This system should (could) include a single promotion/relegation element to start and then move to two teams over time.

It would create interest where there is none and it would prove to be a PR boon as sportscasters just may begin to take notice. Or, we can keep the status quo and have poor attendance at useless playoff games and have two eastern cities playing as east and west... ??? My thoughts anyway...

[denime]

You basically don't have it now. Everyone is focusing on the relegation element as this is the simplest to argue. Take on the deep argument and consider first the single schedule and how this would first perpetuate a new idea in North American sport and thus eventually lead to the relegation argument once the mentality has developed. Every good strategy has multiple tiers, this could all work in conjunction withy expansion as has been suggested, once at 16 teams you have a single schedule. That's 30 games of one at home and one away against the whole league. Execute this for a period of time and develop a strategy to have a stronger supporters union and relegate the "soccer mom" strategy and eventually you can implement a two tiered system. This system should (could) include a single promotion/relegation element to start and then move to two teams over time.

It would create interest where there is none and it would prove to be a PR boon as sportscasters just may begin to take notice. Or, we can keep the status quo and have poor attendance at useless playoff games and have two eastern cities playing as east and west... ??? My thoughts anyway...

Not just yours,many fans think like that and honestly it does make sense to go with single table ones MLS hits 16 teams.

Disclaimer: this is my only opinion ;)

[The Kingpin]

Not just yours,many fans think like that and honestly it does make sense to go with single table ones MLS hits 16 teams.

Disclaimer: this is my only opinion ;)

:D

Hey, can you blame me....

Since I've been putting things like this on the conclusion of my posts, it has tremendously reduced the jagged steel shards thrusting into my chest... :drinking:

[Steve]

You basically don't have it now. Everyone is focusing on the relegation element as this is the simplest to argue. Take on the deep argument and consider first the single schedule and how this would first perpetuate a new idea in North American sport and thus eventually lead to the relegation argument once the mentality has developed. Every good strategy has multiple tiers, this could all work in conjunction withy expansion as has been suggested, once at 16 teams you have a single schedule. That's 30 games of one at ho,e and one away against the whole league. Execute this for a period of time and develop a strategy to have a stronger supporters union and relegate the "soccer mom" strategy and eventually you can implement a two tiered system. This system should (could) include a single promotion/relegation element to start and then move to two teams over time.

It would create interest where there is none and it would prove to be a PR boon as sportscasters just may begin to take notice. Or, we can keep the status quo and have poor attendance at useless playoff games and have two eastern cities playing as east and west... ??? My thoughts anyway...

Attendence wasn't as poor as some people are saying (aside from NE, but come on, they play in the middle of nowhere, in the cold, on a weeknight, and their fans skew much more towards the "good day out" fans than "I love the sport" fans, so you can't really be surprised).

Here is the problem with your suggestion though, how many lower tier leagues have ever received support in north america? Now, I'm going to go right off and mention college sports, because that doesn't count at all. That pulls from a completely different pool of players, has specific requirements for those players (going to school there), and pulls from the pride of the university. I just don't see a lower division as something that is going to be hugely supported here. That means the teams that are relegated, are going to take a severe hit in their bottom line. So, since the league as a whole is owned by the owners of the teams, who is going to make the decision to add in relegation? Why pay 40 million dollars to get into a league, build a stadium, etc, only to know you could easily be relegated the next year, lose all of your revenue and go broke? That's a terrible gamble to make, and not one I would see any investors going for.

People seem to argue also that relegation will somehow make the game more relevant to the people used to other varieties of soccer. I think they're viewing the league through the eyes of someone living in Toronto. Sorry, but it really isn't the same thing in most other places. Many of the cities with MLS teams in the states don't have a huge European fanbase. And if they did, why watch MLS when you can watch EPL? Also, in most places in the states the biggest league being watched in the MPL. They don't have relegation in the same way you're talking about either.

Essentially, Americans (and all Northern Americans) want their team to have a shot at the title. It's what we're used to. Having a team that can't even compete for the trophy for a year just doesn't sit well. So, one, I don't see the fans reacting well to relegation/promotion, and two, I don't see how it could ever come to be (with the votes all in the hands of people who have absolutely no reason to vote for it). That's why I keep saying it will never happen.

[Fort York Redcoat]

You basically don't have it now. Everyone is focusing on the relegation element as this is the simplest to argue. Take on the deep argument and consider first the single schedule and how this would first perpetuate a new idea in North American sport and thus eventually lead to the relegation argument once the mentality has developed. Every good strategy has multiple tiers, this could all work in conjunction withy expansion as has been suggested, once at 16 teams you have a single schedule. That's 30 games of one at ho,e and one away against the whole league. Execute this for a period of time and develop a strategy to have a stronger supporters union and relegate the "soccer mom" strategy and eventually you can implement a two tiered system. This system should (could) include a single promotion/relegation element to start and then move to two teams over time.

It would create interest where there is none and it would prove to be a PR boon as sportscasters just may begin to take notice. Or, we can keep the status quo and have poor attendance at useless playoff games and have two eastern cities playing as east and west... ??? My thoughts anyway...

It'll never work here. It's just not how we do things here. I'm sorry I couldn't resist.;)

Why is it that any change is so impossible to so many people here? Like changing a couple a lines on a paper (single table) is just as difficult as restructuring the whole professional sport in NA? Why does dropping the playoff system automatically mean the MLS will be rendered worthless and riddled with USL teams?

World football has different structures from country to country and I don't see any reason to cling to a system that isn't successful when there are so many other successful models.

[Fort York Redcoat]

Attendence wasn't as poor as some people are saying (aside from NE, but come on, they play in the middle of nowhere, in the cold, on a weeknight, and their fans skew much more towards the "good day out" fans than "I love the sport" fans, so you can't really be surprised).

.

How poor does it have to be to see that it doesn't generate extra interest in the teams involved or the league because of how many people move on to one of the more traditional sports here?

[leviticus]

Hey, does anyone know what happened to Jeff Gonsalves? I remember we drafted him and he is even in Football Manager 2008, but haven't seen the kid since then. What about Joseph Lapira? Is he still rummaging through the Norwegian league?

[Mark in Ottawa]

We are talking two types of success here... on field and financial.
They go hand in hand but in North America we have it a bit backwards.
We reward ineptitude on field as long as the $$ keep rolling. This runs the risk of alienating fans but many North American sports leagues seem willing to risk it.

The promotion/relegation system puts the two things in sync. Do well on the field, with the resources you have, and you get promoted and get even more resources.
Mess up with the more resources at your disposal and you get relegated and suffer the resulting downturn in revenue. As a result the management becomes just as responsible as the players do for building and delivering an atmosphere for success.

[flatpicker]

I like the article... I don't know if we are ready for a relegation system yet though.
But certainly, we need to stop rewarding shitty teams and perhaps find something for those lower teams to fight for.

If a relegation system was tried... I think it would be better to take the bottom team(s) from MLS and the top team(s) from USL and have them playoff against each other to determine if relegation even takes place. While relegation is accepted in Europe, I think it is mildly unfair. Who's to say that the bottom team in the Prem is not better than the top team in the Championship? Those teams should play each other at the end of the season to decide whether or not to switch leagues...

[rocker]

Gareth Wheeler states this ....

The possibility of teams being sent down to an inferior league (competition and revenue generation) is the ultimate catalyst for organizational competitiveness.

I think he's living in a fantasy world. For one thing, MLS has competitiveness without relegation. The fact that Columbus went from nearly worst to first in three seasons without the possibility of relegation, or that Houston keeps putting together good teams without any possibility of relegation, says to me that relegation is not the "ultimate catalyst". It's a red herring, in the same way everyone talks about how the "free market" is the solution to all of our problems in society. You don't see teams going from worst to first in three seasons in the EPL. There's less competitiveness when the money reigns as the source of success.

Wheeler says: It's all about competition, survival of the fittest, and scraping and clawing for your territory.

nope Gareth, it's about $$$$$ and spending more than the rest, which has nothing to do with the competition on the field. If people think Chelsea and Man U are at the top because of some "survival of the fittest" and that they "scraped and clawed" their way up, they are blind.

He also says relegation makes all the games meaningful. But in MLS the playoffs made all the games meaningful until near the end for most teams. I watched the DC - Columbus game near the end of the season when DC needed a win to get into the playoffs and that was an intense, meaningful game.

Anyhow, relegation works in a society where the sport in question is #1. It doesn't need any special support. In a society where the sport is way down the list, it could potentially fail.

[ACSertL]

If a relegation system was tried... I think it would be better to take the bottom team(s) from MLS and the top team(s) from USL and have them playoff against each other to determine if relegation even takes place. While relegation is accepted in Europe, I think it is mildly unfair. Who's to say that the bottom team in the Prem is not better than the top team in the Championship? Those teams should play each other at the end of the season to decide whether or not to switch leagues...

Some leagues in Europe do this; Germany and Sweden come to mind immediately. In these cases the 3rd from bottom in the higher division plays the third from top in the lower divison to determine who stays where. So there still are some automatic promotions and relegations but sort of ensures that there is still 'something to play for'.

With all that said I am not sure that the North American market is ready for, or will even want to accept it.

[Billy the kid]

I think the league is probably ecstatic that a team from a large market like New York/New Jersey made the finals. This kind of thing happens in all other sports in North America. The Cinderella team makes the finals after barely making the playoffs.

[Fort York Redcoat]

Gareth Wheeler states this ....

The possibility of teams being sent down to an inferior league (competition and revenue generation) is the ultimate catalyst for organizational competitiveness.

I think he's living in a fantasy world. For one thing, MLS has competitiveness without relegation. The fact that Columbus went from nearly worst to first in three seasons without the possibility of relegation, or that Houston keeps putting together good teams without any possibility of relegation, says to me that relegation is not the "ultimate catalyst". It's a red herring, in the same way everyone talks about how the "free market" is the solution to all of our problems in society. You don't see teams going from worst to first in three seasons in the EPL. There's less competitiveness when the money reigns as the source of success.

Wheeler says: It's all about competition, survival of the fittest, and scraping and clawing for your territory.

nope Gareth, it's about $$$$$ and spending more than the rest, which has nothing to do with the competition on the field. If people think Chelsea and Man U are at the top because of some "survival of the fittest" and that they "scraped and clawed" their way up, they are blind.

He also says relegation makes all the games meaningful. But in MLS the playoffs made all the games meaningful until near the end for most teams. I watched the DC - Columbus game near the end of the season when DC needed a win to get into the playoffs and that was an intense, meaningful game.

Anyhow, relegation works in a society where the sport in question is #1. It doesn't need any special support. In a society where the sport is way down the list, it could potentially fail.

Exactly my point. The games didn't mean anything until the end of the season when it looked like teams could or couldn't sneak into the playoffs.

Also, it's the difference between celebrating obscure places with parity and the Giant killing scenario elsewhere. So with both sytems you can get your "Cinderella story" it's just a different format.

What it comes down to is there isn't that much to risk getting rid of playoffs right now. Just a couple of poorly attended games that may be made up during an all important season.

[Flipityflu]

oh yeah, new expansion teams forced to pay $40 million in fee's are just going to jump at the chance of joining with relegation. get over it. its North America, not the rest of the world. why there is a constant push for a system that will not work in this region is beyond me.

i do agree with the playoff system critique, but once again, this is North America, and things just don't work that way. North Americans are used to and comfortable with the regular season/playoff structure. that being said, i do like the home and away schedule to cut down on games so international games can be accomodated. i figure by the next expansion round we will be ready for this.

[Fort York Redcoat]

oh yeah, new expansion teams forced to pay $40 million in fee's are just going to jump at the chance of joining with relegation. get over it. its North America, not the rest of the world. why there is a constant push for a system that will not work in this region is beyond me.

i do agree with the playoff system critique, but once again, this is North America, and things just don't work that way. North Americans are used to and comfortable with the regular season/playoff structure. that being said, i do like the home and away schedule to cut down on games so international games can be accomodated. i figure by the next expansion round we will be ready for this.

Who cares about international games. This is NA and the league is the only thing worth following. MLS cup means you're the World champions.

It's just the way things are here. Change is NEVER gonna happen.:p

[keem-o-sabi]

We are talking two types of success here... on field and financial.
They go hand in hand but in North America we have it a bit backwards.
We reward ineptitude on field as long as the $$ keep rolling. This runs the risk of alienating fans but many North American sports leagues seem willing to risk it.

The promotion/relegation system puts the two things in sync. Do well on the field, with the resources you have, and you get promoted and get even more resources.
Mess up with the more resources at your disposal and you get relegated and suffer the resulting downturn in revenue. As a result the management becomes just as responsible as the players do for building and delivering an atmosphere for success.

Problem is there aren't the fiscal rewards here if you do well. If you get promoted to MLS you get slightly more coverage than if you were in the USL1/USL2/NPSL/or PDL. TV rights have finally come into MLS after years of paying to be shown (basically infomercials).

The playoff system needs altered, yes, but promotion relegation isn't the answer.

[Toronto_Bhoy]

I'd love to see a relegation format but it would never work here.

Soccer is a minor league sport in North America because it's not engrained in the sporting culture…things like relegation don't resonate with the sports fan here. Nor does it resonate with owners…and they run the leagues here unlike the FA’s in Europe. Owners are about money and in NA you don’t make it playing in the minors…you don’t get sponsorship…you don’t get TV. The business sports model on this side of the Atlantic just doesn’t have room for demotion…it would be the kiss of death.

IMO, the soccer moms (or SMILFs as I call them) are the future of the game in North America! It’s their children that will become the RPB’s of the future. I know its not a popular concept on these pages but its the largest market to mine…the tens of thousands of minor footballers in the GTA who enjoy the beautiful game.

Have a look around people…the “real” football supporter” isn’t interested in the MLS…attendance proves it. How many of us have friends who say, “How can you pay and watch that shit?” In large immigrant rich markets like Chicago, NY and LA it’s just not happening. The cultural populations in those cities should be filling stadia ten times over…but their not. We are an anomaly in Toronto, probably because of our cultural diversity. Growth in the MLS is going to come from those kids who get a “old country” game day experience from watching the likes of Barra Brava and RPB and saying, “Man, that looks like fun!” Our football snob buddies aren’t coming…

[Beach_Red]

I'd love to see a relegation format but it would never work here.

Until the day Celtic get relegated I'll continue to say it doesn't work anymore anywhere. This relegation you people are talking about is years out of date.

(I could have also said Rangers or Liverpool or ManU, but your signature, you know...)

[gmacpheetfc]

North American Football League Cup resembles Carling Cup and goes like this 4 regions ranked from 1-8 featuring teams from the MLS USL1 and USL 2 Where bottom 8 USL 2 teams play preliminaries to see who makes it into the final 32 rankings based on previous years tables.

Next years tournament would set up something like this
1 New York Red Bulls
2 Chivas USA
3 Colorado Rapids
4 Puerto Rico Islanders*
5 Carolina Rail Hawks
6 Minnesota Thunder *
7 Atlanta Silverbacks
8 Cleveland City Stars *

1 Houston Dynamo
2 DC United
3 San Jose Earthquakes
4 Montreal Impact
5 Rochester Rhinos **
6 Miami FC Blues *
7 Crystal Palace Baltimore **
8 Harrisburg City Islanders *

1 Real Salt Lake
2 FC Dallas
3 LA Galaxy
4 Charleston Battery
5 Austin Aztecs FC
6 Portland Timbers
7 Western Mass Pioneers *
8 Bermuda Hogges


1 Columbus Crew
2 Toronto FC
3 Seattle Sounders FC*
4 Vancouver Whitecaps **
5 Charlotte Eagles *
6 Richmond Kickers
7 Wilmington Hammerheads *
8 Pittsburgh Riverhounds**

You may argue will lead to abolishment of US Open Cup but with marketing has potential to become Much Bigger then US Open Cup

[mighty_torontofc_2008]

Garth Wheeler is smoking weed again...Christ promotion and relgation will not work over here. No MLS investor would want to see his club forced down into the USL. So thats a no go from the start. The playoff format they have now is fine and will be better as the league grows. I hope this issue will finally die as it is not going to happen.:mad:

[Azerban]

You may argue will lead to abolishment of US Open Cup but with marketing has potential to become Much Bigger then US Open Cup

yeah i mean it's only the oldest continually running football cup competition in the world



scrap that shit I want the Budweiser Mega Soccer Cup (sponsored by Cutco!)

[Damien]

scrap that shit I want the Budweiser Mega Soccer Cup (sponsored by Cutco!)

http://bp3.blogger.com/_vB_rBiiPsVo/RZUh8cxHaKI/AAAAAAAAAdo/QXjBps9oSHk/s320/bud_cup_logo_small.jpg

[Cashcleaner]

I wonder if we would still be selling out BMO Field every game if TFC ended up playing in a league below MLS...

Somehow, I don't think so. :skep:

Please people, you gotta use your heads on this one. A system of promotion/relegation just won't fly in North America. At least not in the foreseeable future. The geography and economics here are completely different than overseas.

[Azerban]

I wonder if we would still be selling out BMO Field every game if TFC ended up playing in a league below MLS...

Somehow, I don't think so. :skep:

i wonder if the leafs would have won the cup by now if there was the threat they'd be relegated to the AHL




or if the marlies would have

[flatpicker]

I will agree that the relegation system would not be accepted in North America.
Nor do I think it should be implemented here...

But there still needs to be a better playoff system that rewards the top teams.
Simply playing a lower ranked team is not enough.

[Fort York Redcoat]

Garth Wheeler is smoking weed again...Christ promotion and relgation will not work over here. No MLS investor would want to see his club forced down into the USL. So thats a no go from the start. The playoff format they have now is fine and will be better as the league grows. I hope this issue will finally die as it is not going to happen.:mad:

How does the playoffs get better as there are more teams ie less talent in the league? Why would I care about playoffs more if more crappy cities I care nothing for are in it? As long as the playoffs are not any more popular than the league the subject of playoffs won't die.

[Beach_Red]

i wonder if the leafs would have won the cup by now if there was the threat they'd be relegated to the AHL




or if the marlies would have

Well, given that the Leafs send right up to the salary cap, what you're asking is would they have made better choices if there was the theat of relegation? Would they have drafted better, made better trades or hired better coaches/managers?

Well, if there was relegation in the NHL with the owners the league has now, there'd only be teams in Montreal and Toronto, so yeah, I'd say the Leafs would have won a cup by now.

[Azerban]

Well, given that the Leafs send right up to the salary cap, what you're asking is would they have made better choices if there was the theat of relegation? Would they have drafted better, made better trades or hired better coaches/managers?

yes, that is what i am asking

and the answer to my own question is yes, they probably would, and would certainly have a better record year to year even if they didn't end up winning it, because a smaller margin of error means you have to work a lot harder and smarter

[JonO]

i wonder if the leafs would have won the cup by now if there was the threat they'd be relegated to the AHL




or if the marlies would have
Are there any seasons that the Leafs would actaully have been relegated? Relegation only adds incentive not to finish last. Those who annually finish middle of the pack would also have no fear of relegation, not just the winners.

Looking at the EPL, you have your top 4 and then the the battle for relegation. Those in the middle of the pack are likely destined to stay there (for the next few years at least). I like the parity of the MLS which makes it exciting for all teams. Next year any team can be the team to beat (see Columbus).

Although I am sure many will disagree - this has been largely successful in the NFL and really does increase interest in the sport. Heck - even the Lions may have a shot at the playoffs next year ;)

[JonO]

Exactly my point. The games didn't mean anything until the end of the season when it looked like teams could or couldn't sneak into the playoffs.

The exact same can be said for relegation. No-one really knows the importance of any match until the season draws to a conclusion...

[Beach_Red]

yes, that is what i am asking

and the answer to my own question is yes, they probably would, and would certainly have a better record year to year even if they didn't end up winning it, because a smaller margin of error means you have to work a lot harder and smarter

"Probably would." But maybe not, there's no gaurantee.

The best that would have happened is that the Leafs would have become one of the big spending teams because they would have had the fan base to support it. It would have been great for Toronto and Montreal, they would have become the ManU and Liverpool of the last decade.

The rest of the league would have folded.

What I see with relegation is that the top few teams simply spend more money and the gap is widening every year. It works (for now) because supporters of those other teams have decades invested in them and for most of that time those teams had realistic chances at the championship. We'll see how this plays out over the next 10-15 years with that gap getting even wider.

Now, if there was relegation and revenue sharing with a salary cap, that would be something. Let's see if we can talk the billioniare's club into that.

[Hitcho]

I don't see why the promotion/relegation system has to involve USL or any other North American leagues. In any event, those leagues are too fractured to get a tiered system in place (who ranks above who) and the geography would be a nightmare for the lower leagues with less money. The whole idea is way too complicated to even consider.

BUT, there's no reason MLS cannot expand to say, 20 clubs, and then have a double MLS league, one above the other. The top two teams from the "MLS Championship" (or whatever) go up to "MLS Elite" (or whatever) and the bottom two teams go down. You only play teams in your own MLS division on a home and away basis. Otherwise, equality in terms of salary cap, tv coverage etc all remains the same and the draft picks start at the bottom of the lower MLS league and finish with the league winner of "MLS Elite". This will prevent anything like a "top four" problem occuring.

It also removes all the financing and franchise issues since all the teams are still under the MLS umbrella and no-one pays a franchise entry fee and risks getting booted out of MLS. There would be 18 league games a season (9 home and 9 away) so to keep all teams playing each other you could introduce, for example, two cup competitions: one is a genuine "MLS Cup" and is run like the FA Cup but with home and away legs on a straight knock-out basis, and the other is a series of local rivalry cups (because the MLS loves these) based on three or four "local" teams. That way the guaranteed home games each season goes up to around 9 league games, at least one MLS Cup game and probably around three local rival cup games.

It would also get round the "no-one wants to watch a relegated side" issue because each season there would be all these trophies up for grabs:

MLS Elite (overall MLS league title)
MLS Championship (winner of second tier)
MLS Cup
Local Rival Cup

Plus, for the "relegated" teams there is a promotion place to play for on top of the trophies and the need to avoid relegation for those teams in the top league, so interest is maintained throughout the season [EDIT - not to mention an MLS Cup run]. The changing teams in each league and the random MLS Cup draw means you wouldn't just end up playing the same teams over and over each season and the equality issue and draft pick system would prevent serial powerhouses emerging and dominating for decades on end.

Anyone see any serious flaws with this? Because I reckon it could definitely work...

[flatpicker]

^

I actually have thought about that scenario a few times.
I like it... and if there is any expansion in the league then those new teams would start in the MLS "Championship" (as you call it)
- in order to balance out the number of teams in each league they could just alter the number of relegated and promoted teams in a given season.

I think there would be even more incentive if there was a decent cash prize for the winner at the end of the season.
(not sure what there is now)
Whatever it is... they should make the biggest cash prize for the first place team in the league and the next biggest payout would be for the MLS Cup.

They could tack on a sponsor to the trophies (in order to raise money for the payout)...
- like The MLS Elite Pepsi Champions, The Sierra Mist Championship Trophy, The Carlsberg MLS Cup.

[Ossington Mental Youth]

as of right now, under the 'parity for all clubs' rules, this just aint gonna happen.
noone wants to pay 40 million to watch their team get relegated, spose that might be different if you start at the bottom and work your way up.

[flatpicker]

^ if it's all under the MLS umbrella and there is still a level of shared revenue... then it wouldn't be so bad

[Fort York Redcoat]

The exact same can be said for relegation. No-one really knows the importance of any match until the season draws to a conclusion...

But you can't say the season leading to playoffs are treated as seriously.

[flatpicker]

the only thing I find confusing though with the single table format...
Let's say there are two teams tied for first place with one game each to go (on the same night and not against each other)
How do they award the trophy to the winner?
Do they just guess what city to take it to?

[Hitcho]

the only thing I find confusing though with the single table format...
Let's say there are two teams tied for first place with one game each to go (on the same night and not against each other)
How do they award the trophy to the winner?
Do they just guess what city to take it to?

They make a replica and take that to the team considered less likely to win it. AT least, that's what I've seen done in other leagues.

[flatpicker]

^ I thought that might be the case.

[Toronto_Bhoy]

Until the day Celtic get relegated I'll continue to say it doesn't work anymore anywhere. This relegation you people are talking about is years out of date.

(I could have also said Rangers or Liverpool or ManU, but your signature, you know...)

Your kidding right? You don't understand the significance of relegation and promotion???

Relegation in Europe is about giving clubs and supporters the hope and opportunity…for the strong and worthy to be promoted and the weak to be demoted…its not really that difficult to understand. It’s survival of the fittest. Sure teams of substance need not worry but for the rest its game on!!!

IMO, the most compelling competition in football is the promotion from the CCC to the EPL…the drama is unparallelled in all of sport. It is absolutely brilliant…so much at stake…money…prestige…a payout of $120 million!!!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6616459.stm

I don’t follow other leagues close enough to know what’s happening at the bottom of the table and in Scotland the prize isn’t worthy of the crown, there’s no money…other than Old Firm pay days.

Relegation offers a perspective of European sporting culture that North American's have great difficulty in grasping…hence your comment…it does work and thousands of supporters throughout Europe embrace it every May…hope springs eternal…

[Beach_Red]

Your kidding right? You don't understand the significance of relegation and promotion???

Relegation in Europe is about giving clubs and supporters the hope and opportunity…for the strong and worthy to be promoted and the weak to be demoted…its not really that difficult to understand. It’s survival of the fittest. Sure teams of substance need not worry but for the rest its game on!!!

IMO, the most compelling competition in football is the promotion from the CCC to the EPL…the drama is unparallelled in all of sport. It is absolutely brilliant…so much at stake…money…prestige…a payout of $120 million!!!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6616459.stm

I don’t follow other leagues close enough to know what’s happening at the bottom of the table and in Scotland the prize isn’t worthy of the crown, there’s no money…other than Old Firm pay days.

I understand the significance of relegation, it's just not that many teams actually face it. If there was a realistic chance that Celtic could get relegated, then it would be significant, then it would be the strong and worthy, survival of the fittest. But it's not, it's survival of the richest and the rich are getting richer and distancing themselves more and more from the rest of the pack.

Right now it looks like the only thing relegation/promotion does is give out some kind of distant second-place prize to teams that have no hope of a championship. Sure, it's compelling competition for a few teams at the bottom of the table in the EPL and the top of the CCC but is that really the best way to go? I don't think that would work here.

My knowledge of the Scottish league comes through a writer named Christopher Brookmyre (if you haven't read his books, they're great, start with A Big Boy Did It And Ran Away) and he's a supporter of St. Mirren. So I look up St. Mirren online and I see a team with a stadium about the size of BMO, some great supporters groups and zero chance of being league champs. The Chicago Cubs may have gone 100 years without a world series, they still have a better shot than St. Mirren does at the Scottish League.

It's true, I don't know about any other leagues, but I know what effect money has and with no salary caps and no revenue sharing the gaps between the rich teams and the rest will continue to widen. I'm not convinced that in 10-15 years people will be so thrilled with a relegation/promotion system. You know, other than supporters of the top few teams. (but hey, if it happens here I'll be okay with it)

[flatpicker]

^ but if that relegation system were confined to the world of MLS (as brought up by Hitcho) then might it work?

Maintaining a level of salary restrictions would prevent a couple of teams from complete dominance of the league.
Personally I don't like identical cap rules for all teams... I think there should be some wiggle room for those that have more financial success.
But not so much advantage as to remain at the top of the table for years on end.

So, as was brought up earlier... a two tier MLS system with a single table format could work well...

[Hitcho]

I understand the significance of relegation, it's just not that many teams actually face it. If there was a realistic chance that Celtic could get relegated, then it would be significant, then it would be the strong and worthy, survival of the fittest. But it's not, it's survival of the richest and the rich are getting richer and distancing themselves more and more from the rest of the pack.

Right now it looks like the only thing relegation/promotion does is give out some kind of distant second-place prize to teams that have no hope of a championship. Sure, it's compelling competition for a few teams at the bottom of the table in the EPL and the top of the CCC but is that really the best way to go? I don't think that would work here.

My knowledge of the Scottish league comes through a writer named Christopher Brookmyre (if you haven't read his books, they're great, start with A Big Boy Did It And Ran Away) and he's a supporter of St. Mirren. So I look up St. Mirren online and I see a team with a stadium about the size of BMO, some great supporters groups and zero chance of being league champs. The Chicago Cubs may have gone 100 years without a world series, they still have a better shot than St. Mirren does at the Scottish League.

It's true, I don't know about any other leagues, but I know what effect money has and with no salary caps and no revenue sharing the gaps between the rich teams and the rest will continue to widen. I'm not convinced that in 10-15 years people will be so thrilled with a relegation/promotion system. You know, other than supporters of the top few teams. (but hey, if it happens here I'll be okay with it)

I think these are genuine concerns and I'd hate to see MLS become a procession of the same few teams winning the league year after year because it's not exciting and it kills incentive for other teams to boot. But if you look at my post above about a two tier MLS system then the powerhouse/rich sides win all scenario is unlikely to come into play, and the "relegated" sides don't stand to lose much other than a bit of pride whereas they'll have a real prize to play for in promotion.

Another point about that system is that MLS can grow and expand freely, because they could end up with two leagues of 16 sides each, or an "elite" league and two parallel "championship" leagues or even a third tier system and, as in the good old days in England, a well managed side can easily jump up two divisions in as many seasons, and vice versa for a poorly managed side. But despite that, no MLS franchise will be penalised financially or stand to gian too much and be able to cement their place.

It's a much better system, IMHO, than resorting to divisions within conferences as the league grows, a la hockey etc.

[Toronto_Bhoy]

I love relegation because unlike North American sports it means absolutely every league game counts! Regardless of who you are…you can’t take a day off…

And even for those teams that will never face relegation, games involving them become significant to those clubs at the bottom of the table. In the EPL and SPL the relegation battle is usually far more compelling than the Championship. The league can be won weeks in advance of season's end but promotion/relegation is usually decided on the last weekend…its phenomenal sports drama!

Beach_Red, what would your option to relegation be? The same teams stay…forever? What do the St. Mirren’s, Fulham’s and Reggina’s have to play for? What do their supporters have to hope for? Ask a Birmingham or Leeds supporter why bother supporting a club that has no chance…cause there’s that hope…opportunity. What about the teams that win their Championship in lower leagues? Don’t they deserve a crack at the Celtic’s and Liverpool’s?

Relegation is a two way street…a team goes down…one comes up…it’s as much about promotion as relegation.


Love Street, home to St. Mirren is about half the size of BMO…10,000…if that

And your absolutely correct, Christopher Brookmyre is a terrific writer…right up their with Ian Rankin!

[Steve]

I think these are genuine concerns and I'd hate to see MLS become a procession of the same few teams winning the league year after year because it's not exciting and it kills incentive for other teams to boot. But if you look at my post above about a two tier MLS system then the powerhouse/rich sides win all scenario is unlikely to come into play, and the "relegated" sides don't stand to lose much other than a bit of pride whereas they'll have a real prize to play for in promotion.

Another point about that system is that MLS can grow and expand freely, because they could end up with two leagues of 16 sides each, or an "elite" league and two parallel "championship" leagues or even a third tier system and, as in the good old days in England, a well managed side can easily jump up two divisions in as many seasons, and vice versa for a poorly managed side. But despite that, no MLS franchise will be penalised financially or stand to gian too much and be able to cement their place.

It's a much better system, IMHO, than resorting to divisions within conferences as the league grows, a la hockey etc.

Seriously? Come on. Yes, there is revenue sharing in MLS, but it isn't complete revenue sharing. You give a portion of your revenue to the league, not all (or ever close to it) of your revenue. Do you seriously expect teams to draw the exact same crowds, sell the same merchandise, etc, when they are relegated? Do you really expect the American public to show up to see a team that isn't even in the top league? They're barely showing up for the top league in the country.

It's a pipe dream. Relegation won't happen because the investors won't agree, and the fans won't support it. The reason we go with divisions here is so that all fans know their team has a shot at the title. I'd rather, as we expanded, strengthen the division concept. I'd rather, eventually, move to a league with completely different, yet equal, divisions. With an "MLS West" and an "MLS East". Each with 16 teams in it. Each only plays teams in their own division. At the end of the regular season, there will be a champion crowned from each division, the top dog out of 16 teams. After that, the top 6 teams from each division will enter into a cup tournement (like we have today) for the MLS cup, champions of all the MLS. Since you're playing different teams, there is an added element of interest. It also allows MLS to expand past 20 teams, keep its division format, and increase the interest in the playoffs. To me, that would be a perfectly north american solution, one that would sit better with fans and investors, and still give those set on their own ways something to grab onto (A real champion of your league, and a post season compitition with another league).

[Roogsy]

Maybe one day we will realize that soccer in every league doesn't have to be done the same way. Just because Europe does it doesn't mean we have to. As long as the game is being played at a high level, who says relegation HAS to be a part of the equation? Let's not forcefeed this to the American public which doesn't understand nor cares to.

[flatpicker]

Seriously? Come on. Yes, there is revenue sharing in MLS, but it isn't complete revenue sharing. You give a portion of your revenue to the league, not all (or ever close to it) of your revenue. Do you seriously expect teams to draw the exact same crowds, sell the same merchandise, etc, when they are relegated? Do you really expect the American public to show up to see a team that isn't even in the top league? They're barely showing up for the top league in the country.

It's a pipe dream. Relegation won't happen because the investors won't agree, and the fans won't support it. The reason we go with divisions here is so that all fans know their team has a shot at the title. I'd rather, as we expanded, strengthen the division concept. I'd rather, eventually, move to a league with completely different, yet equal, divisions. With an "MLS West" and an "MLS East". Each with 16 teams in it. Each only plays teams in their own division. At the end of the regular season, there will be a champion crowned from each division, the top dog out of 16 teams. After that, the top 6 teams from each division will enter into a cup tournement (like we have today) for the MLS cup, champions of all the MLS. Since you're playing different teams, there is an added element of interest. It also allows MLS to expand past 20 teams, keep its division format, and increase the interest in the playoffs. To me, that would be a perfectly north american solution, one that would sit better with fans and investors, and still give those set on their own ways something to grab onto (A real champion of your league, and a post season compitition with another league).



This is pretty much what we have been discussing in the "playoff" thread.
It would be my first choice (as I'm sure you have figured by now)... even though you seemed to disagree with it in that thread...
Or maybe you agreed with the two single table part of my plan... but disagreed with the lack of post season play before the Cup Final...





Wow, I disagree with pretty much everyone in this thread.


If we went with the version you say (two single tables but with playoffs, and enough teams advancing to keep hopes alive)...
... then I would suggest making it 5 teams per division that advance.
- the first place team get's a pass to the semi's... while the other 4 playoff for the chance to play the division champ in the semi's

... now this might raise the question - How is it fair that the first place team misses out on the extra revenue of playoffs while the lower ranked teams earn more by playing extra games?
- Well I suppose there could be a playoff revenue sharing plan that splits all playoff profits amoung all 5 teams from each division.
- then of course the profits would be split between 3 teams in the second round (the first place team not playing and the two lower teams fighting for a spot in the semi's)
- then in the Cup Final, the profits would be shared by the host city and the two finalists... with a cash prize for the winner.

[Steve]

This is pretty much what we have been discussing in the "playoff" thread.
It would be my first choice (as I'm sure you have figured by now)... even though you seemed to disagree with it in that thread...
Or maybe you agreed with the two single table part of my plan... but disagreed with the lack of post season play before the Cup Final...







If we went with the version you say (two single tables but with playoffs, and enough teams advancing to keep hopes alive)...
... then I would suggest making it 5 teams per division that advance.
- the first place team get's a pass to the semi's... while the other 4 playoff for the chance to play the division champ in the semi's

Yeah, that would work.

And yes, to clarify, I agree with splitting the league into two single tables, I just don't agree with getting rid of the playoffs. I think in the north american mindset, playoffs are too important. The difficult thing to balance for me is:
1) Not letting in too many teams, you don't want to make the regular season mean nothing and;
2) Not letting in too few teams. You always need to keep the cinderella story alive. Look at almost every sports movie ever made in Hollywood. Team overcomes all odds to win the cup. For that to play out in the real world, you need to have a team that does really poorly for the first half of the season, then all of a sudden start to gain momentum. That means you need to have a playoff system that will let in enough team to allow them to JUST sneak into the last spot. Of course, how many teams that is would be the problem.

Personally, 5-6-7 are all good numbers for a league of 16. They allow it to be an accomplishment, but also allow enough teams to sneak in to make for a real story (and keep enough teams in the hunt late enough in the season so all fans have that element of hope).

[Beach_Red]

I love relegation because unlike North American sports it means absolutely every league game counts! Regardless of who you are…you can’t take a day off…

And even for those teams that will never face relegation, games involving them become significant to those clubs at the bottom of the table. In the EPL and SPL the relegation battle is usually far more compelling than the Championship. The league can be won weeks in advance of season's end but promotion/relegation is usually decided on the last weekend…its phenomenal sports drama!

Beach_Red, what would your option to relegation be? The same teams stay…forever? What do the St. Mirren’s, Fulham’s and Reggina’s have to play for? What do their supporters have to hope for? Ask a Birmingham or Leeds supporter why bother supporting a club that has no chance…cause there’s that hope…opportunity. What about the teams that win their Championship in lower leagues? Don’t they deserve a crack at the Celtic’s and Liverpool’s?

Relegation is a two way street…a team goes down…one comes up…it’s as much about promotion as relegation.


Love Street, home to St. Mirren is about half the size of BMO…10,000…if that

And your absolutely correct, Christopher Brookmyre is a terrific writer…right up their with Ian Rankin!

Well, if we're talking theory here - which would be the ideal system, I have to say that currently relegation/promotion isn't working. It's certainly not headed in the right direction with the operating budgets of some teams so far in excess of others - this pretty much gaurantees their positions - except for the few teams at the breaking point.

Now, if every team in the league faced an equal chance of being relegated - which I undestand is the way things used to be - then it would work.

Right now it looks an awful lot the like playoff system - the few teams that face relegation are the ones not making the playoffs this year and the ones that get promoted are like the ones that scrape into the playoffs and get knocked out in the first round - or, very rarely, make a decent playoff run. In the relegation system that "playoffs run" happens in the next season if they do well and in the playoff system it happens as soon as the season ends.

All I can say is that for the next ten years, the same two teams will be at the top of the Scottish table (and likely the same 4-5 of the EPL), but we have no idea what two teams will be in the Super Bowl this year, never mind five years from now. It could be Green Bay, Wisconsin or Jacksonville, Florida or some other small market team (all we know for sure is that it won't be Detroit).

So, it looks like the choice is the same teams stay at the top of the table and the same few teams in the middle change "divisions" forever or the same 32 teams stay in the league but can move all the way up and down the standings.

Getting the shot at Celtic or Liverpool and/or winning a lower level championship might be enough for fans with generations of history invested in teams but I imagine there are a few of them saying that huge money is ruining the sport and that it isn't as good as it was. There are issues with relegation/promotion that need to be dealt with - on it's own it doesn't look any better to me than a set league with playoffs.

Isn't St. Mirren getting a new stadium closer to 20,000?

And what about Stuart MacBride? He's newer but his books are good as well.

[Chewy Unikronik]

Why are people only fixated on the regulation portion of the article, completely ignoring the fact that the rest of it is pretty much dead on.

The playoff system as it is now needs to go.
More teams make a single table more of a reasonable possibility.
Less games as a result of Home and Home allows for better spacing of games and following international calendar.
Having the MLS Cup (or whatever else) played during the season, still allows for both it and the Supporter's Shield to coexist.

Can you argue against any of these points?

[Kenny/Boozemaster/Lenny/togetherness/Roc le Roc]

Ya its an american league and the Playoffs system is all they know or care about ..Unless ofcourse its College football , then they fuck that up too..

Won't happen , the playoffs are here to stay..

[Fort York Redcoat]

Why are people only fixated on the regulation portion of the article, completely ignoring the fact that the rest of it is pretty much dead on.

The playoff system as it is now needs to go.
More teams make a single table more of a reasonable possibility.
Less games as a result of Home and Home allows for better spacing of games and following international calendar.
Having the MLS Cup (or whatever else) played during the season, still allows for both it and the Supporter's Shield to coexist.

Can you argue against any of these points?

Because it might be feasible and no one wants to talk about change that's possible. They want to say it'll never happen. Like the most popular player coming to MLS would never happen.

Bad example? Ask the league and their accountants.

[Ossington Mental Youth]

single table makes sense to me, playoffs sadly will have to stay for a while and relegation will never happen (if it does itll happen 60 years from now when the league is solid as all hell)

[Ossington Mental Youth]

we could even do single table play each team twice which would make the season shorter by 2-4 games but make more sense.
Also they need to put more value in the Supporters shield as opposed to the winner of the playoffs

[Fort York Redcoat]

In keeping with the theme of this thread:

Shortening the season costs owners money therefore...

IWNH

It Will Never Happen

[Ossington Mental Youth]

until we get 18 teams or what have you.
Also they really do need to put more significance on the supporters shield and downplay the winner of the playoffs, sorta reverse it, slowly but surely, that could be done no probs and i dont think people wouldbe up in arms about it.

[Hitcho]

As I understand it, the seed of objection to play-offs in this thread (or another like it) is basically that a team can sneak into the last play-off spot (in the shite bulls case not even in their own freaking conference) and be crowned "champions" of the league. It's ridiculous that the Crew (much as I hate the place and its fans) can be the best team all season, win their conference, the supporters shield, make it to the play-off final and be denied the title of champions by a team that barely made the post seaosn and has been patchy at best throughout the year. I take the point about the american hollywood dream and the late run to victory, but doesn't that just make a mockery of the team that's been the best all season getting screwed over by an unfair system at the death? To me it does.

As for all the arguments about a dominating top few teams, I set out a post earlier in this thread which gets around that by having two MLS leagues which are equal in terms of salary cap, roster size, tv revenue, etc and still favours the lowest ranked teams in the draft pick system. So in that scenario no dominance would be possible on the scale of the Old Firm in the SPL or the "big four" in the EPL. I do NOT accept the arguments about dwindling crowds limiting a team that's "relegated" to the second MLS league because how is that different to dwindling crowds at teams losing all the time in the current set up? Either you have fans or you don't, including if that's based on results. Besides which the whole point of a two tier MLS system as I set it out is that it's entirely possible to jump back up again and then win the "elite" league the following season. So the american/hollywood dream is well and truly alive.

As for foisting on the Namerican public a system they don't understand, I'm not sure that's true either. Like Canada, a lot f the support for MLS in the US comes from second/third (or whatever) generation Canadians/Am,ericans who stem from football loving countries. They get the league system, they are used to the league system and many of them would probably love to see it in place in MLS.

On top of that, "soccer" is not an American game, it is an imported game. it is struggling to break into the US market because it is not an American game. So to foist the play-off system onto the game there is backwards because the one thing soccer has going for it in the US is that it's DIFFERENT. Giving MLS a league structure would make it stand out, give it some credence and authenticity and not make it look like a poor attempt to mould a non-US game into the US sports system. There will be opposition to ti for sure, but I am willing to bet there would also be at elast an equal amount of support for such a move.

See my post above for details of how a two-tiered MLS system could be structured and safeguard against the pitfalls of dominance and bankcruptcy for teams that are promoted/relegated. I also agree that it's a much better way to geerate season long excitement for teams at all levels of the league than the play off system, because some teams are out of contention very early on, whereas they'd have sopmething to play for all seaosn under a league system.

[Fort York Redcoat]

Yeah I'm not sure how many people would miss MLS cup. Well, I guess the past 13 winners but c'mon, you call that tradiiton?

[Hitcho]

we could even do single table play each team twice which would make the season shorter by 2-4 games but make more sense.

This would be an excellent interim measure until we have enough teams in MLS to make a second league.

All new MLS franchises of course would go in at the lower level. An extra team could be promoted in any one season to keep the numbers even.

[Beach_Red]

In keeping with the theme of this thread:

Shortening the season costs owners money therefore...

IWNH

It Will Never Happen

Well, they could eliminate the playoffs and add four regular season games - that would make even more money because the whole league would be involved.

The more I look at it, though, the more similar the systems seem. The only difference is when the games happen. In order to win it all the top teams have to beat each other head to head and not be upset by weaker teams.

In the playoff system those games are at the end instead of spread out through the season - upsets still happpen in both, just at different times in the season - losing a game to a weak team in the middle of the season could cost you the league the same way losing a game in the playoffs gets you knocked out.

The NFL is still the model of a successful league in North America - plenty of interest all season long and a playoff format. If you're going to invest $40 millionin a team you want it to be successful like that.

[Fort York Redcoat]

Well, they could eliminate the playoffs and add four regular season games - that would make even more money because the whole league would be involved.

The more I look at it, though, the more similar the systems seem. The only difference is when the games happen. In order to win it all the top teams have to beat each other head to head and not be upset by weaker teams.

In the playoff system those games are at the end instead of spread out through the season - upsets still happpen in both, just at different times in the season - losing a game to a weak team in the middle of the season could cost your the league the same way losing a game in the playoffs gets you knocked out.

The NFL is still the model of a successful league in North America - plenty of interest all season long and a playoff format. If you're going to invest $40 millionin a team you want it to be successful like that.

That first bit is brilliant!:yum:

But wait a min, your Nfl has how many games? The NFL isn't topped with barn burners every week it just has an incredibly short season which elevates the importance of the games.

We agree that to many the systems can look similar but I've been saying the instrumental difference is that eliminating playoffs kills the dire competition with you NFL et al while beefing up the most successful point in the MLS season.

[denime]

Well, they could eliminate the playoffs and add four regular season games - that would make even more money because the whole league would be involved.

The more I look at it, though, the more similar the systems seem. The only difference is when the games happen. In order to win it all the top teams have to beat each other head to head and not be upset by weaker teams.

In the playoff system those games are at the end instead of spread out through the season - upsets still happpen in both, just at different times in the season - losing a game to a weak team in the middle of the season could cost you the league the same way losing a game in the playoffs gets you knocked out.

The NFL is still the model of a successful league in North America - plenty of interest all season long and a playoff format. If you're going to invest $40 million a team you want it to be successful like that.

NFL has short season 16 games only,32 teams, 1/3 is going to playoffs, MLS 30 games with 14 teams,and 2/3 are going to playoffs.
No wonder there is more interest in NFL.

[Toronto_Bhoy]

Isn't St. Mirren getting a new stadium closer to 20,000?

And what about Stuart MacBride? He's newer but his books are good as well.

The new St. Mirren stadium is due to open sometime in the new year. I was under the impression it was even smaller than Love Street but I can't imagine it being any bigger?

Haven't read any MacBride but I'll give him a try…are you Scottish?

[Steve]

I take the point about the american hollywood dream and the late run to victory, but doesn't that just make a mockery of the team that's been the best all season getting screwed over by an unfair system at the death? To me it does.


That's the culture. Think about it, what is it that defines the states? Is it the nobles? The upper class, doing well for all of history? Royalty, passed down from father to son?

No. No matter what the truth of it is today, look at the history (which is really what defines the national psyche). First, an upstart colony told the big, rich, "supporter's shield" winning country that they could suck it. They entered into the "playoffs" (war of independence), winning their freedom and eventually becoming the world super power (MLS cup winner).

They want(ed) the world's poor, downtrodden, underdogs, and they would give them a shot at the title. The whole american dream is "Born in the gutter, die in a mansion". Their entire psychological perspective on the world has been forged by a gigantic underdog story. You say it isn't fair for the team that put in the biggest effort over time? Of course it isn't! The American public doesn't want fair! What happens when huge, rich companies collapse? When movie stars go on drug binges? The public rejoices! If there's one thing they love more than a rags to riches story, its a riches to rags story.

And that, my friends, is why the playoff system exists.

[Hitcho]

That's the culture. Think about it, what is it that defines the states? Is it the nobles? The upper class, doing well for all of history? Royalty, passed down from father to son?

No. No matter what the truth of it is today, look at the history (which is really what defines the national psyche). First, an upstart colony told the big, rich, "supporter's shield" winning country that they could suck it. They entered into the "playoffs" (war of independence), winning their freedom and eventually becoming the world super power (MLS cup winner).

They want(ed) the world's poor, downtrodden, underdogs, and they would give them a shot at the title. The whole american dream is "Born in the gutter, die in a mansion". Their entire psychological perspective on the world has been forged by a gigantic underdog story. You say it isn't fair for the team that put in the biggest effort over time? Of course it isn't! The American public doesn't want fair! What happens when huge, rich companies collapse? When movie stars go on drug binges? The public rejoices! If there's one thing they love more than a rags to riches story, its a riches to rags story.

And that, my friends, is why the playoff system exists.

Hah! This is a brilliant post - kudos! :D:D:D

Not sure I agree though, primarily because going back to an easlier post I made in this thread I am not sure that the soccer fans in the US have the same kind fo background you're describing. A large portion of them are immigrants and are probably wondering why the hell MLS has play-offs and not a league system, because it's not a US sport. Granted any new audience MLS wants to attarct will comprose a lot of more classic US populace, but if MLS sets itself out now as being different then people will acept that. if they go on for another 20 years and then try and change with a larger fan base, it'll be much harder to pull off.

[Lucky Strike]

I just don't agree with getting rid of the playoffs. I think in the north american mindset, playoffs are too important. The difficult thing to balance for me is:
1) Not letting in too many teams, you don't want to make the regular season mean nothing and;
2) Not letting in too few teams. You always need to keep the cinderella story alive. Look at almost every sports movie ever made in Hollywood. Team overcomes all odds to win the cup. For that to play out in the real world, you need to have a team that does really poorly for the first half of the season, then all of a sudden start to gain momentum. That means you need to have a playoff system that will let in enough team to allow them to JUST sneak into the last spot. Of course, how many teams that is would be the problem.

Personally, 5-6-7 are all good numbers for a league of 16. They allow it to be an accomplishment, but also allow enough teams to sneak in to make for a real story (and keep enough teams in the hunt late enough in the season so all fans have that element of hope).

I agree 100% with what I quoted from you above.

In a 15-16 team MLS that we'll have for the next couple years, a playoff with 6 teams would be best. It would go something like:

- 6 teams make the playoffs, 2 from East and West and the next best 2. (38% of teams make the playoffs with 16 teams in the league).
- The conference winners get a bye (incentive to finish as high as possible and good reward for doing so - more than just playing a lower ranked team) to the next round while the other 4 play each other in one-leg.
- The two winners face the conference champions and so on...
- This format presupposes MLS not having a single table (obviously).

For an 18 team MLS, I'd make the 7 best playoff-bound (39% of teams make the playoffs).

- The Supporter Shield winner gets a bye to the next round.
- You get teams 2-7 play each other in a winner-take-all match.
- You're left with 3 teams plus the SS winner giving you 4, and so on until you have a winner.

For a 20 team MLS (which ought the be the maximum, really), I'd use the same format as the 18-team league but with 9 teams making the playoffs (45%).

I think it's a good balance between rewarding the good teams (and the regular season champion) and not making it too exclusive to keep the playoff chase alive all throughout the season. IMHO, no league should have more than 50% of its teams make the playoffs. Somewhere in the 35-45% range is ideal.

[flatpicker]

^ if I am reading that correctly then we are on the same page...

Teams need some incentive to win the conference... and getting a free pass to the semi's would be a good way to do that.
Also - the two conferences need to be more independent of each other (only a few inter-league games per season)

As I suggested earlier (it was either this thread or the other one with almost the exact same conversation in the news section)... Revenue in the playoffs would have to be shared or the Conference Winners would earn less than the lower teams since they would skip over the early round(s) of playoffs.


We almost need to merge this thread with the big "playoff" thread in the news section!

[Fort York Redcoat]

That's the culture. Think about it, what is it that defines the states? Is it the nobles? The upper class, doing well for all of history? Royalty, passed down from father to son?

No. No matter what the truth of it is today, look at the history (which is really what defines the national psyche). First, an upstart colony told the big, rich, "supporter's shield" winning country that they could suck it. They entered into the "playoffs" (war of independence), winning their freedom and eventually becoming the world super power (MLS cup winner).

They want(ed) the world's poor, downtrodden, underdogs, and they would give them a shot at the title. The whole american dream is "Born in the gutter, die in a mansion". Their entire psychological perspective on the world has been forged by a gigantic underdog story. You say it isn't fair for the team that put in the biggest effort over time? Of course it isn't! The American public doesn't want fair! What happens when huge, rich companies collapse? When movie stars go on drug binges? The public rejoices! If there's one thing they love more than a rags to riches story, its a riches to rags story.

And that, my friends, is why the playoff system exists.

And I guess I don't like playoffs because my forefathers didn't participate in the war of independence.:rolleyes:

They fought in the on the side of the British in the American Revolutionary War.:canada:

[flatpicker]

^ you had four fathers??? You bastard!

[Fort York Redcoat]

No fore fathers.

They were avid golfers.

[flatpicker]

^ well there's no doubt that at least one of them got a hole in one!

[Fort York Redcoat]

:lol:

So THIS is how one kills a thread...;)

[mighty_torontofc_2008]

How does the playoffs get better as there are more teams ie less talent in the league? Why would I care about playoffs more if more crappy cities I care nothing for are in it? As long as the playoffs are not any more popular than the league the subject of playoffs won't die.


with more teams who said their would be less talent? the playoffs are important as they determine the League champion like it or not.
but the format for nest season should be top 4 teams in each division make the playoffs....1st round 2 legs, Conference final 2 legs and the MLS Cup 2 legs with the team with the best record hosting the 2nd leg of the final.

[Fort York Redcoat]

with more teams who said their would be less talent? the playoffs are important as they determine the League champion like it or not.
but the format for nest season should be top 4 teams in each division make the playoffs....1st round 2 legs, Conference final 2 legs and the MLS Cup 2 legs with the team with the best record hosting the 2nd leg of the final.

I said it. Add teams and you dilute talent. It can be improved over time but there are only so many Freddie's in the world to buy and make a talented team.

[Hitcho]

Some valid points on here, but the fact is if you have a play-off system then it doesn;t really matter how you structure it, it;s all just money and politics frankly. The bootm line is that with a play-off system someone who sneaked into the last wild card place can and was frankly crap for large parts fo the season ending up way behind the overall "league winners" can still be crowned champions. And that, as I see it, is what people object to with a play-off system.

The promotion/relegation thing is a side issue. Either you have a league winner or a play-off lottery where a low ranking team in the regular season can usurp the crwon off the back of a couple of good (or flukey) matches. It comepltely undermines the regular season in my book.

Of course, not having a straight "everyone plays everyone else home and away" means you can never really have a "league winner" because it's not a level playing field. So either you keep the unfair lottery of play-offs or you go to a traditional league (with a second tier if you tet too many teams).

[Hitcho]

For a 20 team MLS (which ought the be the maximum, really)

What's your reasoning behind this? because to me it's suicide for the sport of professional soccer in North America. How can the sport grow and develop if there is such a limited ceiling for top level teams? it makes no sense at all, other than to artificially limit the number of teams so that you get convenient numbers for a play off system, which is quite possibly the most backwards approach I;ve ever heard of in sport.

Let the sport grow so that more players can join the league, more fans can go to games, more revenue can be generated for grass roots development, etc. Limiting MLS to 20 teams is madness. let it grow to its natural capacity and have a second tier MLS system (see above) if it gets too big for one. if there's sufficient interest to have that many teams buying in, then there's sufficientinterest to sustain a marginally lower league, especially given the parity it would allow.

[flatpicker]

well, in a nutshell... for me the biggest problem with the current playoff format is the lack of reward for first place teams.
If they were to at least give the first place team in East and West a free pass to the semi's then I would consider them more legit.

[Technorgasm]

YA, bring the Impact and Whitecaps into the MLS!!!!

so they can embarass us again, and give their local fans plenty shards of prickly metal to stab into our chests for YEARS to come. . . .

[TFC Via Buffalo]

That's the culture. Think about it, what is it that defines the states? Is it the nobles? The upper class, doing well for all of history? Royalty, passed down from father to son?

No. No matter what the truth of it is today, look at the history (which is really what defines the national psyche). First, an upstart colony told the big, rich, "supporter's shield" winning country that they could suck it. They entered into the "playoffs" (war of independence), winning their freedom and eventually becoming the world super power (MLS cup winner).

They want(ed) the world's poor, downtrodden, underdogs, and they would give them a shot at the title. The whole american dream is "Born in the gutter, die in a mansion". Their entire psychological perspective on the world has been forged by a gigantic underdog story. You say it isn't fair for the team that put in the biggest effort over time? Of course it isn't! The American public doesn't want fair! What happens when huge, rich companies collapse? When movie stars go on drug binges? The public rejoices! If there's one thing they love more than a rags to riches story, its a riches to rags story.

And that, my friends, is why the playoff system exists.

And a wonderful minority of us don't watch TMZ, hate Britney Spears AND want a table system. We are a few, but classy bunch indeed.

[Hitcho]

well, in a nutshell... for me the biggest problem with the current playoff format is the lack of reward for first place teams.
If they were to at least give the first place team in East and West a free pass to the semi's then I would consider them more legit.

But that's not really a reward though. For a start, the club loses a set of gate receipts and pooling the gate receipts unfairly punishes a team who came second, for example. It also denies the fans the chance to see a post season game against (in theory) easier opposition which their team has mroe chance of winning. And, worst of all, the conference winners can still just as easily be knocked out by someone who finished way below them over the course of the season. Therefore, getting a bye is hardly giving them recognition or reward.

I understand the concepts behind the play-off system and I know why MLS have employed it. But it's taking a peculiarly American idea and applying to to a world game which just doesn't recognise it outside of the states. (Promotion play offs in the CCC for example are NOT the same thing, because the league winners go up as of right, as do the second placed team, and teams 3 to 6 slog it out for the final promotion slot, but get no title, trophy etc and do not usurp the genuine league winners - which is not at all how the US system works).

[flatpicker]

^ are the gate receipts not shared by the league?

I figured there would be some sort of money pool created by the playoffs that would be shared by all involved.

some sort of communist system that rewarded success... (is that contradictory?)

[Hitcho]

^ you may be right, but that's kind of worrying if true. Does that apply to all regular season games or just the play offs? the thought of 20,000 TFC fans subsidising columbus every week because the shit heads there don't turn up makes me feel sick.

surely if we get a massive gate receipt each week we should be able to use that money for the club, eg grass pitch etc. why the fuck should we have to give it away to shit teams with no fans? that's fucking bullshit man.

do they get a chunk of our concession sales as well? because that will really make the beer taste sour on match day if so...

[flatpicker]

Q&A: M.L.S. Commissioner Don Garber (http://goal.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/18/qa-mls-commissioner-don-garber/)

NY Times (http://goal.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/18/qa-mls-commissioner-don-garber/)





NY Times: I guess this is part of the scheduling issue, maybe not, but now, with the Red Bulls in M.L.S. Cup as the second wild card and with a losing record there have been a bunch of articles in the blogosphere critical of the league for maintaining its most American of postseasons. Are these folks misguided or fantasizing?

Don Garber: Basically we have a bunch of people, a small subset, who believe that the season should end after the last regular season game. Is that what America is really looking for? Tell me how that makes sense here. In the playoffs, we had one badly attended game, but we’ve had our best games over all in the playoffs. Last Saturday’s games were incredibly competitive. Playoffs have been a huge part of our league, and they’ve been incredibly successful for what we’re trying to do, which is to grow interest and enthusiasm for our fans. Things in Columbus, attendance, the supporters groups, have been really fantastic. It shows that our fans are getting more and more excited and passionate about the league.
From my perspective how is it a negative? We had a similar story with the Red Bulls. This thing is an incredible positive. When the Giants get to the Super Bowl as a wild card or with a .500 records, it’s heralded as an incredible sports story. But when the Red Bulls do it people think it’s a joke.
It’s a great story, and we need great stories. We need our fans to believe that the playoffs matter, that you can be an underdog and have a great series against Houston, against Real Salt Lake and get into the championship game so fans stay interested during the most competitive part of the sports season in the U.S. Why is that bad? If the more traditional soccer fan wants us to be like the English Premier League, I’ve got news for them — this is not England and we’re not the E.P.L.; and they remind us of that all the time. We have to manage our business in a way that is about growing the league in the U.S. That’s where we live, that’s where our teams play and that is the core of M.L.S. Is somebody going to tell people in Columbus that is has not been exciting, or tell Red Bulls or Salt Lake fans? Sure it’s a disappointment in Houston, but it remains a great story. These are the things that drive interest in sport. We need those stories, we need someone pointing to Red Bulls as being a success after all these years.
To think that we are the only soccer league that has playoffs is just silly. Maybe no leagues in Europe do, but you’ve got Australia, Mexico, Chile and some others. If just ending the season after the last game was the perfect model for sports every American sports league would do it. The only reason European leagues can do it is because of promotion and relegation. Without that fear of relegation and the relegation race, aren’t so many league races in Europe anticlimactic?

[Toronto_Bhoy]

Gee Don, why even have a regular season?

[king dave]

I am gonna post on this one when I collect my thoughts.
Right now I firmly believe Garber is a douche and I am fucking mad!
He likes his job and he's paid to do so.
So why would he even consider other options?
Playoffs in football, yes.
But in temperate climates thank you.
How the fuck would TFC play this late into the season at BMO if they made the playoffs?
And don't give me that Russian league horseshit.
Even they take a break for Christ sakes.
Good thread as usual K.
I will be back often.
Fucking Garber is paid a good income to promote and defend a league which, by following the North American pro sports template, will never be able to compete against other teams/countries successfully because of this inherent flaw:
How can you play a game against another international team on an equal footing when 2 completely different sets qualifying/promotion/relegation rules apply?
KD.

[Beach_Red]

The new St. Mirren stadium is due to open sometime in the new year. I was under the impression it was even smaller than Love Street but I can't imagine it being any bigger?

Haven't read any MacBride but I'll give him a try…are you Scottish?

Ha, no I'm not Scottish but I am a fan of quality writing. From the Brookmyre I'm pretty sure St. Mirren is in Paisley and one of my all-time favourite books, Espedair Street by Iain Banks is about some guys from Paisley who form a rock band in the 70's.

[Fort York Redcoat]

Convince me, Don. Convince me I care about this story.

The glory of winning a week old cup in a 13 yr old league by winning half my games.

[james]

i dont have a problem with the playoff format.

i would like a relegation and promotion format but i never see that happening.

But what i think is a must is getting rid of this stupid east/west shit. They can easily make the league a 1 table. They could do that for next season.

[Hitcho]

i dont have a problem with the playoff format.

i would like a relegation and promotion format but i never see that happening.

But what i think is a must is getting rid of this stupid east/west shit. They can easily make the league a 1 table. They could do that for next season.

I totally agree. It's done in other sports, I assume, because of the geogrpahy involved and the frequency of games (a major league rounders team plays at least 6 times a week as far as i can tell, and the puck bunnies aren't far behind). But with MLS, the teams basically play once a week, so what's the big deal about a four hour flight? Make it one league, everyone plays each other home and away and then you've got a real winner at the end of the season. And as the league expands, add another league along the lines of my earlier post in this thread, which allows for expansion and prevents unfair dominance by maintaining equality.

All roads lead to a genuine Major LEAGUE Soccer in ym world. All of them.

[brad]

We all know that promotion/relegation will not happen.

However, assuming they were to introduce it - what would the pitch be to expansion teams? Pay your $40 million dollar expansion fee, play one season, most likely finish in last place, and drop out of the MLS. Thanks for the cash.

[flatpicker]

We all know that promotion/relegation will not happen.

However, assuming they were to introduce it - what would the pitch be to expansion teams? Pay your $40 million dollar expansion fee, play one season, most likely finish in last place, and drop out of the MLS. Thanks for the cash.


not if they set up the MLS as a two-tier system (as has been discussed)
There would be two levels under the MLS umbrella (and you couldn't sink any lower than that)
An expansion team would start in the second division and have to work it's way up.
So if they kept both levels under the "MLS" name, then profits would still be shared amoung all, so the financial blow of playing in the lower level would not be as hurtful to the pocketbook.

I think it's a good way to go... it could be done sensibly, while still maintaining a hint of North American style playoffs.

[brad]

not if they set up the MLS as a two-tier system (as has been discussed)
There would be two levels under the MLS umbrella (and you couldn't sink any lower than that)
An expansion team would start in the second division and have to work it's way up.
So if they kept both levels under the "MLS" name, then profits would still be shared amoung all, so the financial blow of playing in the lower level would not be as hurtful to the pocketbook.

I think it's a good way to go... it could be done sensibly, while still maintaining a hint of North American style playoffs.

It assumes that people in N. America are going to care about second tier football. I doubt that many beyond the hardcore supporters would.

MLS (and football in general) is still struggling to gain popularity here, and I doubt this would help at this stage.

[Fort York Redcoat]

not if they set up the MLS as a two-tier system (as has been discussed)
There would be two levels under the MLS umbrella (and you couldn't sink any lower than that)
An expansion team would start in the second division and have to work it's way up.
So if they kept both levels under the "MLS" name, then profits would still be shared amoung all, so the financial blow of playing in the lower level would not be as hurtful to the pocketbook.

I think it's a good way to go... it could be done sensibly, while still maintaining a hint of North American style playoffs.

And then they could expand way faster!

40mil x ? 12, 20? They'd love that! If it would get promotion here I'll take it (even with the playoffs:puke:) Please forward to Don.

[Fort York Redcoat]

It assumes that people in N. America are going to care about second tier football. I doubt that many beyond the hardcore supporters would.

MLS (and football in general) is still struggling to gain popularity here, and I doubt this would help at this stage.

Does it frustrate you as well when it's said "If only the league was bigger people would care."? You'd care more if the talent was more diluted and the franchises less storied?

It ranks right up there with " I'll watch them if they make the playoffs."

[flatpicker]

It assumes that people in N. America are going to care about second tier football. I doubt that many beyond the hardcore supporters would.

MLS (and football in general) is still struggling to gain popularity here, and I doubt this would help at this stage.


They would just need to use clever marketing to avoid making fans feel like their team is in a lesser division.
Don't call the two tables "One" and "Two", or "First" and "Second"
Call them "Paramount" and "Elite" or some such thing
When they advertise the MLS, they would promote the whole MLS entity (not just the top division)
So set it up with a relegation "style" system... but use smoke and mirrors so as not to upset the newbie fans.

[brad]

Does it frustrate you as well when it's said "If only the league was bigger people would care."? You'd care more if the talent was more diluted and the franchises less storied?

It ranks right up there with " I'll watch them if they make the playoffs."

If the league was better, more people would care. Higher caliber requires more money. And more money requires popularity.

Any talk of storied franchises in a 12 year old league is rubbish. That's built up over decades of ups and downs.

Also, this is not unique to the MLS. Clubs in Europe see there popularity rise and fall with their level of success, and the league they play in.

[Fort York Redcoat]

They would just need to use clever marketing to avoid making fans feel like there team is in a lesser division.
Don't call the two tables "One" and "Two", or "First" and "Second"
Call them "Paramount" and "Elite" or some such thing
When they advertise the MLS, they would promote the whole MLS entity (not just the top division)
So set it up with a relegation "style" system... but use smoke and mirrors so as not to upset the newbie fans.

:lol:

That would be hilarious.

"Why was our team moved from the Campbell to the Wales Conference table this year?":noidea:

"No reason. So who are we playing first.":hide:

[Fort York Redcoat]

If the league was better, more people would care. Higher caliber requires more money. And more money requires popularity.

Any talk of storied franchises in a 12 year old league is rubbish. That's built up over decades of ups and downs.

Also, this is not unique to the MLS. Clubs in Europe see there popularity rise and fall with their level of success, and the league they play in.

Correct. It's concerning knowing this that the league is looking at expansion (quick fix) but not seriously considering salary increases and roster spots.

I know with roster spots it may seem contradictory with the focus on diluting talent but when it comes to moderate to good players playing too much that leads to injury or lack of serious competing in certain contests (most cups).

[Hitcho]

They would just need to use clever marketing to avoid making fans feel like their team is in a lesser division.
Don't call the two tables "One" and "Two", or "First" and "Second"
Call them "Paramount" and "Elite" or some such thing
When they advertise the MLS, they would promote the whole MLS entity (not just the top division)
So set it up with a relegation "style" system... but use smoke and mirrors so as not to upset the newbie fans.

Exactamundo. The other point to note is that it would be easy to shift between leagues because of the parity issues and the draft pick system, so a team could still finish low down in "MLS Championship" one season and get in to the "MLS Elite" the following season through a couple of good trades, as Cowlumbust have basically done this season. So there would be fluidity between the two tiers in a way that has not previously been seen in any other league around the world, and there's a safety net in that you cannot ever be relegated out of MLS no matter how crap you are.

If you market the leagues as two almost parallel competitions, at least to begin with, it really wouldn't be a big thing among fans I don't think, because they'd still basically be playing the same MLS teams whichever league they were in from season to season, since DCU, for example, would probably have gone "down" this season. That's the beauty of MLS, and it's an important factor to retain if the league structure is ever put in place.

[flatpicker]

I think we have a great plan here... now let's iron out all the details, put together a nice Powerpoint presentation (with lot's of pretty pictures), and present it to the league... I'm sure we will have no problem setting up a meeting!

[Hitcho]

I think we have a great plan here... now let's iron out all the details, put together a nice Powerpoint presentation (with lot's of pretty pictures), and present it to the league... I'm sure we will have no problem setting up a meeting!

Agreed. The first slide will be entitled "A Presentation by Flatpicker and Hitcho", with our respective avatars underneath. After that, there really won't be any need to show them the rest... :noidea:

[Fort York Redcoat]

Agreed. The first slide will be entitled "A Presentation by Flatpicker and Hitcho", with our respective avatars underneath. After that, there really won't be any need to show them the rest... :noidea:

How about "how win over 25% of your supporters." I love your ideas. I wish the outlook on change was not so bleak.

[Yohan]

Exactamundo. The other point to note is that it would be easy to shift between leagues because of the parity issues and the draft pick system, so a team could still finish low down in "MLS Championship" one season and get in to the "MLS Elite" the following season through a couple of good trades, as Cowlumbust have basically done this season. So there would be fluidity between the two tiers in a way that has not previously been seen in any other league around the world, and there's a safety net in that you cannot ever be relegated out of MLS no matter how crap you are.

If you market the leagues as two almost parallel competitions, at least to begin with, it really wouldn't be a big thing among fans I don't think, because they'd still basically be playing the same MLS teams whichever league they were in from season to season, since DCU, for example, would probably have gone "down" this season. That's the beauty of MLS, and it's an important factor to retain if the league structure is ever put in place.
So, your plan involves somehow putting a wool over avg fan's eyes and somehow convince them that relegation is not as bad as it sounds?

[Fort York Redcoat]

So, your plan involves somehow putting a wool over avg fan's eyes and somehow convince them that relegation is not as bad as it sounds?


Shhhhh, not so loud.:)

[flatpicker]

Also... regarding our new relegation plan as a sneaky deception of North American fans...
We could set up this two-tier system, but we won't call it relegation!
We could call it a "Revolving Conference" format...
And instead of getting "relegated", a team would get "reassigned"

:)

[king dave]

Fuck off!
1 league.
1 division.
1 winner.
Out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RrvkB3pK8lg&feature=related
KD.

[GabrielHurl]

Fuck off!
1 league.
1 division.
1 winner.
Out.
KD.

as a wise friend of mine said


You have one table, everybody plays home and away. At the end of the season you have your MLS Champion. The team that finished top of the table.

Then you start the MLS Cup, with the teams playing each other based on the standings, first vs last, second vs last second, etc.

So from the current format, you spin off into two competitions and you still get the playoff vibe.

Add to that the CONCACAF CL and Canada Cup and away you go.

[AL-MO]

as a wise friend of mine said


You have one table, everybody plays home and away. At the end of the season you have your MLS Champion. The team that finished top of the table.

Then you start the MLS Cup, with the teams playing each other based on the standings, first vs last, second vs last second, etc.

So from the current format, you spin off into two competitions and you still get the playoff vibe.

Add to that the CONCACAF CL and Canada Cup and away you go.

I like that setup Gabe. Simple, but satisfies both the football purist, and the NA sports fan.

[king dave]

as a wise friend of mine said


You have one table, everybody plays home and away. At the end of the season you have your MLS Champion. The team that finished top of the table.

Then you start the MLS Cup, with the teams playing each other based on the standings, first vs last, second vs last second, etc.

So from the current format, you spin off into two competitions and you still get the playoff vibe.

Add to that the CONCACAF CL and Canada Cup and away you go.
I could live with that sir.
KD.

[GabrielHurl]

It's not an idea of mine - I'm not taking credit for it

I wholehearted agree with him though

[king dave]

Still too much football with all the other shite competitions going on though.
I think FIFA should step in here, no?
KD.

[king dave]

First on the hit list!
Get fucking rid of that UEFA vs. Champs. league game for fuck sakes.
KD.

[king dave]

2nd on the hit list,
This bullshit tourney TFC is involved in.
I could give a flying fuck about Montreal or Vancouver.
They hate us and we hate them, but we have an MLS squad and they don't!
KD.

[flatpicker]

uh-oh!
The King is into the over-sized letters again!

[king dave]

3rd on the hit list,
International Friendlies.
PERIOD!!!!!
KD.

[king dave]

4th on the hit list,
Rod Stewart.
Just kidding, I love Rod and can't wait for the Faces to tour:hump:.
KD.

[king dave]

I will retreat back to the standard font (for the time being:D) and relay a rumour I have heard.
That is if ya'll want to hear it?
KD.

[flatpicker]

Also... regarding our new relegation plan as a sneaky deception of North American fans...
We could set up this two-tier system, but we won't call it relegation!
We could call it a "Revolving Conference" format...
And instead of getting "relegated", a team would get "reassigned"

:)


furthermore...

while we are redesigning the league... let's redesign the MLS logo as well... it's crap!


http://bp1.blogger.com/_gJqV5dUNjGY/Rk6PMlITKzI/AAAAAAAAAdc/s9fC9kZs-YA/s320/major-league-soccer-logo.gif (http://www.majorleaguesoccertalk.com/)

[Technorgasm]

YAY! RELEGATE!!

http://content.imagesocket.com/images/sunshine_LRG430.gif

[Hitcho]

as a wise friend of mine said


You have one table, everybody plays home and away. At the end of the season you have your MLS Champion. The team that finished top of the table.

Then you start the MLS Cup, with the teams playing each other based on the standings, first vs last, second vs last second, etc.

So from the current format, you spin off into two competitions and you still get the playoff vibe.

Add to that the CONCACAF CL and Canada Cup and away you go.

I like that a lot, but it severely limits the number of teams you can have in MLS, otherwise the number of league games each season will go through the roof. So at some point you'd have to slip a second league in there. Whether it's parallel (ie old east vs west idea, etc) or vertically tiered (ie promotion and relegation), you're going to need room to expand.

The idea FP and I came up with is therefore still better because it allows for expansion, but we could defintiely blend in the MLS Cup idea of top vs last etc as a separate comp. You could do it for both leagues, for example, after expansion makes a second league necessary. The MLS Elite Cup and the MLS Power Cup, to go with the Elite and Power league titles. What do you reckon Flat Picker Man?

I say Bingo!