Today’s News, Monday , Dec. 01

[denime]

Major League Soccer is on the right track, but far from perfect. So with that in mind, here are some suggestions for the league
By GARETH WHEELER

With Major League Soccer's 13th season in the books, it's appropriate to ask the question: Where does it go from here?
One suggestion would be to MLS commissioner Don Garber: Know the names of the league's top players.
In fairness, he got the name right, calling for Guillermo Barros Schelotto when presenting the MLS Cup to the Columbus Crew -- the problem being that Frankie Hejduk is the captain of the Crew and not Schelotto.
An embarrassing mistake, but nothing's embarrassing about the growth of MLS over recent years.

Read more (http://www.torontosun.com/sports/soccer/2008/12/01/7589201-sun.html)



Gazidis departure a blow to MLS
By Ives Galarcep,

Major League Soccer has seen its share of key players leave the league for greener pastures in Europe through the years, but it had never lost a top executive to Europe until now. The departure of MLS deputy commissioner Ivan Gazidis to become CEO of Arsenal is a landmark moment for the league, but it may be a while before we see just what impact Gazidis' departure will have on MLS.

Read more (http://soccernet.espn.go.com/columns/story?id=597061&sec=mls&root=mls&&cc=5901)



Canada draws with Swiss in under-20 soccer friendly
THE CANADIAN PRESS

BERN, Switzerland – Victoria's Adam Straith scored the game-tying goal as Canada earned a 1-1 draw with host Switzerland in a men's under-20 soccer friendly Wednesday.

Read more (http://www.thestar.com/Sports/article/544427)



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

[scooter]

mornin denime

[flatpicker]

Major League Soccer is on the right track, but far from perfect. So with that in mind, here are some suggestions for the league
By GARETH WHEELER

- Playoffs add little in terms of drama or hype -- relegation does, with every game important. With this in mind, MLS should look into establishing a second division, where teams can bounce up and down based on performance.

Read more (http://www.torontosun.com/sports/soccer/2008/12/01/7589201-sun.html)





hmmmm.... this sounds familiar... sorta like the two tier system I have been discussing with other like-minded RPB in here.

Relegation can work if we limit it to two leagues under the MLS umbrella.
(of course, that's after the set up a single table to acclimatize NA fans first... gotta ease them in)
Revenue sharing and other financial rules will keep teams in the second division healthy.
And there is no lower to go than the second league.

[SLBuu]

where would the teams that play in this second league come from? and will MLS charge them a $40 mill entry fee to join this second tier league? What would differentiate teams from the second and first tier, ie. lower salary cap, no allocation money allowed. what are the circumstances that seperate a first tier team from a second tier team?

[Hitcho]

where would the teams that play in this second league come from? and will MLS charge them a $40 mill entry fee to join this second tier league? What would differentiate teams from the second and first tier, ie. lower salary cap, no allocation money allowed. what are the circumstances that seperate a first tier team from a second tier team?

The ONLY thing that separates them (and this is the whole point) is where they finish in the league the previous season. Salary caps, roster sizes etc all remain the same. Effectively, you're looking at one single MLS structure without any financial penalties for teams in the second division. It's a good way to get MLS into a single table format and still allow it to grow past a certain size. The equality between teams will allow them to bounce up and down freely so no one team will become too powerful or too down-trodden. And in any event, the draft system will still work such that the bottom team in league 2 gets 1st pick and the top team in league 1 gets last pick.

So then you have two MLS leagues, each operating as a single table with its own league "title" up for grabs at the end of the season, and the top two (or three, whatever) from league 2 go up and the same number come down. This will keep the leagues fluid and ensure teams get to play all the other MLS sides regularly over the years. For example, DCU may have gone down this season, along with LA Galaxy. Crew may have gone down the season before but ended up being MLS Cup winners this year. This can happen in MLS, and the term "relegation" isn't nearly as threatening as it is in Europe etc. In fact, they should really use another more neutral term. Eg, teams get re-designated between the MLS Elite League and the MLS Power League. It would work well.

As for where the teams come from, you blend MLS into a single table now and once a few more have joined you split into two tables based on league positions the season before (with everyone on notice so that they know). New MLS sides then join in the MLS Power League (with one less team getting re-designated to keep the split level) and can earn re-designation to the MLS Elite League easily enough.

It's a great plan. You can then build in a genuine MLS Cup with all teams entered on a knockout basis, and if the fixture list will take it create a "local rivalry cup" for teams in the same geographic area (perhaps for those out of the MLS Cup after the first couple of rounds to avoid fixture congestion). MLS should seriously consider this - it's flexible, neutral and far more respectable as a "soccer" league.

[Hitcho]

hmmmm.... this sounds familiar... sorta like the two tier system I have been discussing with other like-minded RPB in here.

I tell you Flat Picker Man, we're going to slowly steam-roller this idea into existence. Our fellow RPB's are privileged to have seen our ideas first...

:D:D:D

[rocker]

i'm not sold on what benefit Promo/Reg would have for MLS.

Everyone who proposes the modified version of it (which I have suggested too in the past as the only way it could work financially, with a cap across both divisions) can't explain exactly what it would do. Greater competition? But the hurt is cushioned in these modified versions by the fact that the second division would have the same cap as the first. And if you could be back in Div 1 in a year, is that really a big penalty? you don't lose your contract because it becomes unaffordable or whatever... teams that go down and lose fan support would still be subsidized by the league, so what's the incentive there?

also, this league is too close (parity) to be knocking 2-3 teams down when they finished a few points back of ones who survive. If it's some "three year average" before getting knocked down, then the whole equation is so massaged and calculated that it becomes meaningless.

third, the competition value of promo/releg seems strange when I see Columbus going from nearly worst to first in three seasons. There was no promo/releg in place, so I'm not sure what pushed Columbus's management to make the team better? ;)

To me, the promo/releg ideas are drastic changes to a league that doesn't need it. It's an ideology that really doesn't provide any real (maybe theoretical) benefit.

I see more movement in teams up and down the table in MLS than I see in the EPL even though they have promo/releg.
And I see great competition between bottom feeders in MLS as they fight to make the playoffs at season's end (the DC game and the RSL game near the end of the season as they struggled to make it in were great games). The season still had meaning right to the last three weeks.

Anyhow, this talk should be saved for when MLS is settled.. when all the expansion teams are in and the league has a few years to see how things are going. Definitely not something that should be considered within the next 10 years.

[JonO]

teams that go down and lose fan support would still be subsidized by the league, so what's the incentive there?
Prestige and excitement. For teams and players, there is the prestige of playing in the "big" league. For the fans, there is the exitement of relegation/promotion. Financial incetives to the owners could be prize money for finishing top of the table....

Just throwing a few ideas out there...

[Technorgasm]

All I see is one thing:

MORE MONEY FOR PLAYERS.

(one table is not an option right now, I wont waste my breath on it)

but for GODS SAKE, it has been proven that there is $$$$ to be made in MLS.
RIGHT NOW
the salaries do not reflect the current or future product of this league.

[Beach_Red]

third, the competition value of promo/releg seems strange when I see Columbus going from nearly worst to first in three seasons. There was no promo/releg in place, so I'm not sure what pushed Columbus's management to make the team better? ;)

And it was possible for them to move from the bottom to the top - it doesn't seem too likely that a team at the 'bottom' of the EPL is going to be challenging for the top anytime soon. Certainly no more likely than any team owned by a billionaire is going to be relegated.

Now, with only 12 or 14 teams the difference between bottom and top isn't the same as a league with dozens of teams, but still.

The main thing relegation would do is change the opponents. If you got relegated you'd play a season against the other "2nd division" teams, which will always be seen as minor league. Likely they wouldn't be anywhere near as big a draw at the gate and you'd lose some fan base and all your sponsorship - especially if none of those "2nd division" games were on TV.

But it would certainly be a good way to weed out the "real fans" from the bandwagon jumpers. MLS would return to a league with 3000 or 4000 at games and it could start building like that, towards becoming a "real league." It would likely take about a generation, say twenty years, but it might be worth it.

What I'd like to know is, if the MLS was formed because the US hosted the World Cup and they needed a domestic league, how come they didn't just expand the USL and use proper formats and rules?

[Roogsy]

I don't understand why a playoff system doesn't have the same drama as a relegation system. It seems to work fine for other sports?

Making a run for points at the end of the season is exactly what relegation is all about...and it is also what the playoff system is about. Essentially...you are vying for a spot in a "2nd" season, the post-season. Bragging rights, money, exposure...everything that goes with being "promoted" also comes with qualifying for "playoffs" and yet somehow a relegation system does it better? I don't buy it.

[Cashcleaner]

My take on Wheeler's article:


- Expand and strengthen the U.S. teams -- although Canadian expansion is a popular idea and necessary for the growth of the Canadian national team, it does little for the American fan-base. More teams in strong American markets is better for the future of the league Another Canadian team (Vancouver) makes sense sometime before the MLS hits 20 teams, but for the time being, satisfying the American market should be the priority.

Wrong! The league would do well to bring in two more Canadian teams, though Montreal has to get sorted out somehow. Three Canadian teams will dominate the market here and we'd probably see coast-to-coast TV coverage as a result. Consider the CBC or Sportsnet getting broadcasting right for all three teams. You would be exposing the league to all 12 provinces. For the price of two more teams in Canada, MLS would be exposing itself to 30 million+ potential soccer fans.


- Raise the salary cap -- the salary structure of MLS is embarrassing. The discrepancy between the league's highest paid players and its lowest paid (as low as $12,900 US) is ridiculous. Not only does it limit what young players make, but it also limits what the best players, who are not designated players, can make. It's a shame a player such as Toronto FC's Carl Robinson, a season after he's named the club's player of the year, has to accept a reduced salary if he wants to stay with his team, simply for salary cap purposes. A cap sitting at $2.3 million, as it did in 2008, makes it extremely difficult to obtain and retain high-quality talent.

Agreed. The cap and minimum salary needs raised. Nothing else to say on this matter.


- MLS relinquish control of player contracts -- MLS having control over player contracts was used as a cost control measure in the past. MLS is at a point where teams have proven they can be profitable, and thus should have control over their own product. A team never should have to sell a player overseas for the sole purpose of being a good bit of business for the league.

MLS needs to start adopting a hands-of approach to management when it comes to the individual clubs. The league needs to reliquish player contracts and keep its nose out of transactions unless mediation between clubs is neccesary.


- Fully recognize FIFA's international calendar -- If you want international quality players in the MLS, then don't have obstacles that stand in the way of them playing both for their club teams and their respective countries. The MLS season starting two weeks earlier and having more mid-week games in '09 is a start, but a complete recognition of international dates will be mandatory as the quality of players coming to MLS continues to improve.

Agreed.


- Make soccer-specific, grass stadiums mandatory -- FieldTurf looks terrible and is bad for the long-term health of the players. As for soccer-specific stadiums, the fact that Seattle is joining the league and playing in a massive football stadium is disconcerting. Whether or not the upper bowl seats are covered is irrelevant; it's the atmosphere that helps make the game and playing in an oversized, stale stadium does nothing for the product.

No. If you have a pre-existing facility that can do the job, there should be no reason to demand a new stadium just for an MLS club. Contrary to what some may believe, sports stadiums don't grow on trees.


- Promote players other than Beckham -- David Beckham was supposed to elevate awareness of MLS and its players to the mainstream. Although the league has gained more exposure, the other players have not. Part of what makes global soccer so compelling is its characters. There are not enough story-lines about MLS players.

Bring in a second DP allocation for clubs and make it so clubs can't trade those slots. I'm not saying teams will HAVE to employ a DP, but it should be more than a simple bargaining option for some clubs.


- Get rid of the playoffs and develop a relegation system -- This is something that's not feasible short-term, however, in moving forward, MLS should establish a single-table league. With league-wide expansion in the works, this will be possible. A balanced schedule would eliminate the playoffs with CONCACAF Champions League, Superliga or US Open Cup games taking the proper stage.

Keep the MLS Cup, but change the format to something akin to the FA Cup. Drop Superliga. Start focusing on CONCACAF Champs League. Single table is a MUST. Pro/rel won't work, and simply wanting it to work won't make it happen.


- Playoffs add little in terms of drama or hype -- relegation does, with every game important. With this in mind, MLS should look into establishing a second division, where teams can bounce up and down based on performance.

No. You're trading one set of problems with another. The economic fundamentals of sports in North America are too intrenched to ignore because the rest of the world operates differently.

[flatpicker]

The ONLY thing that separates them (and this is the whole point) is where they finish in the league the previous season. Salary caps, roster sizes etc all remain the same. Effectively, you're looking at one single MLS structure without any financial penalties for teams in the second division. It's a good way to get MLS into a single table format and still allow it to grow past a certain size. The equality between teams will allow them to bounce up and down freely so no one team will become too powerful or too down-trodden. And in any event, the draft system will still work such that the bottom team in league 2 gets 1st pick and the top team in league 1 gets last pick.

So then you have two MLS leagues, each operating as a single table with its own league "title" up for grabs at the end of the season, and the top two (or three, whatever) from league 2 go up and the same number come down. This will keep the leagues fluid and ensure teams get to play all the other MLS sides regularly over the years. For example, DCU may have gone down this season, along with LA Galaxy. Crew may have gone down the season before but ended up being MLS Cup winners this year. This can happen in MLS, and the term "relegation" isn't nearly as threatening as it is in Europe etc. In fact, they should really use another more neutral term. Eg, teams get re-designated between the MLS Elite League and the MLS Power League. It would work well.

As for where the teams come from, you blend MLS into a single table now and once a few more have joined you split into two tables based on league positions the season before (with everyone on notice so that they know). New MLS sides then join in the MLS Power League (with one less team getting re-designated to keep the split level) and can earn re-designation to the MLS Elite League easily enough.

It's a great plan. You can then build in a genuine MLS Cup with all teams entered on a knockout basis, and if the fixture list will take it create a "local rivalry cup" for teams in the same geographic area (perhaps for those out of the MLS Cup after the first couple of rounds to avoid fixture congestion). MLS should seriously consider this - it's flexible, neutral and far more respectable as a "soccer" league.

^ exactly

- and I like the term I proposed before to replace "relegated" or "promoted"... "reassigned"
fans that are new to the game wouldn't find it so threatening...



Prestige and excitement. For teams and players, there is the prestige of playing in the "big" league. For the fans, there is the exitement of relegation/promotion. Financial incetives to the owners could be prize money for finishing top of the table....

Just throwing a few ideas out there...

^
- yes...the excitement of being "reassigned" ;) up or down would attract fans (especially fans of the Euro game)
- and yes... a financial prize for winning the "Elite" division would be incentive for moving up to first division.




I think having the MLS Cup being a league wide competition would help keep fans in the seats.
Those that are worried about being in the "Second Division" will still benefit from playing teams in the "First Division" during the MLS Cup knockout stage.
Rather than have a random draw for match-ups, the could make sure that "Second Division" teams play "First Division" teams in the opening round.
And if you include those games in the season package then that would help keep seats filled.

[Cambridge_Red]

There's the entry fee issue plus relegation promotion is an outside of N.America idea.. I can't see many American teams beside Chicago/DC/Houston keeping a strong attendance if their team got dumped into a second tier. Just my $.02

[Roogsy]

I would question if even Toronto would support a team in the 2nd tier.

[Beach_Red]

I would question if even Toronto would support a team in the 2nd tier.

Or any city in North America that sees itself as 'big league.'

Although, if the rest of the league structure were the same as, say the EPL - no salary caps or nationalality requirements, the teams with the highest spending owners would never worry about relegation - LA could have got some more guys to go along with their big DP signing, Seattle would be at the top right away, NY would probably buy a first place team and stay near the top.

A place like Columbus - or Toronto - might get excited every three or four years when they get promoted and play the big teams for one season, losing most of the games and getting knocked back the next year. But really, that would only work if the sport had beeningrained in people for a hundred years.

I could see the Pawtucket Red Sox thrilled with their promotion and one season in the bigs playing the Yankees and White Sox, but I can't see soccer fans who aren't so sure about the sport getting behind the idea.


There really doesn't seem to be any way to combine relegation with a salary cap and without a salary cap a few teams will dominate the league and interest will fade in the rest of the cities.

[Fort York Redcoat]

I would question if even Toronto would support a team in the 2nd tier.

What if the Marlies were seperate from MLSE and had an opportunity to play the Leafs after promotion. You're damn right hockey fans in this town would love that.

BTWNH
buthtawilneverhappen:p

[Cashcleaner]

I would question if even Toronto would support a team in the 2nd tier.

We wouldn't. Sure, there's loads of RPBers, U-Sectorites, and North End Elitists who would probably continue to watch TFC play no matter what tier we were in, but the supporters only make up a small segment of total TFC fans.

[SLBuu]

We wouldn't. Sure, there's loads of RPBers, U-Sectorites, and North End Elitists who would probably continue to watch TFC play no matter what tier we were in, but the supporters only make up a small segment of total TFC fans.

i think a lot of people dont realize this point.....

[Beach_Red]

What if the Marlies were seperate from MLSE and had an opportunity to play the Leafs after promotion. You're damn right hockey fans in this town would love that.

BTWNH
buthtawilneverhappen:p

How come people who support relegation/promotion never talk about the fact that it's not working in Europe? That only a few teams in the top leagues really worry about it or are affected by it?

If there was a league with relegation/promotion that didn't have the same few teams winning it every year, this would be an easier sell. One thing about the NFL, NBA and even the NHL is that different teams win championships, teams move up and down through those "tables" a lot more than most teams do in the EPL.

[Hitcho]

Re promo/releg being an "outside Namerica idea". well SO IS SOCCER!!!! If the game is going to survive and thrive in the US then it needs to do so on its own terms. You can't make it into a North American concept because it will forever remain a joke league around the world and no decent players will EVER want to come to MLS on a regular basis and fans of the game who are not born and bred americans (which makes up a HUGE part of the fan base in Namerica right now) will not take it seriously either. You have to let the game exist here in its true format for it to really take off. If born and bred play-off fed yanks are not part of the core fan base in the first few years then so be it, those fans will come as the league gains more credence. If you lose the genuine fans of the game from the outset, you're screwed. Soccer is different. SO let it survive on its own terms.

I've heard lots of arguments supporting the play offs, but the one fact no-one can get around is that at the end of the season the league winner isn't crowned champion, they have to enter a lottery draw and play a bunch of extra games where they might see some side who came 8th crowned champions. That, my friends, is total bullshit, and no rguments in support can ever justify the play-offs because of that, in my book.

As for excitement and games having meaning to the end of the season, it happened this year but when the league expands you'll get teams out of the play offs from a much earlier stage. Then what? Make a third conference to keep them all tight?! With a two tier MLS system you'll have four areas of interest (top and bottom of each league) not just two, right until the end of the season. And the lottery aspect of a team coming from behind and winning the cup against the odds is supported by the idea of a genuine MLS Cup in a knock-out format. A team can be bottom of tier two and win the MLS Cup - there you go, yanks are happy.

As for support of teams in the second tier, the whole point is there's no need for them to stay there. Columbust went from zero to champs in one season. You can go down one season, come back up the next AS CHAMPIONS and be overall MLS champs again the following season. And so on. So yeah, teams would maintain fan support I reckon, especially since it won't always be "shit" teams in the second tier - DCU and LAG could be in there based on this season, for example. And anyway, if the argument about fans dwindling is true, then as MLS expands and more teams go out of play-off contention earlier in the season, the same thing will happen and attendances will be crap for half of the teams for half of the season. So the argument is baseless since it applies in either format. But, under the two tier system, if a team goes down one season they can be fighting for the league title of the second tier the next system. So I don't buy that argument. In fact, if MLS presents the idea intelligently, the position is actually better under the two tier system.

As for entry fees etc, the whole point is that everyone is on a level playing field. There will never be a "big four" in MLS because there cannot be. This underpins the whole idea of the two tier system. You go down, it sucks, but you start with as much chance of winning as everyone else the following system. Some posts above complain about the fact that keeping everything level means there si no "hurt" for the relegated teams, and then worry about teams going bust if there is "hurt". Well, you can't have it both ways. This way, there's meaning right through every season for every team and no team can get shafted financially. Therefore, the entry fee can remain the same and franchises don't stand to pay the money, get relegated and go bust. You start in tier two and could be MLS champs at the end of your second season. At worst, you get the same dosh as everyone else for players etc and get frist draft pick.

It works, my friends. People are reluctant because they look at Europe and confuse the above model with that. Well it's not - it's different, it's geared towards the unique thing that MLS is and it covers all the bases. We should move to a single league ith a knock-out cup format now and a two tier league system (all under the same MLS umbrella) once a few more teams have joined. Aim for two league of 10 each and MLS will be a much better sport for it - individual, respected and supported by amerians and no-americans alike.

[Hitcho]

How come people who support relegation/promotion never talk about the fact that it's not working in Europe? That only a few teams in the top leagues really worry about it or are affected by it?

If there was a league with relegation/promotion that didn't have the same few teams winning it every year, this would be an easier sell. One thing about the NFL, NBA and even the NHL is that different teams win championships, teams move up and down through those "tables" a lot more than most teams do in the EPL.

You're missing the point. THIS COULD NOT HAPPEN IN MLS UNDER A TWO LEAGUE SYSTEM. In Europe, clubs are independent and success leads to more money and more success. The rich get richer and the rest go down. Well in a two league MLS system, the financial playing field would be level, and the lower you finish the better your draft picks, so if anything you're actually better off after a couple of duff seasons.

You cannot point to the EUrope model as a reason not to do this, since a two tier MLS would not be even remotely similar to that. i agree the "big four" syndrome would be a problem, but the fact remains it simply could not happen (or if it did, it would be temporary since players of a good team would age or a good coach would leave, etc - ie, it won't be down to money reasons and other factros leading to a period of dominance will eventually fade away).

[Hitcho]

We wouldn't. Sure, there's loads of RPBers, U-Sectorites, and North End Elitists who would probably continue to watch TFC play no matter what tier we were in, but the supporters only make up a small segment of total TFC fans.

MLS would have to sensibly market the idea, I agree. but if they rpesent it as 20 teams playign in two leagues of ten with fluid movement between the two (ie, to keep the fixture list interesting) then it will float, I'm sure of it.

Part of the TFC experiecne is the game day buzz and crowd noise. I don't see why that would change because TFC were playing DCU in the MLS Power league rather than playing DCU in the MLS Elite league.

[Fort York Redcoat]

How come people who support relegation/promotion never talk about the fact that it's not working in Europe? That only a few teams in the top leagues really worry about it or are affected by it?

If there was a league with relegation/promotion that didn't have the same few teams winning it every year, this would be an easier sell. One thing about the NFL, NBA and even the NHL is that different teams win championships, teams move up and down through those "tables" a lot more than most teams do in the EPL.

Sure...ask them if they would prefer the playoff system to decide the Champions.

Not working? Not affected by it? What league are you watching? You have a top group in most leagues of 1-4 teams unaffected and the rest of the table are challenging. You are looking at it from a NA view. They see it as many groups within a table. You don't like that view and you are not alone. I like the p/r system and think it works. It appeals to me the way the playoff system doesn't. That's a majority view elsewhere.

[Fort York Redcoat]

How come people who support relegation/promotion never talk about the fact that it's not working in Europe? That only a few teams in the top leagues really worry about it or are affected by it?

If there was a league with relegation/promotion that didn't have the same few teams winning it every year, this would be an easier sell. One thing about the NFL, NBA and even the NHL is that different teams win championships, teams move up and down through those "tables" a lot more than most teams do in the EPL.

And we know what those "tables" are worth here.

[mighty_torontofc_2008]

Relegation would never be accepted by the MLS owners, or the supporters is just wouldn't work...Only SSS would be they way to go...No to giant stadiums like
Seattle Quest field, No to BC place, No to Giants stadium. Either you have a SSS or you don;t get in. Playoff system, make all rounds a 2 legged affair as well as the MLS cup final,let the fans of both teams see the final, its much better then having a final where the fans don;t really care for the teams involved...Home depot center for example.

[Ossington Mental Youth]

Relegation is never going to happen, at least not in my life time, not enough interest or money to support, doesnt bother me cuz we would have been relegated a second year in a row.

They should however put more emphasis on the supporters shield and down play the winner of the playoffs.

[arbogast]

[quote=Cashcleaner;283001]My take on Wheeler's article:



Wrong! The league would do well to bring in two more Canadian teams, though Montreal has to get sorted out somehow. Three Canadian teams will dominate the market here and we'd probably see coast-to-coast TV coverage as a result. Consider the CBC or Sportsnet getting broadcasting right for all three teams. You would be exposing the league to all 12 provinces. For the price of two more teams in Canada, MLS would be exposing itself to 30 million+ potential soccer fans.


Agreed. The cap and minimum salary needs raised. Nothing else to say on this matter.

[quote]


It has to be raised, but i don't think it will change significantly for a couple of years at least. If you raise the cap by $1 million/club, next year it would raise the league's expenses by $15 million. The only way to make up revenue is through sponsorships and with the league's abysmal tv ratings, and the economic reality of our times, I doubt they'll find willing companies in the near term. Yes the CA expires next season, and the players can strike, but the league will doubtless open the books to show them the cupboard is bare. I really think the salary issue will be a brutal fight at the bargaining table.

[Ossington Mental Youth]

also realy dont think we will be seeing any canadian teams in the next expansion bit, maybe the two teams after that we might see one but its gonna be two american ones. Prob Miami (mistake) and either Portland or St Louis.

[Ossington Mental Youth]

im not looking at it from a NA perspective, im lookign at it from an owners perspective.

When a team that is backed by two billionaires, already has a fan base and already has a stadium drops out because of a couple million dollars they dont wnat to pay, you are not going to see a ton alot of people rush forward to pay to watch their team that they paid a ton of money for see their team get relegated

[arbogast]

im not looking at it from a NA perspective, im lookign at it from an owners perspective.

When a team that is backed by two billionaires, already has a fan base and already has a stadium drops out because of a couple million dollars they dont wnat to pay, you are not going to see a ton alot of people rush forward to pay to watch their team that they paid a ton of money for see their team get relegated

I agree and I would add that N/A corporate sponsors aren't used to it either and aren't going to be jumping to sponsor or renew sponsoships with "relegated" i.e inferior teams in an lower league

[Beach_Red]

Sure...ask them if they would prefer the playoff system to decide the Champions.

Not working? Not affected by it? What league are you watching? You have a top group in most leagues of 1-4 teams unaffected.

Really, I don't have a preference either way, but that 1-4 teams unaffcted seems like a pretty big elephant in the room no one's talking about.

I actually like the NFL system. You have a few Detroits and New Orleans and a couple of top teams, but it's not predetermined. The Colts can win the Super Bowl one year and be gone the next. New England can dominate for a while and then sink pretty low in the 'table.' Building a team is tough, you can't just buy the best players from Brazil and wherever.

And you know, of course I'm looking at it from a North American view, it's what I know, what I'm used to and what works here. It doesn't feel "broken" because it's exciting, teams can move all the way from the bottom to the top - no one is "unaffected" by anything.

The play-offs are just an elimination system to a final game - they use that in Europe, they call it Champions League or Euro (they even have one for the losers, sheesh, once you're out of the play-offs here, you're out ;)) The Champions League also seems to be the same teams every year, by the way, at least recently.

As for Hitcho's, "You cannot point to the EUrope model as a reason not to do this," well, you can't point to it as a way to do it, either.

The same reasons for why the system wouldn't be dominated by the same teams are also for why a relegation system simply isn't necessary.

"People are reluctant because they look at Europe and confuse the above model with that. Well it's not - it's different."

So now it's a third system? That's really going to be a hard sell.

What we have in North America is the reality that little teams in small towns can't compete for the big title. Well, they can't in a single table relegation/promotion system either, people are just okay with the fallacy that they can. Oh, I suppose if some Russian billionaire bought some little town team he could, in fact, put it at the top, but most people here claim that buying championships isn't a good way to go.

[Beach_Red]

In another thread, tfcleeds says this about the Dallas Cowboys: "It's funny how many people consider the Cowboys to be a "bandwagon" team when they haven't won a Super Bowl in almost 13 years, but then again, they are "America's team". I've been following the team since the days of Tom Landry, when they were truly a team to be admired, I cheered for them during their 1-15 season, and basked in their 3 Super Bowl triumphs in the 1990s."

I don't know tfcleeds, but I like his sig a lot: "To support (Manchester) United is too easy. It's convenience supporting. It makes life too easy. There is no challenge. It is a cowardly form of escapism, a sell-out to the forces of evil. To support them is heroism in a can." - Paul Morley

So, you could call the Cowboys and ManU both "heroism in a can," (what a great line) except the Cowboys haven't won a Super Bowl in 13 years and are unlikely to win it this year. They've missed the playoffs. They could, though, win a Super Bowl in the next few years.

Realistically, what are the chances ManU will have the equivalent of a 1-15 season anytime soon and get relegated and then coming back to the top five years later?

Which system is working better?

[Fort York Redcoat]

In another thread, tfcleeds says this about the Dallas Cowboys: "It's funny how many people consider the Cowboys to be a "bandwagon" team when they haven't won a Super Bowl in almost 13 years, but then again, they are "America's team". I've been following the team since the days of Tom Landry, when they were truly a team to be admired, I cheered for them during their 1-15 season, and basked in their 3 Super Bowl triumphs in the 1990s."

I don't know tfcleeds, but I like his sig a lot: "To support (Manchester) United is too easy. It's convenience supporting. It makes life too easy. There is no challenge. It is a cowardly form of escapism, a sell-out to the forces of evil. To support them is heroism in a can." - Paul Morley

So, you could call the Cowboys and ManU both "heroism in a can," (what a great line) except the Cowboys haven't won a Super Bowl in 13 years and are unlikely to win it this year. They've missed the playoffs. They could, though, win a Super Bowl in the next few years.

Realistically, what are the chances ManU will have the equivalent of a 1-15 season anytime soon and get relegated and then coming back to the top five years later?

Which system is working better?

Which league is more popular?

At least that's a question that can be proven with statistics vs your own opinion. Better? IMO the NFL is putting lipstick on a pig. I couldn't care less for the game or the teams so I can't get drawn in by the big lights NFLers go on about. No league is squeaky clean. No system is perfect (and you know this from other posts and threads I've read). As for your choice in NFL teams to root for the endless bandwagonism is due to the fact that your league of choice has no favourites and people in this country choose on the basis of fancy with little connection to the team city. World football fans over here either have and attachment or followed a team they CAN follow hence all the glory hunters.

[Beach_Red]

Which league is more popular?

At least that's a question that can be proven with statistics vs your own opinion. Better? IMO the NFL is putting lipstick on a pig. I couldn't care less for the game or the teams so I can't get drawn in by the big lights NFLers go on about. No league is squeaky clean. No system is perfect (and you know this from other posts and threads I've read). As for your choice in NFL teams to root for the endless bandwagonism is due to the fact that your league of choice has no favourites and people in this country choose on the basis of fancy with little connection to the team city. World football fans over here either have and attachment or followed a team they CAN follow hence all the glory hunters.

It's actually tfcleeds choice, I hate the Cowboys ;). Actually, when I first read his post I thought it was in direct conflict with his sig, I thought if the Dallas Cowboys aren't the ManU of the NFL - but then I read the rest of what he wrote, the 1-15 season, the missed playoffs and I saw the difference. Still, come on, the Cowboys?

Anyway, the popularity of the EPL says a lot more to me about soccer than about the league - the game is so good it can withstand even an easy-to-manipulate-by-money system.

For years I felt the same way about hockey - the game was so good even those jerks in the NHL head office couldn't kill it, but they may yet prove me wrong about that.

I think soccer will grow and thrive in North America, not because of single table or divisions or playoffs or relegation - it'll thrive in any of those systems because the sport itself is so good.

[Hitcho]

Really, I don't have a preference either way, but that 1-4 teams unaffcted seems like a pretty big elephant in the room no one's talking about.

I actually like the NFL system. You have a few Detroits and New Orleans and a couple of top teams, but it's not predetermined. The Colts can win the Super Bowl one year and be gone the next. New England can dominate for a while and then sink pretty low in the 'table.' Building a team is tough, you can't just buy the best players from Brazil and wherever.

And you know, of course I'm looking at it from a North American view, it's what I know, what I'm used to and what works here. It doesn't feel "broken" because it's exciting, teams can move all the way from the bottom to the top - no one is "unaffected" by anything.

The play-offs are just an elimination system to a final game - they use that in Europe, they call it Champions League or Euro (they even have one for the losers, sheesh, once you're out of the play-offs here, you're out ;)) The Champions League also seems to be the same teams every year, by the way, at least recently.

As for Hitcho's, "You cannot point to the EUrope model as a reason not to do this," well, you can't point to it as a way to do it, either.

The same reasons for why the system wouldn't be dominated by the same teams are also for why a relegation system simply isn't necessary.

"People are reluctant because they look at Europe and confuse the above model with that. Well it's not - it's different."

So now it's a third system? That's really going to be a hard sell.

What we have in North America is the reality that little teams in small towns can't compete for the big title. Well, they can't in a single table relegation/promotion system either, people are just okay with the fallacy that they can. Oh, I suppose if some Russian billionaire bought some little town team he could, in fact, put it at the top, but most people here claim that buying championships isn't a good way to go.

For the record, I totally agree that any kind of predictable dominance by a few wealthy teams is a bad thing for any sport. Right now, MLS doesn't suffer from that and it's important to ensure that it never does. SO then the question becomes, is there any way of improving the current MLS format without fallign into the the trap that European (and other) leagues have of allowing the richest clubs to always dominate? There's a school of thought that there is, and there's a school of thought that the play-off system should remain in place.

I'm not suggesting a third system btw, what I'm saying is it's possible to take the European system and keep the good bits but not have to suffer the bad bits. So, under a two tier MLS system you keep the good bits (eg, the league winner is crowned league champion without the lottery of the play offs, and you get the excitement of a knock-out competition through an MLS cup format not the leagues) but you avoid the bad bits (no-one can get uber-rich and dominate because of the centralised MLS finances and relegation doesn't lead to implosion because you can only drop down one league and you're still able to compete with the other teams on a level financial playing field).

You cited the NFL and the fact that teams can do well and then sink again (and vice versa) season to season. I agree. MLS has that now, and it's important to see that under the proposed two tier system it still would. That's vital to the future of the sport here, and the equality among teams will never change no matter where they finish in the league. Period. What I'm trying to get across is that no matter how rich the owner of an MLS club, the current equality system remains in place. Get it? THERE CAN BE NO FINANCIAL DOMINANCE. Don;t eman to shout at you because I hear your arguments and agree with a lot of them, they're good points. But the same thing keeps getting raised in these threads over and over - ie, that prom/releg will ead to rich clubs and bankrupt clubs. Under the twio tier MLS system proopsed, that cannot and will not happen because the exiusting monetary equality stays as it is.

What you get is two leagues, promoted as being under the same MLS umbrella without the risk of being relegated out of MLS, operating as a side by side system but with the chance to be reassigned form one league to the other depending on where you finish. All of the teams will eventually go into both leagues because of the way the system works in MLS. but it means you get two league winners based on a genuine league, and no-one usurping the tile of MLS Champs after finishing 8th in the league. That has to be a good thing, no? The "come from nowehere glory path" is also still alive through a genuine MLS Cup on a knockout basis.

So, all of the thinsg you want to see kept in place will remain in place, but the MLS system becomes more resepctable around the world and you get a genuine league and league champion system.

As for the fans disappearing if you get reasigned to the lower league, the marketing of the two leagues as both being MLS and with regular flow between the leagues of teams on an equal footing should rpevent that. What no-one has managed toi explain to me yet is this - if fans are so fickle that they'll disappear if a team gets reassigned to the lower MLS league where they have a really good chance of going straight back up again and will l;ikely be playing some "glamorous" names anyway, then why won;t those same fans disappear half way though the season once the league expands and they go out of play off contention early on? You cannot say SSH will be captured for the seaosn because we know at BMO Field that's not true. So, either the sport is fucked and will never be free of this, or the fact is a two tier system will leave us no worse off in that respect and may even be benefical since there will be two sets of league winners and league losers to generate interest, not just two conference winners.

[flatpicker]

^ thank you Hitcho for typing all this... you speak my mind... but I am too lazy to write as much as you do! :)

On the point of league parity through financial restrictions and revenue sharing:
I'm pretty sure that as the league continues to grow in strength and popularity you will find the salary cap grow as well.
It may reach a point were some teams spend more than others depending on their revenue.
Some teams may begin to stay in the "Elite League" more than others, but it would be no different than say the Red Wings or NY Rangers in the NHL.
Big market clubs generally have more to spend and thus have increased opportunity to succeed.
That's typical in any pro league in North America, and I don't see it as a problem.
It's nice to have a couple tougher teams in the league for other cities to hate and get pumped up for on game day.

I do hope we will see a freer market in MLS.
Keep the cap, but raise it whenever the league revenues improve. And let teams have full control over players signings and contracts.
Basically, I hope we will see a similar set up as in the NHL.
Let the teams handle their own affairs, but still maintain a form of revenue sharing so smaller clubs don't suffer.
In the NHL you have clubs that spend up to the cap, and others that don't spend nearly as much.
But that system will usually mean that a club with a smaller payroll will not win the league, but might have a Cinderella chance in the playoffs, while others miss the playoffs entirely.
In the "two-tier" MLS set-up, all clubs, no matter what their payroll or where they finish in the standings, will have a chance at the Cup.
That's something to be excited about I think...

[Beach_Red]

What no-one has managed toi explain to me yet is this - if fans are so fickle that they'll disappear if a team gets reassigned to the lower MLS league where they have a really good chance of going straight back up again and will l;ikely be playing some "glamorous" names anyway, then why won;t those same fans disappear half way though the season

Oh but they will lose fans. How many times on this forum- a supporters' forum - have you heard people say that if this team doesn't start winning they'll stop going and give up their seasons tickets? I hope it's just talk, but you never know.

Right now halfway through the season isn't enough to eliminate a team from contention, they can have a great second half a great playoff run - as NY just did. But if after 15 games the gap between the first place team and 'your' team was too great, then yes, the fans would stay away for the second half. Especially places where there are low season tickets sales.

The last couple games at BMO were the lowest attended ever, weren't they? Imagine what it would be like for the whole second half of the season in Dallas and LA and KC and NY. This league couldn't survive one season like that.

But really, once you've changed the European system so much, once you, "take the European system and keep the good bits but not have to suffer the bad bits," will it really be "pure" enough to sdatisfy people who want the European system?

All you're really talking about is moving the playoffs from the end of the season to have them run parallel with league games and call it something else. That wold work, you should be able to get people on board with that, but how bad is it to have it at the end of the season?

[flatpicker]

^ well, technically, you could have it at the end of the season.

You could shorten the season by a few games since it would be a longer playoff tournament with every team involved.
So, if we went with the "two tier" MLS set-up, the Cup competition could be like the familiar playoffs but bigger.
Have the first place team in the "first division" play the last place team in the "second division" and so on.
But I think all teams would need to include the first round of playoffs in their season ticket package since all are guaranteed a spot.
The first round could be a home and away set-up like we have now so that it benefits all clubs financially.
But I think after that they should go to a one game system with the match played in the city with the best season record.

[Beach_Red]

^ Well, see, now it really looks like six of one a half dozen of the other and doesn't seem worth the effort.

Maybe someday when soccer is one of the big four sports in North America peolpe can worry about 'fine tuning' it like this, but it just doesn't seem worth it now.

[flatpicker]

^ but it's different because one half of those teams don't play the other half all year until the Cup playoff since they would be in different divisions during the season.

[Fort York Redcoat]

^ Well, see, now it really looks like six of one a half dozen of the other and doesn't seem worth the effort.

Maybe someday when soccer is one of the big four sports in North America peolpe can worry about 'fine tuning' it like this, but it just doesn't seem worth it now.

Wait till enough people will be pissed you changed the rules?

SO after OT anyone?

[Beach_Red]

Wait till enough people will be pissed you changed the rules?

SO after OT anyone?

Or, what could happen is enough people (and really what we mean here is Americans) will start to follow MLS, really love it and start to demand it line up with the rest of the soccer leagues in the world.

They won't be pissed off fans, they'll be the ones demanding the change.