MLS Expansion - Shooting itself in the foot?

[Initial B]

With all the talk of becoming a top-10 league, salary caps and TV contracts I suddenly realized something:

MLS needs to be at 28 teams by the next TV contract.

Everyone agrees that the MLS salary cap is too low to allow feilding balanced quality teams that will help raise the level of the game and hopefully TV viewership. The TV deal is fixed for 8 years at $90 million per year. Assuming that money is what keeps the teams solvent and how MLS pays its players, the more teams join the league, the less money there is to spread around, placing an upper limit on the size of the salary cap. The only thing that can mitigate that short-term is expansion fees.

The last TV deal paid $30 million per year. Spread across 19 teams, all that money would have paid $1.57 million of the $3.1 million salary cap for 2014, approximately 51%. Assuming all the new TV deal revenue goes towards paying player salaries and assuming that teams can remain solvent paying for $1.5 million of the salary cap themselves through gate reciepts, a 24-team league would only be able to handle a $5.25 million cap whereas a 20-team league could handle a $6 million cap.

It is rumored the Salary Cap is going to be set at $4 million. Based on past rate of increase of 5% per year, that means that after 8 years the Salary Cap will only be $5.628 million. By that point, the quality of play will have fallen so far behind the EPL and other world leagues that TV numbers will have atrophied as eyeballs turn away from MLS, resulting in the next TV deal being lower, teams becoming insolvent, and the contraction/death of the league. But the Catch-22 is that you need more markets to gather more eyeballs and command greater future contract amounts, but which leaves less money under the current contract for the teams to be profitable.

I think the next couple of years are going to be crucial for MLS and they need to step up the quality of player so that by the time the next TV deal is in place for 2023 the networks will have a bidding war and hopefully triple the TV contract to $270 million per year, which would allow for each team in a 28-team MLS to operate with a Salary Cap of over $10 million, definitely placing it in the top 10 world leagues.

The Expansion fees paid by NYCFC, LAFC, Orlando, and Atlanta give MLS $350 million in revenues above and beyond the TV deal. If they allow 4 more teams into the league by 2023 that would be an additional $400 million. If MLS puts that money towards increasing the Salary Cap above the limitations of the current TV deal, they could pay an average of $93.75 million per year towards player salaries for the next 8 years. If the league agrees to a $4.5 million Cap for 2015, then increases it by 10% per year, by the time 2022 rolls around the Salary Cap will be up to $8.77 million, which would put it at least on par with Liga MX and probably ensure that MLS teams would play in the Club World Cup regularly.

So what's wrong with this forecast? Well, if the next TV contract is signed for less than $200 million/yr, then the clubs might go into deficit situations if they aren't getting fans in the seats. But assuming there is enough buzz around the league, they should be able to move teams around to more profitable markets and find new investors that would be able to absorb some losses until the next TV deal. I think MLS can do this, but does Garber and the owners have the guts to do it? Or does this just sound like pot-smoking pie-in-the-sky from me with no basis in reality?

[Richard]

A 28 team top flight division is ridiculous, just utter nonsense. Cap the league at 20, have a balanced schedule home and away games wise, make each game worth something(still have playoffs), fold the garbage franchises, and improve the overall quality.

MLS is definitely on expansion high right now and it will backfire, no way can they raise the quality anywhere close a top 10 league with a sub 10M cap with that many teams.

[kshep]

I am thinking mls will never put a team cap on the league, not when you can just create more conferences or divisions. In 40/50 years(assuming the league survives that long) could be 80+ teams. 4 divisions/conferences of 20 teams.

Each divisions could have its own playoff or single table, and have 4 team play down for mls cup.

[Initial B]

Well, now that the CBA has been agreed upon we're starting to hear more about the next phase of expansion.

http://prosoccertalk.nbcsports.com/2...neapolis-wait/

A comment that stuck out at me:

Given the fact that Las Vegas is out of the expansion race for 2020 but not out of the picture altogether, is it conceivable that all four of these cities are granted expansion franchises to take the number to 27 by 2020 and then maybe Vegas coming just after to make it 28 by 2022?

I'm thinking they don't stop at 28, but there is a limit to how many teams MLS can sustain with the TV revenue before it meets the law of diminishing returns. I think the ultimate goal of the league is to stabilize at 32 teams by the end of the 2020s. The teams will be divided into Eastern and Western Conferences of 4 divisions of 4 teams each. each team would play a 38-game season of alternating home/away inter-divisional games except for cycling a home and away series between the 3 other divisions in its conference on a 3 year cycle. Playoffs would be the NFL format (Garber is a well-known admirer of that league) - top two teams per conference would get a bye with the next 2 divisional leaders playing a play-in game with the next two top point teams in the conference (wild-cards), followed by successive home and away series leading up to the MLS Cup.

My reasoning:

1. Large number of teams ensures at least 50% of all TV markets in the US.
2. Betting companies would like the increased uncertainty since the team match-ups would change every year.
3. The alternating intra-conference home-and-away series and playoff structure would be just like the NFL, attracting those viewers with a familiar structure.
4. For the same reasons as 3, Europeans would find the structure familiar as a EUFA Champion's League Group Stage table.
5. A 38-game schedule would meet Klinsmann's demands for more games for players to hone their skills (equal to an EPL season)

Is this doable? Better Question: Is this desirable? As the academies ramp up their player production, there should be enough prospects to counter any possible dilution of quality.

[Yohan]

http://www.startribune.com/sports/296080511.html

I'd say Minnesota and Sacramento are in for next 2 cities for expansion

[Detroit_TFC]

Seems like MLS is headed to two large conferences with limited inter-conf play. I don't see a problem with that, especially if it can be single table within the conference. I'd even be happier with no inter-conf play except preseason and possibly a bracketed playoff. That would make east/west games in USOC/Cdn Cup/MLS playoffs very special when they happen. Unfortunately I'd guess it's more likely they'd go to geographical divisions or add 3rd conference. I guess they could split the league into pro/rel divisions but I can't see it happening until after this new structure is maxed out.

The question is whether that will happen when/if MLS absorbs NASL, or grow into it after not being able to turn down $100M (or more) checks waved in their faces.

edit: this entire post ignores my signature statement, so this is for entertainment purposes only.

[Miko]

http://www.startribune.com/sports/296080511.html

I'd say Minnesota and Sacramento are in for next 2 cities for expansion

Sac would be a great team in MLS. The Republic have already expanded their stadium, won a title and always seem to fall in the top 10 of tv ratings for soccer.

Tower Bridge Battalion is becoming a legitimate organic supporters group and the San Jose rivalry is a natural.

[ensco]

Sac would be a great team in MLS. The Republic have already expanded their stadium, won a title and always seem to fall in the top 10 of tv ratings for soccer.

Tower Bridge Battalion is becoming a legitimate organic supporters group and the San Jose rivalry is a natural.

Sacramento is a big multicultural city. It gets lost in the glare of LA and SF. But it is big.

[Cashcleaner]

Well, we're at 20 teams now and have Atlanta and LAFC both coming in for 2017. Miami is still in the air, but I'm sure they will eventually sort themselves out and Garber could easily find another expansion city to come in with them sometime before 2020.

Do I think MLS will eventually expand beyond 24 teams? Yes. Do I think it's a good idea to have that many clubs in the league? Absolutely not. At least not with the current format.

But if we are to have a league with over 24 clubs I would prefer the league is split between 2 Conferences (East & West) with no inter-conference play during the regular season. Mixing things up in the playoffs would be cool, but keep East and West separated for the remainder of the season. All said, though, I really REALLY don't want to see MLS get that big. 24 clubs is pushing it as it is.

[ag futbol]

A 28 team top flight division is ridiculous, just utter nonsense. Cap the league at 20, have a balanced schedule home and away games wise, make each game worth something(still have playoffs), fold the garbage franchises, and improve the overall quality.

MLS is definitely on expansion high right now and it will backfire, no way can they raise the quality anywhere close a top 10 league with a sub 10M cap with that many teams.

Won't happen. A baseball style AL-NL format with each division having a balanced schedule is the best we'll get. Relegation is dead in any league not anchored to history for reasons relating to business. I don't think it's too over the top for two countries and ~350 million people to have 28 teams.

Agreed that will create quality issues, but after the last cba I have serious doubts as to whether they would ever care to make progress in the area.

[prizby]

A 28 team top flight division is ridiculous, just utter nonsense.

have you seen argentina!

[Alonso]

Seems like MLS is headed to two large conferences with limited inter-conf play. I don't see a problem with that, especially if it can be single table within the conference. I'd even be happier with no inter-conf play except preseason and possibly a bracketed playoff. That would make east/west games in USOC/Cdn Cup/MLS playoffs very special when they happen. Unfortunately I'd guess it's more likely they'd go to geographical divisions or add 3rd conference. I guess they could split the league into pro/rel divisions but I can't see it happening until after this new structure is maxed out.

The question is whether that will happen when/if MLS absorbs NASL, or grow into it after not being able to turn down $100M (or more) checks waved in their faces.

edit: this entire post ignores my signature statement, so this is for entertainment purposes only.

Hey now. You're on a Canadian forum, the correct spelling is cheques.

As for the rest of your post, I couldn't agree more.

[kodiakTFC]

Why is 28 teams ridiculous? I don't see the logic that because Europe doesn't have it, means we can't do it. Argentina has 30 teams. I've always thought that 2 leagues of 15 actually makes A LOT of sense. The travel in this league is unfair to players, splitting it into two would be favorable.

[Alonso]

Why is 28 teams ridiculous? I don't see the logic that because Europe doesn't have it, means we can't do it. Argentina has 30 teams. I've always thought that 2 leagues of 15 actually makes A LOT of sense. The travel in this league is unfair to players, splitting it into two would be favorable.

Especially when you factor in the various other tournaments that would potentially bump the number of games played to 18+ not to mention the friendlies that the league seems to be so fond of during mid season.

[Initial B]

The owners would never agree to that in the short term because they want the Revenue that comes from having desirable teams visit their stadiums (LAG, TFC, SS, NER, NYCFC, ORL, etc). Not until the TV revenue is in the billions per year would they go with that format.

[kodiakTFC]

The owners would never agree to that in the short term because they want the Revenue that comes from having desirable teams visit their stadiums (LAG, TFC, SS, NER, NYCFC, ORL, etc). Not until the TV revenue is in the billions per year would they go with that format.

This is true but, its not like teams in the West don't miss us already or teams in the East miss LAG. I think it would be fine as long as you have enough 'major' teams in each conference. For instance Tor/NYCFC/Whoever and Seattle/LAG/whoever. I'm not against some inter-league play too.

[Steelers7]

This post intriqued me so thought I'd chime in. My post might be long but hopefully it makes sense.
As you can see I'm a big NFL fan and when you really look at all the leagues within North America it has the best mould and formula for its scheduling and playoffs too. Some people don't know how it works so I'll explain how it works for the NFL quickly:
So using my own team the Steelers for this season 16 games:
they play their division twice each home and away = 6
they play another division within the AFC 2 home 2 away (the AFC west) = 10
they play the other 2 divisional teams within the AFC that finished in the same place as them = 12
they play 1 NFC divison 2 home 2 away (NFC west) = 16
so the AFC divisions with the exception their own is on a 3 year rotation so next year they will play the AFC East, in 2017 the AFC south and so on
the NFC divisions are on a 4 year rotation so next season they play the NFC East, in 2017 the NFC north and so on

As you can see the 'rivalry' factor within their own division or any divison in the NFL is top notch.

As for the MLS side of it I'd be interested to see everyones input on how the divisions could align as I personally believe you'd have to have the same mould where in per say the Eastern Conference you'd still have to have Western based teams and vice versa so travel is equal if expansion were to reach 32 teams. Although I don't know where to begin so for now I'll stick with what we have lol

2 divisions for each Conference as follows:
Eastern Conf.
MLS North:
TFC/NYRB/Revs/L'Impact/NYCFC
MLS South:
Crew/DC United/Orlando/Union/Fire
Western Conf.
MLS West:
LA/Seattle/Portland/Shitecaps/Earthquakes
MLS Central:
Houston/Dallas/Rapids/SKC/RSL
As it stands you play 34 MLS games so the schedule could play out as follows but it would be scaled back 2 games to 32
Play your divison 3 times each 2 home 1 away and each season it flips ie TFC plays Montreal twice at home this year once on the road; 2016 2 on the road 1 at home = 12 games
Play your own other conference division twice each 1 home 1 away, 10 games = 22
play the other conference divisions 1 game each, 10 games and each season roate the location = 32

Curious on what people think.

[TFC1154ever]

I would switch SKC and Orlando.

[Initial B]

MLS won't lower the number of games in a season, especially since all the top-flight leagues play 34-38 game schedules. If anything, they'll add more games. I also like the way the NFL rotates its divisional play and that's what I think can be modified to meet MLS needs. They won't split the conferences further until the league size reaches beyond 24 teams. They'll split it into 4 divisions, then further split it into 8 divisions once they reach beyond 28 teams. They don't want to have too many teams in a division. The main reason for this was explained by a MLB exec: "It's a lot easer to sell tickets as a 4th place team than as an 8th place team."

Package teams in close geographical proximity into 4-team divisions and watch the rivalries boil. I'm drooling at the thought of Cascadian, Californian, Mountain, Texan, Lakes, Southern, Metropolitan, and Shield divisions.

[barticusz]

No idea what to expect out of this league as we move forward. It can't be just like Europe because we're so different on many levels, geography, population, etc. I never expected it to be as long as 28, but honestly can see that happening. If that means more Canadian teams can join the fold though, I'd love for it to happen. Edmonton, Ottawa and others if they manage to create teams would be great.

If it is split into two conferences which seems to make the most sense and is currently happening the USL (trial run?), with a playoff at the end I will be sad to not see the western conference teams. If anything we should pay attention to what is happening at the USL level as it may paint a picture of the future.

[Fort York Redcoat]

I expect them to follow the stated NFL model. It doesn't excite me. I don't care for "division rivalries" in the least. Some do. NA sports appreciates them.

[BeachTory]

No idea what to expect out of this league as we move forward. It can't be just like Europe because we're so different on many levels, geography, population, etc. I never expected it to be as long as 28, but honestly can see that happening. If that means more Canadian teams can join the fold though, I'd love for it to happen. Edmonton, Ottawa and others if they manage to create teams would be great.

If it is split into two conferences which seems to make the most sense and is currently happening the USL (trial run?), with a playoff at the end I will be sad to not see the western conference teams. If anything we should pay attention to what is happening at the USL level as it may paint a picture of the future.

it is my expectation that, long term, that there are no Canadian teams in MLS. Firstly because CSA doesnt want to hive off the interest in soccer in Canada into a league that continues to discriminate against Canadian players, second because Canadian TV markets mean nothing to US advertisers but mostly, the summer league concept doesnt work as well as a fall / spring type of leahue for players and advertisers.

If Minnesota, with an outdoor stadium, gets into MLS it really mixes up my thoughts. Hard to take them in then move to a fall/spring schedule. But it does mean that another body blow to NASL . That makes the NASL Canadian division more likely as they need teams and the support of a federation, even if it is the CSA as the USSF doesnt seem to do NASL any favours.

[C.Ronaldo]

if geography were gonig to determine our biggest rivals, vancouver would be out of it. but you gotta do whats best for the league

i prefer 2 conferences, two single tables. 1 final

[Yohan]

it is my expectation that, long term, that there are no Canadian teams in MLS. Firstly because CSA doesnt want to hive off the interest in soccer in Canada into a league that continues to discriminate against Canadian players, second because Canadian TV markets mean nothing to US advertisers but mostly, the summer league concept doesnt work as well as a fall / spring type of leahue for players and advertisers.

MLS does not want to give up monopoly on Canadian D1 soccer. Though that's not really MLS's choice.

MLS teams however, does not want to miss out on lucrative (well, potentially lucrative) revenue. No Canadian league will ever match the money US leagues will bring in.

[Steelers7]

I thoroughly enjoy MLS but for anyone to say the NFL doesn't have the best model is very narrow minded.
The reason it works is because every single game actually means something in the regular season mainly divisional and inter conference. You've only got 16 games to work with. The NFL doesn't just make billions upon billions for nothing.

Now I understand MLS having a longerish season due to the fact that its really physically impossible to maintain optimum performace running around for 90mins. If they condensed the schedule with 3 games a week for a couple of months you'd see the quality depreciate pretty quickly so it makes sense that the season is longer.

I agree with the statement of not being able to see the West teams but if they were to rotate it around it would still be fine. As technically in the NFL you play the NFC divisions on a rotation every 4 years but if say 4 years ago the Steelers played Seattle at home and this year its in Seattle its 8 years before they return to Pittsburgh.

Ultimately or say eventually if MLS does expand to say 30+ teams divisional and inter conference play would mean something more but I would say adopt the 1 home and 1 away game vs the west if possible. Or like someone said if they break into 4 divisons play 2 west divisions a season 4 home 4 away so every 3rd season they'd come to Toronto.

[Fort York Redcoat]

I thoroughly enjoy MLS but for anyone to say the NFL doesn't have the best model is very narrow minded.
The reason it works is because every single game actually means something in the regular season mainly divisional and inter conference. You've only got 16 games to work with. The NFL doesn't just make billions upon billions for nothing.

Now I understand MLS having a longerish season due to the fact that its really physically impossible to maintain optimum performace running around for 90mins. If they condensed the schedule with 3 games a week for a couple of months you'd see the quality depreciate pretty quickly so it makes sense that the season is longer.

I agree with the statement of not being able to see the West teams but if they were to rotate it around it would still be fine. As technically in the NFL you play the NFC divisions on a rotation every 4 years but if say 4 years ago the Steelers played Seattle at home and this year its in Seattle its 8 years before they return to Pittsburgh.

Ultimately or say eventually if MLS does expand to say 30+ teams divisional and inter conference play would mean something more but I would say adopt the 1 home and 1 away game vs the west if possible. Or like someone said if they break into 4 divisons play 2 west divisions a season 4 home 4 away so every 3rd season they'd come to Toronto.

The NFL model is the best model for gridiron. To say its the best model for every sport is naive.

And that model in its divisions and conference formation isn't what makes billions of dollars alone. There are plenty of other factors outside of league organization.

[Steelers7]

If MLS adopts a formula not exact per say like the NFL but has its own quirks that work for them it would improve the game and be better for fans. The point system for soccer is great hockey needs the same...getting a point for losing is idiotic.

You're too concerned with what works across the pond. It would never work (in my opinion) here in NA and vice versa.
Its too spread out here where as there most leagues are in real close proximity especially EPL.

[OgtheDim]

It should be noted that up until the 80's, the only NFL team with any followers outside of its own geographic area was the Cowboys. You just didn't find Rams fans outside of LA.
Now people who live all over support teams from all over.

That's a bit different dynamic then MLS, where support is still largely geographic based (that Facebook image of who supports who is a crock of leprechaun dung)

[Fort York Redcoat]

If MLS adopts a formula not exact per say like the NFL but has its own quirks that work for them it would improve the game and be better for fans. The point system for soccer is great hockey needs the same...getting a point for losing is idiotic.

You're too concerned with what works across the pond. It would never work (in my opinion) here in NA and vice versa.
Its too spread out here where as there most leagues are in real close proximity especially EPL.

Not with what works but what I like.

Divisional rivals is something created to save on team travel. Anything beyond that is made up.

The balanced schedule was the most exciting for me to see. I got to see every team. What do I care if I get to see closer teams more than once a year?

[Steelers7]

Not with what works but what I like.

Divisional rivals is something created to save on team travel. Anything beyond that is made up.

The balanced schedule was the most exciting for me to see. I got to see every team. What do I care if I get to see closer teams more than once a year?

Ok fair points.

And I agree the current MLS sked should favor what you currently like based on the amount of teams.