2017 Playoffs and 2019 CCL

[Kjbert]

Thought I would create a thread to cover a couple of topics here - what we are playing for and the implications of any success.

I've reviewed the 2017 playoffs schedule and while they aren't as funky as last year, they're still not super convenient. Sounds like a guarantee of two early week homegames if the season ended today and we advance. Then it is interrupted by an international date.

Someone told me on here that there were only two paths to the 2018 CCL this year - MLS Cup and U.S. Open Cup. What happened to the other two US spots in CCL? I thought Mexico received 4, the US received 4 and Canada placed 1 through the Canadian Cup? Has that changed?

Edited for 2019 CCL

 

[LeeNYCFC]

Thought I would create a thread to cover a couple of topics here - what we are playing for and the implications of any success.

I've reviewed the 2017 playoffs schedule and while they aren't as funky as last year, they're still not super convenient. Sounds like a guarantee of two early week homegames if the season ended today and we advance. Then it is interrupted by an international date.

Someone told me on here that there were only two paths to the 2018 CCL this year - MLS Cup and U.S. Open Cup. What happened to the other two US spots in CCL? I thought Mexico received 4, the US received 4 and Canada placed 1 through the Canadian Cup? Has that changed?

They've re-oriented the tournament for 2018 to go Feb to May. To accommodate that they're qualifying 2016 teams to it and then having 2 each from 2017 and 2018 qualify to 2019

 

[Kjbert]

They've re-oriented the tournament for 2018 to go Feb to May. To accommodate that they're qualifying 2016 teams to it and then having 2 each from 2017 and 2018 qualify to 2019

Thank you. So MLS Cup and US Open Cup qualify for the U.S. If Toronto wins MLS Cup, do we know what the back-up is? Is it the loser of of MLS Cup? Is it the next team in the Supporters Shield? Would hate to see Toronto beat San Jose 4-0 in MLS and San Jose on 40 points makes the CCL.

 

[LeeNYCFC]

Thank you. So MLS Cup and US Open Cup qualify for the U.S. If Toronto wins MLS Cup, do we know what the back-up is? Is it the loser of of MLS Cup? Is it the next team in the Supporters Shield? Would hate to see Toronto beat San Jose 4-0 in MLS and San Jose on 40 points makes the CCL.

That hasn't been released officially so presumably concacaf will make up a rule for if if/when it's necessary.
There's lots of permutations in the event of a Canadian champ or a US team winning more than 1 of the 4 cups so it's tough to speculate.

 

[Kjbert]

That hasn't been released officially so presumably concacaf will make up a rule for if if/when it's necessary.
There's lots of permutations in the event of a Canadian champ or a US team winning more than 1 of the 4 cups so it's tough to speculate.

So I found an article that touched on this briefly. You are right, no rule. Speculation is that it would fall to the best regular season record OR the best regular season record over two years. If that's the case, we would need to best Dallas by 7 points or NJRB by 4 points to have the most points in MLS over a two year period.

That's also f'ing insane that we could be the best regular season squad over two years in our second and third year in existence.

 

[LeeNYCFC]

Another weird wrinkle would be TFC or another Canadian team winning MLS cup when their qualification path is the Canadian Championship. So what happens when they win the former and not the latter?

 

[dannd23]

nm

 

[Kjbert]

Another weird wrinkle would be TFC or another Canadian team winning MLS cup when their qualification path is the Canadian Championship. So what happens when they win the former and not the latter?

Exactly. I don't think, at full strength, anyone is nearly as good as TFC, with the slight wrinkle being that NYCFC hasn't been fully healthy or available all season.

TFC good bet to win MLS Cup right now with how they are playing. USSF may have to make a ruling. Will be interesting to see how they screw us if we come in second in the SS.

 

[mgarbowski]

So I found an article that touched on this briefly. You are right, no rule. Speculation is that it would fall to the best regular season record OR the best regular season record over two years. If that's the case, we would need to best Dallas by 7 points or NJRB by 4 points to have the most points in MLS over a two year period.

That's also f'ing insane that we could be the best regular season squad over two years in our second and third year in existence.

This will be ugly. I mean, in the scope of CONCACAF corruption and standard MLS ad hoc rulesmaking, it's par for the course. But this should have been resolved from the start.
This article is pathetic. It's from the MLS website and they don't even know, and get what info they do report from Sports Illustrated: "It’s not yet clear what will happen if a Canadian club wins MLS Cup or if a US team wins more than one of those trophies, though the SI report noted that it is "probable" that the berth would be allocated based on regular-season performance."

I never even considered your hypothesis that they will use a combined record of 2016 and 2017. Now you bring it up, I think it is unlikely. We already have 4 qualifiers from 2016. There is no reason to give any team a second chance based even in part on their 2016 record.
But, we can still have an argument. Let's say Toronto wins MLS Cup, or SKC wins a cup double. NYC finishes second in the league with, oh 62 points. Seattle wins the West with 53. Both are in line with current performance.

NYC argues when an extra spot opens up you go with the best US record in the league, as it has always been done when a spot opens.
Seattle argues when an extra spot opens up you give it to one of the spots that was taken away this year, which is the winner of the conference that didn't win SS, as has also always been done.

You can reasonably argue which is more fair until you know who benefits. Now all such arguments are tainted BS.

 

[Kjbert]

mgarbowski spot on about the ad hoc MLS rules.

 

[SoupInNYC]

This will be ugly. I mean, in the scope of CONCACAF corruption and standard MLS ad hoc rulesmaking, it's par for the course. But this should have been resolved from the start.
This article is pathetic. It's from the MLS website and they don't even know, and get what info they do report from Sports Illustrated: "It’s not yet clear what will happen if a Canadian club wins MLS Cup or if a US team wins more than one of those trophies, though the SI report noted that it is "probable" that the berth would be allocated based on regular-season performance."

I never even considered your hypothesis that they will use a combined record of 2016 and 2017. Now you bring it up, I think it is unlikely. We already have 4 qualifiers from 2016. There is no reason to give any team a second chance based even in part on their 2016 record.
But, we can still have an argument. Let's say Toronto wins MLS Cup, or SKC wins a cup double. NYC finishes second in the league with, oh 62 points. Seattle wins the West with 53. Both are in line with current performance.

NYC argues when an extra spot opens up you go with the best US record in the league, as it has always been done when a spot opens.
Seattle argues when an extra spot opens up you give it to one of the spots that was taken away this year, which is the winner of the conference that didn't win SS, as has also always been done.

You can reasonably argue which is more fair until you know who benefits. Now all such arguments are tainted BS.

Now obviously we are talking hypotheticals and what-ifs because MLS, but if they were to do a combined record in these scenarios, wouldn't it be more likely to be 2017 and 2018 combined? Since they are taking the cup winners from both of those years, I would imagine they would use those two years for a combined point total standpoint.

 

[mgarbowski]

Now obviously we are talking hypotheticals and what-ifs because MLS, but if they were to do a combined record in these scenarios, wouldn't it be more likely to be 2017 and 2018 combined? Since they are taking the cup winners from both of those years, I would imagine they would use those two years for a combined point total standpoint.

I don't see why there is any need to go to a 2 year aggregate at all.

Because they revised the schedule they lose one cycle.
To make up for that they had to cut the usual pattern of 4 teams qualifying every year down to 2 qualifiers in each of 2017 and 2018. After they they go back up to 4 teams every year.
If Toronto wins MLS Cup this year one of the 2 preset spots will be open. Why would you wait until next year to fill it based on an aggregate? What is next year a Canadian team wins again? Or some team gets a double? I know this is MLS and CONCACAF we're talking about but that's just piling on unnecessary complications even by their standards.

 

[SoupInNYC]

I don't see why there is any need to go to a 2 year aggregate at all.

Because they revised the schedule they lose one cycle.
To make up for that they had to cut the usual pattern of 4 teams qualifying every year down to 2 qualifiers in each of 2017 and 2018. After they they go back up to 4 teams every year.
If Toronto wins MLS Cup this year one of the 2 preset spots will be open. Why would you wait until next year to fill it based on an aggregate? What is next year a Canadian team wins again? Or some team gets a double? I know this is MLS and CONCACAF we're talking about but that's just piling on unnecessary complications even by their standards.

I'm not at all that certain that it would provide unnecessary complications. In fact, I think it may better protect MLS in that it would more likely provide a better quality team rather than having one like Colorado in. In this case, you are more likely to have a team that is more consistent make it through than one that may have one good year.

I think the reason why they may do aggregate is if one American team wins a combo of 2 or more of the cups, how do you decide which year to assign the open spots to? Example, say SKC wins the US Open Cup this year and then again next year. Which table would the open spot go to? The 2017 or 2018 table?

 

[adam]

I'm not at all that certain that it would provide unnecessary complications. In fact, I think it may better protect MLS in that it would more likely provide a better quality team rather than having one like Colorado in. In this case, you are more likely to have a team that is more consistent make it through than one that may have one good year.

I think the reason why they may do aggregate is if one American team wins a combo of 2 or more of the cups, how do you decide which year to assign the open spots to? Example, say SKC wins the US Open Cup this year and then again next year. Which table would the open spot go to? The 2017 or 2018 table?

I'll bite and side with mgarbowski

2017 SKC wins USOC
2017 TFC wins MLS Cup
Give a 2017 best Reg season record/conf/goals scored by header/OGs or whatever you want to use, but keep it in 2017.
Let's give it to DCU on OGs

Then
2018 DCU wins the USOC
2018 MTL wins the MLS Cup
Now we have 2 spots for 2018, just use the same qualification criteria as used in 2017.

That way you have 2 yearly qualifiers. To award 3 spots in one year without it already written somewhere feels like you're screwing a deserving team.

 

[LionNYC]

If a Canadian team wins MLS Cup, the LA Galaxy are going to get the spot.

Let's be real, we all know this.

 

[LeeNYCFC]

I'll bite and side with mgarbowski

2017 SKC wins USOC
2017 TFC wins MLS Cup
Give a 2017 best Reg season record/conf/goals scored by header/OGs or whatever you want to use, but keep it in 2017.
Let's give it to DCU on OGs

Then
2018 DCU wins the USOC
2018 MTL wins the MLS Cup
Now we have 2 spots for 2018, just use the same qualification criteria as used in 2017.

That way you have 2 yearly qualifiers. To award 3 spots in one year without it already written somewhere feels like you're screwing a deserving team.

Again the weirdest part of this to me is that your scenarios could happen, and Toronto and Montreal could even both do the double with supporters shields in their year, and neither of them would be qualified for CCL. If Vancouver or a USL side wins the 2018 Canadian Championship, they're in for 2019 and these two double champions are out.

 

[413Blue]

If a Canadian team wins MLS Cup, the LA Galaxy are going to get the spot.

Let's be real, we all know this.

Or maybe LAFC? Will they be the new benefactor?

 

[adam]

Again the weirdest part of this to me is that your scenarios could happen, and Toronto and Montreal could even both do the double with supporters shields in their year, and neither of them would be qualified for CCL. If Vancouver or a USL side wins the 2018 Canadian Championship, they're in for 2019 and these two double champions are out.

If they award CCL based on OGs we need to re-sign slosh asap!

 

[Ulrich]

Or maybe LAFC? Will they be the new benefactor?

Can't see a brand new team being gifted that sort of prestige.

But I do hope LA sinks to all new lows as karma payback for the filthy help MLS consistently gave them.

 

[EganSoccerWords]

This will be ugly. I mean, in the scope of CONCACAF corruption and standard MLS ad hoc rulesmaking, it's par for the course. But this should have been resolved from the start.
This article is pathetic. It's from the MLS website and they don't even know, and get what info they do report from Sports Illustrated: "It’s not yet clear what will happen if a Canadian club wins MLS Cup or if a US team wins more than one of those trophies, though the SI report noted that it is "probable" that the berth would be allocated based on regular-season performance."

I never even considered your hypothesis that they will use a combined record of 2016 and 2017. Now you bring it up, I think it is unlikely. We already have 4 qualifiers from 2016. There is no reason to give any team a second chance based even in part on their 2016 record.
But, we can still have an argument. Let's say Toronto wins MLS Cup, or SKC wins a cup double. NYC finishes second in the league with, oh 62 points. Seattle wins the West with 53. Both are in line with current performance.

NYC argues when an extra spot opens up you go with the best US record in the league, as it has always been done when a spot opens.
Seattle argues when an extra spot opens up you give it to one of the spots that was taken away this year, which is the winner of the conference that didn't win SS, as has also always been done.

You can reasonably argue which is more fair until you know who benefits. Now all such arguments are tainted BS.

Well before we get the MLS pitchforks out, US Soccer is responsible for selecting CCL bids not MLS. I think its a little premature to get upset at a what if that is more likely to not happen then happen. Not that it is a perfect metric but SPI gives Canadian clubs a 38% chance of winning the cup. This is a one-time event so its perfectly understandable to not have the details about something that may not even happen.

In the event it does happen, US Soccer has the incentive to choose the strongest American club to represent them. No reason to not think its going to go to highest American club in the Shield standings and they will have an entire year to figure it out.