Promotion & Relegation

Can someone give me a single reason why a current owner of an MLS team would vote in favor of a pro/real system?
 
  • Like
Reactions: BlueWarrior
Can someone give me a single reason why a current owner of an MLS team would vote in favor of a pro/real system?
FieldCricket.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: BlueWarrior
Pro/rel is a relic of a bygone era that serves no point in today's business orientated world.

Carpi (not Capri) will be playing in Serie A next year. The town they play in has 70,000 and their stadium seats 4000.

Good luck telling Fox/Espn that this would be good for tv rights.

Besides pro/rel wont make better US players, a better youth development system will.
 
Last edited:
Pro/Rel does too much to create haves and have-nots at the top level. It really turns the sport into a money game that an extremely small few can do anything about.

Look how many BILLIONS Abu Dhabi had to pour into Man City to get a seat at the big boys table and that table isn't the PL, its the tiny aristocracy at the top of the PL with actual aspirations of winning it.

And they had the advantage of leveraging a natural rivalry against the biggest team in the country at the time. It'd probably take billions more for a Sunderland or West Ham.

I'm sorry, I know it would make for a nice story if say, Syracuse, rose through the ranks to join MLS but once they're there, in this day and age, they become completely irrelevant. Sure the fans might get to enjoy superstars coming into their stadium every couple of games but that's about it.

I'd rather they stay where they can actually compete and take on cities that they find to be more natural rivals like Rochester, Scranton or Hartford. They can still get a shot at the big boys via the US Open Cup, too.

The US Open Cup is a game-changer in my opinion as it really creates an environment that allows for more than one top league to exist in this country.
 
Can someone give me a single reason why a current owner of an MLS team would vote in favor of a pro/real system?
Easy.

The owner doesn't see his/her team as the one that's going to be relegated and believes the system will increase fan interest and revenue. I can see (both) LA voting for it. NYC once we get our team together. Seattle.

The real question is can anyone name one reason a majority of owners would vote for it. There I got nothing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: joe
Easy.

The owner doesn't see his/her team as the one that's going to be relegated and believes the system will increase fan interest and revenue. I can see (both) LA voting for it. NYC once we get our team together. Seattle.

The real question is can anyone name one reason a majority of owners would vote for it. There I got nothing.
It may make the owners come out of their comfort zones and stop treating the clubs as cash cows .
 
What would the benefit be of eliminating the Pro/Rel system in other nations as some of you suggest? What does that do to all the lower leagues? What's the point of them after that.
 
What would the benefit be of eliminating the Pro/Rel system in other nations as some of you suggest? What does that do to all the lower leagues? What's the point of them after that.
What's the point? What's the point in having a local team that squares off against rivals with whom they can be competitive with, you ask? I'm not sure.

What's the point of going to a league you never actually plan on being competitive (and by competitive, I mean in it to win it, not to lose gracefully) in?

You could free the leagues of their rigid old-world confines and let them compete against each other a la MLS/NASL/USL. So even though the PL is top dog today the Championship could rise up and re-claim its crown.

I, as an MLS fan, think its a shame that we have to designate MLS and NASL as div. 1 and 2.

US Open Cup serving as the battleground for entire leagues with bad blood between them would be unlike anything anywhere else in the Soccer world. Teams and leagues who have wronged each other now fighting it out for national supremacy.

I think it'd be fun.
 
For example, let's say MLS stops at 28 teams because they run out of ownership groups that are willing to pay their rising expansion fee, which has hit a silly $500 million.

Yikes, a $500 million franchise fee for an MLS team? It would make more sense to buy / but into a NFL, NBA or NHL team.
 
Yikes, a $500 million franchise fee for an MLS team? It would make more sense to buy / but into a NFL, NBA or NHL team.
Not really.

MLS can have a global reach that the others can't -- atleast not anytime soon.

Even at 500 million, its still a bargain.
 
Yikes, a $500 million franchise fee for an MLS team? It would make more sense to buy / but into a NFL, NBA or NHL team.

The way owners of sports teams make money isn't really thru operating revenue. The model is to buy a team and let it appreciate in value, and then sell it. For example, the first Forbes article I pulled up for numbers states that the Washington Redskins were purchased for $750M in 1999, and appreciated to $1,560M by 2012, for a 100% return on investment regardless of any operating profits. http://www.forbes.com/sites/brianso...of-most-expensive-sports-team-purchases-ever/

I bring this up because expansion fees are a way for existing MLS owners to pump up and demonstrate the value of their franchises. Every time the league sells a new franchise for a larger fee, the value of their team in the marketplace goes up. (Comparable sales are an important metric when valuing a business.)

For that reason, expect franchise fees to really push the limits of what new investors are willing to pay. It does all existing owners a disservice to sell for $1 less than what they could get.

It's also a big reason why the league is putting pressure on Beckham. He's getting a discounted franchise fee, so they want him in sooner than later. Him paying $25M instead of $100M is a lot better than him paying $25M instead of $200M in a few years.
 
For the record, I always found this topic moronic at best. Relegation with nasl usl or any other leagues with stadiums like the cosmos high school field obviously would never happen...

But now that MLS is "exploding" (expansion wise- they're talking about 28 teams?) I can see a faux relegation/promotion in the distant future.

If it were to ever happen it would probably be Something like MLS 1 + MLS Dos and the Pro/Relegation term would not be thrown around too much as to not devalue the teams, but it would be understood...

1. NYCFC
2. Western NY
3. Boston
4. NJ
5. NJ2
6. Pittsburgh
7. Cleavland
8. Cincinnati
9. Columbus
10. St.Louis
11. Minnesota
12. Portland
13. Seattle
14. Vancouver
15. Toronto
16. Montreal
17. Canada 4
18. LA
19. LA 2
20. San Diego
21. San Antonio
22. Miami
23.
And on and on......
 
For the record, I always found this topic moronic at best. Relegation with nasl usl or any other leagues with stadiums like the cosmos high school field obviously would never happen...

But now that MLS is "exploding" (expansion wise- they're talking about 28 teams?) I can see a faux relegation/promotion in the distant future.

If it were to ever happen it would probably be Something like MLS 1 + MLS Dos and the Pro/Relegation term would not be thrown around too much as to not devalue the teams, but it would be understood...

1. NYCFC
2. Western NY
3. Boston
4. NJ
5. NJ2
6. Pittsburgh
7. Cleavland
8. Cincinnati
9. Columbus
10. St.Louis
11. Minnesota
12. Portland
13. Seattle
14. Vancouver
15. Toronto
16. Montreal
17. Canada 4
18. LA
19. LA 2
20. San Diego
21. San Antonio
22. Miami
23.
And on and on......


If it ever happens, this is the only way it happens.

People who have poured tons of money into a brand new team and a young league are not going to risk having it all go away when they finish in the bottom 3 the very first year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NYCFCP and Gene
For the record, I always found this topic moronic at best. Relegation with nasl usl or any other leagues with stadiums like the cosmos high school field obviously would never happen...

But now that MLS is "exploding" (expansion wise- they're talking about 28 teams?) I can see a faux relegation/promotion in the distant future.

If it were to ever happen it would probably be Something like MLS 1 + MLS Dos and the Pro/Relegation term would not be thrown around too much as to not devalue the teams, but it would be understood...

1. NYCFC
2. Western NY
3. Boston
4. NJ
5. NJ2
6. Pittsburgh
7. Cleavland
8. Cincinnati
9. Columbus
10. St.Louis
11. Minnesota
12. Portland
13. Seattle
14. Vancouver
15. Toronto
16. Montreal
17. Canada 4
18. LA
19. LA 2
20. San Diego
21. San Antonio
22. Miami
23.
And on and on......

so basically adding the new teams in MLS plus some USL teams to make mls 1 and 2...this is the only way i feel they do this and maybe the only way they can try to get TV deals to bite into deals....hey its still "MLS". Any new teams that potentially can join in the future will have to go thru USL or whatever is under MLS 2 ( PDL? ) for a certain period and then let them join MLS 2. Kind of how japan does it with J3

though to be fair NASL got some ok deals with Be in sport and CBS sports network
 
  • Like
Reactions: NYCFCP
An MLS 1 and MLS 2 setup is probably even less likely than true pro/reg. Instead of potentially dropping 2-3 teams to a lower level each year, MLS would self regulate 50% of their teams? No way. It's silly and doesn't make any sense outside of people who want pro/reg just to have pro/reg.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gene
An MLS 1 and MLS 2 setup is probably even less likely than true pro/reg. Instead of potentially dropping 2-3 teams to a lower level each year, MLS would self regulate 50% of their teams? No way. It's silly and doesn't make any sense outside of people who want pro/reg just to have pro/reg.

i thought MLS doesnt own any more teams any more....i think in MLS 1 and MLS 2. MLS still has control over it...J league has control of J1, J2, J3.

I will say this....to me there is such a thing as having too many teams in a top division....and i prefer a MLS 1 and 2 set up than having the idea of having like 4/6 divisions instead to divide the MLS teams into regions.
 
An MLS 1 and MLS 2 setup is probably even less likely than true pro/reg. Instead of potentially dropping 2-3 teams to a lower level each year, MLS would self regulate 50% of their teams? No way. It's silly and doesn't make any sense outside of people who want pro/reg just to have pro/reg.

I don't understand where you got the 50% thing.

It would be the same ownership structure they have now.. just more teams... Divided into an American / National MLB like set up, and teams being move around in there to create a faux pro/rel ....