2020 Schedule Thread

[sbrylski]

The playoff complication is a good point.

The advantage of one or more additional conferences is that you can keep a schedule where every team plays every other team at least once, while preventing the number of games from getting out of hand. With two conferences of 14 teams each, a "two-and-one" style schedule requires 40 games. At 15 teams each, the requirement becomes 43 games.

How about 4 conferences? At 7 teams each (28 total), two-and-one scheduling leads to 33 games. At 8 teams each (32 total), you get 38 games.

But three conferences doesn't solve that either.

At 27 teams, you need 34 games. Great. But we aren't stopping there.

At 30 teams, you need 38 games.

At 33 teams (not a likely stopping point), you need 42 games.

At 36 teams, you need 46 games.

So, what's the advantage again? The only scenario where 3 conferences is better than 2 conferences is if we stop at 30 teams and move to a 38- game regular season. In all other instances 2 conferences is better or they have the exact same problems.

EDIT: With the rising franchise cost ($300 million for the 30th team) for a shrinking percentage of MLS/SUM equity, there's really only four expansion bids that have the firepower to get across the finish line right now - Charlotte, Las Vegas, Phoenix, and Detroit. And the Detroit bid hardly seems serious. I'd be (a) shocked if they stopped at 30 before the 2026 World Cup, but also (b) if they went above 32. If you price out all the remaining bidders, the value of your commodity drops back down.

 

[LionNYC]

The playoff complication is a good point.

The advantage of one or more additional conferences is that you can keep a schedule where every team plays every other team at least once, while preventing the number of games from getting out of hand. With two conferences of 14 teams each, a "two-and-one" style schedule requires 40 games. At 15 teams each, the requirement becomes 43 games.

How about 4 conferences? At 7 teams each (28 total), two-and-one scheduling leads to 33 games. At 8 teams each (32 total), you get 38 games.

If you only had to play teams in your own conference (except for MLS Cup), that would partially reduce the travel problems with MLS. The longest trip would be to Miami which is 2.5 hours in the air and probably 5 hours overall of travel. However, as a fan, I do enjoy seeing West Coast cities for away days.

 

[FootyLovin]

If you only had to play teams in your own conference (except for MLS Cup), that would partially reduce the travel problems with MLS.

I am in favor of an intraconference home and home with remaining 4-8 games (depending on expansion) as interconference.

• Less travel.
• Yes, imbalance. But there will be no matter what. At least this limits the imbalance to a handful of games.
• Gives every team a full home and home with all of their closest rivals within the conference.
• Makes the interconference games and rotation more special. Every interconference game is one you won't get at home again for 4-8 years. I actually really like that.
• If the conferences get big enough, they would essentially each be there own league and deserving of their own trophy.

 

[moogoo]

the thing about not playing every other team in the league at least once, it kind of makes supporter's shield a bit meaningless. are you really the best regular season team if you haven't played everyone else? maybe you got the lucky fixtures that year.

it's obviously very difficult to play every other team at least once with MLS continuing to add teams. will be interesting to see how they decide to do it going forward.

 

[Gotham Gator]

The bigger issue with not playing every other team at least once is that you reduce league cohesion.

 

[sbrylski]

The bigger issue with not playing every other team at least once is that you reduce league cohesion.

Bah, NFL and MLB don't have a "league cohesion" problem.

 

[Ulrich]

This seems reasonable using all currently announced teams
View attachment 10448

I’m left scratching my head at the mediocrity of the flyover states division....

 

[adam]

I’m left scratching my head at the mediocrity of the flyover states division....

And the East would have 4 of the highest spending teams in the league (TFC, MIA, NYC, ATL)

 

[FootyLovin]

the thing about not playing every other team in the league at least once, it kind of makes supporter's shield a bit meaningless.

That's one reason I can imagine eventually splitting into 2 conferences that each award a regular season trophy.

Alternatively, of course, you could do pro/rel. But we already have 100's of posts parsing that issue somewhere in these forums.

 

[Shwafta]

That's one reason I can imagine eventually splitting into 2 conferences that each award a regular season trophy.

Alternatively, of course, you could do pro/rel. But we already have 100's of posts parsing that issue somewhere in these forums.

I wonder if they'd consider 36 team double league pro/rel and just call it 'MLS MLS2'

 

[moogoo]

That's one reason I can imagine eventually splitting into 2 conferences that each award a regular season trophy.

Alternatively, of course, you could do pro/rel. But we already have 100's of posts parsing that issue somewhere in these forums.

Yea, we won't get into a pro/rel discussion here. But I will say, it's just not part of american sports culture. However, with growing popularity of the EPL and fans learning more about soccer culture in the rest of the world, perhaps in the distant future, MLS could go to a pro/rel scenario with USL. I still think chances of that are pretty slim to none.

I don't like the idea of not playing every other team in the league at least once a season. As the league expands, I think 2 conferences with conference champions crowned at the end of the regular season would be great. And then a playoff comprised of the top 4 teams of each conference, re-seeded based on regular season points. makes regular season performance more important but we still get playoff excitement.

 

[sbrylski]

Yea, we won't get into a pro/rel discussion here. But I will say, it's just not part of american sports culture. However, with growing popularity of the EPL and fans learning more about soccer culture in the rest of the world, perhaps in the distant future, MLS could go to a pro/rel scenario with USL. I still think chances of that are pretty slim to none.

I don't like the idea of not playing every other team in the league at least once a season. As the league expands, I think 2 conferences with conference champions crowned at the end of the regular season would be great. And then a playoff comprised of the top 4 teams of each conference, re-seeded based on regular season points. makes regular season performance more important but we still get playoff excitement.

You can't have a small postseason with no relegation. Most teams will have nothing to play for most of the year. The only sport that works for is MLB, and that's because you attend a baseball game expecting to throw your time down the drain anyway.

 

[Victors87]

I do think that if champions league was more prestigious with high prize money fighting for those top 4 spots would be great or a possibility to libertadores would make a season of each team playing each other exciting..and maybe pro/rel with (1) with a caveat as long as that division 2 team has a stadium for 18k or that the bottom 4 go to a mini season with top 2 team from second division joining for a 6 team mini season with the bottom 2 team of of that mini season descending.....yea I don't know...just ranting I guess

 

[mgarbowski]

First home match. MLS schedule first game is February 29.

2020 MLS opening day set for Feb. 29

This will mark the earliest start to the regular season in league history.

www.sounderatheart.com

That makes sense to why we might play in citi too.

The Sounder At Heart article indicates the league just recently decided on when to start the season. I'm shocked they didn't decide this at least a couple of months ago, or even further back. It is possible that NYCFC was waiting on that to see how tight the schedule options are, to decide on whether to split the season, which is why the [potential] announcement is coming so late. Or it could just be a split season ain't happening.

PS: moved this to the schedule thread where it makes more sense.

 

[Gotham Gator]

It leaked today, but it certainly could have been decided much earlier.

 

[mgarbowski]

It leaked today, but it certainly could have been decided much earlier.

You're right. Somehow I misread it earlier and thought it said they had been told it was recently decided.

 

[Gotham Gator]

It will be interesting to see which teams will be hosting those first couple of weeks. The league would need at least 13 different hosts to run a full schedule each week, and there will not be 13 warm weather teams in 2020. Plus, we know that Miami will not host either of the first two weekends because its home opener is March 14.

Ranking from warmest to coldest

1. Atlanta (indoors)
2. Miami (not hosting first two weeks)
3. Orlando
4. LA Galaxy
5. LA FC
6. Houston
7. San Jose
8. Dallas
9. Seattle
10. Portland
11. Vancouver
12. Nashville
13. DC United
14. Salt Lake
15. Philadelphia
16. New Jersey
17. New York
18. Kansas City
19. Cincinnatti
20. Columbus
21. New England
22. Chicago
23. Denver
24. Toronto
25. Montreal (potential indoor option)
26. Minnesota (potential indoor option)

 

[FootyLovin]

It will be interesting to see which teams will be hosting those first couple of weeks. The league would need at least 13 different hosts to run a full schedule each week, and there will not be 13 warm weather teams in 2020. Plus, we know that Miami will not host either of the first two weekends because its home opener is March 14.

Ranking from warmest to coldest

1. Atlanta (indoors)
2. Miami (not hosting first two weeks)
3. Orlando
4. LA Galaxy
5. LA FC
6. Houston
7. San Jose
8. Dallas
9. Seattle
10. Portland
11. Vancouver
12. Nashville
13. DC United
14. Salt Lake
15. Philadelphia
16. New Jersey
17. New York
18. Kansas City
19. Cincinnatti
20. Columbus
21. New England
22. Chicago
23. Denver
24. Toronto
25. Montreal (potential indoor option)
26. Minnesota (potential indoor option)

So to get to 13, if you take away Miami and add the two indoor options you get:

1. Atlanta (indoors)
2. Montreal (potential indoor option)
3. Minnesota (potential indoor option)
4. Orlando
5. LA Galaxy
6. LA FC
7. Houston
8. San Jose
9. Dallas
10. Seattle
11. Portland
12. Vancouver
13. Nashville

I don't know about the northwest sites in Feb. But if they are okay I would think Nashville as the coldest option isn't too bad.

 

[moogoo]

So to get to 13, if you take away Miami and add the two indoor options you get:

1. Atlanta (indoors)
2. Montreal (potential indoor option)
3. Minnesota (potential indoor option)
4. Orlando
5. LA Galaxy
6. LA FC
7. Houston
8. San Jose
9. Dallas
10. Seattle
11. Portland
12. Vancouver
13. Nashville

I don't know about the northwest sites in Feb. But if they are okay I would think Nashville as the coldest option isn't too bad.

isn't vancouver also an indoor location? i can't remember

 

[Gotham Gator]

isn't vancouver also an indoor location? i can't remember

Yes, good catch. It has a retractable roof. Revised list is below.

Ranking from warmest to coldest

1. Atlanta (indoors)
2. Vancouver (indoors)
3. Miami (not hosting first two weeks)
4. Orlando
5. LA Galaxy
6. LAFC
7. Houston
8. San Jose
9. Dallas
10. Seattle
11. Portland
12. Nashville
13. DC United
14. Salt Lake
15. Philadelphia
16. New Jersey
17. New York
18. Kansas City
19. Cincinnati
20. Columbus
21. New England
22. Chicago
23. Denver
24. Toronto
25. Montreal (potential indoor option)
26. Minnesota (potential indoor option)