Expansion Rumors Megathread
- Thread starter MagnusPax
- Start date
Infinite divisions of zero teams. Wait, I think my math is wrong.
Just fartin' around.
I think they'll stick to two conferences, 34-game schedule, and everyone plays everyone. This will slowly shrink the pool of teams each team plays twice. At 24, each team will play their entire conference twice. At 28, each team will play 7 of the other 13 teams in their conference twice. At 30, 6 of 14. At 32, 5 of 15. And so on.
I personally would prefer to miss teams on a rotating basis. For example, 4 conferences of 8 with double round robins within each conference (14 games) plus 20 games against the other 24 teams. You would play each non-conference team 5 out of 6 years, which is still very frequently.
I do prefer a group stage playoff. With a 16 team group stage and an 8-team knockout round, that's only a 6-matchday postseason.
ExtraTime Radio interview with Mark Abbott, Deputy MLS Commissioner regarding expansion...
http://www.mlssoccer.com/post/2017/...pansion-process-extratime-radio?autoplay=true
I think the biggest thing is that 25 and 26 announcement deadline will be the end of this year. 27 and 28 will be from the current bids.
http://www.mlssoccer.com/post/2017/...pansion-process-extratime-radio?autoplay=true
I think the biggest thing is that 25 and 26 announcement deadline will be the end of this year. 27 and 28 will be from the current bids.
Sacramento bid is back on track after the group that made the bid has agreed to acquire Republic.
So many great markets so few slots. I think making a second team in LA was a waste. Rather spread out geographically to hit untapped markets than an oversaturated one.
Last edited:
By that logic, we shouldn't exist either.
I do agree that MLS has an embarrassment of riches with all the great applications. It'll be hard to turn so many away, but ultimately it is better for the long term health of the league.
LAFC has yet to play.....this is not Chivas USA
No Red Bull should fold. LAFC and Red Bull spots should go to 2 other teams in different markets. Hell the Canadians should go to their own league open up another 3. But I digress...
Rivalries are important to the league in terms of rating, especially local ones. LAFC vs. LAG will hopefully rival NYCFC vs. Red Bull, Don Garber hopes.
I'd trade RB for a solidly run Kosmos - anything is better than that billboard team. (I know I'm sinking low, but I already hate them Kosmos so why not hate them twice as much each year for derbies?). And NYC should have two teams - both could be highly marketable as opposed to the current NJ connection.
I like LAFC because I think they will be run differently than the Galaxy and there's moxy to be had by playing in LA (just like us in NYC).
I'd trade away the Canadian teams to open up those slots. They can help their new league hit the smallest of critical masses necessary, which isn't a bad thing. And we have so many bids that are justifiable that's it's painful to think some will be shunned. It'll also help simplify the allocation of CCL spots.
MLS can't figure out where to build one stadium in NYC. I can't see them managing two. Unless you plan to share, which I doubt.
I agree. Red bulls in its current iteration should be dropped. If they rebrand to something less ridiculous we can keep them.
I think the situation with the 2nd/3rd division leagues is worse. I dont like how they are a mix of small market/MLB style farm/reserve teams. Should strictly be kept for smaller market teams that cant crack the top 32.
Has any professional league in the world surpassed 32 teams? Is their precedence for it?
I would have no problem sharing a stadium if it helped get it built faster. It works for other teams/cities around the world... so we're not reinventing the wheel with the timeshare nature.
More evidence as to why I believe San Diego is or should be MLS's top choice: http://www.espnfc.us/mexican-liga-m...x-games-this-year-live-on-facebook-in-english
Juan Carlos Rodriguez, the owner of Univision and San Diego MLS investor is listed as the 3rd most powerful person in American soccer after Gulati and Garber: http://www.fourfourtwo.com/us/features/fourfourtwos-31-most-powerful-people-us-soccer-5-1?page=0,2
The San Diego group will cross invest in a Liga MX team, host Mexican friendlies, and push MLS and rivalries with Liga MX on Univision, the largest soccer media supplier in North America. If MLS wants to win or compete in North America with the other big American sports and Liga MX, having Juan Carlos Rodriguez as an invested ally is nearly a requirement.
I don't think it's even that close. Garber admitted that the ownership group is the single largest factor. San Diego is a home run.
If St. Louis gets their stadium approved, I think they're number two. Sorry Sacramento.
Juan Carlos Rodriguez, the owner of Univision and San Diego MLS investor is listed as the 3rd most powerful person in American soccer after Gulati and Garber: http://www.fourfourtwo.com/us/features/fourfourtwos-31-most-powerful-people-us-soccer-5-1?page=0,2
The San Diego group will cross invest in a Liga MX team, host Mexican friendlies, and push MLS and rivalries with Liga MX on Univision, the largest soccer media supplier in North America. If MLS wants to win or compete in North America with the other big American sports and Liga MX, having Juan Carlos Rodriguez as an invested ally is nearly a requirement.
I don't think it's even that close. Garber admitted that the ownership group is the single largest factor. San Diego is a home run.
If St. Louis gets their stadium approved, I think they're number two. Sorry Sacramento.
100% agree with you. Maybe it also gets Liga Mx & the MLS to form their own cup competition outside of the CCL (which could invite other leagues) that makes the most sense for the 2 major NA leagues schedule wise and economically (TV revenue).
Similar threads
