Central would be wide open with essentially 6 new teams
Expansion Rumors Megathread
- Thread starter MagnusPax
- Start date
I am not a fan of dividing the league further into divisions, but if it happens, I like your split with one change. Switch Dallas, Austin and Houston for Chicago, Detroit and Cincinnatti and have South and Central.
i dont like divisions at all.....but on the contrary I see this as yet another point to crap on the shield if it does happen.
On the contrary, it would tend to square up the schedules even more; a higher percentage of each team's schedule would be in common with every other team.
but you play every team once...either at home and away. and you may be in a tough division playing everyone twice and then you play others just once.
and then you may be in a weak division and then play everyone twice and then everyone in tough division once....so you may get more points out of it
i base all this on my idea that to be considered best of league you play everyone same amount of times....which will never happen in MLS
I agree that the best is to have everyone play everyone else the same amount of times, and I agree that won't happen in MLS. I also believe that unbalanced scheduling has much less of an effect than people think, but I will save this argument for another time.
Regarding how unbalanced a schedule is, one simple way is to divide the games teams have in common by the total number of games they play. Right now, when comparing teams in different divisions, they have 21 of 34 games in common (i.e. all the single games they play against each other team in the league), for a commonality ratio of 61.8%. Among teams in the same conference, the ratio is 31 of 34, which is every game but the three opponents the teams play an extra time, or 91.2%.
In the scenario you propose with 28 teams divided into 4 divisions of 7 teams, the commonality across the league would be 27 of 34, or 79.4%, and the commonality within a division would be 33 of 34 or 97.1%.
I'm not a fan of the balanced schedule when we have more than 12 teams. I'd rather replace games against teams I don't care about out west, with teams I do or don't care here out East, and if we ended up doing 4 divisions, a Northeast division would be excellent!
NYC, NJ, NE, MTL, DCU, PHI and Austin would be dope
NYC, NJ, NE, MTL, DCU, PHI and Austin would be dope
fair....well continue this as the league grows and changes the schedule format
I'm not a fan of the balanced schedule when we have more than 12 teams. I'd rather replace games against teams I don't care about out west, with teams I do or don't care here out East, and if we ended up doing 4 divisions, a Northeast division would be excellent!
NYC, NJ, NE, MTL, DCU, PHI and Austin would be dope
speak for your self .....i enjoyed my trips out to portland and denver
and the ones i plan to go to next year
True, but those trips will be just fine every other, or every third year or whatever it would be. I'd rather more games within a few hours.speak for your self .....i enjoyed my trips out to portland and denver
and the ones i plan to go to next year
And here comes another suit MLS’s way.
http://soccer.nbcsports.com/2017/10...letter-league-denies-it-misled-expansion-bid/
Maybe MLS has to learn that bending the rules only works in-house for the galaxy.
http://soccer.nbcsports.com/2017/10...letter-league-denies-it-misled-expansion-bid/
Maybe MLS has to learn that bending the rules only works in-house for the galaxy.
Precourt is in a very precarious position being on the expansion committee and pulling his relocation stunt.
I could see threat of a lawsuit keeping them in Columbus till 2023 and to a different city with a stadium plan in place. Could be a very awkward 5 Years with essentially a lame duck team.
KennyD
Registered
Haven't read through the whole thread so apologies if I am repeating.
Why not push the league to 30 teams 15/15 split in the conference and play a 43 game regular season play everyone in the conference H/A 5 non-conference teams H/A and 3 extra Derby games reserved for rivals alternating h/a every year. There is enough high-quality interest out there to fill this quota within 5-10 years
Breaks down in my mind
Cincinnati, Detroit, Nashville and whatever mess in FLA they choose in the East
Sacramento, Phoenix, and either Austin/San Antonio to the West
Brings the team count to 30 quickly and I think the schedule would cut down on the major cross-country travel cost for the teams
Why not push the league to 30 teams 15/15 split in the conference and play a 43 game regular season play everyone in the conference H/A 5 non-conference teams H/A and 3 extra Derby games reserved for rivals alternating h/a every year. There is enough high-quality interest out there to fill this quota within 5-10 years
Breaks down in my mind
Cincinnati, Detroit, Nashville and whatever mess in FLA they choose in the East
Sacramento, Phoenix, and either Austin/San Antonio to the West
Brings the team count to 30 quickly and I think the schedule would cut down on the major cross-country travel cost for the teams
That math doesn't add up.
- H/A in-conference: 28 games
- H/A out-of-conference: 10 games
- Derby games: 3 games
- Total: 41
We can barely squeeze in 34 right now. I highly doubt we add more games, especially a ton of extra games.
For scheduling, the key is whether they want everyone to play everyone. I speculate they will, as they won't want to lose LA v NY games ever.
In that case, their options that include double round robin within groups and once against everyone else are as follows:
28 teams - 4 groups of 7 (33 games + 1 extra rivalry game)
30 teams - 6 groups of 5 (33 games + 1 extra rivalry game)
32 teams - 8 groups of 4 (34 games)
I favor the NBA setup where they have 30 teams in two conferences with three divisions each. The divisions are basically only for scheduling purposes. The division winners are guaranteed a playoff spot, but not a seed. The top 8 from each conference make the playoffs and are seeded based on their record regardless of division.
Did you count CLB twice on that map, with a spot there for both Austin and Columbus?
I think we could go to a few more games if the season were to start a month or so earlier. That requires having enough warm weather teams to hold a full schedule for a few weeks until things warm up elsewhere.
Let's see where that stands.
Cold Weather (i.e. decent chance of snow in February)
New York
New Jersey
New England
Philadelphia
Montreal (but could use the domed stadium)
Toronto
Chicago
Columbus
Minnesota
Kansas City
Salt Lake City
Denver
Borderline
DC United
Seattle
Portland
Vancouver
Warm Weather
Atlanta
Orlando
Houston
Dallas
LA Galaxy
LA FC
San Jose
You need half the teams to be in warm weather zones or under a dome to play a full schedule in February. These teams would have to host a game each weekend until other cities warm up enough to start hosting. This could work well, as these cities could then host fewer games in summer months.
Right now, there are only 7 teams out of 23 that are capable of hosting a full February schedule. There are another 4 that are borderline - that could maybe host a game or two that month to ease scheduling pressure, but can't and shouldn't be expected to blow 4-5 home games under questionable weather.
Expansion could help with this. Many of the candidates are in warmer weather areas: Miami, Charlotte, Phoenix, San Diego, Tampa, and Sacramento could all host a winter schedule. Plus, any new northern team could build a stadium with a roof. Still, there is a long way to go, with 12 cold weather teams and only 7 warm weather teams.
Similar threads
