Hmmmm this may come true earlier than I expected
Maybe in that world they may actually take all 2/B teams and bring back the reserve league? Why did the first one fail ?
Ottawa (NASL) to USL? UPDATE: Tampa Bay Rowdies too?
- Thread starter sbrylski
- Start date
Hmmmm this may come true earlier than I expected
Maybe in that world they may actually take all 2/B teams and bring back the reserve league? Why did the first one fail ?
I know I should be sad seeing another soccer league go down, but I can't help but laugh. Not after all the soccer war crap their Commissioner and the Faux Cosmos have been trying to build
The league was incredibly stupid and naive to not only turn down a partnership with MLS but also believing they had any chance of competing with them.
The league was incredibly stupid and naive to not only turn down a partnership with MLS but also believing they had any chance of competing with them.
Well said! But most likely, the majority of the team's will land on their feet in the USL and make it stronger. A few of the teams were bound to fail from poor ownership, but only the Kosmos are in a bind with being financially stable while not wanting to join an MLS-tied league; I believe they originally had the chance to go USL and opted for the NASL to keep their "independence" and a failed shot at D1 league status... so now the question is if they're enjoying their crow and are willing to be part of a league they can't force rules on???
Has the Cosmos ownership group ever said they don't / never wanted to join MLS? Or did MLS ever say or infer anything bad about the Cosmos (as a potential MLS club)?
What about golden parachutes for the clubs being relegated? With and MLS roster and the added cash boost, they should be able to move back up into the MLS fairly quickly.
Ask these teams:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11624460
But for your idea to work, MLS & USL would have to merge and literally be a single organization since the players' contracts are held by the league. And if that was the case, it wouldn't be so much that the relegated team(s) would have MLS quality rosters, all of the teams would have similarly constructed rosters utilizing the same bizarre rules, not to mention if there's a Cap in the top division then there'd definitely be a Cap in the lower division - but how do you do navigate that if a new DP has a 3-4 year contract and the Golden parachute is enough GAM for a single year to float the entire roster's payroll?
I don't know - maybe there is a fair way to do it, but if I was one of the MLS owners, whether from the original group or recent, I'd vote against it because there's no possible way that a golden parachute could make me whole from my recent investment buy-in or from the unrealized gains my team has amassed since my initial $5M buy-in (or whatever it was back then). MLS teams over the next 10-20 years are going to become billion $ investments for the well run clubs when they loosen the purse strings/increase the roster quality and make games more enticing to the networks.
I think the logical thing to do would be to at least for DP contracts and maybe all player contracts is to have a standard relegation clause. If a team is relegated, a team would have the option to terminate any player making over the max budget charge. All other players would receive mandatory pay decreases upon relegation. Vets could have a player option to terminate their contract upon relegation.
What if MLS required for all new team licenses and all sales that the team would cede their vote to MLS for any future votes pertaining to pro/rel?
It would take some time, but every new team and ever change of ownership would get one vote closer to being able to do it.
Who makes the rules for MLS? The owners do. And none of he current owners will ever write a rule like that. None of the current owners have any incentive to convert to Pro/Reg because any drop from the top tier will ultimately, if not immediately, hurt their club investment regardless of golden parachute.
All of these posts are great for figuring out how to make a tiered system function, but every one of them has failed to point out what would entice any owner to go along with it. That should be the first item to figure out, and until it happens, this is all moot, or rather just mental stimulation/masterbation.
Usually a promotion/relegation system is created from the bottom up. A select few endowed teams want to break away from a league and the concession is that they have to allow some way for the teams left behind to fight their way to the new league.
Since the American situation is backwards with the MLS already established as the top league, a more natural system will be like baseball's minor leagues.
Since the American situation is backwards with the MLS already established as the top league, a more natural system will be like baseball's minor leagues.
Pro/Rel was great 100 years ago when the business side of the sport was much less relevant. It's such a stupid concept in the modern game, especially with an established top-division.
Arguments for Pro/Rel:
1. It's entertaining and makes the whole season relevant for more teams.
True, but in MLS we have the playoffs, which this season no team was officially eliminated from until week 29 I think. It's not needed from an entertainment perspective.
2. It's a chance for players to move up from the lower ranks to the top flight.
Sure, but it also stunts development of young players as clubs with a desire to move up will hold onto their best players with the hope of moving up, which may or not happen. In these cases, players wind up in D2/3 for much longer than they should when they could be laying in D1. The affiliate system imo is much better for player development, as you can move players up, and down (for playing time) much more freely between affiliated clubs along the divisions.
3. Great minor-league clubs can't get to MLS.
Who cares. They can/could have been in MLS if they wanted to. I think it's much better to bring teams into the league based upon a viable business structure instead of a poorly run/funded team being fortunate enough to put together some good results over just 1 season to get into MLS, where their operational struggles get exposed.
Pro/Rel coming to MLS/US Soccer is a stupid discussion.
Arguments for Pro/Rel:
1. It's entertaining and makes the whole season relevant for more teams.
True, but in MLS we have the playoffs, which this season no team was officially eliminated from until week 29 I think. It's not needed from an entertainment perspective.
2. It's a chance for players to move up from the lower ranks to the top flight.
Sure, but it also stunts development of young players as clubs with a desire to move up will hold onto their best players with the hope of moving up, which may or not happen. In these cases, players wind up in D2/3 for much longer than they should when they could be laying in D1. The affiliate system imo is much better for player development, as you can move players up, and down (for playing time) much more freely between affiliated clubs along the divisions.
3. Great minor-league clubs can't get to MLS.
Who cares. They can/could have been in MLS if they wanted to. I think it's much better to bring teams into the league based upon a viable business structure instead of a poorly run/funded team being fortunate enough to put together some good results over just 1 season to get into MLS, where their operational struggles get exposed.
Pro/Rel coming to MLS/US Soccer is a stupid discussion.
I'm not really certain its best here for the US, but to say it's a stupid discussion seems somewhat silly.
I don't know if it will ever work here, or if it really should be tried here, and if so, it really wouldn't or shouldn't be for another 20 years or so while the popularity of soccer here in the states continues to rise.
The added benefits pro/rel would bring would be increased TV markets. At some point, MLS is going to reach a max number of teams that they won't expand from, and being in the US, there will be a lot of untapped markets. Especially considering some of the markets currently in play aren't the largest (Columbus, KC, possibilities of Sacramento, etc).
I'm not certain that other markets will continue to draw fan attention without the possibility of reaching division 1 (MLS).
So the big question to me is, what is the number of teams that MLS will max out on, and what will be left out? Next year we'll be looking at 22 teams with the potential list of teams to come in:
Indy
Cincinnati
Charlotte
Miami
Sacramento
San Diego
Ottawa
I'm sure there are others I'm missing here from the top of my head
That still leaves many US and Canadian markets untapped (Pittsburgh, Tampa, Milwaukee, Tennessee, San Antonio, Oklahoma City, St Louis, San Francisco, other Canadian cities, etc).
The obvious biggest hurdle to getting there (whether it makes sense or not) is there isn't a whole ton of incentive to current owners to make this move. But I think there could potentially be in 20-30 years, if the popularity of this sport was to reach close to European levels. Fans in Chicago may be more willing to show up and watch their team play at the end of a dumpster fire (pun intended) to support not getting relegated. On the flip side, I may actually turn on and watch St Louis vs Milwaukee to see a promotion battle.
Ultimately, when it comes to sports, money talks, and for this to happen, there would need to be viable and fairly certain financial incentives.
I'm not an advocate for pro/rel, but I think there are some very long term considerations. Ultimately though, I just want this league to succeed, and grow to the point where top flight talent comes to the MLS, not to collect a paycheck or as a stepping stone to another league, but because this is the place to play against top talent.
And that was the longest #mobilepost I will probably ever have
I don't think pro rel is stupid just not practical with current situation. At most you have MLS/ USL/PDL but I doubt it
As for NASL tweets are running around saying strikers got new owners willing to buy the team. So team may not die.
Also for those joining USL, will they pay expansion fee or something? Do they have $$ for it.
Still, interesting times new couple months with this lower leagues drama
As for NASL tweets are running around saying strikers got new owners willing to buy the team. So team may not die.
Also for those joining USL, will they pay expansion fee or something? Do they have $$ for it.
Still, interesting times new couple months with this lower leagues drama
Completely unsubstantiated internet rumor, but some guy is claiming the USSF is about to create a new D2 league for all qualifying clubs (i.e. pretty much all of NASL and whichever USL clubs want to join) and restrict any MLS2 teams to the D3 level: https://www.reddit.com/r/NASLSoccer/comments/55dswa/im_breaking_the_news_ussf_to_create/
There would be pro/rel between the levels after the results of the first season.
It would look something like this: http://midfieldpress.com/2016/09/19...es-to-division-2-soccer-in-the-united-states/
Probably complete bullshit, but fun to discuss anyway. And who knows? It could explain why we all know Ottawa is leaving the NASL but are all wondering where the hell they expect to play next year...
There would be pro/rel between the levels after the results of the first season.
It would look something like this: http://midfieldpress.com/2016/09/19...es-to-division-2-soccer-in-the-united-states/
Probably complete bullshit, but fun to discuss anyway. And who knows? It could explain why we all know Ottawa is leaving the NASL but are all wondering where the hell they expect to play next year...
lol i just saw mention of this in twitter and i really think its fake, just speculation at this point. we will start to see some changes when USSF makes its decision for D2, which should happen in the coming weeks.
Let the Florida snowball begin. Strikers and Armada both bleeding money and have to be eyeing up USL as their long term home.
