Promotion & Relegation

Like I said...

Before you get too excited, look at the actual words "current" "likely"
A politician for sure.

But the NASL remain open etc etc.....

I really hope NYCFC as part of the CFG do well, but for the sake of real football as per the rest of the world, I hope the NASL ethos wins out in the end.

Promotion and relegation is the best way to refresh the league. Clubs owning there own destiny is the best way to run a club / business.
Winners and losers are a fact of life... It strikes me that some people need to learn how to deal with that.

http://www.si.com/soccer/planet-futbol/2014/08/05/mls-promotion-relegation-mark-abbott
 
Before you get too excited, look at the actual words "current" "likely"
I really hope NYCFC as part of the CFG do well, but for the sake of real football as per the rest of the world, I hope the NASL ethos wins out in the end.

Promotion and relegation is the best way to refresh the league. Clubs owning there own destiny is the best way to run a club / business.
Winners and losers are a fact of life... It strikes me that some people need to learn how to deal with that.

I know I tapped out of this discussion in a blaze of glory but I agree with every word you said here.

edit: formatting
 
Before you get too excited, look at the actual words "current" "likely"
A politician for sure.

But the NASL remain open etc etc.....

I really hope NYCFC as part of the CFG do well, but for the sake of real football as per the rest of the world, I hope the NASL ethos wins out in the end.

Promotion and relegation is the best way to refresh the league. Clubs owning there own destiny is the best way to run a club / business.
Winners and losers are a fact of life... It strikes me that some people need to learn how to deal with that.

http://www.si.com/soccer/planet-futbol/2014/08/05/mls-promotion-relegation-mark-abbott
Yep...like the US government.

I mean why do they not allow monopolies? Its great for Celtic and Bayern right? Winners and losers blah, blah, blah...

Or the Spanish government, Atletico Madrid should have gone bankrupt long ago if not for the government.... Winners and losers....

Damn it, who wants wide-open leagues with super stars on all their teams when we could have a financially unstable league with all the good players on 1 or 2 teams that win the title every year?

Great system, can't wait to have that shit here.

Seriously, what's wrong with you?
 
You guys crack me up. Its never been about whats the best for the sport, the country or the players. Its always been about what will actually happen. Here the President of the league says "probably no chance". Sounds pretty solid a no as you get in this world.

I would bet good money as American and multinational billionaires start taking over UEFA Champions League clubs, we will see the concept of Pro/Rel in many leagues limited to Divisions 2 and down. Just wait.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NYCFCFan10
You guys crack me up. Its never been about whats the best for the sport, the country or the players. Its always been about what will actually happen. Here the President of the league says "probably no chance". Sounds pretty solid a no as you get in this world.

I would bet good money as American and multinational billionaires start taking over UEFA Champions League clubs, we will see the concept of Pro/Rel in many leagues limited to Divisions 2 and down. Just wait.

Magnus (& co)

I am going to try to explain here why I am so against the American model.

In Europe the biggest clubs have muted the possibility of a European Super league for years, this model would protect clubs from promotion / relegation and the clubs would all be self sufficient as they would hoover up the TV rights etc. So far this has been resisted.

The problem with the MLS is that it almost is not a national competition, but a Continental competition.

All the MLS teams have qualified for equivalent of Europe each year without actually winning anything.

Each of your states is the equivalent of a European Country. Each State (or maybe region) could actually have its own competition, with the top teams qualifying for the pinnacle competition (MLS in some guise)
This would
Make it easier for fans to travel to away games
Promote regional rivalries
Promote games on a local level
etc etc

The MLS was formed from the 1994 world cup bid , where America agreed to create a top division
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_League_Soccer
and indeed has played a major part in promoting the sport in the UK. (Edit mean US)

However it is now getting to the point where it acts as a blocker to smaller teams who want to grow organically rather than splash £100 million to join the elite.

Man City in the 1990s were probably something akin to the Cosmos, where the Red Bulls (United) were part of the Elite, and Cosmos were a struggling club that used to be good.

Now City have received some investment (into the team not the league) and are flying, and in many respects have overtaken United.

The club is flying high...
Would this investment into a team and local area have happened if the G14 breakaway super league happened ?
Would the investment have happened if the way to the top was blocked by Elite clubs.

Ok so now the same owners have created a new franchise in the MLS. Is this because if they had bought a NASL team and invested into it the route to the top was blocked ?
Is an area somewhere missing out on the level of investments Manchester has received purely because the MLS bars entry.

Is the new FFP ruling in Europe which indirectly bars entry to the top table the reason Aston Villa are struggling for a buyer.

The FFP ruling will be challenged sooner or later on the grounds of restriction of trade.
America has similar laws (I do not claim to be a lawyer) and I hope to god that someone challenges the MLS bar to entry similarly in the near future.

Much as I want NYCFC to do well, in a similar way to wanting my cousins to do well, I am sorry I do not agree with any sports system that buts absolute barriers in the way of entry.

There are similarities with the MLS to the ECB (Cricket) and the Major and Minor Counties leagues. So I do partially understand the model.
The model does work in part (no promotion/ relegation to and from the other).
But I do not believe the restriction to entry to Major League Cricket is financial (entry fee) but based upon facilities. Clubs do own there own facilities, and the league is ran on behalf of the clubs not owned by them so each (county) club still has the opportunity to join the elite.
 
Magnus (& co)

I am going to try to explain here why I am so against the American model.

In Europe the biggest clubs have muted the possibility of a European Super league for years, this model would protect clubs from promotion / relegation and the clubs would all be self sufficient as they would hoover up the TV rights etc. So far this has been resisted.

The problem with the MLS is that it almost is not a national competition, but a Continental competition.

All the MLS teams have qualified for equivalent of Europe each year without actually winning anything.

Each of your states is the equivalent of a European Country. Each State (or maybe region) could actually have its own competition, with the top teams qualifying for the pinnacle competition (MLS in some guise)
This would
Make it easier for fans to travel to away games
Promote regional rivalries
Promote games on a local level
etc etc

The MLS was formed from the 1994 world cup bid , where America agreed to create a top division
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_League_Soccer
and indeed has played a major part in promoting the sport in the UK. (Edit mean US)

However it is now getting to the point where it acts as a blocker to smaller teams who want to grow organically rather than splash £100 million to join the elite.

Man City in the 1990s were probably something akin to the Cosmos, where the Red Bulls (United) were part of the Elite, and Cosmos were a struggling club that used to be good.

Now City have received some investment (into the team not the league) and are flying, and in many respects have overtaken United.

The club is flying high...
Would this investment into a team and local area have happened if the G14 breakaway super league happened ?
Would the investment have happened if the way to the top was blocked by Elite clubs.

Ok so now the same owners have created a new franchise in the MLS. Is this because if they had bought a NASL team and invested into it the route to the top was blocked ?
Is an area somewhere missing out on the level of investments Manchester has received purely because the MLS bars entry.

Is the new FFP ruling in Europe which indirectly bars entry to the top table the reason Aston Villa are struggling for a buyer.

The FFP ruling will be challenged sooner or later on the grounds of restriction of trade.
America has similar laws (I do not claim to be a lawyer) and I hope to god that someone challenges the MLS bar to entry similarly in the near future.

Much as I want NYCFC to do well, in a similar way to wanting my cousins to do well, I am sorry I do not agree with any sports system that buts absolute barriers in the way of entry.

There are similarities with the MLS to the ECB (Cricket) and the Major and Minor Counties leagues. So I do partially understand the model.
The model does work in part (no promotion/ relegation to and from the other).
But I do not believe the restriction to entry to Major League Cricket is financial (entry fee) but based upon facilities. Clubs do own there own facilities, and the league is ran on behalf of the clubs not owned by them so each (county) club still has the opportunity to join the elite.

I think there's a problem with your view. A US State is the equivalent of a European terms of size, but in terms of cultural identity you couldn't be more wrong. If anything, cultural identity tends to go by regions. So I'm from Louisiana, but most Americans lump me as a Southerner (Which actually isn't quite right since the Cajun/Creole influence of South Louisiana makes me culturally different, but that's a long digression). So there's isn't that identity where I'm so much more interested in competing with people within my state as opposed to people outside my state. I'm perfectly happy seeing my New Orleans team play Atlanta and Houston and Dallas.

As far as organic growth, most of the American sports leagues that exist have been formed when two successful leagues merged to form a better league. NFL & AFL merged into NFL; NBA and ABA, American and National League into MLB. So if there's a point where MLS cannot contain all the franchises, I think the NASL can rise up and create a top league. Nothing is stopping them other than the perception of it not being a top league. What you're seeing in Sacramento is that teams are willing to spend, but they're spending with the goal of being admitted eventually into MLS.

I'd also argue that there are many in England who feel that organic growth into the top of the EPL is impossible for most clubs. The Champions League money (which has created an almost de facto Superleague) has so widened the gap that you need a Sheikh to bridge that gap. Look at Southampton. Southampton developed its own player into a top half of the table squad, and as a reward has been pillaged by the big clubs and will almost certainly be relegated. These smaller clubs are playing at the dance, but they don't really have a hope of winning the league.

That doesn't fly in professional U.S. sports. Every team starts off the season trying for the title. Parity such that every team has a hope of a title (and as such their fans can keep interested). L0ook at DC United. Terrible last year, rebuilt, and is now a strong contender.

As far as restriction of trade laws, I actually am a lawyer although not an expert in anti-trust laws. MLS can grant franchises just like McDonalds or any other franchisor can. If they prohibited people from starting their own clubs, that would be a violation but MLS is under no obligation to allow people who start clubs to be entered into MLS. Anti-trust usually only bothers the league when negotiating with the players, but as long as they are operating according to a collectively bargained agreement with the players' union it's ok. It's worth noting that the NFL was sued on grounds of anti-trust by a rival league. It was found to be in violation, but it failed to prove any damages so was only awarded a nominal fee. Literally the NFL had to write a $3 check.
 
I think there's a problem with your view. A US State is the equivalent of a European terms of size, but in terms of cultural identity you couldn't be more wrong. If anything, cultural identity tends to go by regions. So I'm from Louisiana, but most Americans lump me as a Southerner (Which actually isn't quite right since the Cajun/Creole influence of South Louisiana makes me culturally different, but that's a long digression). So there's isn't that identity where I'm so much more interested in competing with people within my state as opposed to people outside my state. I'm perfectly happy seeing my New Orleans team play Atlanta and Houston and Dallas.

As far as organic growth, most of the American sports leagues that exist have been formed when two successful leagues merged to form a better league. NFL & AFL merged into NFL; NBA and ABA, American and National League into MLB. So if there's a point where MLS cannot contain all the franchises, I think the NASL can rise up and create a top league. Nothing is stopping them other than the perception of it not being a top league. What you're seeing in Sacramento is that teams are willing to spend, but they're spending with the goal of being admitted eventually into MLS.

I'd also argue that there are many in England who feel that organic growth into the top of the EPL is impossible for most clubs. The Champions League money (which has created an almost de facto Superleague) has so widened the gap that you need a Sheikh to bridge that gap. Look at Southampton. Southampton developed its own player into a top half of the table squad, and as a reward has been pillaged by the big clubs and will almost certainly be relegated. These smaller clubs are playing at the dance, but they don't really have a hope of winning the league.

That doesn't fly in professional U.S. sports. Every team starts off the season trying for the title. Parity such that every team has a hope of a title (and as such their fans can keep interested). L0ook at DC United. Terrible last year, rebuilt, and is now a strong contender.

As far as restriction of trade laws, I actually am a lawyer although not an expert in anti-trust laws. MLS can grant franchises just like McDonalds or any other franchisor can. If they prohibited people from starting their own clubs, that would be a violation but MLS is under no obligation to allow people who start clubs to be entered into MLS. Anti-trust usually only bothers the league when negotiating with the players, but as long as they are operating according to a collectively bargained agreement with the players' union it's ok. It's worth noting that the NFL was sued on grounds of anti-trust by a rival league. It was found to be in violation, but it failed to prove any damages so was only awarded a nominal fee. Literally the NFL had to write a $3 check.

I respect and acknowledge your viewpoint, and understand that the showcase American sports are all similarly franchised.

You have far more knowledge of the feeder system stateside than I do.
I suspect that the MLS is pillaging NASL clubs of there best players in a similar way to what the top clubs do to the likes of Southampton.
The thing is Southampton developed those players, and have reaped the financial reward for selling them. This can then be reinvested, and the club take a small step on the road to organic growth in a league that did not (ffp now so ??? ) restrict them. The probability is that they all have sell on clauses in the sale agreements as well.

With the possible exception of Arsenal no team (Manchester United included) has ever won the EPL without a Sheikh like figure in the background.
Ok you may have a variety of winners in the league, but you do not get the romance. A team doing what Rushden and Diamonds did over here, rising from the lowest levels to league football (yes a sugar daddy who pulled out) but hey those fans lived the dream for a while.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kinkladze
I respect and acknowledge your viewpoint, and understand that the showcase American sports are all similarly franchised.

You have far more knowledge of the feeder system stateside than I do.
I suspect that the MLS is pillaging NASL clubs of there best players in a similar way to what the top clubs do to the likes of Southampton.
The thing is Southampton developed those players, and have reaped the financial reward for selling them. This can then be reinvested, and the club take a small step on the road to organic growth in a league that did not (ffp now so ??? ) restrict them. The probability is that they all have sell on clauses in the sale agreements as well.

With the possible exception of Arsenal no team (Manchester United included) has ever won the EPL without a Sheikh like figure in the background.
Ok you may have a variety of winners in the league, but you do not get the romance. A team doing what Rushden and Diamonds did over here, rising from the lowest levels to league football (yes a sugar daddy who pulled out) but hey those fans lived the dream for a while.

If someone rises up in NASL, they'll probably get snatched up its true. But a lot of the players in MLS come elsewhere, either up through colleges here in the states, academy systems, or from overseas. Players usually go to NASL because they still need to grow before being MLS ready.
 
I respect and acknowledge your viewpoint, and understand that the showcase American sports are all similarly franchised.

You have far more knowledge of the feeder system stateside than I do.
I suspect that the MLS is pillaging NASL clubs of there best players in a similar way to what the top clubs do to the likes of Southampton.
The thing is Southampton developed those players, and have reaped the financial reward for selling them. This can then be reinvested, and the club take a small step on the road to organic growth in a league that did not (ffp now so ??? ) restrict them. The probability is that they all have sell on clauses in the sale agreements as well.

With the possible exception of Arsenal no team (Manchester United included) has ever won the EPL without a Sheikh like figure in the background.
Ok you may have a variety of winners in the league, but you do not get the romance. A team doing what Rushden and Diamonds did over here, rising from the lowest levels to league football (yes a sugar daddy who pulled out) but hey those fans lived the dream for a while.
Arsenal had Danny Fizman pump 50M into the club in the 90s. unheard of money at the time. ALL success has been bought. It's the nature of the game these days.
 
I respect and acknowledge your viewpoint, and understand that the showcase American sports are all similarly franchised.

You have far more knowledge of the feeder system stateside than I do.
I suspect that the MLS is pillaging NASL clubs of there best players in a similar way to what the top clubs do to the likes of Southampton.
The thing is Southampton developed those players, and have reaped the financial reward for selling them. This can then be reinvested, and the club take a small step on the road to organic growth in a league that did not (ffp now so ??? ) restrict them. The probability is that they all have sell on clauses in the sale agreements as well.

With the possible exception of Arsenal no team (Manchester United included) has ever won the EPL without a Sheikh like figure in the background.
Ok you may have a variety of winners in the league, but you do not get the romance. A team doing what Rushden and Diamonds did over here, rising from the lowest levels to league football (yes a sugar daddy who pulled out) but hey those fans lived the dream for a while.
So the dream starts and ends in the lower divisions?
 
Pro/Rel will never happen with MLS. Teams paying $100,000,000 to participate in the MLS, will not welcome any others without them paying the same.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MagnusPax
Pro/Rel will never happen with MLS. Teams paying $100,000,000 to participate in the MLS, will not welcome any others without them paying the same.

I have to laugh at that argument.
Teams pay significantly more than that in Europe, without any guarantees.
But at least they not there own destiny, without too much league interference.

Do you think Leeds United did not invest £100 000 000 or more.
 
MrE-if teams outside of MLS could pony up $100,000,000 they would be participating. With television rights and teams in most major cities in America, it will be very difficult for another league to compete with MLS.

Please keep in mind $100,000,000 is just the entry fee, there is much more money needed to get a successful team off the ground.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: MagnusPax
Lol... restricted access, to senior competition. No college league can dream those dreams.
You don't know enough about our college system to realize how wrong you are...

th
 
  • Like
Reactions: MagnusPax
You don't know enough about our college system to realize how wrong you are...

th
I never said your college system did not draw crowds I said that the clubs are barred access to the pinnacle. Two completely different statements