Ideas for MLS League Design [Superthread] III

So 1,100 is the limit in this forum? Good to know

 

Well, good work my Moderation Monarch. This is why you're better than I am

 

Top at 24 clubs for D1.

Many teams toward bottom even in NBA and NHL are struggling in attendance.
(American sports with rich and deep history/tradition and strong foundation)
http://espn.go.com/nhl/attendance
http://espn.go.com/nba/attendance/_/year/2011
Average for bottom 6 NHL is like 11K.

Let the rest of markets start and get strong in D2.

Now.. Keep the tradition of two tables.
12 in East & 12 in West

H/A in table and one match out of table = 34 matches regular season.
Top of each table = Conference Champions.
Then playoffs for overall MLS Cup Winner.

MLS Cup winner and US Open Cup winner = CCL Direct
MLS Runner up and US Open Cup Runner Up = CCL pre-round
Conference Champions = Copa Libertadores

 

Y'know what, every single bit of this makes sense. I'd replace the USOC Runner-Up with the Supporters Shield winner, and have a few more playoff rounds. But I could live with this. I'd prefer to see:

MLS Cup Champions and SS winner: CCL Group Stage
USOC Winner and Conference Champion (non-SS): CCL Preliminaries

In the likely case that one team occupies more than one slot, (in fact, it's required), I'd give the lower slot to the runner-up in that competition. MLS Cup and USOC, Prelim slot goes to USOC Runner-up. W1 wins the SS and E1 wins the MLS Cup, E2 goes to the Prelims

But wait, if CONMEBOL ever lets us in CopaLib (big if) then I assume it would be like Mexico and CCL participants would be barred from participating in both. If CONMEBOL gives us two berths, I'd be inclined to give them to the next two slots in each conference.

 

Yes I was assuming we will get into Copa Lib like Mexicans by the time we have 24 clubs.

When we finally have that setup, SS title doesn't really mean much.
It's pretty much balanced in each table, thus top of table conference champion title is very much legit. However it's heavily unbalanced between the two tables, thus SS title isn't that much credible. In fact that's why we have playoff and MLS Cup to determine who is the overall champion of MLS.

It's kind of like comparing top of EPL table and top of La Liga table via points.
(of course we have certain degree of integration, but still...)
So there's UEFA Champions league to determine overall European champion just like we have MLS Cup playoff for overall MLS champion.

That's why I would pay less attention to the SS title when we finally have the setup.

I'm not concrete on the playoff setup, so kind of left it open.
10 out of 24 sounds still reasonable. Anything more than that will already be over 50% which seem too many (if there's pro/rel then it would be perfect, but I don't want this turn into another pro/rel, so will leave it open. It deosn't really effect this overall setup except # of playoff spots. Too few will produce too many meaningless games at the bottom)

One thing I want to see differently is to have inter-conference playoffs.
Like E1 vs W4, E2 vs W3, E3 vs W2, E4 vs W1, etc..

Edit: by the way top 5 from each table for playoffs, no need for wild card system.

 

Re: USOC Runner-Up; Ok, if there is an extended playoff (more than just two teams) then having the Conference Regular Season Champs and MLS Cup Champ in makes sense.

And I'd actually very much agree with you. If it is primarily intra-conference play, I'd love to see an E1 v W4 set up. Top 5 from each conference with a E4 v E5 play in round makes the most sense.

Playoff Set-up (assuming higher seed wins every game)

Play in Round
E4 v E5 (@ E4)
W4 v W5 (@ W4)

Quarterfinals (Two legged; return leg at higher seed)
W1 v E4
E1 v W4
W2 v E3
E2 v W3

Semifinals (Two legged; return leg at higher seed)
W1 v E2
E1 v W2

Final (Neutral Site)
W1 v E1

 

Mostly same, for the playoff bracket, I was thinking something like this



- One game play-in 4th vs 5th at higher seed
- One game at higher seed for quarter-finals
(or could do two legged series depends on scheduling. If schedule too tight, one game at higher seed)
- two legged series semi-finals
- Final

Now.. I'm still open to the final format. I'm not too comfortable with the neutral site thing for MLS. For one game final, neutral site makes the most logical sense, but I'm not sure. Maybe rather want to see it at home of one of the finalists somehow (higher seed from regular season + playoff results?)

 

Our brackets are identical. Good work.

Neutral sites are used in pretty much every Cup Competition everywhere, both in US Sports and in Soccer. I'm 100% ok with it

The reason I like the two-legged in the Quarterfinals is double:
1. Two-legged formats were developed for systems like the Champions League where there's no objective way to say that the Portuguese Champion is better or worse than the Danish Champions. This system doesn't have a way to determine that E2 is better or worse than W3
2. It gives fans of playoff teams the opportunity to see their team play competition that they wouldn't otherwise get to see, year to year.

 

Just like the world Cup and Champions League.
Think about it. There are Asian division, Euro division, Afro division, SA division.
They play in divisions for the qualification round. For the World Cup playoffs, they mix it.

You just had division games all year long in the regular season.
Why more division games in the playoff? It's time to mix.

 

Because with primarily intra-conference play, mixing divisions allows the Revs to host and play against Seattle, something they otherwise wouldn't have to opportunity to do.

It also is a way to prevent teams from being punished by being in a stronger Conference. For instance, this year's playoffs would be:

Play in
CLB/NY
FCD/COL

1/4Finals
LA/(NY/CLB)
SKC(FCD/COL)
SEA/PHI
RSL/HOU

Seems to me that Seattle and Salt Lake aren't punished for being close to each other by making the #2 and #3 seeds play each other in the Quarterfinals

 

That's right. I'm more toward two legged for quarter-finals. It's actually same thing I said about SS title - can't really tell E1 is better than W1 based on higher points.

 

But you couldn't either when the SS was created, and I doubt a second trophy would be made so that there'd be a ESS and WSS

 

Exactly. For the overall MLS Cup champion, we want to test it regardless of the conference strength.

If we keep divisions throughout the the World Cup, it'll be same thing as basically the Confederations Cup.

 

True, that's why there has been controversies over it and often debate on SS vs MLS Cup. We never had balancedness either in or between/among tables. The league has been still developing and expanding. Why inherit the controversy when we finally have solid setup.

 

There's only a controversy because people want there to be one. You really mean to tell me that if there was no trophy for it, there wouldn't be people claiming LA were the 'real' champions?

You think with these playoffs, there aren't going to be people clamoring about how there are two equal 'real' champions??

 

Well this year we happen to have balanced schedule, so those people can have stronger argument for this particular year, but with that heavily unbalanced set up it's basically same as saying ManU with 40 pts in EPL is better than Barca with 38 pts in LaLiga because ManU earned 2 more pts. If you still want to give out a trophy, why not for the sake of recognizing the fans effort and tradition , but what does it really mean? That's all I'm saying.
So... right.. it's not even a controversy.. it doesn't even mean much.

 

That being said, when it comes to CCL placement, I'd very much like to reward Regular Season success over victory in a Cup that only 3 teams give a damn about

 

(This is assuming that we get berth to Copa Lib by the time - at least two spots)

We should send our champion to CCL, so MLS Cup champion should go to CCL
(otherwise CONCACAF may have issue). That's pretty much given.

Berth to CCL vs Copa Lib, which one is more rewarding? I would say about the same... The tournament itself is much more prestigious with Copa Lib, however you get Club World Cup berth from CCL. I wouldn't mind either way for my club.

Now I would say top of each table goes to Copa Lib. Why? because they are arguably the two strongest and most consistent teams in MLS. So tougher and more prestigious tournament for them representing MLS.

On the other hand, we are sending our 'official overall champions and runner-ups' to our region's champions league.

I think this all makes sense and would make everyone happy - CONMEBOL, CONCACAF, Cup Winners, and Winners of each table.

Everything fits together.

 

Let's have this discussion pertinent to the world we live in, not the world you'd like to.

Conmebol has not invited us to CopaLib.
If we were, CONCACAF and FIFA would require us to send our best teams to the CCL, just like they do with Mexico

 

I think entry into Copa Lib is very possible in the future.
It's win-win for MLS and CONMEBOL assuming that MLS will be a great league.

Yes CONCACAF will have an issue if we don't send our 'best teams'.
That's exactly what I said.

So first we are sending our two official overall champions = MLS Cup Champion(If US) and US Champion(remember CCL berth is based on nations). Next two are debatable. Cup Runner-ups or top of each table from regular season. I don't think CONCACAF would have a issue if we send MLS Cup winner, USOC Winner, and the runner ups.

CONMEBOL would be also happy if we send top of each table who are arguable the strongest.

We can also switch so that runners-ups go to Copa lib and top of each table joins CCL, but I really think the former makes much more sense.

Well these are minor details.

 

Conmebol already gets tons of money from the US. As it stands, there is far more money and viewers in the US for Mexican clubs and American clubs. Right now Conmebol has it's cake and eats it, too; all the money from the US without further dilluting their tournament with the 6th and 7th best US teams (non-CCL qualifiers) and threatening the seperation between themselves and CONCACAF

 

So you are saying RBNY was overall 6th/7th best US team in 2010 from last years result.
http://www.mlssoccer.com/standings/2010

Assuming MLS Cup winner is the best, who's the second best? MLS Cup runner-up? or SS winner?
In MLS, it all depends how you interpret it.