I would think that FIFA doesn't want civilian courts involved because lots of dirty laundry gets aired in court. Like the NHL vs. Balsillie situation in Phoenix.
NHL is not set up like FIFA is. So you can not compare the two issues. FIFA has its own judicial court system FIFA Court of Sports Arbitration and have specific guild lines on how the teams, leagues and federations operate. And part of the fifa statue that all issues related to the sport has to be dealt within CSA unless specifically says that it can be dealt in civilian court. It'll be like a US Judge ordering USSF to not sanction NASL.
I don't think it's overselling at all. He's correct that there is nothing USL can do to prevent Rochester, Tampa and CP from playing in NASL. Now they may get some $$$ in the end from one or more, but none of the teams can be forced to play in USL. And on the off chance it comes to that for the first time ever they can just fold the 3 existing franchises and start 3 new ones in the same cities.
Not necessarily. FIFA doesn't want civilian courts involved because in countries where soccer is more important than everything else and upholding the law is maybe not as important as everything else, a club can sue over a ruling they don't like from their FA, gladhand around and find a friendly judge, and get FA rulings overturned in their favor. Remember what happened in Italy after the 2006 World Cup? There were politicians and judges seriously talking about about voiding the Italian FA rulings against Juventus et. al in the Seria A scandal because Italy winning the World Cup was proof that nothing was wrong with the sport in the country. And that almost happened in a country with a long-standing system of law!
PR can't really be in USL2. Think about it for two seconds and you'll see why not. The main reason for most clubs to be in USL2 and not USL1 is to keep travel costs down. Flying to Puerto Rico would be an expensive proposition for the USL 2 teams that are pretty concentrated in the NorthEast.
I don't get why anybody assumes that FIFA or USSF would automatically favor the USL just because they've been around for a while. In the early 90's, FIFA/USSF went with creating a Div I league from scratch (MLS) over sanctioning an existing league as the US's top flight league (APSL/A-League). I also don't get why people think there would be any problem with the NASL admitting Portland. I haven't seen anything from Merritt Paulson saying he's particular in favor of USL or against the NASL. The line from Paulson is, and always has been, that since he'll be done with Div II soccer at the end of the 2010 season anyway he doesn't have any invested interested in either cause, and will ultimately go with whomever comes out on top. I haven't seen anything that contradicts that. Given that as their stance, why would Portland jump to the NASL before the NASL gets sanctioned? It doesn't jive with their MO. Also, the notion that NASL would deny Portland admission based on holding a grudge against Portland for not moving sooner is just beyond retarded in light of the fact that NASL has already admitted a team whose owner had previously been extremely vocal in support for the opposing cause.
I think that the USL could get an injunction that blocks the three teams from playing in a non-USL-1 league for the 2010 season or as long as the dispute is within the court's domain. And my guess is that is what the USL might be hoping for as the NASL is unlikely to get to 8 teams if a court is blocking TB, CPB, & Roc from joining. It doesn't help the USL in the long run, but it helps them for 2010.
Bermuda had to help pay for travel costs. Perhaps the Islanders or the USL will help offset the added travel costs? You never know....
PR just pure speculation on my part. I didn't know about the regional rivalries, etc. There have been teams in the Carribean who have played in USL2. Bermuda Hogges, but we all see what happens when this gets attempted.
Agreed. Paulson is playing his cards very close to the vest. When NASL gets sanctioned (and trust me it will) he'll jump in a heartbeat as will Austin. They'll have no choice. But Paulson like Cooper is a savy guy; he knows that until USSF says so it isn't written in stone. He has his options open. People say Portland, and Austin's support of USL is implicit because neither organization has said anything. First, why does Portland need support either camp? They don't have a dog in the fight. In 2011 they move on up to MLS. Sayonara 2nd division, and good luck. Now I'd be willing to put up money that when (and yes if) they move to NASL that Cooper would sit down with Paulson, and try to arrange a Vancouver/Edmonton type deal. Secondly I think Austin is understandably gun shy. They are only a year old as a team, and keeping a low profile while all the posturing goes on. When the smoke clears on this thing both these teams will be with whoever comes out on top. Trust me it's going to be NASL
This implies that USL's position is "if we're going down, we're taking as many people with us as possible." I really hope that's not the case.
Unfortunately, this sounds exactly like what USL is doing. Even if they win and force Rhinos, Rowdies and CP to play in 2010, no way those teams play for them 2011. I can only guess their ultimate strategy is that they will break the NASL by winning the lawsuit and force some/most of the NASL to come crawling back for 2010. Even then, would all these "disciplined children" be there in 2011? No way.
A few points: 1. Why does everyone keep repeating that a league needs eight teams to be sanctioned? This is simply not true. Yes, I know it's in the USSF rulebook, but let's look at the history. 1986 WSL: 6 teams 1987 WSL: 6 teams 1988 WSL: 6 teams 1992 A-League: 5 teams 1993 A-League: 7 teams 1994 A-League: 7 teams 1995 A-League: 6 teams 1996 A-League: 7 teams A consistent 8-team league in every division is a fairly recent phenomenon. Anyone who doesn't think the USSF will bend this rule if NASL or USL-1 wants to play with 7 teams for a year or two until (Atlanta, Ottawa) comes on line is kidding themselves. 2. I've seen a lot of people here describing FCNY as an imaginary team. As far as I can tell, this is based on the fact that people don't like their web site and don't like the fact that they haven't paid someone to set up a much better web site. Here's the thing. Look at some of the USL-2 teams' web sites. They all look pretty similar--because the USL designs and builds them to. This is part of the services the league provides. If the USL is going to build them a web site before the season starts, why would they waste money building their own? Seriously, take a look at the new Tampa Bay Rowdies web site. This is apparently what makes this look like a "real" team to people on the Internet and New York look like vaporware. Sure, it's flashy. It also has no content of any kind. Tampa Bay has held a player combine, but hasn't announced a single player yet. They have hired a coach. New York has held a player combine, but hasn't announced a single player yet. They're still looking at potential coaches. Neither has a stadium, sponsorships, or anything else to say. New York isn't "vaporware," it's just a minor league team whose web site hasn't launched yet.
If you minus teams like the Silverbacks and Thunder, and then minus CP, Tampa and Rhinos, NASL is down to 5. That could be too small. I don't really care about USSF's rule, if they break it for womens, they can break it for mens. But 5 for a continent wide league? I think too small. Tampa has a coach, technical director, done market research on logos and colors, uniforums, has had tryouts (with pictures) and with real professionals (former MLS players and such). They are currently in Liverpool's academy grounds getting ready for another tryout. FCNY? Do they have anything except a amatuer tryout (for $300 bucks) and an announced stadium deal? I wonder if Hofstra would confirm that? Tampa even has a Facebook account!
I totally agree with this post. And I hope that is not the strategy of USL. But I guess I am looking for some clarification. Everyone keeps bashing "USL." If I am correct, the USL is a longstanding organization that encompasses a huge youth system, PDL and USL1 and USL2. As a group, this organization has done great things for the game of socccer in the USA. All hell broke loose when NuRock got involved. From the outside looking in, it looks like NuRock is the bad guy. Who is driving this legal attack by USL? Is it NuRock with USL employees forced to play along? Or is it, in fact, the longstanding management of the USL?
Well NuRock has made some bad decisions certainly, but it started long before that. With previous regimes (or should I say the current one?).
If the 3 teams will be forced by court order it will be bad for soccer. This is exactly why FIFA wants all issues to be dealt within CSA not civilian court.
That's something TetsuoShima suggested we add, which it has. Most NASL teams even have a YouTube account, which I'll be adding in soon.
People have a love/hate relationship when it comes to USL on these boards. Before the whole NuRock/TOA debacle it more or less consisted of people cringing at moves the USL made business wise as they were very conservative (financially), and tended to watch the bottom line. That's not necessarily a bad thing. That kind of management kept the league(s) afloat. Then they did this eleventh hour back door deal with NuRock, and all hell broke losse. There is enough blame to around here on all sides USL/TOA(NASL)/USSF. Ultimately everything falls on USSF to sort all this out. They didn't step in soon enough, when all this nonsense started so in a sense of the three parties involved they have a lion share of the blame. But, as I stated before USL(NuRock)/NASL(TOA) are also responisble for this mess. Because of USSF inaction in the whole situation has put them in a very awkward position. They are trying to convince FIFA that "The Game is in US", when what is happening in our second division is evidence counter to that very statement. Look at the wording of the statement on the 7th. They said a decision would come, "..sooner rather than later". This would imply that they would want to get this mess cleaned up before the WC year. Both sides are suppose to have plans/details of their leagues submitted. Now if this is the case why is all this scrambling with lawsuites etc. going on with USL? I don't think they have their preverbial s--- together. Cooper and his organization aparently do. Also I've spoken to a source, whom I trust and they said that USSF is ready to pull a trigger if not by Friday then by the beginning of next week. Believe me when I tell you this person would know. That being said USSF could shock everyone, and based on the lawsuits give the sanctioning to USL(NuRock). Fasten your seatbelts everyone the ride isn't over. We're gone have a lot more turbulence before it ends, but it will end soon.
You can't really argue that USSF will side with USL based on the lawsuits. The fact that Usl(nurock) filed lawsuit USSF could use that to sanction the NASL. Usl(nurock) would want to get judge to tell where and where not these teams can play. It be pretty much US court telling USSF/FIFA how to run their business. Assuming USL wants US court to tell the 3 teams that they must play in USL next season.
Injunction's not an appropriate remedy for breach of contract. Assuming NuRock is suing for breach (I don't know the details), all USL can gain from its suit, assuming its claims are true, is a financial award equal to the amount of money it would have made had the breaching clubs kept their promise to play in USL. And that's the best-case scenario. Cooper's absolutely right -- the U.S. courts will in all likelihood be powerless to keep any of the clubs from joining NASL. The only remaining argument is over the amount of compensation owed NuRock, if any.
IMO, the lawsuits are simply an organization in the midst of death throes making one last gasp attempt to recoup as much money as possible before their First Division dissolves into nothingness. I guarantee you that the lawsuits did no good, and most likely significant harm, in their case to the USSF. If they thought they were on the "right side" of all this, they would have held off on the lawsuits until after USSF rendered a verdict. I see no way that the three sued teams play in USL next season. I could see an outside chance of of a judge ordering them to pay damages to USL, but if they were "forced" to field a team, we'd probably see three sides full of amateurs paid $100 a game coached by the local pub manager. Who says that they have to field a "professionally competitive side"? Just my opinion.
I'm afraid this may mean USL as a whole dissolves into nothingness if their first division gets sanctioned. So USL2, PDL, and W-League suffers as well because of the way the new owners have handled this whole situation. Sad, really very sad. There will be a lot of fallout here in the 2nd, and 3rd divisions.