And this is only fair, the standards for div 2 are pretty high while there are almost no standards for div 3 nowadays
I'm also hoping that the NASL and MLS work out a deal so that if any team wants to join MLS they would have to go through NASL first to test the market. I think that would create at least 6 positive outcomes for US soccer in general. 1. Help MLS see what Markets would strengthen MLS like Vancouver, Portland, Montreal, and Seattle. 2. It would help NASL find stronger ownership groups. 3. It will help MLS and NASL Figure out if Pro/Rel is possible in our Future. 4. It pressure USL to try to work with NASL rather then against. (Orlando, SSE, and Rochester). 5. It would Create a Stronger fan bases with the hope of maybe one day going to MLS. 6. It might Help different possible ownership groups in one city to try to create a partner ship to make it possible for a NASL future MLS venture. (Spurs/Hartman in San Antonio). I'm going to start a thread for this.
Why wait for the end of the year? Call the show every week and ask them how things are going in the "Second highest division of soccer in North America" then laugh and so "Oh that's right you're in the 3rd division now!" The crew of KickThis is a bunch of lemmings running towards a cliff. I'd venture to say they prefer and are of the mindset that ruined outdoor soccer in the 80s. The idea that indoor soccer is the way of the future. It's pretty absurd at how provincial and small their thinking is considering the position Rochester could have in US Soccer.
I think they ought to just blow it up and start over for next year. This whole thing was snakebitten from the beginning. I'm not the biggest fan of the USL; they've had their problems. But this was NOT the way to go about it.
I have heard that the USL were in USSF's ear about not slacking on the D2 standards just to have a D2 league because they opted to go D3 straight away under the assumption that the standards were going to be the standards. I believe that having high standards are a good idea. I just think that USSF set the D2 bar so high that it is unlikely that you can get a league to meet those in the US at this point in time. Soccer below MLS is not profitable for those standards to work long term, IMO.
I agree. And to expect every team to be able to meet every standard in even the 6 months since they were announced is crazy. How long did it take for MLS to see multiple teams not owned by one investor, or for teams to move into proper stadiums? I don't understand why they can't allow NASL to play while monitoring their progress and helping to build a league that fully meets all the standards. Where were these type of standards for D1 when MLS was struggling early on? They weren't there because they just wanted the league to survive because it served the Federations interest. Well guess what, having a D2 league and club teams in 8 markets serves the USSF's interests too. If they want American soccer to grow, and kids to take up the game and perhaps become the American stars of the future, killing soccer in 8 markets is no way to do that.
100% agreed.Im all for standards but there unrealtist. Also i believe that these standards will not usher in another d2 league.
Isn't there a requirement saying that ''the majority owner needs to have a net worth of 20 million dollar'', this is extremely high IMHO Knowing that every jerk with 25 jerseys and 3 soccerballs easily meets D3 requirements (lol)
In my opinion USL just wants to stay stagnant and never grow. wasn't D2 formed for aspiring teams that want to grow and eventually end up in MLS or be a strong division 2 team.
Yes that is a requirement, and all the teams meet it. I believe the USSF's concern is with Traffic more or less financially backing 4 teams, but they've got the cash to do it. They are funding Atlanta, Carolina and Minnesota BUT the organizations are already in place there, Traffic would just be signing the checks. Traffic would only really actively be running the Strikers. I think it's a great requirement because then you don't have situations like Baltimore or St. Louis where the rest of the league and the USSF has to bail teams out so they can finish the season and then go under. But when it comes down to it, if one owner needs to step in and help out a club, or clubs, for the benefit of the league, the USSF should not hold that against them. After MLS disbanded the league owned Mutiny and poorly-owned Fusion, there were only 3 owners in MLS. They lost some teams(like NASL lost Baltimore and St. Louis), and the remaining owners stepped in and saved everyone else for the good of the league and for the good of soccer in the US. NASL should be given that same chance to right the ship. Right now I don't see anyone else trying to work towards building a stable D2 league, and I doubt they just up and find 8-12 new investors worth $20 mil who want to start up an entirely new league with new teams. So the bottom line for the USSF is either work with NASL to build the kind of D2 they want to see, or be left with nothing but a defacto D2 in USL-Pro, run more or less exactly the same as before, just what the Federation was trying to move away from.
Also, we don't yet know that the issue is with Traffic ownership. Multiple teams under one owner requires a plan to rectify the situation promptly, but it is allowed as long as the offices function independently (a great requirement - I'm thankful for Traffic's money, but I'll pass on the marketing organization they run in Miami). It's not clear what Traffic's road-map to financially independent teams is. That might be the issue, but they might get by on "our plan is to divest ourselves of our share in everything except Ft. Lauderdale as quickly as possible, moving teams to other markets if that's where the money is." However, even so we've still got two problems - an eight-team league with three foreign teams, and a team with no stadium and no name whose sale has yet to be finalized. Comments about how financial concerns were what drove the decision make it seem likely they're giving NASL a pass on the domestic teams issue based on the fact that the 2012 expansion plan brings the league into compliance, but I can't say I blame USSF for objecting to the current situation in NC. If the sale gets finalized before the USSF board votes, though, and the new owners get a renewed lease on the stadium, I can imagine the fed sanctioning NASL. If they're OK with Traffic, that is. At this point, it's plausible but highly unlikely that NASL gets D2 sanctioning. They should be going for D3 as a backup plan, but it sounds like they'd rather play unsanctioned, and that would be the death of those clubs. We'll see how it plays out in a couple short weeks, though.
The USA has ONLY 32 pro soccer teams (MLS, NASL and USLpro), it would be a shame to see even 1 of these teams disappear
Yup. I used to consider myself solidly behind the NASL in this fight (I've soured on them and now don't much care for either organization), but I've never wanted USL teams to fail - I just thought USL wasn't the organization that would keep them going. Now, USL looks like they're playing games directed at sabotaging a couple NASL teams. But that's not my main complaint right now, since the NASL looks like they might do a good enough job of dying all on their own.
My point to the USSF would be, wouldn't it be better to have a league with 5 American clubs and 3 foreign cubs, rather than not having those 5 American clubs at all? That's a sticking point that hopefully in time will be corrected(and with San Antonio replacing Montréal it will), but I just don't see the harm in letting a league run where still the majority of the teams are US-based and as a bonus, two of the three foreign clubs happen to be pretty good competition(Montréal and PR) for our young American players to hone their skills against. I was under the impression that Traffic had already taken over in Carolina. I just heard about the name and stadium issues, but honestly I don't see why they can't get a lease done and the name issue sorted out. That's a shame if they can't keep the Railhawks name because I've always liked it. I just hope whatever the outcome the 8 NASL teams play some kind of sanctioned season this year. From a personal standpoint, we're this close to seeing pro soccer potentially return to some level of respectability in South Florida with the revival of the Strikers, and to have it taken away at this point would totally suck.
Agreed. I'm guessing the fed doesn't mind, since there's a plan in place on that front. They're holding tryouts, they're selling tickets, the office staff are all still employed, and obviously somebody is paying the bills. Almost certainly Traffic. But Traffic doesn't officially own the team outright yet so far as anybody can discern from public information. As soon as that's finalized, which probably happens in under a day after somebody caves on the name, it's easy enough to get a stadium lease in place. I'm guessing they'll have one in time for the final USSF board vote. +1.
I don't care much if the NASL is 2nd or 3th division, I just hope that pro soccer remains alive in their 8 cities
This, a thousand times this. D2 would be nice. If it's not an option, D3 would be almost as nice, and a million times nicer than losing the team that turned me into a sports fan.
