What about adopting the Apertura/Clausura model?

I don't want two seasons per year. I'm happy with what months MLS plays in. If FIFA wanted every league to have a season including two years (such as 2011-2012) rather than entirely within one season then FIFA shouldn't have awarded Japan the Club World Cup. Japan's season is entirely within one year.

 

Just another in the long line of post based off the premise that Sepp honestly, truly cares about what we're doing and that he thinks its bad.

And, honestly, if that were the case and Sepp wants to see everyone look like the Premiership, Opening/Closing* will not quench his thirst for Don-blood.

*This is America and I don't want Toby Keith to be upset with me

 

Note: Anything MLS does to make Sepp Blatter and FIFA happy is NOT something that should be attempted.

 

100% agree

 

To whom? And why would it be more marketable?

 

No. That format is why I don't even watch any South American soccer right now. No way. That's too foreign and would fail miserably. Plus it's just a dumb format anyway. Like I said, I don't even get it in the leagues that have it now.

 

Oh, well, if YOU don't like it, it must be a terrible idea.

 

I've said this before. My local league does not play in the winter. Why should the professional team I follow do it in any other way?

PLus how can we have northern/Canadian teams play in the winter? It is bloody cold here. Do you expect teams to just have money laying around for domed stadiums.

If you're suggesting two seasons within the March-November timeframe, that's too tight given current schedule congestion.

Now that I've cited the logical reasons.Can I just add that I find the Apertura/Clausura system even weirder than I find the American sports' divisional strucutre (like the one MLS adopted this year). They both seem to unneccessarily complicate what should be straightforward.

 

Our "spring" season here in San Antonio (0-30 division) just started Jan 8th. We've already had a weather cancellation and this weekend is tentative.

... in South Texas.

 

I like having one tournament per year and having MLS be a summer sport other than MLB. Although I don't like Apertura/Clausura anywhere, I think Apertura/Clausura would make more sense in the ten club leagues in Switzerland and Austria where every club plays every other club four times per year than in Mexico (where each season has 17 regular season games, an odd number) or MLS with 18, 19, or 20 clubs. In Switzerland or Austria clubs could play twice per Apertura and twice per Clausura if that model was used.

 

Because it makes sense .... that's why it clearly can't be an option.

 

We already play virtually 2 seasons (regular season and playoffs) if you wanted an Americanized apertura/clausura then just keep the season/playoffs but make them two competitions nearly equal in length

March-July - MLS League
August - November - MLS Cup

Right now MLS league is basically a giant group stage to enter a knock out tournament. If you wanted two competitions then just separate them. Have all the teams play each other once (home or away rotating each year) then name a points leader champion. You can hold off a few years until we have enough teams for lets say a 20-22 game league season (MLS played 26 games in 01' and USL Pro played 24 last season) In the fall start another competition where every team gets to play in a cup format (group and knock out).

MLS gets to keep its current calendar year, while playing 'important games' in July. MLS fans who want a points leader league champion with a balanced schedule gets it (but has to live with only 1 leg) and fans who want a knock out playoffs can get that as well. MLS can keep their current tv/sponsorships deals with MLS cup, but major coverage on ESPN wouldn't start until the final rounds during the same time MLS Cup is now.

 

Must spread rep.

------RM

 

Watching MLS games at Red Bull Arena in early March is almost unbearable. First thing I was happy about this year is that we start the first two weeks on the road. I can't imagine how bad it'd be in places like Chicago, Montreal, Boston, Toronto, etc. I get why people would want to line up with FIFA, but we can't. It's got to stay Spring/Summer/Fall. Also, we aren't the only ones who do this, all of Scandanavia does for the same reason we do. Too damn cold in the winter. Except for them, the entire county is too cold, not just some markets.

 

Why does everybody assume if they do an aperture/clausura style league it has to only be single table? What would be the problem if they simply play round of games home or away in Apertura + a round of play-offs, crown Champion A, then have a 3 week break, begin Clausura playing the opposite from aperture home or away + play-offs, crown champions B, then in the following weeks have a separate final to see who was the better champion of the year, in either a one match final at best champion (through standings, points OVERALL) or have a home and away style match and winner is crowned with another named trophy, to get bragging rights for the year ( Maybe both are in the CCL, but the winner of this final gets the 1 seed tagged on)

I just believe a tournament style like this for MLS would put more importance to each match as opposed to the style we have now? 34 games? is a lot, you lose one or two matches and no one cares, but if it was the split style season one loss can eff your season up... There is too many games in MLS season with no importance, fans need that Umpphh in every game.. IMO..just saying

 

Alright, I'll bite.

So how exactly would this more compelling format look? How many matches per tournament? How about the playoffs? Geographical conferences? Is it even scalable as the league grows?

 

Couple of problems in my view from an implementation point:

a) Soccer is basically a summer sport in Northern US/Canada, I don't think you can legitimately do a mid-summer break when MLS currently schedules a lot of games.. Though it could have its benefit in a World Cup year

b) With playoffs, too many teams will have dead time (assuming you do an 8 team playoff for each half year).

c) Obviously, a fairly foreign concept to Americans.

On a personal note, I'd say it's generally an inferior method of choosing a champion since the smaller amount of games lends to luck more.

 

No, you guys are correct, it can't be done, I was trying to set it up for 24 teams, not possible runs into winter time on both ends, won't b possible. I had this idea when the league was going to stop at 18 teams, but now that there going to 24 its going to be different. Won't work, you guys got me, but then how else can there be a different format, unless we leave it how it is. (don't fix whats not broken?)

 

I didn't know FIFA cared about MLS not playing in winter. Do they have a problem with European countries that take winter breaks? Also, even if they did have a problem, why is that MLS' problem?

How would it be more marketable? You might get a few teams that can sell a few extra seats when the second half of the season begins, but you may also get a few teams whose fans think "Hey the season is over, I'm going home" after their team is eliminated in the first half playoffs. Especially when they have this thought between the end of the spring season and the start of the winter season.

Also who would want to watch soccer in February outside in the Northeast?

Actually it is a very American model. Many minor league baseball leagues have had it for decades. MLB even used it once after a players' strike gutted the regular season.

Just to play nice, I think this idea, like most ideas, could be made to work with some elbow grease and some positive thinking. Perhaps the league could have the two halves follow distinctive formats. Maybe one half is a first past the post round robin while the other follows a World Cup like format with teams seeded into groups based on first half records. Or maybe have one big playoff at the end of the second half involving teams that qualified from both halves. To keep things interesting, a team that gets two playoff berths gets a bye in the first round.

 

After the regular season in Belgium, 14 out of 16 clubs can still qualify for the Europa League. After the regular season, 6 clubs compete for the title, 8 clubs are divided into two groups of 4, and 2 clubs compete to not be relegated. The winners of the two groups of 4 play each other and the winner of that plays the fourth or fifth place club (depending on where the Cup Winner finishes) from the top group for a Europa League spot. That made me think of this idea for a two part season with 20 clubs in MLS:

Part 1: Single round-robin with 19 games per club. Which clubs get 1 extra home game could alternate years or be determined randomly. Another possibility is 20 games with one rival who you play twice and 18 clubs you play once. No champion would be decided after this part.

Part 2: The Part 1 table would divide the clubs into one group of 8 and two groups of 6. The group of 8 would be the Top 8. The groups of 6 would be done so the sum of the ranks for each group would be 87:

Clubs 9, 11, 14, 15, 18, and 20
Clubs 10, 12, 13, 16, 17, and 19

Each group would play double round-robin, giving the top 8 clubs 14 games each and everybody else having 10 games each. If you want to make the games played more even you can make the groups of 6 play triple round-robin for 15 games each with the top three clubs in each group having 1 more home game.

The Top 6 clubs from the top group and the winners of the other two groups would go into the 8 club playoffs. A decision would have to be made as to whether the three groups are ranked by points in Part 1 and Part 2 combined or just in Part 2. I would prefer to use just Part 2 because if the parts were combined club 8 would start Part 2 with a disadvantage and might be less likely to make the playoffs than club 9, who must win its groups to make the playoffs but starts with an advantage. Maybe just use Part 2 to determine playoff positions but use Part 1 and Part 2 combined to determine the Supporters' Shield, with only clubs in the group of 8 eligible for it.

The two winners of the groups of 6 would be the 7 and 8 seeds in the playoffs. With two leg quarterfinals, two leg semifinals, and a one game final, a finalist who was in the group of 8 would play 19 games in each part for a total of 38 which is close to how many games an MLS Cup finalist would play now.

If MLS ever had relegation and relegated 3 clubs like the EPL does, the bottom club in each of the groups of 6 would be relegated and the fifth place clubs from those groups would play each other to decide who stays and who gets relegated. I know that relegation is unlikely.

 

Wow. I have to remember this the next time someone complains about the playoff system in MLS. I don't think I've ever seen a more complicated post-season format.

------RM

 

I like it. I might want to throw in a draw for the bottom groups, perhaps one staged at halftime of the All Star game. A draw would avoid the possibility of a team throwing games if it decides that one bracket might shape up to be a better fit for them the other one.

I think he forgot to mention what happens when teams go on double secret probation and cannot win the championship unless they win all their games on the road when they play on Sunday and all their games at home when they play on alternate Saturdays.