Since this topic seems to make its way into countless other threads and taking those threads way off topic, can we please just discuss the topic of pro/rel in North American soccer in one central place? This is a topic that gets people pretty riled up and if it is discussed in the wrong thread, it can really detract from the enjoyment people would get from that thread. Pro: it will make MLS look more like the so-called big-time leagues in Europe, Latin America, and elsewhere. Con: It is too risky for current and future MLS franchisees. Therefore, it will probably never happen, and, even if the stars align, it wouldn't be a realistic option for at least 30-60 years.
Another CON is that there is NO solid D2 league in which to pro/reg TO. Right now lower league soccer is as stable and dependable as Independent League Baseball and Arena Football. Until that day happens there will not and should not be any pro/reg. And the pro of 'looking like everyone else' isnt a pro, I am convinced that pro/reg will die out there before it is adopted here
PROS It will get people to shut up about our league being "different" from most other leagues in the world. It would possibly help some lower level teams that get promoted gain greater support. Could also help soccer become a more "recognized" sport around the country. CONS Financially, its impossible to execute anytime soon. Costs of travel, stadium expenses, player salaries, etc. Crowd attendance at lower tier clubs generally is around 5,000 fans or so on average, that is NOT going to sustain a team in the long run. Relegation could destroy a major, current MLS team. If say, the New York Red Bulls were relegated their brand new stadium would most likely be empty for most matches and would leave the Red Bulls organizaton with the brunt of costs which could cause them to fold. There isn't really a support structure for lower tier teams. The MLS doesn't have the muscle to compete for advertising or broadcasting contracts with the major sports leagues and that includes the lower leagues. Money is what makes the world go round and without it, you can't have as many teams as needed for a tiered soccer pyramid to work.
Pros -something for bottom teams to play for (though to be honest the excitement of watching the worst teams in the league struggle to finish 17th or 18th has never made sense to me. I understand why the fans of the teams are ecstatic to escape relegation, but not why it would be remotely interesting as a spectacle to neutral observers) -similarity to other leagues (this seems completely superficial, but it seems very important to a lot of people for some reason) -unique position in crowded American sports landscape (soccer has a hard time catching the attention of the mainstream sports crowd, pro/rel could become just another reason for Americans to label soccer "foreign" but I actually think the concept of smaller clubs rising to the top or terrible clubs being punished might strike a chord with the public) -reward competent and ambitious ownership (I think this advantage is way overblown by Euro-fans. The threat of relegation would probably get an owner like Kraft to pay more attention to his team but it's entirely possible for a great club with good ownership and a great fanbase to have a bad season, thus destroying decades of work for one bad year.) -create passionate involvement at more levels (There are all sorts of stories of fans who didn't really care much about the sport of soccer but who fell in love with the game after watching with a supporter group. There are not a lot of people who love the game enough to watch it at the D2 level, but there might be a lot more people willing to watch their local side with the hope of someday being in the top league) Cons -every point counts (but this is a good thing, right? Well, with MLS' unique scheduling issues it seems inconceivable that we can have a season without national team callups taking a few player games. If DCU loses their star striker (I'm sure we'll get one someday) for two games and fail to make the playoffs, I can live with that. If DCU loses their star striker for two games and we get relegated by a single point, I'm going to be absolutely livid.) -we all sink or swim together (European leagues are an association of independent clubs. The clubs care about their own success, and don't have to worry about the state of the sport overall. If one club fails, another will take its place. MLS has to grow the game and to do that they need to maximize their marketability and fanbase. Replacing Newcastle with Wigan means little to English football; replacing LAG with Rochester could mean the loss of millions of dollars to American soccer.) -short term thinking (if American soccer is going to improve overall, young players need a chance to play. If you know that your existence as a financially stable club is in peril, you are very unlikely to give young players a chance to grow and make mistakes.) -we don't have a hundred years of tradition (most European clubs have had decades to integrate themselves into the local culture, dropping a division hurts but won't ultimately destroy a fanbase. MLS teams do not have that luxury) -European football is unprofitable (numerous reports in the last few years have raised concerns about the European financial model, certainly the fans benefit from constant spending and cutthroat competition but it doesn't provide a stable environment for a young league) -other world-class sporting options (If your English club drops to the Championship you can still feel good that you are watching a pretty high level of soccer and a level of sport that can only be matched in your country by the EPL, much like if you follow a college football team instead of the NFL, if your MLS team falls a level you now have to choose between watching the minor league of a niche sport or the best baseball, basketball, or football players in the world.) It seems to me that overall, the pros are generally about presentation. Some can be significant to the experience for fans and the product on the field and a few might even result in long-term growth for the sport. The cons frequently involve financial devastation for a club, if not for the league as a whole. If you eliminate all financial considerations and just look at what will create the most appealing fan experience, then pro/rel probably is the best option (though still not a necessity). But, obviously, eliminating all financial considerations is ridiculous.
It seems like most people are focusing on pro/rel between MLS and a lower level league. I really don't think that is ever going to happen, the disincentives for the MLS owners are just too big. There are more plausible scenarios for MLS implementing pro/rel, like a merger between MLS and another league of equal or greater value, or MLS expanding until it has enough teams to split into an upper and lower division.
explain to me why it would be a "con" that D2 is currently not stable? two points 1. if D2 teams dont have the finances or the stadium to qualify for promotion then they don't get promoted. 2. pro/rel adds some stability to the whole pyramid. D2 teams now have more value because of the possibility of playing in the top league.
Right now no one at the DII level would meet a reasonable financial backing or stadium requirement. If you're going to have a litmus test that makes pro/rel functionally undoable, why even have pro/rel? Franchise value isn't the issue at lower levels, it's revenue streams. Given how hard it is to get MLS games on TV, will pro/rel get more DII games televised? No. Will it significantly increase advertising revenue, stadium naming rights, or shirt sponsorship deals? Maybe a little, but not enough to close the gapping hole in on field talent between MLS and the lower levels.
which means those against pro/rel would have nothing to worry about since according to you guys there would be no promotion. but the reality is as soon as the pro/rel structure was in place you would see more investment in D2 and within a few years several teams able to qualify for promotion. And if not then like i said there would be nothing to worry about for those that don't want to see any relegation. Value is an issue. Value is based on potential profits. A D2 team in a pro/rel system has an entirely different business plan and estimated value than a team not in pro/rel. Right now USL teams are on TV. So i assume D2 would be able to get some kind of TV deal.
Please show your work that D2 investment will go up the moment pro/rel is implemented. Have you talked to major businesses that say they are just waiting for pro/rel to invest in soccer? USL pays to be on TV. It's not a good deal.
So why didn't this happen in the early 90's when there was pro/rel? In reality, there were a number of teams in that time period who passed up promotion because they couldn't afford it.
people act like there is a vacuum and the only other football country is england and if we just flip a switch we can be like them. Does Pro/Rel in China save the league and get millions to stop watching euro superclubs? We have a league that most americans and most soccer fans consider to be a 'minor' league in the world game. This idea that opening the door to MLS is going to be this major turning point is a joke. It will not increase the viewers for the top of MLS because those people either ignore MLS because they don't like soccer or don't think MLS is quality enough. It brings in no one. Does it bring in people at the bottom? Would more people be interested in NSC Stars if they could play into MLS? Sure! Because right now the club is worth nothing and MLS values are worth 40M (still 'minor' compared to the billion+ a superclub is worth). So you are doing nothing but improving the financial outlook of clubs with small owners, small stadiums, and didn't pay a dime to get into the league. And you are hurting the owners who lost 100s of millions of dollars to make this league what it is. An open pro/rel could have been fine before MLS. We went a decade without a real 1st division, then some guys come in a drop 100s of millions to start one up, and guys on the internet are totally baffled why they wouldn't just hand the keys over to some clubs worth a few 100 grand and didn't pay a dime to MLS.
i think that pro/rel if sold differently by mls owners can be successful. It has been painted as a crutch because a rich team can go down after an owner has been spending millions. Yes, that can damage any further investing for soccer in the u.s. . However it can be painted another way. Let the minor league usl, nasl build up with cheap investment. let them build a solid fan base for the future mls. instead of an investor, that is not too sure about soccer, splashing down 40 million on a venture that might not give money for 5 years at best, the fee is lowered to 2 million and they can keep investing until reaching the majors. after all smart business do that. start small and expand. so a team in atlanta could have small fan base but with the help of an mls team sending its loans to develop they can gain some great talent great and astute leadership can get championships and eventually the promised land. promotion gives fans of minor leagues something to look forward to. after all isn't that what we want here, for the interest in a the sport to grow. what better way then to give a small town in north dakota, maine or arkansas a chance to see beckham, angel or henry visit their hometown. the solution is not to spend at the top but rather at the bottom, have grassroots support. let the teams become part of the community. invest for 10 years in the minor leagues. and when there are much stable support, put the guidelines for stadium and let the ball roll. the domestic cups and pro/reg are the best aspects about football. only the best play in the top league. we wouldn't have any sterling's clipper or detroit lion that suck year in and year out. soccer has to be focused in small town america. we know that the big cities have a diverse population that a small percentage of the city can support a team. lets stop speaking to the choir and go after medium to small towns thats were the future of us soccer lies. pro/rel gives that chance to those cities to matter. the key thing we have to start investing now. you can also sell the us open cup and pro/rel as david vs goliath and after that is what american sports fans like. i would be against the point system determining the relegation. i like the mexican system of point per game. it assures that one bad season will not sink a good traditional team. if you suck for 3 years running you probably do not belong in the top league anyways. thats just my two cents
Just wondering go back to 94 and MLS is born, now look at NASL. Sometime for pro/rel to work is if MLS merges with NASL.
Reasonable* paths to pro/rel. * reasonable means does not guarantee losses for some MLS owners. Does not force owners out of the franchise league that they founded and paid money to be in. Reasonable doesn't assume that MLS owners will welcome possibility of losses to please an incredibly small percentage of soccer fans that demand it. Reasonable means that MLS owners see that there could be value in a limited pro/rel system that protects them and their investments. It does not call for a radical change in league business structure. OPTION ONE The merger. MLS merges with another league of equal value. They see value in bringing in this new league to increase the value of the sponsorships and tv deals. D2 franchises are valued at under 500k, MLS franchises are valued at 80 times that. So a rival league of near equal value is a long way away. OPTION TWO MLS2 franchises. MLS decides to start a D2 and sells limited franchises to those owners. They can play into MLS and be relegated and replaced by other MLS2 teams. MLS original clubs can not ever be relegated. This is a way for MLS to be relevant in 20 cities in which they are not right now. OPTION THREE Franchise buy in. A group of D2 owners decide to form a corporation and buy a MLS franchise. They create a league and let the winner play in, after the end of the year they have a playoff series to see who gets to play in the following year. This is similar to Option 2, but instead of MLS trying to build a D2...a D2 comes to MLS and tries to buy in. All options would be a nightmare as far as player rules/movements/salaries/marketing/budgets...It would take a whole lot of reworking. But these are REALISTIC paths to pro/rel. If you want to put together pro/cons for pro/rel you should at least talk about what kind of pro/rel you are describing. And if you don't want the argument to be purely fantasy, you should try to suggest a system that is at least reasonable and doesn't require teams to agree to loose money.
I like your ideas...I think Option 3 is more realistic. What if a team is relegated by being last and by it's value: No. 13 Kansas City Wizards Value: $22 million Revenue: $5 million Operating Income: -$2.9 million
I think Option 2 is the most realistic personally. It would allow more control for MLS to pick the markets they want to be in instead of a group that includes some cities they may not be interested in. KC is worth far more than 22M. MLS franchises are being sold for 40M each by MLS. So every club is worth at least that much. If not the Impact would have just bought them for 22M and relocated them. And MLS would not drop teams that bought in, because then all other clubs fans/sponsors/media partners would be scared of a drop and would decrease their value. They want those values to go up and will protect them forever. If MLS sold D2 franchises it would be different, all owners/fans/sponsors/media would know from day 1 that their is a risk but the club paid less to the league so the risk is OK. To throw that on a club that paid millions to the league would be a horrible move financially. MLS can get all the benefits from pro/rel while still protecting their original clubs.
NASL looks like it wants to work with MLS and vice-versa. So let's say all the D2 owners have their teams worth $20 million, half of MLS team's worth. Here is the kicker the last place MLS team goes down and get's half the value of the franchise value, but they can't lose anymore because USSF has set standards for D2 to be $20 million and the relegated team gets first draft pick from MLS. and we take all the DP's and make like a (WC group stage lottery) except that the relegated team takes one of the DP's.
Why would MLS want to work with NASL? It's cherry picking it's best teams at will. What is in it for MLS?
I think option 2 is least likely because with MLS aiming for parity, I don't see them intentionally creating an unbalanced league like this, especially just for the sake of pro/rel. I think option 1 is the most realistic but, as you've pointed out before, highly unlikely because it would require a group of individuals to do what MLS can't even do now. Option 3 is similar to 2 and sounds decent but I'm sure if we all think about it long enough, we'll find problems with it too . I'd like to explore a bit more regarding how that system would fit into MLS' tight single entity structure.
wow this is pretty far fetched. I think NASL franchises were going for 400k, for them to be valued at 20M would be a 50 fold increase in value. For any business to grow that much is pretty unbelievable. It would certainly take a long time and in that time MLS would certainly have grown a huge amount as well. Just so you know how big of a jump it would be, if any MLS team saw a 50X growth it would be worth 2B and every MLS club would be bigger than Man United or the Yankees. Just to put in perspective how hard it would be for a club to grow naturally from worth 400k to 20M. VERY HARD. This is one of the amazing things about MLS growth, how they went from 5M value to 40M value in a decade, and why owners would be very caution in doing anything (open pro/rel) that would change that. Since natural growth would be almost impossible that fast, the league could build stadiums and make that part of the ownership package. But then MLS would have to want to own/operate small stadiums as well and I don't see it happening. The rival league merger happening would be very difficult. NASL as is doesn't interest MLS. NASL would need to obtain some huge contract and some serious TV viewership and a willingness for the owners to not go to MLS and force the league to take the entire league as a 2nd division. In reality it just will not happen. Owners in D2 are not on the level needed to attract MLS or make the kind of moves that would attract big audiences. The ones that could are already gone.