OK, gang with 3 of 4 of the first legs of the conference semis going to the home team 1:0 and the other going 0:0, prepare yourselves for both soccer bashers gloating and league officials wringing their hands about what to do. We'll soon see recommendations from MLS officials to go back to "Doug Logan style" formats such as "best of 3" and "first to 5", both of which were relegated to the dustbin of history with the CrapShootouts, and rightfully so. What do do? Why do American soccer officials insist on trying to re-invent the wheel? there are two solutions that have been used for two leg competitions in other soccer leagues for decades and have a much better chance of avoiding producing only 3 goals in 4 games: Away goals as the first tiebreaker (widely used around the world) Higher seeded team gets the first tiebreaker (Mexican "Liguilla" system) Both create the incentive to score, not hope for 0:0 in the first leg and then take it home. Come on MLS, look around and see what works in the world's game.
Re: [R] Low Scoring Playoffs I love this format. It rewards the higher seed making the season more valuable and it also eliminates the extra time or PK's.
Re: [R] Low Scoring Playoffs Of course, the best option is to decide the championship over the course of the ~200 game regular season, since then the excitement or lack of for any one game or series won't be magnified. (runs) And also of course, you can't judge this season's playoffs based on the first weekend. According to MLS playoff history, we can expect this year's postseason scoring to be 6.9% less than the regular season. So with an average of 518/195 = 2.66 in the regular season, we should see 2.47 goals a game in the playoffs. Or 27 in 11 games. Probably won't hit that now, but let's just see.
Re: [R] Low Scoring Playoffs Or they could do one-off matches like a few unimportant tournaments that happen in four-year cycles do.
Re: [R] Low Scoring Playoffs That's what they do for the conference final. The reason for not doing this in the conference semis is so that ALL the playoff teams can have at least one home match.
Concern about playoff format As a traditionalist, it took me many years to accept the playoff system that MLS uses to determine their champion. I understood that the two-leg aggregate goals setup was established because it is a fairer method of deciding the better team. If this is so, why isn't the two-leg series continued in the conference championship? Having a one-game championship subjects the competition to luck, which is what the two-leg series was supposed to prevent. I understand that the final is a one game affair due to TV, but why isn't the conference championship a two leg series?
Re: Concern about playoff format Because home field advantage is a reward for regular season success.
Re: [R] Low Scoring Playoffs I like the home and home series. I think the league should do it in the next round too instead of just 1 game.
Re: Concern about playoff format That's not correct. The 2 leg system was established so that there would be schedule certainty over the best-to-something format used previously, while still ensuring every team in the playoffs got a game at home.
Re: [R] Low Scoring Playoffs == Higher seeded team starts with 0.242 goals (or any arbitrary number between 0 and 1). Seems a bit contrived
Re: Concern about playoff format The system was the result of the Hunts having too many votes. It's a bad system.
Re: [R] Low Scoring Playoffs One-offs introduce too much of a random element. I prefer the Mexican system, which was intentionally designed to give the advantage to the higher seed. The "away goal" rule is neutral and is designed to promote a more aggressive away play in Cup type events where all teams are deemed equal. The Mexican system rewards the team performances during the regular season and that should be where MLS is headed.
Re: [R] Low Scoring Playoffs The away goals rule just scares home teams to really press for it, they know that going to the other leg at 0-0 is better then trying to go forward and giving up a goal which can kill them.
Re: [R] Low Scoring Playoffs If you are the higher seeded team how does having the first tiebreaker discourage you from playing for a draw on the road? If anything it encourages you to play for the draw in both legs. I actually like that as a tie breaker I just don't think it has anything to do with scoring. Away goals is arbitrary, and I seriously doubt it has much effect on actual strategies. Perhaps, like all American sports, scoring is down in the playoffs because the crappy teams that are easy to score against are eliminated and both teams come into the game fully rested and intent on not making mistakes on a national stage? No, it must be the format.
Re: [R] Low Scoring Playoffs Could it be that most of the weaker playoff teams are good enough to eek out 1-0 wins at home, but not strong enough to really outgun their opponents?
Re: [R] Low Scoring Playoffs The goals per game average for the first round of the 2007 conference semifinals was a whopping .75 goals per game. That is (by far) the lowest ever since the two game playoff series was introduced. It's nearly a goal a game less than average, and it's half a goal a game less than the previous worst year. The good news is that every year the 2nd round games feature many more goals ... on average nearly double, in fact. Code: [U]Goals Per Game - 1st Round[/U] [I]2007: .75 GPG[/I] 2006: 2 GPG 2005: 1.25 GPG 2004: 1.5 GPG 2003: 2 GPG 2003-2006 Average: 1.7 GPG [U]Goals Per Game - 2nd Round[/U] 2007: TBA 2006: 3 GPG 2005: 3.5 GPG 2004: 2.25 GPG 2003: 3.25 GPG 2003-2006 Average: 3 GPG Another interesting tidbit: since 2003 the higher seed has won the series about 70% of the time. Here's all the data if you want to look further. Code: [U]2006[/U] NYR 0 :: 1 DCU DCU 1 :: 1 NYR COL 1 :: 2 FCD FCD 2 :: 3 COL (COL on PKs) CHI 1 :: 0 NER NER 2 :: 1 CHI (NER on PKs) CDC 2 :: 1 HOU HOU 2 :: 0 CDC [U]2005[/U] CHI 0 :: 0 DCU DCU 0 :: 4 CHI NYM 1 :: 0 NER NER 3 :: 1 NYM COL 0 :: 0 FCD FCD 2 :: 2 COL (COL on PKs) LAG 3 :: 1 SJE SJE 1 :: 1 LAG [U]2004[/U] NER 1 :: 0 CMB CMB 1 :: 1 NER NYM 0 :: 2 DCU DCU 2 :: 0 NYM SJE 2 :: 0 KCW KCW 3 :: 0 SJE COL 1 :: 0 LAG LAG 2 :: 0 COL [U]2003[/U] DCU 0 :: 2 CHI CHI 2 :: 0 DCU NYM 0 :: 2 NER NER 1 :: 1 NYM LAG 2 :: 0 SJE SJE 5 :: 2 LAG COL 1 :: 1 KCW KCW 2 :: 0 COL
Re: Concern about playoff format There is no perfect playoff system. They all have pluses and minuses. The current system is the result of a series of compromises between different needs of the fans and the league. It stretches the playoffs a week longer than single elimination to make it feel like more of a journey than a single blip at the end of the season, yet avoids the drag of the NBA playoffs or the scheduling problems of best of three. It gives every team a home game which is important for developing fans, yet offers some reward to regular season finish in the conference finals. It combines a familiar international playoff format with a familiar American playoff format. It, perhaps, makes it less likely that a single bad game or bad call will eliminate a top team in the first round, yet leaves open the possibility of memorable upsets. The current system doesn't do a great job at satisfying any one need or desire but it does a pretty good job of doing a little bit of everything.
Re: [R] Low Scoring Playoffs Well teams are playing different. They are staying compact and not advancing as a team. Chicago and Dallas did that anyway. I have a feeling that Houston, DC, and Chivas are going to be looking at 10 men behind the ball in the 2nd leg matches. (Although not seeing KC I have no idea how they will approach it)
Re: Concern about playoff format I still much prefer the system used in the Mexican Liguilla. Two legs for conference semis and final with the higher seed advancing if the aggregate score is tied. It rewards the regular season and eliminates the random element of a single game.
Re: Concern about playoff format One possible format I have thougrht would be interesting is a regular season consisting of home-and-away (each team plays every other team once) followed by a World Cup style format where the top 6 or 8 teams (more once the league expands) are drawn into two pots (the top two teams would be seeded into separate pots) and then they play a home-and-away round with the top two teams moving into single-elimination with the top teams in each pot taking homefield advantage for the single-elimination game. One of many possibilities. That said, I don't have any particular heartburn with the way things are done now. It is what it is.
Re: Concern about playoff format This gets my vote too. I think the final game between LA and Chicago is the perfect example of what you get when these are the background rules. Chicago was ranked higher. LA showed up needing to win in order to advance. Chicago went through with just a tie. However, because of the dynamics of this system, it forced LA to attack in order to advance, but it also forced Chicago to attack in order to prevent LA going through on a last-minute-miracle. It created a lot of tension and drama. That roar of the crowd when Thorrington lobbed Cannon was a combination of joy and relief, and it was awesome! The playoffs, in a figurative sense, had already begun. And the fact that Chicago went through with a tie, added to this. My vote is to adopt the Mexican system: reward the higher-placed team by allowing them to get through with a tie, and force the underdog to win it outright. You set up better and more dramatic games.
Re: [R] Low Scoring Playoffs Chivas and DC looked more than happy down 1-0, Houston somewhat less so. It's as if we've arrived at a scoreline that both teams can agree upon, spin in their own way, claim as victory. That's just poison to watch. If the league can have different rules for the first round of the playoffs (two legs) and the second (one game), then the two-legged round should follow the Mexican league rule that the lower seed has to outscore the higher seed over the two legs or go out. Anything to give more weight to the regular season, and to further encourage teams in the race for 2nd place in each conference. This would make the end of the regular season even more exciting, so teams already in the playoffs won't be so inclined to just mail it in.