Because the MLS/SUM/USSF/USL/USASA cartel insists that leagues formally apply for sanctioning rather than just Tweeting their intention.
Not all teams are playing in the fall season. I don't know if 1904 are still even a thing or not, but not playing in the fall doesn't really answer that question. Roots aren't playing in the fall either, fwiw.
The owner of San Diego 1904 promised the season will start in September last night. But I have my doubts.
Am hearing @ChattanoogaFC and @DetroitCityFC could join @TheMiamiFC in joining @NISALeague.— Bob Williams (@WilliamsBob75) July 24, 2019
Some more news and rumors dropping. Cal FC too.— Bob Williams (@WilliamsBob75) July 24, 2019 "We are very excited @TheMiamiFC is joining @NISALeague and will begin competition this Fall 2019. Miami FC has a legacy of success and we welcome the level of competition they bring to the pitch,” - Mr. John Prutch, Commissioner, NISA. #MiamiFC #NISAnation pic.twitter.com/34B7puXcP6— NISA Official (@NISALeague) July 24, 2019 Very likely Oakland Roots join for Fall as well and Connecticut (Spring) and Baton Rouge are out for Fall. https://t.co/Q9spGFv0Mm— Chris Kivlehan (@kivlehan) July 24, 2019
So the fall half champions get automatic spots in the spring half playoffs. Not sure how I feel about that.
Some questions about that schedule. 1. The Detroit/Philly game on August 31 is an exhibition. Is the Oakland-Cal United game on that day? The league is really promoting the start on September 7. 2. What is the NISA Challenge Cup? 3. I'm counting games for each team, not counting the ones labeled exhibition. Any ideas on the disparity? East Philadelphia - 7 Atlanta - 7 Miami - 7 Stumptown - 6 West 1904 - 7 Cal United - 7 LA - 6 Oakland - 5 Ah, they have a 1904 at Miami game listed. That is probably Stumptown at Miami. That would make 7 each for the East. The West would then have 12 games but still not evenly distributed.
Oh, how adorable, 1904's games start at :04 past the hour. I am gonna guess (total guess) that the "NISA Showcase" means "We just had to get something down on paper." 1904, Atlanta and Los Angeles all have three league home games, while California, Miami, Philadelphia and Stumptown have three and Oakland has two. The other 8/31 game shouldn't be an exhibition, as it's between two league teams, unlike the Philadelphia/Detroit game. Can I just say this? Philadelphia at Franklin Field has the potential to be the biggest disaster in recent history. And the "Los Angeles" and Atlanta teams? Oh, boy. Good luck.
So the "NISA Challenge Cup" was originally intended to kick off the season and I assume that had all been arranged and agreed as some "thing". Oakland and Cal United had a friendly scheduled the week before, then they both joined the league, so I guess they just decided to make that a league game, as well. Why the hell they had to keep the "Challenge Cup" name for a game between two teams (one not even with a name released yet) in the second week, I don't know. I assume somebody must have sunk some money into marketing something and didn't want to lose that. From: http://midfieldpress.com/2019/06/10...er-news-from-nisa-board-of-governors-meeting/ "The Fall season will start on September 7th. We are going to roll out with a limited schedule of 4 home games and 4 away games. It will feature a lot of regional play." Obviously we're not seeing that, but my guess is that at the last minute, either 3 extra teams showed up they weren't expecting, or (more likely) 2 they were expecting didn't. That's probably where the Chattanooga and Detroit friendlies come in (which is also probably a consolation given that defections to NISA made their fall season fall apart). Honestly, I would have called this whole thing they're doing in the fall "the NISA Challenge Cup", but I have no idea what sorts of constraints they are under to maintain sanctioning. I would imagine that's the whole purpose for any of this in the first place.
Neck and neck but The Matt Driver Factor has Philadelphia hitting the tape a fraction earlier. I am trying to think of recent abject disasters to compare what the Fury is likely to be to. California Victory isn't it. Orlando SunDogs? That's going way back. Phoenix FC was a wreck, but they weren't trying to play at Sun Devil (football) Stadium. Will have to check. I mean, the whole thing is likely to be a mess. You have teams that apparently just showed up the other day and somehow meet PLS (?), no one I am aware of with track records in selling tickets, little lead time and some way-too-big stadiums. About the only positive is that Boca Raton FC isn't one of the teams. Yet.
That's a good one. At least FCNY played a complete season. I called one of their home games on Fox. They finished 6-11-7 and drew an announced 900 people a game, so I've seen worse. But they weren't good. Antigua Barracuda (at the end, when they were a road-only team for some reason, and didn't win a game all year) was bad. If you're old enough to remember the Sacramento Scorpions/Team Sacramento, that was bad. As were the Edmonton Aviators. There are probably other candidates.
Oh, the 2009 Cleveland City Stars were a trainwreck, though they were well-intentioned and had done well at the D3 level before either overreaching or being pulled up to D2. They moved away from their downtown location to some high school in the sticks (and they renamed their home Middlefield Cheese Stadium on game days) and went 4-19-7 with a -30 goal differential. That was the end of that. I still think that will be better than the Philadelphia Fury.
Just noticed that the Atlanta team is Atlanta SC, last in the division the NPSL. Wondering about the competitiveness of this league.