The All-Encompassing Pro/Rel Thread on Soccer in the USA

Discussion in 'Soccer in the USA' started by bigredfutbol, Mar 12, 2016.

  1. ThreeApples

    ThreeApples Member+

    Jul 28, 1999
    Smurf Village
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Robert Kraft opted out when it started, but bought in later. I don't know of any owners that opt out now, because its profitability is what changed the whole equation for MLS to be attractive to new owners. Nonetheless, it is not a requirement. It is a parallel company, not a parent company.
     
    JasonMa repped this.
  2. ThreeApples

    ThreeApples Member+

    Jul 28, 1999
    Smurf Village
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    What's the problem with the SUM/MLS relationship? I understand the complaints about the SUM/USSF relationship, but the SUM/MLS relationship is just the MLS owners separating their league operations and their media operations into different LLCs.
    Yes, it does, just not due to a legal mandate.
     
  3. Paul Berry

    Paul Berry Member+

    Notts County and NYCFC
    United States
    Apr 18, 2015
    Nr Kingston NY
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    SUM is not the parent company of MLS. It's a separate company.
     
    JasonMa repped this.
  4. Doogh

    Doogh Member+

    Oct 5, 2019
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    My mistake.
     
  5. Expansion Franchise

    Chattanooga FC
    United States
    Apr 7, 2018
    On its own, nothing. It's when you add the context of the USSF and that SUM and MLS are so tightly conjoined is where it runs aground.

    If SUM was just selling the rights of MLS there's no ethical dilemma whatsoever. Even throwing in the FMF's broadcasting rights, still nothing super untoward.

    It's the Venn diagram that's the problem.
     
    M repped this.
  6. M

    M Member+

    Feb 18, 2000
    Via Ventisette
    Lol, another poster with their eyes closed. The USSF most definitely regulates leagues; didn't it refuse a certain divisional status for NASL?
     
  7. M

    M Member+

    Feb 18, 2000
    Via Ventisette
    It's interesting how some of the anti pro/rel folks label those with opposing views as not living in the US. Falsely, I might add. Not including you in this, of course.
     
  8. M

    M Member+

    Feb 18, 2000
    Via Ventisette
    So time to end the contract and avoid at least the appearance of a conflict of interest.
     
  9. Doogh

    Doogh Member+

    Oct 5, 2019
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    #24559 Doogh, Nov 2, 2019
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2019
    I have my eyes quite open. It is you who is conflicting regulating (control of leagues) to sanctioning (rules and guidelines in accordance of FIFA)

    NASL was a part of the process to the current PLS in 2010 and 2014, respectfully. Its not USSF or MLS or FIFA or POTUS or your mother's fault that NASL had internal management problems, a lack of governance and leadership. They didn't even get to the number of teams that they agreed to. They had time to regroup and reapply for sanctioning, they voluntary refused and sue instead.

    I'm not anti-pro/rel, I do support pro/rel. I don't appreciate your unfriendly tone and ad hominem attacks "M".
     
  10. JasonMa

    JasonMa Member+

    Mar 20, 2000
    Arvada, CO
    Club:
    Colorado Rapids
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Your button is stuck on this dumb argument.

    PPG
    Sheffield United (6th place): 1.45
    Man U (10th place): 0.85

    Over 11 games that difference is 3 points. IF they go 5-1-2 (and Sheffield maintains their current pace) between now and Boxing Day they'll make up that 3 points.

    BTW, the last time Man U finished under 1.7 PPG (double what they have now) was 1990-91, the last time they finished at 0.85 was 1973-74. Needless to say there's no reason to expect their current for to continue.
     
  11. Paul Berry

    Paul Berry Member+

    Notts County and NYCFC
    United States
    Apr 18, 2015
    Nr Kingston NY
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    NASL had 3 teams! 3 teams!!!
     
  12. M

    M Member+

    Feb 18, 2000
    Via Ventisette
    #24562 M, Nov 2, 2019
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2019
    "Sanctioning" is part of "regulating", especially as it is the USSF that is responsible for those standards.

    You can try to weasel around it any way you like, but the bottom line is that the regulator of leagues - the USSF - decided not to sanction the NASL at the level it requested. I also note that the NASL didn't sue "MLS or FIFA or POTUS or my mother".

    And I don't appreciate your deciding, based on my views, that somehow they are presumably of lesser weight because I apparently don't live in the US. Not only should it not matter where a poster lives, but you're completely wrong anyway.
     
  13. M

    M Member+

    Feb 18, 2000
    Via Ventisette
    And the regulator stepped in and denied them status...
     
  14. Doogh

    Doogh Member+

    Oct 5, 2019
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    #24564 Doogh, Nov 2, 2019
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2019
    Nope, you're just not getting it. USSF doesn't control leagues. It doesn't control MLS, USL, NISA or NPSL. Only gives permission for professional leagues to play among the rules and guidelines already in place.

    Of course USSF didn't APPROVE NASL's lackluster D2 application. After NASL had so many waivers/pathways trying to keep the ship from sinking, they barely had anyone left besides Rocco and Riccardo Silva. Meet the D2 rules and requirements, then they'll approve you. NASL had 4 teams in the end of 2017 and not the 12 qualified for D2 approval.

    Stop spreading misinformation because you think that you are right. Your ad hominem attacks aren't productive as well.
     
  15. M

    M Member+

    Feb 18, 2000
    Via Ventisette
    #24565 M, Nov 2, 2019
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2019
    In other words it regulates them. Just as the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency regulates some banks.You're just not getting it.

    I agree, of course it didn't approve NASL's application - that's what a regulator needs to have done and the USSF did it.

    Sounds like you're the one making ad hominem attacks... "Surprised that you actually care about American soccer and its business procedures since you don't even live here". Hmm, I wonder who went down that road??
     
  16. Doogh

    Doogh Member+

    Oct 5, 2019
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Its funny how you know what I said was right that USSF doesn't control leagues, yet you continue to twist my words/deny facts into your falsehood narrative.

    Since you're regurgitating falsehood talking-points, what you're saying is that USSF didn't approve NASL, because USSF controls NASL?

    Notice how you're not making any sense? You're not trolling are you? Because you are wrong in this case.
     
  17. Expansion Franchise

    Chattanooga FC
    United States
    Apr 7, 2018
    "It’s absolutely accurate that while NASL’s Division II application was rejected with no chance to cure any defects (USSF would say that was because NASL had no plan), USL was given at first a month, and then until January 2018 to fix its application. Then it was given two years to fully come into compliance with Division II standards. NASL not surprisingly alleges this disparate treatment was part of the conspiracy, stating the fact USL needed 20+ waivers showed it wasn’t particularly better off than NASL was. USSF’s answer in this section is interesting."

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/soccer...endants-file-answer-to-amended-complaint/amp/

    NASL was screwed and a trainwreck, but there is a valid complaint here that USSF helped cause their demise. (To be clear here, I'm not suggesting this is necessarily true, just that USSF has made this more difficult to dispute).

    This, coupled with USSF's attempt to revise the D1 standards when NASL was investigating going to D1, you see either a conspiracy or an oafish federation unable stay out of its own way.
     
  18. Doogh

    Doogh Member+

    Oct 5, 2019
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    #24568 Doogh, Nov 2, 2019
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2019
    "Alleged valid complaint" and facts with evidence are two different things. You need to look up WHY the current PLS is designed this way. It is BECAUSE of the infighting between USL and USL TOA (then became NASL) in 2009-2010. Thus, they both were a part of this current robust PLS we currently have today.
    If you're talking about the 2015 quick revision of the PLS in which NASL said there was anti trust concerns so USSF ended up not mandating it. The 2014 revision still stands.


    I just don't buy the "USSF helped them caused their demise" (your own words BTW) goes with the common conspiracy theories I see with NASL partisans or pro/rel folks on twitter.

    Here's what we know:

    • NASL already had internal management and organization problems ranging from Traffic Sports, etc.
    • NASL had multiple waivers every year regarding their PLS status. As they didn't meet their status with D2 PLS.
    • Sunil Gulati and NASL had numerous meetings.
    • Another one from above
    • Another one for D2. This time with Rocco Commisso.
    • And another one, this time for D3 status.
    • NASL wanted a merger with USL.
    • Oh and the various pathways to D1, improving their D2 status, etc.
    • Rocco's conspiracy theories ranging from MLS/SUM collusion and this (NO evidence of these either...)
    • US Soccer does NOT run, regulate (control) or manage leagues. Thus, no one was trying to shut them down moreso their own mistakes.
    • NASL had 4 teams in the end of 2017. 4.

    A viewpoint from former NASL communications director Kartik Krishnaiyer.
     
  19. Expansion Franchise

    Chattanooga FC
    United States
    Apr 7, 2018
    I even explicitly said it wasn't necessarily true, just that USSF's own actions make NASL's claim harder to disprove.
    Which 1) I don't subscribe to 2) are irrelevant here.
    Snipping a bunch of irrelevant bullet points.

    Look, NASL failed for a bunch of reasons. My point is that they've accused USSF of conspiring against them with MLS and USL, which, if true (and, again - I am not weighing in on the merits of that) would cast a really different light on their demise.
    Do I think there's anything there? Yes, I think there is probably some inappropriate favoritism at play.
    Do I think it's the reason NASL failed? I do not.
    However, if there was any inappropriate relationship between USSF and member organizations that would be detrimental to other parties that USSF governs that were to come out of the suit, I would hope that the federation was held accountable, regardless of whether or not it was really the basis of NASL going belly up.
     
  20. jaykoz3

    jaykoz3 Member+

    Dec 25, 2010
    Conshohocken, PA
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Yup, this right here. It's amazing the sport has progressed as much as it has in the US with the way the USSF goes about trying to appease everyone, and pissing everyone off instead.
     
    Expansion Franchise repped this.
  21. Paul Berry

    Paul Berry Member+

    Notts County and NYCFC
    United States
    Apr 18, 2015
    Nr Kingston NY
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    If I was USSF I would do exactly what they are doing. Dismissing the case would make it seem like they had something to hide. Instead they're expecting NASL to make idiots of themselves.
     
    HailtotheKing, CoachP365 and jaykoz3 repped this.
  22. Expansion Franchise

    Chattanooga FC
    United States
    Apr 7, 2018
    I don't think that the trial implies guilt, or, frankly, NASL has much of a case.
    But I don't have access to evidence and I am not the judge. If the only outcome of the trial is that the federation has to be more transparent and do less by the seat of their pants (which is a big part of the reason they're in court in the first place), I'd say it was successful.
     
  23. CoachP365

    CoachP365 Member+

    Money Grab FC
    Apr 26, 2012
    I'm sure those 4 games in Cary right after Malik wiped the prints off the dagger in the NASL's back were pure quoincidence...
     
  24. jaykoz3

    jaykoz3 Member+

    Dec 25, 2010
    Conshohocken, PA
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    What 4 games would these be?

    The Women's team routinely plays in Cary. Also, wasn't there a USMNT game held in Chattanooga after this as well???

    Why do some people actually want a Conspiracy? People are aware that Government interference in FIFA matters leads to being banned from FIFA competitions???
     
  25. M

    M Member+

    Feb 18, 2000
    Via Ventisette
    You're the only one that's mentioned the word "control". The USSF regulates as opposed to controls. So, as regulator, the USSF correctly didn't approve the NASL's request for status.

    Ah, so now we've moved on from "your view is worth less because you don't live here" to "your view is trolling". Interesting.debating style.
     

Share This Page