Who really cares about Pro Rel? I'd be happy with secure stable teams. Pro Rel is destabilizing so personally I could care less about it. Give it to Europe they can keep it.
Do we actually know what the level of play will be ? We know what the level of play was when USL D2 was at that level. We can't however know what the level of play will be because of all the unknowns surrounding the league. We do know that D3 will have a shorter season than D3. We also know that they want an inter league cup, and are least open to pro/real between the two leagues. We Wil just have to wait and see what develops.
Distabilising or a chance to rebuild. most club who get relegated normally have bigger support than their new rivals when the get relegated, they rebuild often with youth players from their academy and get promoted back in a season or two and are stronger than they were and finish safely in mid table. Not all the time but there are multiple examples, too many to mention but It has clearly been a huge benefit to all the countries which use it. Off the top of my head over 100 leage's. Even when my team was in the first division, our crowds were down but I loved visiting new away grounds and at the end of the entire ordeal we are now 100% fan owned and stronger than we have ever been before. Double champions 2017, Highest Average attendance by a wide margin and providing the Irish National team with several players. The only people who benefit from not pro/rel is the owners who can pocket more of the $$$.
So most clubs will hover around the league they're supposed to be in? Why not just keep at the level they're suited for? Aside from making the end of the season more exciting, what benefits? Would mean the death of clubs at this moment in time. Soccer is not well established enough (see: SF Delta's). We need more stable clubs and fan bases first. Could make traveling prohibitively expensive for a lot of regions. USL has been growing the league with regional clusters of clubs to encourage rivalries and traveling... and there are a lot of teams. MLS has their regional pockets as well (Cascadia, I-95 corridor) but it's too spread out otherwise. In 2018 I can drive to 6 clubs that are within somewhat reasonable distance (I mean, if you consider 6, 8, or 11 hours of driving "reasonable"). That number gets cut in half if we moved up to MLS. It would be great to be able to jump on a train for a couple hours to see any conference opponent but traveling support is an ordeal in the US. Wait, are you implying fan ownership was a direct result of pro/rel? We've had so many failed leagues in this country that I couldn't give two shits how much owners are making as long as there is a stable league. And with USL averaging ~5k and MLS averaging ~21k I think we're doing just fine.
I figure it’s a decent guess that clubs in Statesboro, Georgia and Tucson, Arizona will have lower budgets, especially for players, and the league’s overall quality of play will probably be somewhat lower. That’s just a guess, though. Anyone who says definitively that a league that has yet to sign a player will or won’t be better or worse than another is making it up. How the presence of a competing D3 league will impact things is open to conjecture. If there is such a league.
I understand why USL is adding a D3 but don't like the fact that having two USL leagues (i.e USL 2 and USL 3) makes it harder to implement the regionalization that cuts down on travel costs. While improving, lower division soccer in the US is not supported overly well and we need to use scarce resource on things like coaching and player salaries and not on travel costs. To strike a proper balance between lowered operational costs and league competitiveness, I'd like to see them consider the following: 1) 3-5 regions (or whatever number makes operational sense) with both a D2 and a D3 level. 2) D2 plays a high percentage of its games against their region's D2 teams and a lower percentage of games against their region's D3 teams. All games count toward regional and league standings. Shouldn't be a big deal as long as the quality difference between D2 and D3 remains reasonable. 3) Separate national D2 and D3 playoffs comprised of the top teams from each region and a few wildcards. 4) Potential for regional pro-rel between D2 and D3 within your region.
You can have salary caps in league with pro/rel. In Ireland for example Clubs can only spend 65% of revenue on players salaries but there is pro/rel. League of Ireland is not perfect example. But the English non league Pyramid system should be the ideal. Scottish non league is following suite and the Welsh non league system.
Firstly, I still stand by my statement that clubs will hover around the league they're supposed to be in. Why else would Leicester City have been the soccer story of the decade. Everybody was so shocked and thrilled by it because it never happens. Secondly, how is being sent to a lower league rebuilding when you have to fire players you can no longer afford? Furthermore, how many of those lower league players are actually going to be around if and when the club moves back up? It's a constant shuffle in the middle of the pyramid with such disparity at the top that only a handful of clubs ever hope to win the top tier championship. In the US the top tier is locked out from the rest of the pyramid (which at this point, is only USL) but MLS has parity that allows for any club to win any year, though there were dynasties here and there (DC in the early days of the league, LA in the early 2010's.) But that's my point. Soccer is not well established enough to work in one of the biggest and densest cities in the country. I mean, the ownership was not the best but there wasn't even a draw and they rocked the league. And to your ManU/Madrid point, soccer had hardly existed 100 years ago. The US has tried over and over again and now we're finally stable so let's not turn right around and throw a pro/rel wrench in the gears. What did that graphic have to do with travel costs? It's just a pyramid structure. And it doesn't matter what other leagues have set up, we still don't have that or even enough teams to do something close to that. In the US there is regionalization growing but it's slow, this takes time. If you implement pro/rel now it will ruin the regionalization. We have two leagues. TWO. And you're talking about nine regions just in one league. We're talking about the US where soccer is still fighting for a foothold. And my point wasn't about the team travel cost. I'm talking about the fan travel. I have given you an actual, real-world example of how pro/rel could easily make traveling support more expensive because this. Traveling support is getting better every year, we don't need to add more complications to it. They haven't even kicked a ball yet. Let's hold off on pipe dreams until we see actual league structure. So pro/rel can mean the death of a club, like I was saying. New England have had terrible owners their entire existence but they aren't in danger of folding. We don't need clubs trying to do "proper football" instead of worrying about making money. Just look at the NASL. MLS does have a salary cap (more like a budget). That's what keeps the league competitive but still allows for ambitious spending here and there.
I assume what will separate D3 from D2 in the USL will be salary structure and ability to play more amateur players and that will naturally seperate the leagues.
And you can have salary restrictions unlike the NASL in a pro/rel system. 65% of revenue is a good system or different levels can have different restrictions.
It's not like the current structure has actually shown any stability. I'm for pro/rel, but obviously there needs to be some "incentive" for it -- typically media revenue sharing is a way to offset operation costs. I should have been a little clearer with my post ("Let's not act like there's a huge disparity between USL D2 and USL3."). What I meant about that was USL as D3 in 2017 (and before) isn't all that different from USL as D2 in 2018. The only thing that has made a huge difference now is NASL folding and players from there matriculating into USL D2. USL3 will have lower salaries, for sure. But, let's not think that numerous current USL sides are actually paying great money. There's tons that are probably paying D3 salaries but will stay D2. D3 is not supposed to have a shorter season as D2. That information was provided by USL in an ownership prospectus. It is supposed to run from March to November as well. Play more amateurs? It's a pro league. Doubtful we'll see amateurs.
Amateurs play in it all the time. Most are from the MLS2 squads, but even nonaffiliated USL teams have played teens in their academies that are signed to amateur contracts. USL even set limits (5) for this upcoming season for the number that are allowed to be on the game-day roster.
They don't play in it "all the time." Sure, it can happen and does on occasion, but that's a far cry from "all the time." Show stats that it happens "all the time," please.
Timbers 2 (Montes, Calixtro, Cini, Perez, Anguiano, Bodily) Galaxy 2 (Aquilar, Garcia, Hernandez, Hernandez, Agredo, Mendez, Lonergan Payeras, Sepulveda, Arteaga, Estrada) Sounders 2 (Lotenero, Gonzalez, Ocampo-Chavez, Teves, Fowler, Briscoe, Martin) Those are just three teams, albeit three teams that used their academy players especially frequently. Feel free to search the player stats for each USL team for more. Clicking the "General" tab takes you to their minutes. While we're asking for stats, please provide stats that back up your claim that:
Bodily was 16 on his debut and it was like watching boy's vs men. He was good technically but vs a professional player in the prime of their life was not a level playing field.
Teams with none: FC Cincinnati (could include Halfhill, as he was signed on amateur contract for USOC -- a college grad, but was later signed to full contract) Rochester Rhinos Tampa Bay Rowdies Ottawa Fury Saint Louis FC Harrisburg City Islanders Charleston Battery Richmond Kickers Pittsburgh Riverhounds Charlotte Independence Bethlehem Steel RGVFC Colorado Springs Phoenix Rising FC Tulsa Roughnecks Any wrong here? Probably could add a few more to this list too. You have 23 players out of 388 in USL (5.9% of league). Exactly what would make this statistic "valuable"? The USL is more international than 2017 was (up from 46% to 49.9%). The league average age is 25.6 years old. These young amateur players are few and far between. I get it. When the MLS Reserve League operated this same thing happened. MLS teams were required to have Reserve teams, but roster numbers were lighter. So, they supplemented their Reserve team with U18 or U17 players. That's cool. It doesn't mean they actually value it much.
The entire point is amateurs do play in the current iteration of USL D2, which is different from "Play more amateurs? It's a pro league. Doubtful we'll see amateurs." and a USL D3 is more likely to have a higher percentage of amateurs because it is a lower level and controlling costs will be even more important than in USL D2.
I think that the desire to go to college has a big impact on the development of young players in the US over other countries. So many good academy players would rather take a scholarship at a big university to play soccer for a few years and get a degree out of it rather than accept a minor league soccer contract. If an MLS offer or big international team offer is there, they are more likely to take it. But if you have a longer shot at making it to the top level, having a degree after a few years beats being stuck with nothing if soccer doesn't work out. I hope that teams like RSL can find a way to help their academy players who move on to the Monarchs, or D3 team or whatever, can find a way to resolve this. I think it would be great if they could make an agreement with a local university that they could send their players to school (if eligible) and have a way to work out the school work, etc, around practices, games and other obligations to their USL career. I think something like that could really become a game changer in keeping your kids in your system. RSL just opened up an on site high school for their academy players at their new training and academy facility to solve a similar issue at a younger age.
MLS has a partnership with Southern New Hampshire University, which is a nonprofit school with a highly reputable online degree program. While some scoff at online education, it is a rapidly growing and increasingly viable option. Taking into consideration the flexibility it provides for working adults (in offices and on soccer pitches), it is a legitimate way for players to earn a degree (at no/reduced cost, if I understand it correctly) just in case the whole soccer thing doesn't pan out. https://www.snhu.edu/about-us/news-and-events/2018/01/mls-partnership None of the other professional leagues do anything like this. NFL players tend to have degrees, or at least the bulk of college completed before going pro. NHL players tend to be a mix of college grads and junior players, so it wouldn't hurt there. MLB often pulls kids from high school and the NBA looks to be returning to that as well (not that the one and dones are much better, education-wise). This could become a new standard in minor league systems for those three sports as they continue to evolve. With the NBA emphasizing the G-League and dropping the college requirement again, I see them doing something like this next.
The NFL does have a continuing education program. http://www.nflplayerengagement.com/continuing-education/ MLB now has a partnership with Northeastern University to provide education opportunities to players. The most recent collective bargaining agreement provides funding for this. https://news.northeastern.edu/2017/...n-university-as-preferred-education-provider/ The NHL and NHL-PA has a BreakAway program for continuing ed by players and alumni. http://www.nhlabreakaway.net/welcome.html It doesn't look like the NBA has a specific program like those but players are going back to school on their own: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/06/sports/basketball/06nba.html
It is an improvement. LAG also have a deal with Cal State - Dominguez across the street, which is better than the online program with SNHU. A lot of high quality universities have really good soccer programs. It is clearly a step down from playing full time in the USL. This isn't a knock on online education or SNHU, but lot of these players come from middle to upper middle class families where college is important. Few are going to turn down a scholarship offer from UVA, Duke, UNC, Georgetown, Michigan, etc for a USL contract and online education at SNHU. The USL plus education deal is going to appeal to players from families from lower incomes by and large. The USL salary and level of play would have to increase a fair amount for the next tier of prospects to sign there. The top tier will continue to sign abroad or MLS by and large or go one and done in college, which is basically the same as signing immediately following graduation and DA season.
As someone with degrees from two longtime soccer schools (Drake and Grand View), I agree. I wasn't aware of that program. Hopefully as the sport continues to grow, we'll see more like this. For example, if the rumored DM expansion to USL D3 ever happens, hopefully they can work out a deal with Drake, GV, or Simpson, all of which are in the metro. The bulk of the current and rumored markets in all three leagues (MLS, USL D2 & D3) have plenty of nearby colleges that could partake in this endeavor.