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

I'm guessing there's not a huge gap in quality and finances between divisions. Some of the teams play on sand pitches.

 

I'm guessing you're taking this discussion way too seriously.

 

I noticed that as well. While out on an errand today, I passed the ground for https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SV_Deportivo_Nacional and https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SV_La_Fama is about a kilometer from where we're staying.

@Paul Berry, yes, they're sand.

There's another stadium we pass by a lot that SV Britannia uses that pictures on Facebook looks they have turf.

 

I think literally correct is better.

Or maybe I'm not.

 

Wasn't Aruba a planned USL or NASL expansion team at one point?

But of a schlep from Edmonton I would think.

 

Depends if you mean the figurative or literal definition of "literally".

 

That was Antigua.

 

That's even worse! Antigua is 5,996 km (3,693 M) from Edmonton, Aruba is only 5,944 km.

 

Once you're gone through customs and boarded the plane, I don't think a difference of 30 miles matters much, but I agree with your larger point.

There were two other Caribbean clubs that year, apparently, both in Puerto Rico.

 

Scratch that. USL Pro apparently rejected the three Puerto Rican clubs at the end of May of the season they were scheduled to play in. It looks like they were basically replaced on the schedule with MLS reserve teams, who were not officially part of the league, but the games counted towards the standings. If evidence is ever needed of the independent clubs' skepticism towards the USL, this era is rife with examples.

 

This explains Puerto Rico.
https://web.archive.org/web/20110514205255/http://www.uslsoccer.com/home/524777.html

Antigua had financial difficulties. They eventually joined USL in 2013 and lost all 26 games, ending with a goal difference of -80. They withdrew in 2014 due to the lack of an affordable stadium.

 

They joined in 2011. They played three seasons.

 

My mistake.

 

I mean, it's esoterica.

 

The "Rewarding failure with better draft choices bowl" took place today, so congratulations to Arizona on being number 1. And it seems that not only does NFL rig its schedule for parity based on crapness, it effectively uses that past crapness to break ties for draft positions:

"the San Francisco 49ers, New York Jets and Oakland Raiders were in a three-team race for the second spot, which was determined by strength of schedule. The 49ers will pick second based on their .504 strength of schedule, with the Jets (.506) and Raiders (.545) picking third and fourth."

Yeah for closed leagues!

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/25650115/arizona-cardinals-lose-buzzer-pick-no-1-overall

 

Doesn’t come right out and denounce p/r, just shows the consequences. https://www.independent.co.uk/sport...t-final-score-epl-jonathan-liew-a8704066.html

And, uh, I got two words for those who think closed leagues are unusually crooked - forza Juve

EDIT - when you are listing a series of bonuses, you can say "An added bonus is" etc. etc. Maybe "An additional bonus" is more accurate. Okay, if you're listing a series of bonuses, and there is a recent addition to the list, "added bonus" is perfectly acceptable.

I'm glad I rushed back to the keyboard to make this point, it was necessary and helpful

 

Before the draft was introduced NFL was becoming dominated by a handful of wealthy clubs. The draft was a way of restoring parity.

It's become so popular it's now become a 3 day TV event, and there are draft competitions in every office and online and $100 of millions is spent on associated marketing.

I guess they could have introduced pro/rel instead except outside NFL gridiron was an amateur sport played at educational institutions.

At the time most European leagues were amateur or maintained parity through a maximum wage. The bigger clubs had more money to spend on building youth organizations, transfer fees and padding players' salaries through indirect or illegal payments.

The poorer teams could compete for promotion and relegation but prior to the playoffs, and the third point for a win, most teams had nothing to play for by Christmas.

MLS now differs from NFL and NBA in that it no longer relies primarily on players developed in schools and at colleges for it's intake. With the exception of the expansion draft it's simply a clearing house for players without clubs.

The method used of allowing slightly worse performing teams to sign slightly better players is fair enough. An alternative would be a random drawing.

If some legal way could be found of compensating soccer institutions, including clubs, with real money for domestic player transfers the MLS draft would be even less relevant.

 

Says the moderator who recently called another poster on this thread “a moron” and “officially insane”.

In contrast drafts are a significant feature of US closed leagues so it has everything to do with this thread.

 

I disagree.

 

Much less impact on MLS than other leagues.

 

You’re wrong. Rewarding failure is a feature of US closed leagues.