2017 US Open Cup qualifying thread

Discussion in 'US Open Cup' started by newtex, May 2, 2016.

  1. Owen Thornhill

    Dec 22, 2012
    Club:
    Cork City
    An Oregon team should be paired vs a northern Californian team or maybe if there was a Utah team to play one of these.
     
    UNPeaceKeeper repped this.
  2. UNPeaceKeeper

    UNPeaceKeeper New Member

    Feb 12, 2015
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Check your sources a team from KC couldnt afford the travel not CO, but its close enough I guess.
    Whats really wrong here too is there are 2 other teams still left from CO that do not have to travel whatsoever.
    http://thecup.us/2016/05/02/ussfs-n...ess-has-challenges-to-address-after-year-one/
    My sources tell me the CO Rush team will be in Oregon on Oct 22.
    http://currentofcolorado.com/archives/20336
     
    msilverstein47 repped this.
  3. msilverstein47

    msilverstein47 Member+

    Jan 11, 1999
    Country:
    United States
  4. msilverstein47

    msilverstein47 Member+

    Jan 11, 1999
    Country:
    United States
  5. msilverstein47

    msilverstein47 Member+

    Jan 11, 1999
    Country:
    United States
    2017 US Open Cup qualifying Round 2 scores (Sat.)

    Minneapolis City SC (MN) 2:1 (AET) Oakland County FC (MI)
    Azteca FC Denver (CO) 2:1 Harpo's FC (CO)
    Junior Lone Star Football Club (EAST PA) 3:2 Brick Lions FC (NJ)
    Boca Raton Football Club (FL) 4:1 Hurricane FC (FL)
    NTX Rayados Academy (NORTH TX) 2:0 CD Motagua of New Orleans(LA)
    Moreno Valley FC (SOUTH CA) 6:0 Ozzy's Laguna FC (SOUTH CA)
    Colorado Rush (CO) 4:0 International Portland Select (OR)
    Chula Vista Futbol Club (SOUTH CA) 4:1 FC Hasental (SOUTH CA)
     
    ceezmad repped this.
  6. newtex

    newtex Member+

    May 25, 2005
    Houston
    Club:
    Houston Dynamo
    News from the USSF on the 2017 tournament:

    http://www.ussoccer.com/stories/201...up-rescheduled-second-qualifying-round-scores

    A change to the qualifying tournament schedule and the dates for the U.S. Open Cup tournament next year.

    Qualifying Tournament

    Third Qualifying Round: March 11-12, 2017
    Fourth Qualifying Round (if needed): April 8-9, 2017


    2017 Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup Tournament Schedule

    Wed., April 12: First Round pairings and Second Round possible matchups announced
    Wed., May 10: First Round
    Wed., May 17: Second Round
    Wed., May 31: Third Round
    Wed., June 14*: Fourth Round (MLS teams enter)
    Thur., June 15: Round of 16 Draw
    Wed., June 28*: Round of 16
    Tues., July 11^: Quarterfinals
    Wed., Aug. 9*: Semifinals
    Wed., Sept. 20: Final

    It is hard to see how they can run the tournament like this unless they really cut back on the number of amateur teams. We'll have to wait and see, I guess.
     
  7. SJJ

    SJJ Member

    Sep 20, 1999
    Royal Oak, MI, USA
    Club:
    Michigan Bucks
    Country:
    United States
    #32 SJJ, Oct 25, 2016
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2016
    With the re-alignment of two teams going NASL-to-USL, time to dust off the spreadsheet of "how many amateur teams enter the LHUSOC" (assuming that amateur's enter in R1, USL in R2, NASL in R3, MLS in R4; this was the case the last two tournaments, excepting any last-minute changes):

    The count as I have them. (Hopefully correct, please update if need be.)

    • MLS (22 teams, three Canada, 19 eligible)
    • NASL (10 teams, 1 Canada, 1 Puerto Rico, 8 eligible)
    • USL (33 teams, 4 Canada, 8 Owned / Managed by higher team, 21 eligible)

    • NASL eligible: Carolina, Fort Lauderdale, Indy, Jacksonville, Miami, New York, OKC, San Francisco
    • USL eligible: Arizona, Colorado Springs, OKC, Orange County, Rio Grande Valley, Sacramento, Saint Louis, San Antonio, Tulsa, Charleston, Charlotte, Cincinnati, Harrisburg, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Richmond, Rochester, Wilmington, Nashville, Reno, Tampa Bay

    (note that Austin is no longer listed on the USL team page)

    The calculations:

    E = 32 (net number of teams in R4)
    A = 19 (MLS, enter R4)
    B = 8 (NASL, enter R3)
    C = 21 (USL, enter R2)
    (amateur, enter R1) = 2 * (2 * (2 * (E - A) - B) - C) = 30

    So if we think that there are already 10 PDL and 8 NPSL teams, that would leave 12 spots between qualifying, more PDL, and more NPSL.

    In the USSF qualifying, there are 16 teams already in QR3, with two more QR2 matches to play, making 18, or nine QR3 winners; so if there are no QR4 matches, it would leave only three open spots.

    Or the USSF would have to move teams "down" a level to include even more amateurs.
     
  8. newtex

    newtex Member+

    May 25, 2005
    Houston
    Club:
    Houston Dynamo
    Those look right to me at the moment except for the USL.
    Rio Grande Valley is eligible but I'd expect them to ask to be excluded again this year. Reno, who has a similar operation, has said they want to play. Also, Wilmington is on hiatus for 2017.

    I think there are 19 USL teams that will be in the tournament at the moment.

    Last year there were these 48 amateur teams:

    Qualifying tournament - 14
    NPSL - 15
    PDL - 19

    The qualifying tournament looks like it is headed to 7 or 8 teams so the number of amateur teams will probably be closer to 38 or 40.

    Overall, I agree with you. The only way they can have anywhere close to the same number of teams as last year is to push the NASL and/or USL teams into earlier rounds.
     
  9. newtex

    newtex Member+

    May 25, 2005
    Houston
    Club:
    Houston Dynamo
    Just a hypothetical but if you push the NASL teams into the 2nd round you would really open things up.

    1st Round - up to 50 amateur teams
    2nd Round - 19 USL + 8 NASL + 25 amateur team winners/byes
    3rd Round - 26 winners
    4th Round - 19 MLS + 13 winners
    5th Round - 16 winners

    I don't think the USSF will do this as long as the USL is D3 and the NASL is D2 but that could change.
    It will be interesting to see how things shake out with the NASL and the division sanctioning.
     
  10. EvanJ

    EvanJ Member+

    Manchester United
    United States
    Mar 30, 2004
    Nassau County, NY
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Country:
    United States
    What about making the bottom MLS clubs start in Round 3 with the NASL clubs? Those clubs wouldn't like starting earlier, but I think it would be better than when the bottom MLS clubs had to qualify against each other when the U.S. Open Cup had fewer clubs. In 2016 there were 48 amateur clubs. 48 amateur clubs, 19 USL clubs, 8 NASL clubs, and 19 MLS clubs would be 94 clubs. Here's my proposal for the amount of clubs in each round:

    Round 1 (42 clubs): 42 amateur clubs
    Round 2 (46 clubs): 19 USL clubs + 6 amateur clubs starting + 21 Round 1 winners
    Round 3 (36 clubs): 8 NASL clubs + Bottom 3 MLS clubs in the USA in the 2015 Supporters' Shield Standings + 2 MLS expansion clubs + 23 Round 2 winners
    Round 4 (32 clubs): Top 14 MLS clubs in the USA in the 2015 Supporters' Shield Standings + 18 Round 3 winners

    If you didn't want to give amateur clubs byes for Round 1, you could go up to 54 amateur clubs starting in Round 1, with 27 Round 1 winners and 19 USL clubs in Round 2. Going up to 54 amateur clubs would give the U.S. Open Cup 100 clubs.

    The following format would have all the MLS clubs start in the same round, but would only allow for 34 amateur clubs:

    Round 1 (34 clubs): 34 amatuer clubs
    Round 2 (36 clubs): 19 USL clubs + 17 Round 1 winners
    Round 3 (26 clubs): 8 NASL clubs + 18 Round 2 winners
    Round 4 (32 clubs): 19 MLS clubs + 13 Round 3 winners

    Having clubs at the same level start in different rounds already happens in at least two notable cup competitions. The English clubs in UEFA competitions start the EFL Cup (League Cup) one round later than the rest of the Premier League clubs. The top Serie A clubs start the Coppa Italia two rounds later than the rest of the Serie A clubs.
     
  11. newtex

    newtex Member+

    May 25, 2005
    Houston
    Club:
    Houston Dynamo
    Yeah, having some MLS teams start earlier would also work. I'm skeptical that the USSF would do that especially since the just-released schedule says "Wed., June 14*: Fourth Round (MLS teams enter)". I'm sure that is to allow MLS to go ahead and make a schedule for 2017. But we shall see.

    Heck, we don't know right now how many NASL teams will be left by next May let alone how many amateur teams will be included so it is all speculation.
     
  12. SJJ

    SJJ Member

    Sep 20, 1999
    Royal Oak, MI, USA
    Club:
    Michigan Bucks
    Country:
    United States
  13. EvanJ

    EvanJ Member+

    Manchester United
    United States
    Mar 30, 2004
    Nassau County, NY
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Country:
    United States
    I hope there aren't any clubs that want to stay in the NASL and are financially solvent but can't play next year because the NASL folds. Would it make sense to make two Division II leagues, one with USL clubs that are MLS affiliates and one with USL and NASL clubs that are not MLS affiliates?
     
  14. newtex

    newtex Member+

    May 25, 2005
    Houston
    Club:
    Houston Dynamo
    Would it make sense to the USL? Probably not. One of the big advantages the USL has right now is the number of teams means they can be grouped geographically reducing travel a lot. Splitting the league vertically takes that away. The USL has already said that when they get up to 36 teams they will split into 3 conferences to get teams even closer together.

    Would it make sense for MLS to push for that? Probably not. One of the reasons they went this route was to get their reserve teams games against non-reserve teams. Otherwise, they would have just stuck with the Reserve League.

    Would the USSF push for it? Probably not. They really don't like telling the leagues what to do.

    If no one sees it as an advantage, why would it happen?

    As far as nowhere for NASL teams to play, they can always join the USL. According to news reports all but 2 of the NASL teams had at least conversations with the USL recently. Teams like the Cosmos and Miami that are probably the ones that didn't look at the option wouldn't be more likely to join the USL if they realigned. They don't want to be part of someone else's league, period.

    And just to pick a nit, why would USL affiliates that may or may not get a couple of players a year from their MLS partner be stuck in with the MLS2 teams? Plenty of NASL teams have players on loan from MLS teams. What's the difference?
     
  15. msilverstein47

    msilverstein47 Member+

    Jan 11, 1999
    Country:
    United States
    #40 msilverstein47, Oct 27, 2016
    Last edited: Oct 27, 2016
    Sunday scores from 2017 LH USOC Round 2:

    Oct. 23
    Red Force FC (FL) 3:2 (AET)
    Uruguay Kendall FC (FL)
    Tropical Park Stadium
    Miami, FL

    Oct. 23
    Outbreak FC (SOUTH CA) 2:1 SFV Scorpions SC (SOUTH CA)
    College of the Canyon
    Santa Clarita, CA

    Oct. 23
    El Farolito (NORTH CA) 2:1 Strikers FC South Coast (SOUTH CA)
    Lake Forest Sports Park (Field A)
    Lake Forest, CA

    Oct. 23
    MF 10 (NV) 0:2 (45′) FC Anahuac (NV)
    Las Vegas Sportspark
    Las Vegas, NV

    Round 2 games still yet to be played:

    October 30, 2016 @ 9:00 pm
    Santa Ana Winds FC @ La Maquina
    Orange County Great Park
    Field 1
    Irvine, CA

    November 13, 2016 @ 9:00 pm
    LA Wolves FC @ Inland Empire FC
    Rancho Jurupa Regional Park
    Jurupa Valley, CA
     
  16. newtex

    newtex Member+

    May 25, 2005
    Houston
    Club:
    Houston Dynamo
    Here is the final Round 2 results:

    Sunday, October 30
    La Máquina FC (CA) 3-0 Santa Ana Winds FC (CA)

    Sunday, November 13
    Inland Empire FC (CA) 2-9 LA Wolves FC (CA)

    The 18 teams moving on to the 3rd round are:

    GPS Omens (MA)
    FC Motown (NJ)
    Christos FC (MD)
    Tartan Devils Oak Avalon (PA)
    Junior Lone Star FC (PA)
    Boca Raton FC (FL)
    Red Force FC (FL)
    Minneapolis City SC (MN)
    NTX Rayados (TX)
    Azteca FC (CO)
    Colorado Rush (CO)
    Anahuac FC (NV)
    Moreno Valley FC (CA)
    Chula Vista FC (CA)
    Outbreak FC (CA)
    El Farolito (CA)
    La Máquina FC (CA)
    LA Wolves FC (CA)
     
    msilverstein47 repped this.
  17. SJJ

    SJJ Member

    Sep 20, 1999
    Royal Oak, MI, USA
    Club:
    Michigan Bucks
    Country:
    United States
    Still waiting on the USL (D-2 or D-3) and NASL (D-2, D-3, or out) decisions to be made, so we'll know the tourney setup and number of bids.

    [o.k. I tried to make it a joke that they wanted to be D-one, but could end up D-o-n-e.]
     
    EvanJ repped this.
  18. SJJ

    SJJ Member

    Sep 20, 1999
    Royal Oak, MI, USA
    Club:
    Michigan Bucks
    Country:
    United States
    So, currently (at least this is what it looks like at this very moment, while still waiting for USSF announcements on D-2, D-3 statuses):

    MLS: 19 of 22 teams
    NASL: 6 of 8 teams (according to http://bigapplesoccer.com/teams/cosmos2.php?article_id=46774 )
    USL: 20 of 33 teams (Wilmington is still listed on the league's teams page)

    leads to: 40 amateur teams in the first round (again, assuming amateurs in R1, USL in R2, NASL in R3, MLS in R4). So if the QR3 is played, you would then have PDL 10, NPSL 8, USSF 9, leaving 13 openings to distribute.
     
  19. SJJ

    SJJ Member

    Sep 20, 1999
    Royal Oak, MI, USA
    Club:
    Michigan Bucks
    Country:
    United States
    Recalculation time for the amateurs:

    two D2 leagues, and if my numbers above are correct, 26 teams total. With 19 MLS teams, leaving only 13 slots open in R4, the 26 teams would exactly result in 13 winners from R3, meaning zero amateur teams. So of course, some would have to start in R2. If you start them all in R2, you would have 52 total amateur sides , winners play the D2's in R2, the winners play R3, and those winners play MLS in R4.
     
  20. Owen Thornhill

    Dec 22, 2012
    Club:
    Cork City
    I'd prefer to have a big round of 64 with all 19 MLS teams and 26 D2 clubs with the remaining 19 to the winners of the Amateur round of 38.
     
  21. newtex

    newtex Member+

    May 25, 2005
    Houston
    Club:
    Houston Dynamo
    I wouldn't count on Wilmington. I know the USL website still lists them but they themselves say they are now PDL.

    http://www.wilmingtonhammerheadsyouth.com/2016/09/30/hammerheads-begin-new-chapter/

    The USL would appear to have 18 Open Cup teams.
    30 total, that includes Reno as an expansion team but without Montreal and Wilmington.
    For the Open Cup less -
    3 Canadian teams - Toronto, Ottawa, Vancouver
    8 U.S. based-MLS2 teams ineligible - NYR2, BET, OCB, SWP, SLC, LA2, POR2, SEA2
    1 Withdrawn - Rio Grande Valley


    I could see this:
    Round 1 - 56 amateur teams (or do some byes into Round 2)
    Round 2 - 6 NASL + 18 USL + 28 winners
    Round 3 - 26 winners
    Round 4 - 19 MLS teams + 13 winners

    There were 44 amateur teams in 2016. If they stick with that then you could have 32 teams play in Round 1 and give byes to 12 teams.

    It will be interesting to see what the USSF does.
     
  22. newtex

    newtex Member+

    May 25, 2005
    Houston
    Club:
    Houston Dynamo
    No chance that they make MLS teams play that many rounds. The USSF has already said the MLS teams will enter in Round 4 on June 14. I'm sure the MLS schedule which comes out next week will reflect that.
     
  23. Owen Thornhill

    Dec 22, 2012
    Club:
    Cork City
    One of the better things about the cup is you get to play teams from other leagues but this will mean 6 mls clubs won't play a lower division team. boring.
     
  24. PAKIII

    PAKIII New Member

    Jan 9, 2017
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    I'm new here but here's my take:

    1st Round = 42 Amateur Teams (14 USASA clubs, 14 NPSL clubs and 14 PDL clubs)*.

    2nd Round = 21 First Round Winners + 14 USL clubs + 5 NASL clubs === 40 R2 teams.

    3rd Round = 20 Second Round Winners + 2 USL Eastern Conference Finalists + 2 USL Western Conference Finalists + 2 NASL Finalists === 26 R3 teams.

    4th Round = 13 Third Round Winners + 19 MLS Clubs === 32 R4 teams.

    *I'm positive that at least 11 USASA clubs will be chosen for the local qualifying round. The USSF might add more teams.
     
  25. PAKIII

    PAKIII New Member

    Jan 9, 2017
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    I'm new here but here's my take:

    1st Round = 42 Amateur Teams (14 USASA clubs, 14 NPSL clubs and 14 PDL clubs)*.

    2nd Round = 21 First Round Winners + 14 USL clubs + 5 NASL clubs === 40 R2 teams.

    3rd Round = 20 Second Round Winners + 2 USL Eastern Conference Finalists + 2 USL Western Conference Finalists + 2 NASL Finalists === 26 R3 teams.

    4th Round = 13 Third Round Winners + 19 MLS Clubs === 32 R4 teams.

    *I'm positive that at least 11 USASA clubs will be chosen for the local qualifying round. The USSF might add more teams.

    MLS = 19 (all in R4).
    NASL = 7 (2 Finalists in R3, other 5 in R2).
    USL = 18 (4 from Conference Finals in R3, other 14 in R2).
    NPSL = 14 (all in R1).
    PDL = 14 (all in R1).
    USASA = 14 (all in R1).
     

Share This Page