I think the 36 way would be best but I like the idea of just playing a rival again. To build up regional interest. Rotate who gets extra home game each yr.
You can also do a NFL divisional set up. Have 38 games, 32 team league you'd just play everyone in your division of 4 (3) times have 29 games left to play the other 29 teams left across the other division one time.
Again....where are these extra games going to be fit in? The schedule is already congested, and MLS often plays right through FIFA dates. With these new Nations League coming online soon, there's going to be even more pressure to NOT play through FIFA Dates. Add in Open Cup games, CCL games, Re-scheduled games due to weather/Cup matches.............You really want to try to play games in Montreal, Toronto, Chicago, NY, New England, Columbus, Minnesota, Colorado, & Utah in February? It's difficult enough as is to get people to attend early season games in these places in March.......... Add in the new game between Liga MX and MLS Champions, the fact that many of these stadiums were built with hosting international friendlies and WCQ's in mind as an added revenue stream..........add in dates for concerts, Lacrosse, American Football, CFL, NFL, College football, High School Sports, College Soccer, Men's & Women's National Team games, Rugby.........squeezing in 2 additional home games a season per team...........not very easy, or practical. Not to mention MLS owners are NOT going to give up these added revenue streams in order to accommodate 2 more home games a season, at least one of which will be played in February (because that's going to draw sellouts in the previously mentioned winter climates). Oh, they can just move the game to the local Dome venue you say? Right, because renting a venue & giving up concessions and parking revenue helps the bottom line...........that defeats the purpose of owning and operating your own stadium where you control all revenue streams.
Oh FFS. Not this crap again Plenty of midweek dates open. More if you have an even # of teams and you keep games played equal.
If you're the I/O of a team do you really want MORE midweek games? You're a Crew fan, how was midweek attendance PRIOR to PSV? Not all that great right? Exactly. Not to mention the TV providers don't exactly want more midweek games either.
The owners only care about $$$ More game inventory means more $$$. You do realize that the number if games will most likely be increased right it's a natural part of growth of a league. More teams mean more games. MLS didn't always play 34 games it was increased to 34 when we went from 10-14 teams just like it will be increased again when we go from 23 teams to 32.
You do realize there's a cost to putting on games, right? Most likely the games will be profitable, but maybe not for teams like Vancouver and New England given the size of their stadiums compared to their attendance. And even if its profitable, it needs to be more than just barely above the line to be worth the effort.
I think we are just arguing a inevitable I'm pretty certain the season length will be extended its just a matter of 36 or 38 games. That is 1152/1216 games in a 36 or 38 games season vs the 782 game season. Are you really debating if a cheap owners like the Krafts won't jump at getting their empty football stadium used for 2 to 3 more weeks out the year. There is absolutely no worry about money attendance isn't a issue the worst attendance team not counting the Columbus disaster would be considered a decent attendance team ten years ago. I think we are grasping at straws why it can't work. It's an inevitability 28 teams is pushing it and I think the change could be made then but definitely anything after 28 teams it's probably getting moved to 36/38 games. All this most likely gets discussed for the next TV deal. MLS will negotiate it's hand at moving the digital package of games off ESPN+ to another company like Hulu or Amazon and ESPN will say we can give you this much extra if you can increase your inventory of games. ESPN will then get to keep the extra inventory of games that they will they have and put them on ESPN+. By 2022 their will be 28 teams it will be more advantageous for the league to increase the inventory of games to match the TV negotiations rather than waiting to go to 32 teams by 2026 or so and missing out on the additional TV revenue, they could've received in the 2022 TV contract.
Midweek dates being open doesn't make them desirable or preferable. I have no desire to have more midweek matches. None. The salary cap makes it difficult to have any serious depth, which means you either run the best players down or you have lesser players on the field -- both of which lower quality of play. Midweek games are also not as well attended, and adding two games to the packages of games people have to pay for has to be a consideration as well. Midweek matches also become difficult to work around when you factor in CONCACAF Champions League, the Open Cup, and FIFA breaks. I know that, because it's already difficult to work around them. You can do it. I just don't know why you'd want to.
Cutting out all mid season friendlies would help open up dates for more regular season games. I don't know if that will ever happen. As a fan it seems like a no brainer but i am guessing they make more off those than MLS games. I really don't know for sure.
Yeah except this claim by you is false. The number of games only increased to 34 in 2011 when Vancouver & Portland came into the league. It hasn't increased since, and 5 teams have been added to the league. Don Garber has even talked about how 34 games is the max due to scheduling constraints. Also, the schedule DECREASED in 2007 from 32 games to 30 despite the addition of a new team. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Major_League_Soccer_seasons How many MLS teams play friendlies anymore though? It seems to be way less now, then in the past. The first few seasons the Union had 2-3 International Club Friendlies each season. Now they have one per season, which is what the fan surveys asked for. It's not just those matches either. RBA will be hosting an ICC match. Talen Energy Stadium will be hosting a USMNT friendly, 3 Union Home Games, and the Collegiate Rugby 7's Championships all in the next 3 weeks. That's a ton of wear and tear on the grass. Not to mention that's a lot of extra income to potentially pass up. Not only that, fans get game fatigue believe it or not. I could have gone up to the RBNY-Philly game Saturday but then remembered that I'm going to the USMNT game tomorrow and the Union have home games Wednesday, Tuesday & Friday. Yeah, passed on the NY trip. Too many games. I imagine a lot of DC United fans are going to feel the same way come the end of August when United is playing at home every 3 days. You must have missed my earlier reply to you. How are more games, likely in February, or midweek going to bring in more money? Those games typically don't sell as much concessions or merchandise as fans are rushing to get to them for kickoff. Plus, fans are much more inclined to leave early or right at the final whistle rather then hang around and buy merch, or hang in the stadium club afterwards. Weekend dates are much more desirable and profitable.
TV $$$ I know for a fact owners are looking to cash in on this next TV deal. I think it was Sporting KC's owner that said in 2014 that this TV deal puts us in a good place but the "Next one will be the game changer" If the deal comes in the $300-450 mil range per year you can cover your depth issues. You are looking at the situation from a MLS now position instead of looking at it from your team will have the cash to add the depth and basically have two first elevens to run out for those games you mention.
Some of them still play 2-3 friendlies...right? Anyway, thats why i said would "help" didnt say it would solve all the problems. But for sure not playing any meaningless games during the season would help in opening up dates for season games. Again, i bet the owners make more money off 2 of these friendlies than regular season games.
Ok I didn't look up the exact year will concede that was going off memory but you are nitpicking a small discrepancy to make a point. There was 30 games played up until the 2011 season when we went from 30 to 34 games when we went from 16 to 18 teams. It was done to balance out the schedule. Here is the fallacy in your argument we went for 16 to 18 and 2011 and decided we need to increase to 34 to balance out the schedule we literally will be going to 18 to 28/32 teams in the not to distant future and yet you and a few others are like NO WAY we can't add games. It's crazier to think we won't go to 36/38 games than to not expect a slight increase to alleviate what would then be a heavy schedule imbalance. Not to mention the benefits of increase in TV dollars by increasing the inventory of games.
The NBA, NHL, and NFL have added teams in recent years, yet the number of games they play has NOT increased. Also, your reasoning and thoughts are also short sighted. I don't doubt that the league and its' investors would LIKE to have more games. I do, however, doubt that the TV networks want more regular season games. It's difficult enough as is to get MLS games on at the same time each week for National TV. Again, the schedule is already congested and shoe horned in as is. Plus, you're forgetting the players and more importantly the players association. The fact remains that due our nations vastness, geography, and varying climates expanding the schedule will be a very difficult task. Playing more midweek games is NOT the answer. Players aren't robots, and fans pay to see STARS, not the reserves. Players need ample time between games for recovery and injury prevention. Starting the season earlier will cut into the off season, which is already short to begin with. MLS will likely add MORE games, just not regular season games. If anything they'll add more playoff games once the league fills out. That's where the money is (TV Money).
MLS playing multiple times in the "big money" friendlies is becoming non-existent. If anything, they are playing in their own venues and if they play, they tend to play 1 friendly. Plus, were their teams that played 3 friendlies? I know foreign teams did, but have MLS teams done so in the last 5-8 years? I think there are only 5 scheduled friendlies so far. 1 was LAFC-Dortmund which was played at a small venue (the Coliseum is literally a stone's throw away) with cheap tickets (compared to usual friendlies). RSL plays Frankfurt at their home venue and has played one international opponent for the last two years. Philly faces Frankfurt at their home venue and the game is the bonus game for all season ticket holder. The Earthquakes face Man U at Levi's, but the Earthquakes have a contract to play a game at Levi's per year (this is probably it). Houston is playing Monterrey at their own stadium in their annual Charity Cup to benefit various charitable organizations. I think all of these games are worked around MLS schedules. Plus, there is MLS All Star Game, but that hasn't changed formats in a while. I expect a few Liga MX team friendlies for the end of next month released soon, but I don't think they will force changes to MLS schedules. Maybe it's because of the World Cup. There also hasn't been an MLS team in the ICC since 2015.
I never said reserves I said with the increase in TV money from the next TV deal say $300-450 mil you can fund two 1st elevens meaning to teams of starter level rosters if not more. As for as the networks they will show more if the ratings justify it. Live sports is more valuable in ad dollars than scheduled recorded programming.
Wasn't there talk before the season of a MLS Liga MX All star game moving forward? I think Taylor Twellman or Lalas was talking about it.
Not this year. Liga MX has some stuff to deal with internally re Pro/Rel, Youth Player minutes, etc before they start that All star game. Though, I think they are sending over youth teams for the Chipotle young players game.
You honestly believe that the MLS PA is going to go for that? MLS Investors can't just raise the Salary Budget because they feel like it. Salary Budget increases need to be negotiated as part of the CBA with the MLSPA. This is why MLS introduces the various forms of Allocation Money instead of just simply raising the Salary Budget. There's maybe a handful of ELITE teams in the club game that can say they have two starting 11's on their roster. A TV deal of $300M-$450M per season.................that would be VERY surprising the next go round. That's NHL territory. $250M is more likely (probably closer to $200M), and that only nets out to an additional $8.9M per team. Also keep in mind that currently MLS isn't getting the full $90M each season, USNT rights are bundled in that number.
[QUOTE="jaykoz3, post: 36661665, can't just raise the Salary Budget because they feel like it. Salary Budget increases need to be negotiated as part of the CBA with the MLSPA. This is why MLS introduces the various forms of Allocation Money instead of just simply raising the Salary Budget. There's maybe a handful of ELITE teams in the club game that can say they have two starting 11's on their roster. A TV deal of $300M-$450M per season.................that would be VERY surprising the next go round. That's NHL territory. $250M is more likely (probably closer to $200M), and that only nets out to an additional $8.9M per team. Also keep in mind that currently MLS isn't getting the full $90M each season, USNT rights are bundled in that number.[/QUOTE] Ahh I see you are back to join our friendly debate okay I'm getting my debate cap back on. [Rings debate bell] Ok I think you are looking at things from the past perspective as far as TV money we are 3 seasons from TV negotiations happening. NHL gets $ 200 mil US NHL Gary Bettman has been said to have mentioned that NHL will seek a US TV deal no less than $500 mil per yr. NHL has only posted two seasons of TV audience growth since their deal in 2010 and have posted back to back year double digit losses averaging 302k reg season TV audience this year. MLS is averaging 281k currently I think it all depends on what NHL gets if they do in fact get $500 mil or close to it I think MLS can get $300-450 mil. For these reasons: MLS is like a safe growth stock it's stable steady growth the TV audience has grown every year since their TV deal and that expected growth of 10-15k in the overall cable ratings per yr should be expected with expansion from 23-32 teams. As far as the CBA like I said it will get negotiated in the CBA when it gets negotiated next TV deal. The MLS PA will continue to gain money in Salary. The players aren't dumb they know they are in a better place money wise from where they were. The owners will of course expect to concede a decent trade off bump in min. salaries at the next CBA negotiation in 2022. It should be noted it's been said only that only a handful of players make the league min.
[QUOTE="jaykoz3, post: 36661665, can't just raise the Salary Budget because they feel like it. Salary Budget increases need to be negotiated as part of the CBA with the MLSPA. This is why MLS introduces the various forms of Allocation Money instead of just simply raising the Salary Budget. There's maybe a handful of ELITE teams in the club game that can say they have two starting 11's on their roster. A TV deal of $300M-$450M per season.................that would be VERY surprising the next go round. That's NHL territory. $250M is more likely (probably closer to $200M), and that only nets out to an additional $8.9M per team. Also keep in mind that currently MLS isn't getting the full $90M each season, USNT rights are bundled in that number.[/QUOTE] Ahh I see you are back to join our friendly debate okay I'm getting my debate cap back on. [Rings debate bell] Ok I think you are looking at things from the past perspective as far as TV money we are 3 seasons from TV negotiations happening. NHL gets $ 200 mil US NHL Gary Bettman has been said to have mentioned that NHL will seek a US TV deal no less than $500 mil per yr. NHL has only posted two seasons of TV audience growth since their deal in 2010 and have posted back to back year double digit losses averaging 302k reg season TV audience this year. MLS is averaging 281k currently I think it all depends on what NHL gets if they do in fact get $500 mil or close to it I think MLS can get $300-450 mil. For these reasons: MLS is like a safe growth stock it's stable steady growth the TV audience has grown every year since their TV deal and that expected growth of 10-15k in the overall cable ratings per yr should be expected with expansion from 23-32 teams. As far as the CBA like I said it will get negotiated in the CBA when it gets negotiated next TV deal. The MLS PA will continue to gain money in Salary. The players aren't dumb they know they are in a better place money wise from where they were. The owners will of course expect to concede a decent trade off bump in min. salaries at the next CBA negotiation in 2022. It should be noted it's been said only that only a handful of players make the league min. As far as TV distribution. SUM is MLS and MLS is SUM. SUM is little more than a geniously planned shell company that funnels money between USSF/ MLS ran by the same hats your cousin Vinny and Mike. They act in conjunction using rackets to get a slice out of all major US soccer events and funnel that money intl MLS/ US soccer and their own pockets. The only difference is the type of share owner/ operator shares you hold. I'm all for it and support it but I can sort of see why Comisso is trying to sue ( because he wants a cut of the rackets). The driver of the cash cow is the product they make the product better get a slice out of more events and throw events they make more $$.