28 is the number Garber is harping on, so here goes. 2 conferences, with 2 divisions each. 34 game schedule: you play each of the other 27 teams once, and each of the other 6 teams in your division a second time, and your main rival (who may or may not be in your division) a third. Division winners automatically #1 and #2 seeds in each conference. 16-team playoff. First three rounds over two-legs. Final is a one-off. Neat and clean. Just the way it should be.
Some clubs have obvious rivals, some clubs aren't near other clubs, and some clubs could be the biggest rival of multiple other clubs. Biggest rivals also change when clubs are created. The Red Bulls and D.C. are rivals, but now the Red Bulls' geographic rival is NYCFC. D.C. and Philadelphia fit as rivals geographically, and Toronto FC and Montreal can be Canadian rivals, but then New England's rival will be far away from them. Rather than using rivals, they could take after the NFL and make the one additional game be between the two clubs in the same conference who finished in the same position of different divisions in the previous year.
Both ideas seem fine, but why bother with the conferences? Just one big open bracket play-offs. And maybe just 12 teams and keep the play-in round. Although I can see the advantages of 16.
To keep interest on both sides of the country. If all four semifinalists come from the northeast, viewership will be lower.
I agree with most of your assessment, but I think MLS will copy the NFL format for choosing the opponent of that extra game. Since they're so high on parity, each team will play home-and-away matches against each divisional rival and the team in the Conference's sister division that finished in the same place on the table the previous year (ie 4th-place in North Division will play 4th-place in South Division, etc).
I don't buy that. If it is not your team, you either watch because it's compelling or not- it doesn't matter if it's sort of near me. And a final between geographic neighbors would be really compelling. Note 2 of our 4 major leagues leave open the possibility of all 4 "semifinalists" being from the same region because they don't have geographically based "conferences".
The Super Bowl is the Super Bowl. If my team's not in it, I still watch (mainly for the commercials). I am not alone there. Baseball numbers have been going down, and the NBA and NFL are both east vs. west.
Exactly. And? I don't think you are right about the NFL there, @shizzle787. I think you meant NHL. So, let's see: East v. West? NBA-Minnesota (west) v. Milwaukee (east) New Orleans (west) v. Atlanta (east) Nope, doesn't really create interest on both sides of the country. Baseball may be "going down" but it has absolutely nothing to do with the lack of East v. West. Hell, if anything, a regional "World" Series (crap name, btw) of: New York Yankees v. New York Mets White Sox v. Cubs Dodgers v. Angels A's v. Giants all create way more interest than the Marlins v. Mariners, or Padres v. Orioles, despite those being on "both sides of the country."
This is the logical suggestion based on 34 game sched.... 4 conferences of 7. Play everyone once, and your division twice for a total of 33 games, one other game against some random team (for Vancouver, can be one of the Canadian teams). Top 3 teams each conference make playoffs plus three wildcards (who face two conference winners with lowest point totals). This is intended to award supporters' shield more significantly as they get a bye. 2 and 3 from each division face off. First round is one-off. After that round, re-seed everyone for QFs based on regualar season points (ignore conference) and form a bracket (open division system) using aggregate matches. If preferred, this can also be one-off in QFs (for fixture congestion) but semis and finals should be aggregate. Sample conferences based on 2 listed expansion cities plus Sacramento, San Antonio, Cincinnati, and St. Louis (IMHO, best candidates right now). Pacific: LAG, LAFC, SJE, VAN, PDX, SEA, RSL Western (Southwest): Rapids, HOU, FCD, San Antonio, SKC, MN, St. Louis Southern: Miami, OCSC, ATL, CLB, Cinci, DCU, Chicago Northeast: NER, IMFC, TFC, NYCFC, Red Bulls, Philadeplia, Is there a better alignment than this.....thoughts? I don't love it due to bunching of expansion teams. Pacific: As above Southern: FCD, HOU, SAS, OCSC, ATL, Miami, Rapids Northeast: DCU, NYCFC, Red Bulls, Philadeplia, NER, IMFC Central: CLB, Cinci, Chicago, TFC, St. Louis, Minnesota, SKC I like this less due to time zone issues. Also IMFC aren't grouped with TFC (though you could give them an extra game).
Agreed sort of, just not sure what meaning the conferences have then. My suggestion is similar, but it just assumes 4 conferences. But chances are MLS will stick to the East-West without any logical reason cuz you know, #Muricah!
They will want most conferences to have teams with some access to warm spring climates so they can have earlier leauge start dates. They will also want to keep rivals together. Using your teams, I see the following alignment: Pacific: Vancouver, Seattle, Portland, Sacramento, San Jose, LAG, LAFC Mountain/Plains: Minnesota (or St Louis), RSL, Colorado, SKC, Dallas, Houston, San Antonio North/Central: Montreal, NER (or NYCFC), TFC, Chicago, Columbus, Cincinnati, St Louis (or Minnesota) Atlantic: NER, NYCFC (or NER), NYRB, Philadelphia, DCU, Atlanta, Orlando, Miami
I like this, I'd assume NER in the north then and NYC in the Atlantic for Hudson River derby. Also, I'd assume Minn in the North and St. Louis in the Mountain, as Minnesota would want Chicago as close rival if anyone.
I do like the 4 conferences of 7 teams. That gives you 4 table races to watch. Not sure if you qualify 4 teams out of every conference, or if you use a wildcard system. Both versions have their pros and cons. I prefer keeping it in conference means that the race is more focused between regional rivals which gives those games extra meaning. I'm also eager for a 16 team playoff. Get rid of the play in game, and just make it a straight bracket all the way. The top seed begins to have more value because the difference between a #1 seed and a #8 seed is going to be a lot bigger than the difference between #1 and #4 which is what we have now.
Single Table would require a 54 game season. Just not feasible. I was thinking of just having a one-and-done playoff where each round consists of one game at the higher seed's field, but after watching the MLS Cup I think that might lead to a lot of negative football. Last year, Garber said that MLS moved to a 12 team playoff format so that networks would know in the future what to and when to schedule for long range planning. I don't see them changing the format. The top team in each division will have a bye, while the second-place team in each division will host a play-in round game with one of the two conference wild cards that have the next best records (they could both be from the same division). It makes the conference mid- and lower-table games meaningful even at the end of the season for teams where a win, draw or loss could be the difference between hosting a play-in game and not making the playoffs at all. I don't know if there is such a concept of playing spoiler in the European leagues as there is in North American leagues.
shorten the regular season to 27 games. lengthen the playoffs....maybe make it a group stage format a la world cup. dont have mls cup in december.
I don't think the clubs would want to give up the revenue from 3 fewer home games (17 out of 34 to 14 out of 28 at home).
more playoff games, less regular season games = definetely more excitement/interest...probably equal or greater revenue.... plus,a few less home games per season is a chance for mls teams to be creative i.e. friendlies etc....(not that i have been a fan of those friendly matches)....on top of that...the regular season gamws during wqc/intl breaks/fifa tourneys are all weak anyway.....take those away and youre probably close to 28 game season already..... if you need to beef up the schedule...frontload it with something or take a break in summer for a 2 week us open cupo tourney/ccl.....
28 team league, four divisions: East DC Montreal NE NYCFC RBNY Philly Toronto Heartland Chicago Colorado Columbus KC Minnesota Salt Lake **Cincy/St. Louis/Detroit South Atlanta Dallas Houston Orlando *Miami **San Antonio ** Tampa/Charlotte/Nashville/Raleigh-Durham Pacific Vancouver Seattle Portland San Jose Galaxy *LAFC **Sacramento/San Diego Play each team in your own division twice for 12 games Play every other team once for 21 games. 33 games total. There is no real reason to have 34. Plus they will likely expand the MLS Cup tournament, so they will need more weeks for that.