With stable MLS money now pouring into the league and Orlando setting the precedent that USL teams can make the jump (are now priority to jump?) , how many years until USSF gives D2 status back to the USL?
Probably not until some of the the other teams in the league catch up. Charlotte's dropping to the PDL and selling its spot in the league to a new club, but Dayton and Pittsburgh don't meet the stadium requirements for D2 and probably several owners don't meet the net worth and line of credit requirements.
I think the precendent was already set by other teams already. Your statment also implies that NASL stays static or has clubs fold which isn't the case. There is just as much potential if not more for a NASL team to move to MLS. We already have conversations regarding Minnesota and SA... I'm sure at some point Indy could be considered or Tampa Bay. Also as already stated USL Pro would need to meet the higher standard that NASL already has to meet. Regardless MLS isn't overly concerned by where a team comes from as long as it can meet the MLS standards based on what standard MLS wants to apply for a franchise to enter. Las Vegas has minimal lower league exposure but if an ownership group can overcome all the obstacles and check all the blocks they could get in just as quickly or quicker than a team in a lower division... NYCFC or ATL ring any bells?
They'd have to actually apply for it, which they don't seem inclined to do. Why would they have to? Who says they're "now priority to jump?" Why would they be? Where are you getting this? USL teams have to meet the USSF Professional Standards, and some of them already meet the D2-specific standards. Ownership capitalization, stadiums and market size are the big sticking points. USL Pro is, basically, the extension of the third-division league that US(IS)L has had going back almost 20 years (though re-contracted and re-organized). USL has no second division league because it has no inclination to have one. They are in a space that seems to work for them. And MLS money isn't exactly "pouring into the league." We don't know the conditions under which these MLSII teams are joining USL Pro (and in any case, Pittsburgh and Arizona and Austin aren't going to be seeing any of those franchise fees, whatever they are) and the only "MLS money" that seems to be flowing into teams' coffers isn't really flowing at all. It's just line items (some player salaries) that are being picked up by someone else.
USLPro may become D3 in name only. With either MLS Clubs owning or having a more involved partnership the talent of players may be on the level of NASL D2 As mentioned above there is still a lot to be worked out before anything can be official. Like will every USLPro club need to have a parent MLS club. Either leaving any independent club having to move to an Independent league. Would the USL exist with both independent and affilated clubs? Or would affilated or MLS owned USL clubs making a D2 investment with the independents staying in a USL Pro D3.
We need to stop saying this. Stop it. People who say "The NASL is Division II in name only" or "USL Pro may become Division III in name only" are silly. These aren't de facto assignations, they are actual designations. They mean things. They have actual milestones that have to be met. ( a ) Not likely and ( b ) There is a lot more that goes into a league's quality than its level of play.
http://www.sounderatheart.com/thefuture/2014/12/13/7387697/usl-pro-d2-ussf-report I'll just leave this here.
I like this. With some of the MLS owned USLPro clubs that are just looking to play their matches on a small practice field. The USSF D2 standard of a 5K stadium. It is unclear of where the future II clubs owned by MLS will not just do what the Galaxy did and play at a smaller secondary field that is really not of pro league standards.
Thinking about this on the train today, it came to me that the MLS CBA will be a real determinate of USL Pro's trajectory. One of the rumors is that the 1st team roster will be reduced. This would have an immediate impact as those bottom of the roster players will now likely move to USL Pro. Moving forward academy players, draftees and pretty much any 'diamond in the rough' find will make their way to USL Pro, for at least a time. Secondly will be how far the CBA goes towards improving the quality of MLS sides. The better the MLS gets as a whole the more 'edge' players will have to find their paychecks elsewhere. Those who have reached their peak and just can't hack it would go to the NASL, but for those who maybe just need rehab or some minutes would go down to the USL Pro affiliates. Next will be what incentives are given for academy player development. The more incentive given, the more resources MLS clubs will spend on expanding their Academy and improving facilities, including where their USL Pro teams play. Thoughts?
Your first paragraph pretty much sums up exactly the immediate impact of having a D-League affiliate/minor league club will have with MLS team and league strategy. The potential smaller 1st team roster could meet with resistance from the players for sure. Where the league and Mangement will point to expansion as providing more 1st team roster spots overall in the MLS
Not sure this is the right thread to discuss this, but I can't rep this enough. I enjoy this type of discussion and talk about it often. I think the MLS roster size SHOULD be reduced. Homegrown players SHOULD sign USL deals and not MLS deals. Draft picks SHOULD sign USL deals ... it SHOULD be nearly impossible for a player to leave the academy or college and get significant minutes with MLS ... so why FORCE MLS teams to "hide" them on the MLS roster. The only reason to sign these players is to get them on a professional contract so if they chose to leave the country MLS teams (or USL teams) can get compensated. The draft should be 1 round for MLS, rounds 2-5 should be for USL teams (MLS2 squads included). MLS teams should reduce roster size, artificially raising the minimum, dropping vets with little upside, moving GA's, HG's, draft picks and other young players to the USL payroll where they may actually play. This will push teams without MLS 2 teams to form them in the next couple of years. That would bring the number of USL clubs up over 30 (and likely close to 40 when you add USL expansion teams). At that point, (bringing this back to the topic of the thread), you could divide USL Pro into a D2 and D3 league, with teams that meet D2 standards moving up ... and possibly rel/pro between them. With D2 a smaller national league, and D3 more regional. In the end, you have 20-24 MLS2 teams, 20-30 USL teams playing on 2 tiers, mixed together, all in the name of developing players and providing jobs for players not up to MLS levels of play.
I'm with you. It's getting to the point where if you care about American Soccer as a whole, you need to care about MLS. The investments teams are making in their academies (it's crazy that last year MLS teams spent more on their Academies than was spent on players salaries 10 years ago, that is a paradigm shift) and now in their USL teams is fundamentally changing the development path of US players, in a very, very good way.
http://www.sbisoccer.com/2015/01/welcoming-continued-expansion.html Lot of stuff there ... mention of D2.
Interesting, until the writer stuck his nose in and mentioned pro/rel. Even though everything else in the article suggests we are heading to a minor league system similar to baseball's.
I'm not entirely sure we are. Soccer is more likely to mix developmental squads (MLS2 squads) with independent squads (more and more USL squads will become fully independant as MLS squads form their own MLS2 squad and USL expands). This is much closer to the Spanish/German pyramid ... as opposed to England (which the develpmental squads pretty much only face other developmental "reserve" squads). I'm not an advocate of pro/rel (or someone saying it's a MUST), but I don't mind the option of it later on. I think once MLS max's out and more markets enter ... and D3 can be strictly regional ... I think there's some good options as to how to handle the US pyramid when that happens. Anything to bring more $$ into the game is something you have to look at. Yes there's risk with over spending, but I think it's something USSF needs to look at (MLS won't ... it's just not in their best interest).
your right. Seeing how beneficial baseball minor league system is. NHL has had it with the AHL and the NBA D-League has also been very effective. Again the pro/rel is brought up. NO MLS club will want its direct minor/D-League team relegated to a lower division. As well if the USLPro does go D2 officially that would mean the financial standard worth of an ownership group would be a big increase. That will be no issue for MLS directly owned or co-owned clubs. As for any new independent clubs you can bet this expansion boom will slow down considerably. Now USL may have a D3 league as well for these clubs which could really boom. But again there will be no pro/rel between the two. For the obvious financial costs of owing D2 to D3. As well as MLS clubs never going to allow there top minor club to play against lesser competition.
USL has some pretty big plans for expanding to 40 plus teams. I will be curious to see if some of the bigger cities, Charlotte, Sacramento (if they should not get an MLS bid), would choose to move to the NASL for marketing regions. Clubs like this who will have the stadium requirements and dollar requirements to own D2. It may be hard to drum up a lot of interest playing MLS2 teams and true minor league cities like Harrisburg, Charleston, Wilmington etc. While they see NBA and NFL teams from Indy, San Antonio, Tampa. Railhawks being in Raleigh area likely benefit market wise by having NHL cities Calgary, EDM, Tampa, etc. opposed to the true minor cities and MLS2 teams. JMO
I think some of it will depend on how much they favor regional play vs bigger cities. USL could add teams in Detroit, Nashville, Milwaukee, etc. as well ... and if the MLS2 teams have players populating the USMNT Youth squads (U20/U23) ... like say Bradford Jamison for Galaxy2 ... then I think the marketing would be easier to the soccer fans that follow the US teams. Hard to say. I'll be honest, anyone who says they KNOW what's going to happen (be it ticket sales, marketing efforts, what ownership groups think about playing MLS2 squads, etc.) ... probably don't.
To be fair.. The author isn't the one sticking their nose in pro/rel. It was part of the subsequent rumors after the initial rumors of USL applying for D2 status came out. Follow-on rumors expanded the initial rumors to include USL-Pro splitting into D2 and D3 leagues, with pro/rel between the two.
So the USL is dropping PRO from their name and getting a snazzy new logo. In the release they slip this into their vision moving forward: This year the League will apply for USSF Division 2 sanctioning to accurately reflect the quality of our league, our ownership groups, our stadiums and our fans. We are United. http://www.uslsoccer.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=32800&ATCLID=209874501&SPLASH_SET=YES So now that we know that the USL is actually going to challenge the NASL for D2 status, how long do people think it will be before they have it?
It will be a bad look for USSF if they adjust the "D2 requirements" to allow USL to be D2. If all USL teams can meet those requirements then they should be granted D2 status. Either way, it will be interesting to watch. I hope USSF doesn't give too many "exemptions" to make it happen either. Ideally, USL splits into a D2 and D3 with pro/rel just to see how it works ... with D2 being "national" and D3 being "regional". But USL is a good 15 teams away from doing that IMO. So maybe by 2017 or so?
Why does USL have to "challenge" NASL for D2 Status? Can there be only 1? Also ... IF NASL tries to go after some D1.5 status ... I hope the USSF simply bumps the D2 requirements up to meet this if they see it as advantagous of keeping the MLS/NASL/USL in seperate divisions. If the USL is going after D3 ... the only thing I can see stopping them (without a USSF "exception") is the net worth of the ownership groups. There are a few stadiums that need the capacity upgraded to 5k, but I don't see any that can't make it work without HUGE facility upgrades (and presumably, they'll have a year+ to make it happen). I don't expect there to be a huge need to divide the USL up between the "have's" (D2) and "have nots" (D3) ... although they could get there in the next few years. The 75% in a market 750k and up is already covered (even if you take out the MLS2 markets, which you shouldn't) there are 12 of 16 USL clubs that meet that (75% exactly). I don't see any other issues with it.