Is the Two-Leg Aggregate Random on Purpose, to Promote Parity?

Discussion in 'MLS: General' started by Stan Collins, Sep 20, 2017.

  1. Stan Collins

    Stan Collins Member+

    Feb 26, 1999
    Silver Spring, MD
    This is from an article that is mostly about the league considering moving to single elimination playoffs, and why it is unlikely to happen:

    https://www.fourfourtwo.com/us/feat...-rules-changes-single-elimination-2018-season

    Which is very interesting, because it implies that:

    1) The era of parity, at least as we knew it, is perceived to be over by a lot of the league's owners
    2) Therefore, a lot of those owners want a playoff system that deliberately masks the talent difference between teams, in order to give them a better shot in the playoffs.

    I've always had a problem with the aggregate, and especially away goals, but this logic bugged me. If you have a problem on point 1, point 2 is not the way you ought to be addressing that.
     
    superdave and JasonMa repped this.
  2. Baysider

    Baysider Member+

    Jul 16, 2004
    Santa Monica
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    This is the reason that's been given before, which also seems to make sense.
     
  3. Stan Collins

    Stan Collins Member+

    Feb 26, 1999
    Silver Spring, MD
    Yeah, that part I get, although it might be criticized as short run thinking. (If more people are paying attention to your playoffs, eventually your league is going to be better off for that.)

    It's the idea that small-market ownership doesn't want single-elimination precisely because it is more likely to reward the better team that would be more irksome.
     
  4. superdave

    superdave Member+

    Jul 14, 1999
    VB, VA
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I've long had a hard time getting excited about two leg playoffs in MLS for a few reasons, one of them being that it makes the playoffs even more of a crapshoot. When they went to away goals as a tie breaker, that was the straw that broke the camel's back; I watch the play in games and the final. The rest of it, I'll catch the 2nd leg if I'm interested, skip it otherwise.

    I doubt there's a bigger, more persistent/obnoxious proponent of single game knockouts on bigsoccer than me.

    They also could end the season 3 weeks earlier; they'd eliminate 2 weeks from eliminating the first leg, and they'd eliminate another week by missing the international date. Alternatively, the could end the season at the same time and eliminate 1 weekday match for each team.

    It's not the biggest deal in the world, but I don't know if I can think of a decision MLS has made since Garber became Commish that I disagreed with more. Even Chivas USA wasn't this bad.
     
  5. Initial B

    Initial B Member

    Jan 29, 2014
    Club:
    Ottawa Fury
    What's also interesting about this is that they're saying that MLS would increase the length of the season by about 10 days. That would be enough time to probably add 4 more games to the schedule, which would allow the league to expand to 32 teams in four 8-team divisions.
     
  6. newtex

    newtex Member+

    May 25, 2005
    Houston
    Club:
    Houston Dynamo
    4 games in ten days? I'm skeptical of that.

    This year the regular season ends on October 22. The FIFA window starts on November 6. MLS could easily add games on the weekends of October 29-30 and November 4-5. The only way you could add 4 games, though, would be to have every team play mid-week and on the weekend for the last two weeks straight. The league doesn't ever do that now.

    Besides, you can arrange the schedule for 32 teams into 34 games however you want if you use divisions. Frankly, once the league gets to 28 teams I'd rather see 4 independent conferences instead of divisions within two conferences. But that probably won't happen either.
     
  7. KCbus

    KCbus Moderator
    Staff Member

    United States
    Nov 26, 2000
    Reynoldsburg, OH
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I've never been a fan of straight single-elimination. I don't understand why you'd play a 34-match season that spans more than eight months and then play the playoffs like you need to catch a cab.

    I also reject the notion that promoting parity is the reason for the format. The parity's already built into the cake. In a salary cap league, the distance between the top and the bottom is always going to be reduced, which means the games will always be more competitive. That will be the case no matter what format you choose.

    I think the reason for having two-legged playoffs is both business-related and sporting-related. Business: having two legs means more soccer, which means more tickets sold, including a home match for a club that wouldn't otherwise have one in any particular round. Sporting: The longer a series goes, the more likely it is the more deserving club wins. Shorter = more chance of a fluke result. (And don't anyone waste time bringing out stats here. When I say "more deserving club", I don't mean the team with more points during the season; I mean the team that played a better series.)

    And frankly, the reason I'm in favor of two-legged series is the one I've listed. I don't think it makes much sense to have a team qualify for the postseason, potentially make it all the way to MLS Cup, and its fans could never see a home playoff game.

    That said, I think the away-goal tiebreaker is so ridiculous in a seeded/home-field advantage playoff format that I'm actually willing to consider single-elimination. At least then, you'd have a straight winner and a straight loser as opposed to a made up tiebreaker.
     
  8. Stan Collins

    Stan Collins Member+

    Feb 26, 1999
    Silver Spring, MD
    #8 Stan Collins, Sep 21, 2017
    Last edited: Sep 21, 2017
    I will also assume these are the reasons this thread was moved to General, even though it's a well-known writer who has sources among league ownership telling you your sporting reason is precisely wrong (both in that it does not work as predicted, and that the owners are fully aware of that fact). As, frankly, would any casual survey of the actual results of single elimination vs two-leg aggregate.

    https://www.fourfourtwo.com/us/feat...lysis-format-importance-of-finishing-top-four
     
  9. KCbus

    KCbus Moderator
    Staff Member

    United States
    Nov 26, 2000
    Reynoldsburg, OH
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I'm not understanding what you're trying to say here.
     
  10. Stan Collins

    Stan Collins Member+

    Feb 26, 1999
    Silver Spring, MD
    The sources among ownership are saying that one of the reasons the series is longer (not the first one, mind, but still one of them) is that the small market owners believe that better team is less likely to win it. Looking at historical records between the conference semis/conference finals on one hand, and the play-in round on the other, confirms this belief is true.
     
  11. KCbus

    KCbus Moderator
    Staff Member

    United States
    Nov 26, 2000
    Reynoldsburg, OH
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Well, of COURSE it is.

    In a two match playoff, the "better" team has to play a road game, while they wouldn't have to in a single match playoff. That's going to shift things.

    But,as I've already said, the "more deserving team" isn't the one that amassed more regular season points -- it's the one that plays better during the series. I think THAT is the reason they want two legs. It's so the lower-seeded team has a fighting chance, but the higher-seeded team does retain some advantage (the home second leg). But that's a different reason than "promoting parity". Because in any given year, a league underdog could be the higher seeded team playing against a "superclub" they finished ahead of.
     

Share This Page