I don't think teams will tank either but if they did they'd be dumb. Not only would you get a tougher 1st round opponent you also might run the risk of not hosting MLS Cup Final.
"Quebec's provincial government, owner of Canada's biggest stadium, will spend $200-million to $300-million to replace the Big O's 20-year-old roof, a public-safety hazard peppered with 8,000 patched holes. On hearing the news, critics familiar with the stadium's flaws, the $32-million the province spends each year to run and fix it, and the $1.5-billion, 30-year saga to pay for construction, immediatey asked, "Why not just tear it down?" The answer irritates many sports fans, taxpayers and economists: Montreal's Olympic Stadium is preserved thanks to a combination of inertia, nostalgia, civic pride, cheap land, small-scale usefulness, solid concrete and the province's preference for a predictable annual budget over fear of runaway demolition and redevelopment costs. More than $100-million has been steadily sunk into fixing up the stadium in the past decade and a similar amount is being spent over the next 10 years – not including the roof. "When you add up all the factors, there really is no choice but to put on a new roof. It's unavoidable," says Julie Boulet, the Quebec Tourism Minister, who is in charge of the stadium. "When you add up all the elements, logic dictates it." https://www.theglobeandmail.com/new...g-o-montreals-olympicstadium/article37169871/
I'm going to miss having the final in December. It's become like a part of the holiday season for me in recent years.
I like it for its simplicity and for the fact that it does the best job of creating season long competition throughout the entire table. Without Pro/Rel, increasing the teams to 7 in each conf is really the only way to make the season relevant for the middle and bottom of the table. Teams 1-7 are fighting for playoff position to be able to host games. Teams 8-12 are fighting to get in the playoffs. If they reduce the number of teams in the playoffs to say 10 (5 from each conf.) then mathematically the 14 (and soon 18) teams will be done way before the end of the season.
Teams would be foolish to tank at all. Teams in the last few playoff spots typically are in a fraught position with high likelihood of not making the playoffs at all. There are usually several teams with a chance for the last few spots. Tanking could backfire terribly.
A lot of teams playing cold home games in febreary or play the final in december, maybe in a cold stadium. I prefer the 2nd option.
I'm open to seeing how this goes. Unlike many here, I liked the two game aggregate format. I do like the final being earlier and thus more likely to be in good weather, plus before the international break. I favor re-bracketed the seeds, but I get having fixed brackets is nice for pools and fan competitions. I wish, one day, they would go to one open bracket so we could have a final between two teams from the same region (or if the two best teams are from one conference, they could face each other in final), but I knew I was probably not going to get that. I don't mind 7 teams with just one bye, it keeps the season interesting for middle teams. Plus, the one off games five a clear advantage to higher seeds.
Counterpoint: 1. The cost control measures minimize the extent that MLS can have a true caste system compared to major European leagues, and that's unlikely to ever go away. 2. If we don't have something to reward regular season performance we're cutting into what few incentives do exist for owners to invest in their teams, infrastructure, etc. This falls within the realm of "It will always be something," because as is people say there's little incentive to try for home field advantage since that is less important now. Edit: Just realized I responded to something that wasn't the last post in the thread! Guess my enthusiasm should allow the phone to finish downloading content first, eh?
"14 of the league's 24 teams will qualify for the postseason" So teams in the bottom half can also qualify? Pathetic
Shrug. 6 of those 14 will get one game only. After the first game we'll be down to 8. If trying to get at least one playoff game keeps owners investing in their clubs rather than settling for being a bottom feeder, it's a positive.
I get the idea of this and agree...if the league played a balanced schedule. Since that isn't an option I think it has to stay with conferences and not an open bracket. It may appear that the best two teams are in the same conference simply because their conference is weaker.
On the other hand, even when settling for being a bottom feeder a team can still stay in contention for the playoff right up until the end or even qualify as the 7th team. So why do extra investment when bottom-feeding investment is sufficient.
What good are the playoffs to the owner if they get no home games? It is just more money spent on traveling. I am sure they get a cut of something but nothing like hosting.
When you're a team like the Revs, the definition of a "successful" season is contending for a playoff spot. Not necessarily making the playoffs, but contending. So as long as they can say "we were this close," everything is fine in Kraftville. No need to spend money and bring in a couple of new players who might actually make the team better. As long as we're within budget, that's all that matters.
Not really. Let's look at the past 3 years. 2016: 7th place team in the East had 42 points, 8th had 41, and 9th had 36. West went 44, 39, 38. 2017: East went 45, 42, 39 and West went 46, 45, 36. 2018: East went 46, 41, 36 and West went 48, 47, 38. Eighth place is about the cut-off for being in the play-off race as of now. The closest a 9th place team finished to 7th in the past 3 years is 6 points in 2016 in both conferences. Two extra wins is a tough ask. Also, in 2016 (East), 2017 (West), and 2018 (West) the 8th place team was fighting to make the play-offs right at the end anyway. And as you add teams it will be harder to jump up into that 8th place position to be fighting for the last spot unless you make some sort of investment. And even if a team like that managed to sneak into the play-offs, they'd need to win 4 games on the road to lift the cup. Not a single team that has finished 7th in the past 3 years has even managed to win 4 road games during the regular season of the year they finished 7th. In fact, of all the teams that have finished 7th or worse in the past three years, only Vancouver (2016), RSL (2017), LAG (2017), Van (2018), LAG (2018) have managed 4 or more road wins throughout the length of the regular season.
My biggest argument against this format is extending the number of playoff teams further rewarding mediocrity. I'm sorry but if you are 14th of 28 teams you don't even deserve a shot at glory in a competition that has pretensions of taking serious account of regular season form. I understand the argument of keeping the conferences interesting and minimising dead rubbers toward end of season but not at the cost of undermining the achievement of winning the major prize. Personally I would like to see just 4 teams from each conference advance and go straight to a quarter final knockout 1v4 2v3 for a short version or two groups of 4 teams in round robin competition with two top teams facing off for final in longer version.
Percentage-wise, 14/24 = 58% is one of smaller fractions qualifying for the playoffs in MLS history. It used to be 80%. As recently as 2016 it was 60%.
Well done Commish. However, condensing the season to run congruent with MLB is 90'sish MLS. Just to avoid FIFA dates in November. MLS used to play during the World Cup!
The playoffs provide prime TV content, which in turn raises the value of MLS media contracts. And apparently most folks at MLS and their broadcasting partners feel this move should yield more eyes and money down the road.
I was referring to someone who said an owners goal could be to just get the 7th spot. See below. They were questioning why someone would make extra investment to try to be better than 7th. So my response was specific to an owner gunning for the 7th spot and not just playoffs in general. I completely understand the value of playoffs to the league. I don't however see the value to an individual owner trying to make the playoffs but get no home games.