NASL is no longer considering suing US Soccer for anti-trust over division 1 status

More seriously -- the one person I wonder about in all this is Peter Wilt. Maybe a league in which a third of the teams have ties to Wilt will be more stable? Beats having half the teams tied to Traffic.

 

I can promise you that part of the NASL sales pitch is not that "one day you could move your team up to MLS." They are way to arrogant for that. The sad thing is it should be their sales pitch.

 

Wilt always struck me as pragmatic and he may decide that putting a team in the USL is not the way to go with the new Chicago franchise. I would hope he goes forward with it and if the NASL isn't around the USL I think would love to have him but I think he said something to the effect "If we can't do this thing the right way, we won't do it at all" so we'll have to wait and see but I for one would love to see that Chicago team play somewhere.

 

I suspect most MLS fans don't follow the NASL that closely unless your team is trapped there (like those of us in Minneota -- thankfully not for much longer).

Here is the short history: The prior commissioner of the NASL was David Downs, and he had a sensible plan that was embraced by several ownership groups:

“The NASL’s goal is to be the No. 1 professional soccer in-stadium experience in Atlanta or in Miami or in San Antonio or in Tampa or in Minneapolis . . . To convince people of that and get their per game attendance from an average of 3,000-to-4,000 to 6,000-to-7,000, that would make them financially healthy. And that’s a pretty easy proposition.”

That plan persuaded new owners to get involved in the league like the Faiths in Edmonton, Gordon Hartman in San Antonio, and Bill McGuire in Minnesota.

http://fiftyfive.one/2016/09/the-damage-has-been-done/#sthash.3gnBHBX5.dpuf

The problem is that the Cosmos had a different plan, and when Peterson replaced Downs as commissioner the league became much more combative towards USSF and MLS in the hopes of becoming a second first division. Or getting admitted to MLS on the cheap -- more on that in a minute.

The plan was never well conceived because the Cosmos themselves seemed to lack the financial courage of their convictions. I can't give you a single link to any concise statement from the Cosmos, but over the years the owners seem to have cited the salary cap, single entity roster controls and an expansion fee they thought excessive for not pursing an MLS team. Later, the Division label was attacked as an unfair burden in attracting top talent.

But the Cosmos never delivered on any of this -- they set up shop in Hofstra (where even the original team struggled), they never spent heavily on a high quality roster (the money they saved by not buying into MLS) and with Traffic they pushed the rest of the owners into a battle they couldn't win. Ultimately, for the Cosmos this doesn't ever seem to have been about a competing vision for high end club soccer in this country based on higher payrolls and less centralized control, but some naïve believe that they could force MLS to take them on the cheap because they were that special. That was never going to happen in 2014 and it's not going to happen now.

As for the antitrust case, my guess is there is no one to pay the bills and Kessler isn't going to do this for free. Besides, USSF outflanked them when they essentially gave them what they asked for and backed off raising the criteria for Division 1, at least in some of the most objectionable ways. The second NASL objection -- that MLS, by controlling the board at USSF, has profited by bundling the leagues TV deals with USSF and fees paid to SUM -- will probably come up again in the USWNTPA negotiations over the CBA. That one isn't over yet IMO -- but for the NASL, it may be.

 

So... the Cosmos are sinking the NASL... again?

 

not everything- edmonton has to be bleeding millions over the past 3-4 years- their average attendance has been well under 3 000 (it is about 2 100 for 2016)- how long the soccer 'crazy' owners continue to accept loosing millions in a market that few care about the team is a mystery- but with the imminent demise of the nasl- and it must be imminent-, we will see what happens in edmonton

 

http://www.wralsportsfan.com/soccer/audio/16039175/

Great interview of Brian Straus and Steve Sandor regarding NASL and CPL.

Sounds like Ottawa wont join USL unless the Div 2 thing is sorted out (and they may not have enough $$ anyway). If NASL were to fold, the Eddies may not get an invite to USL due to the travel requirements for USL teams. This is a big indicator that there wont be a USL-2 USL-3 split anytime soon that so many on this board advocate for. One of USL's big selling points is regional play and reduced travel, which it loses if there is a 2/3 split (not enough teams yet)

 

The USSF has a big meeting about USL's D2 request, NASL's D1 request (lol), and other items yesterday and today.
We could be finding out really soon what soccer in the US and Canada will be looking like in the years to come.

 

SOON??!! think NEVER in our lifetime- joining a fool-hearty wholly canadian league that is an east-west structure will just not work - for example, vancouver is hooked to the traditions of a north-south structure- games vs portland, seattle and LA are usually classics- i wouldnt pay a dime to see vancouver play regina or hailfax is some semi-pro league... at best

the whitecaps have a reported value of just under $200 000 000- why the hell would they ever want to leave for some rinky-dink canadian league that has little chance of being anything more than a semi-pro league that will guarantee little reward beyond giving some talented young players more places to get experience? most cities will be lucky to average 3 000 paid customers (edmonton is averaging 2 100 as an NASL team and the owners must have lost millions and like to bleed money)

and if i had aspirations to be a professional soccer player, i would try to attach myself to the 3 Canadian MLS teams which offer a much better conduit to my goal through their USL affiliation which in the near future will have D2 status with the certain demise of NASL and some of their best cities attaching to USL

the CSA's goal of giving more opportunities for young players to develop is noble, but one has to wonder where the long-term finances will come from- personally, i think the idea about a canadian league is more about giving the impression that canada has a league of its own, thus offering a shot at hosting/joint hosting a WC, like 2026- the bidding starts in 2018, the proposed year for the CSA to launch its new league- how coincidental!! IMO, canada would still be a great WC host/joint host regardless if we have a national league or not

i think what needs to happen is for the CSA to invest their resources into solidifying teams in USL, either D2 or D3- montreal, vancouver, TO, ottawa, and maybe franchises in calgary, edmonton, hamilton, victoria, halifax, london and winnipeg- this would have better chance of surviving in the long-term

 

That and the CSA would bankrupt itself extracting the Canadian MLS teams out of MLS. I can't even imagine what the buyout/legal costs of such a thing would be.

 

Right, as soon as there's any sort of reorganization everyone starts imposing their "what if they could do pro/rel?" ideas on minor league soccer, which is NOT how it works in the United States.

It's why Minor League Baseball doesn't have pro/rel APART from the fact the teams are all affiliate teams - the cities in the league all typically play at the level at which the market can support.

 

I stated this in another thread.
All USL teams do not meet D2 requirements.
If the NASL folds, the USL would be in a position to do a very American version of Pro/Rel.
The USL could simply have a D3 league, where teams who do not meet D2 requirements can go until they are able to meet said requirements.
This would allow teams to move up or down, depending on their stadium/ownership/financial issues.

A perfect example would be the Austin Aztexs.
They are currently on hiatus, until they get their stadium issue resolved. This would allow them to operate at D3 level if they have to go back to using an American Football high school stadium. Then the Aztex could move up to D2 once they acquire a soccer specific stadium.

Teams would essentially be free to self relegate, or self promote, within the USL.

 

Really?

 

I actually think that would be worse. If you end up is in a situation where the D2 teams and/or D3 teams are too spread out, you end up really making things difficult with respect to travel costs. I'd prefer a single national D2 with every team that meets the current D3 standard. When we have enough willing to make a national D2 work, we carve that out, but only if it leaves us with a regional mix that makes the third tier viable.

 

Not going to happen; at least in the near future.

One of the biggest selling points for USL is regional play and the cost-savings from travel. There are not enough teams in the league to split into USL 2/ USL 3 and preserve regional play.

 

Correct, moreover they are owned by MLS.

 

Of course they are not. That would be incontheivable.

 

In its current form, you are correct.
I'm talking about what will be possible once the USL reaches 40 + teams.
Next season, regardless of what the NASL does, the USL will already be at 32 teams.
If the 2 NASL defections happen, then it will already be at 34.
MLS expansion will add more MLS II sides.
Should the NASL collapse, the USL could hit 40 + teams within 2 years (!). MLS expansion, in theory, will swell the number of teams in USL even further.
So yeah, the USL could seriously be in a position to do some very interesting things.

 

I seriously doubt you would see this because a very regionalized 40-team league is preferable to having two less regionalized 20-team leagues due to travel reasons.

 

What expansion are you aware of for USL in 2017? I only see 1 new independent team, Reno. That will make 30 except that Wilmington is going on hiatus so there are only 29 confirmed teams for 2017. What are the other 3 teams? I haven't heard of any MLS2 teams for next year for sure.

Nashville is scheduled to start in 2018.

 

You're not really understanding what I'm saying.
I'm saying that the USL is expanding at such a rate, that 50 to 60 teams is not too out of the question. Sure it sounds ridiculous, but suddenly no impossible.
A 30 team D2, and a 30 team D3 sounds good to me.
In the end, regional play is the more likely result. I'm simply dreaming over here.

 

I'm sure at some point Le Impact could relocate to St. Louis or New Orleans or something like that. TFC and VAN seem fine where they are.

 

You have me there. I had forgotten about the whole Wilmington to Baltimore deal.
And I was counting Nashville as a 2017 addition. The other team was San Diego, but that has not actually been verified as anything more than a rumor.
Most of the rumored additions won't happen until 2018 or later.