Sure, but it's practically never mentioned in broad-reach media on the subject. Twitter rants and bleacher reports will be what they are, but it's also overlooked in the long-form, supposedly thoughtful takes by good writers who should know better.

 

The mass media also continues to call summer amateur leagues designed around maintaining college eligibility the "fourth division".

The facts are all out there. It's just a matter of listening and paying attention instead of just getting caught up in the stream of worlds.

The signal to noise issue is what it is.

 

The average English League Champiolnship lost about 13 million dollars last year. The total debt of the league was nearly 300 million. Only one team made money. Even if your scale down the costs for a US 2nd division in pro/reg situation, how many NASL/USL teams can afford to lose millions of dollars a year?

 

Also, this thing about "no one offers $4 billion without market data"... the other problem here is that it assumes Silva made a serious $4 billion offer.

When you make an offer to someone who is contractually prohibited from accepting it, or even from negotiating a deal, it is by definition not a serious offer.

 

Canada will have pro/rel through the Canadian Premier League once Division 1 gets to 16 clubs.

CPL said so before the league even starts and that's why I think that MLS can't have it. MLS never planned for it so it's implementation would be very hard, if not impossible

 

Condescend much?

 

Ditto.

 

It's okay Ruffles, the Chicago Fire are good again!

 

To be fair, the lack of competition in Europe's top leagues isn't due to pro/rel. It is because European leagues don't have a salary carp. Theoretically, you could design a pro/rel system such that tier 1 has a $10 million salary cap, tier 2 has a $2.5 million salary cap and tier 3 has a $1 million salary cap. This would ensure relatively even competition within the various leagues.

 

Nothing from Sleater Kinney?
Come on man!

 

PRO / REL will happen in MLS when it makes economic sense. Right now, I cannot even imagine what that economic model would look like for it to make sense and can't envision it in my lifetime. On the other hand, I never would have bet the US would have hosted a World Cup in my life time when I was a teenager playing the beautiful game; and, I could never have envisioned a 26-team domestic league with billionaires who owned teams in other sports investing in a league averaging over 20K fans per game when I sat in a what felt like an empty Old Sombrero watching the Tampa Bay Mutiny play the Revolution I believe.

 

Does P/R makes economic sense anywhere?.. I'm not talking about the promoted teams... I'm talking an economic sense league/federation wide. Is there any economic reality that says Pro / Rel is beneficial for a league?

 

I'd be okay with a wage haddock.

UEFA giants aren't going to agree to that though. In fact, the EU might even see it as a breach of labour laws because you're capping a person's earnings below what the market might otherwise support.

But the G14 types have spent years leveraging increased money and power. Just look at the UCL berths. The EPL even strong-armed lower leagues into accepting certain aspects of the EPPP.

 

I think it is more likely that the UEFA giants will enact a salary cap and restrict pro/rel than MLS will enact pro/rel, but that wasn't my point. Both of those possibilities are unlikely.

My point was if MLS enacts pro/rel, then MLS will probably still keep some type of salary cap maintaining the overall competitiveness of the first division.

 

I'd prefer a cap.

I've grown to like parity.

 

While I like the idea of pro/rel myself, I also think its proponents (including myself) view it as if it would be implemented in a vacuum. In an idealistic world, everyone in the pyramid would be fine with the concept of promotion and relegation. However, the proprietors, casual fans, city planning boards, etc. would definitely see relegation as their "reward" for their money (the big one), time, and effort spent.

As some have mentioned, the system was implemented in various countries around the world because there was a plethora of teams that could compete at the highest level. In the United States, we aren't quite there. Garber's already stated his desire for 28 teams in MLS, so we can fully expect there to be 28 teams in MLS pretty soon.

Logic would dictate that there would need to be around twice that many teams competing at a high level to justify promotion and relegation. Personally, I would rather see MLS follow the model of other leagues and cut down to about 20 teams.

I think the notion that the passion around the game here will intensify because of pro/rel is misguided. The opposite is true: when the United States (as a whole) falls in love with the game, the idea of a pro/rel system will be justifiable. For now, that seems a long way off.

 

the us/canada has rel/pro this whole time:

Defunct soccer leagues in the United States aka Regged:
Outdoor

ALPF (1894–95) NAFL (1895–1921)
ASL (1921–33) ASL (1933–83) ASL (1988–89)
NASFL (1946–47) USA (1967) NPSL (1967)
NASL (1968–84)
USL (1984–85)
WSA (1985–89)
LSSA (1987–92)
APSL (1990–96)

Indoor/Arena

MISL (1978–92) NPSL (1984–2001) CISL (1993–97)
EISL (1997–98) WISL (1998–2001)
MISL (2001–08) MISL (2008–14)
AISL (2002–08) XSL (2008–09)

Women's

WUSA (2001–03) WPS (2009–11) USL W-League (1995–2015)

Canadian Defunct men's leagues aka Regged

Canadian National Soccer League
Canadian Soccer League (1987–92)
Open Canada Cup
Victoria Challenge Cup
USL First Division D2 Pro League (2010)

Defunct women's leagues

W-League (1995–2015)

MLS Defunct aka Regged teams:

Miami Tampa Bay Chivas USA San Jose Earthquakes

Promoted Teams:

Portland Timbers, San Jose Earthquakes, Montreal Impact, Orlando City Sc Toronto FC Vancouver Whitecaps FC Minnesota United FC Seattle Sounders FC

 

Belittle, ridicule, marginalize.
Typical holier than thou condescension from your side.
You can practically set your clock by it.

If a reasonable Pro/Rel system had existed, the USL Tulsa Roughnecks would have either been relegated to the 4th division after winning only 5 matches and finishing dead last in 2016, or at the very least remained mired in the 3rd division with a much improved side capable of potentially winning its way into the 2nd division.

In our current system of financial Pro/Rel, the Roughnecks are:
1. Rewarded handsomely with D2 status despite an absolutely dreadful season in 2016.
2. Able to realize a huge potential profit by selling the club (this fall) for a good 5-10 times more than the 3rd division USL territorial rights were originally purchased for.
3. Able to improve from horrific to mediocre this season by opening their purse strings in anticipation of realizing the profit referred to above.
4. Able to continue to marginalize my local (defacto) 4th division club, who cannot win promotion no matter how much they win, and are blocked out of participating in the USL for as long as the Tulsa Roughnecks owners continue to hold onto local USL territorial rights.

 

Ah, how I've missed these little discussions.

1. Nice to see USL rewarded for building a solid league.
2. And to think they said you couldn't get a good ROI in closed leagues.
3. Nice to see that ROI invested back into the club.
4a. How about NASL?
4b. I have it on good authority that the Roughnecks were for sale recently. Opportunity missed?
4c. If you start a team in a semi-pro league in a closed system, you can't really have an expectation of promotion.
4d. Perhaps relocation could be an option. Does Hawaii have a D1 or 2 team these days?

 

I haven't. Much more interesting discussing the subject at hand with those who don't play mind games or attempt to act as contrarian gatekeeper in a restrictive bigsoccer thread.

The USSF made the rather arbitrary decision to change the status of a 29 team league rather than "promote" the individual clubs in it who met (or were closest to meeting) all the standards. MLS2 sides are in violation of some basic standards of D2. The only independent sides who IMHO truly belong in D2 are, for the most part, the very same sides who consider themselves both short term and long term candidates for MLS.

Rochester owners have already said the current D2 model is unsustainable for them while Colorado Springs owners admit that if they tried to apply to USL as a D2 expansion team they'd be rejected.

USL Tulsa did not get a ROI based on ownership growing the fanbase and fielding a strong competitive club playing in an appropriate venue. Or by winning promotion on the field of play. That would be different. Their ROI will be, for the most part, based on a bureaucratic USSF "promotion" to D2 from D3. Convenient that their value rose near the end of a 3 year commitment despite having what was rumored last season to be one of the lowest player payrolls in the league.

Since the NASL does not field a D3 league, the NPSL's Tulsa Athletic had no other choice if they wanted to more effectively compete with the local USL team than to partner with a potential majority owner for a 2nd division NASL team in a soccer war death match much like what happened last season in Yukon, Oklahoma.... coulda been nice though, as an NASL club playing a full season probably would have bolstered our standing with our stadium landlords...Tulsa Athletics officials in discussions with NASL for pro soccer status

I think my side would probably have more interest in buying Rayo OKC on the cheap and using the savings to construct a 4k-6k capacity modular stadium rather than overpay for a side whose league wouldn't take kindly to changing the name and rebranding from Roughnecks to Athletic.

If Hawaii wants a team to compete with Fresno, Sac, Vegas and Reno, then they can either fork over $5mil+ to join USL as an expansion team or they can make an attractive offer to the minority and majority owners of the Tulsa Roughnecks to buy and relocate that team. Or they can hope the owners unilaterally decide to relocate, much like what potato chip magnate Ward Lay Jr did when he moved his NASL franchise that had been playing in San Antonio in 1975 & 1976 to Honolulu to become Team Hawaii in 1977.

The minority owners (Energy FC) don't want the in-state rival they paid $$$ for USL's territorial rights in 2013 to relocate, while the majority owners (Drillers AA ballclub) don't want the bad publicity of selling the club off to Memphis or New Orleans or Birmingham to inspire a fan/sponsor backlash directed towards their ballclub.

 

I was being sarcastic.

 

Just to clarify a point, do you think it would've been better to bump NASL to D3 than grant USL D2 status? Given that doing so would've meant two more clubs jumping ship and the league folding, USSF was in a bind. Loose interpretation of standards meant provisional D2 for both leagues, while strict interpretation meant killing one. It is what it is.

 

CLUBS > leagues

I think USSF should have stepped in (a bit similar to 2010 but not really) and this time designate individual clubs as 2nd or 3rd division and/or approve several clubs on the fence as provisional D2's rather than have 2 leagues with blanket D2 approval on a provisional basis and no 3rd division, despite some 2nd division standards that seem rather aspirational when it comes to financial net worth and plans for soccer specific stadiums?

Based on the intent of 2nd division standards I think NASL teams in Indy, Miami, and Carolina would be D2 since NASL doesn't have a D3 but the rest would likely be designated provisional D2 with 2-3 yrs to get it together or be forced to either fold or join a D3 league. Oddly, the impetus for Pro/Rel is coming from 3 different leagues (NISA, NPSL, NASL) who don't really have a snowball's chance in hell of making it work in the next 3 or 4 years... while the only league currently in a decent position to implement it in the next 3 or 4 years would be USL.

Teams who'd remain in USL 3rd division or at the very least only have provisional D2 status as individual clubs: All 8 MLS2 teams plus Orange County, Charlotte, Harrisburg, and Pittsburgh and several others based on minimum salary requirements (You can't be paying ramen noodle wages if you want to compete in D2). Phoenix and RGV would be D2 based on stadium construction and an anticipated bump in attendance.

Expand the leagues from there for the next three years and allow for some interdivisional play between teams in the same "regional pod" (a term I heard once on a phone call with USL's director of franchise development) to reduce travel costs and encourage more localized rivalries... treat them a bit like non-conference games and let those games count in the standings.

And never again allow a team that only wins five matches in a thirty game season "promotion" into a higher division for any reason. EVER.

 

No.
Really?