So why are the playoff bids so unbalanced toward the Western Conference, with the Central Conference getting the shaft? The West gets 3 of 8 teams in the playoffs (two play for the conference title, and Ottawa automatically into the final four). The Northern Conference gets 7 of 14 teams (regular season champ gets a bye, two teams from each division play the first round). The Central, with even more teams (15) than the North, gets only 4 bids. Maybe the Central can petition to get three teams from each division into the playoffs. They should have originally pushed for three divisions instead of two. (USL seems to want two teams from each division in the playoffs at all levels, with the exemption for Ottawa.) Heaven forbid that the Western winner plays Ottawa in the national sem-final. That would result in the case of that micro-sized conference getting a sure bid into the final. The W-League should revisit this before the season starts, and eliminate the unbalance toward the Central.
Well, your president is unbalanced... Nobody is getting the shaft. Well, to start with, Ottawa is in the larger Eastern Conference, not the Western. http://wleague.uslsoccer.com/home/65358.html Ottawa gets a bye in the four team Finals Tournament as host (which they deserve, as they were one of four finalists last year). That is necessary for the attendance and finacial success of the tournament. Central got two of the four last year, host Hampton Roads and Chicago, so that evens out over the years. Ottawa still competes in the qualifying playoffs so as to be able to become the Conference Champions, and if they are conference champions the second-place Eastern Conference team advances to the final, which is fair. It is important to point out that the purpose of the Conference playoffs is to practically qualify a Conference Champion for the Final Tournament: http://wleague.uslsoccer.com/home/67049.html ...so each Conference has to come to a fair way to do it. The decisions were probably left to the teams in each conference to work out, not imposed by the League office in Tampa. Your complaint also seems to be that the number of qualifying playoffs to determine a Central Conference Champion to send to the final tournament is less. That's because there are a lower number of divisions (two) because geographically it would be unfair for some teams for travel reasons to span the southeast and the midwest. If the Central Conference wanted it's two divisons to have an extra set of playoffs, they could probably have them, but it would render the division regular season meaningless if 4/7 or 4/8 teams qualified for the qualifications. If, as you suggest, they have the top three qualify, they would also need to have a bye for the first round to the top team in the conference like the Eastern. This is also bad for two other reasons: 1. The travel for the unfortunate teams that have to play a team from the other distant division. 2. The leader of the regular season in the Mid-west Division would have an advantage of probably getting more regualr season points because of the large number (4 of the 8, especially considering the dominance of Chicago Cobras over the other returning teams) of new teams than the leader of the Atlantic division. I'm sure the Central Division was consulted and they advised that they preferred the playoff structure that they got. I'm sure that if they petitioned for more qualifiers, they would get them, but there is probably no such desire. Perhaps pressure from their fans, anxious to see their teams in the playoffs, would be enough to change this, but as it stands now, it makes little sporting or cost sense. The Eastern Conference needs more playoffs so that there are divisional playoffs period. It needs more divisions because that's how geographically it naturally divides. Also, the divisions are a lot more evenly balanced, with fewer expansion teams and the expansion teams having a strong basis because of past activities (for example, the Sudbury Canadians proved stronger than some of the W-League games in exhibiton games in the last season). The bye given to the Eastern Confernce regular season leader therefore, besides being mathematically necessary, is justified because of the stronger divisions and the fact that there is more even strength between the divisions. The alignment, and the resulting qualification playoff and Final tournament setup, is the only practical way to run the league. The W-League is an amateur league, unlike the A-League and WUSA ,(which is why the players can still play in the colege system of the US and Canada), and there is a lot less money around for them to have the travel involved for interconference play. This is also probably a factor for fewer qualifying playoffs in the second. It is truly wonderful that we have such a great league as the W-League with such great athletes despite the financial and other obstacles. The Western Conference has 8 teams, one division and a horrendous travel schedule. They only get two teams in the qualifying playoffs, so if any conference should complain (and they are not) about the playoff structure, they should. If the Western Conference and the Central Conference winners after the qualifiers need more games so they won't get stale prior to the Final tournament, they can always schedule one or two friendlies, as they won't be meeting in the opening games of the Finals.
Thanks for The Correction Thanks for that correction, El Gato, it wasn't clear from reading the USL dispatches. I see from looking at RSSSF that Hampton Roads did get a non-competing bye into the final tournament last year(they did finish well ahead in the Atalntic Division, so it didn't stop their motivation to succeed). I have to say that until Edmonton was awarded a franchise this year, I only paid half attention to the W-League. Incidentally, because of geography, we have the bye structure for hosts in a number of Canadian sports setups, including Junior and sub-NHL hockey, and Collegiate sports, and the host still competes in the qualifying play-offs. It's clear from looking at these competitions that the desire to be Conference or Regional Champions overcomes any desire to coast, and often it is the second place team from the Conference/Region that is given the bye when the finals host finishes first through the play-offs. I can see where there may be a jaundiced view of this practice. Of course, the host award is usually given to a team that has made it to the finals in the previous year I still think that the current playoff structure, with perhaps the addition of qualifying playoff spots for the Central and Western Divisions once the new franchises become stronger, is the only practical way to go. That goes for the alignment too.