Yes. But it will never happen.... For now, best to have MLS teams and work on successful USL teams...
I'm all for it!But the problem that we have in this country is that nobody wants to step up and start something(on our own)....
NHL... CFL... But yeah, I get your point. Canada needs to grow up and stop suckling off the American teat so much.
? Australia-New Zealand in the A-League is pretty much analagous to the US-Canada in MLS. Both leagues take two predominantly English speaking countries with similar cultures and a tradition of cross border sports leagues coupled with soccer as a non-traditional sport (Hell all 4 countries even call it "soccer" to the dismay of Eurosnobs everywhere) and create a combo conference. They also both use the franchise formula and lack the traditional club structure seen in other parts of the world. It doesn't matter as my guess would be eventually cross border rivalries (The Cascadia Cup for example) will grow large enough where a separate league would be unthinkable. It would be like trying to remove the Canadian sqauds from the NHL and breaking up Toronto-Buffalo and Montreal-Boston.
New Zealand is a country of 3 million people, kind of hard for them to have their own league. Canada has a population of 32 million, more than Aus-NZ combined. I don't think it's comparable. And well, given Gary Bettman's behaviour lately, many Canadians are talking about the idea of removing the Canadian teams for the NHL and forming our own league. There isn't much of a Toronto-Buffalo rivalry anyway. The Leafs' main rivals are Montreal and Ottawa.
New Zealand has 4.3 million people. Scotland has a population of a whopping 5.1 million and has a well established leagues. New Zealand is technically large enough and wealthy to have a successful domestic competition. Theres more of an opportunity for Canadian and American franchises to develop in a combined structure than try and huff it alone. It helps having successful franchises in Toronto, Vancouver, Montreal, Philly, Portland, Seattle, and LA feeding off each other. The Cascadia games in particular should be great for years to come. It creates a broader base of strong franchises to grow the North American game without having to worry about trying to sell in tougher soccer markets like Calgary and Atlanta. And Bettman is an idiot, but please. One of the biggest opponents to Blasile's attempt to move the Coyotes was MLSE. Southern Ontario is ripe for a second NHL franchise (quebec city and winnipeg are different stories), but blame the Leafs as one of the primary actors opposing a move to Hamilton or Kitchner.
As an American who lived in Canada for a few years I noticed a bizarre-cum-weird-cum-unheard of paradox. Other than the CFL and Junior hockey, teams in US leagues did better at the gate. I was in Winnipeg from 91-94 (Ya all the stories about winter are true) and the basketball Winnipeg Thunder proved "The Shelts rule of Canadian teams in US Leagues" " The Shelts rule of Canadian teams in US Leagues" states that any Canadian team playing an American team will always..........ALWAYS out draw any Canadian team playing a Canadian team. Canada (and forgive me Canada, I love your country and would be happy to return if Revenue Canada simply 'went away') seems to have this kind of superiority-inferitortiy complex with the USA. The Tragically Hip were in the Winnipeg band scene in the 90's and all people in The 'Peg could say about them was it was a "Canadian band" IE - it had to suck because it was Canadian. Now if an band came from the UK or USA then it automatically would be better simply because it wasn't a "Canadian band". Same thing with tv. There was a Canadian lassie type shows on tv that were dismissed out of hand because they were "Canadian shows" and any US show was inherently better simply because it was a US show. (and yes, that lassie show was truly lame. He was a dog who would like, come across a homeless man and find him a home, before wandering off) but the point is there was a sense of US things are better There is this unspoken/unwritten need to beat an American team that goeth along with a team in Canada. Never understood it.............ever. Still.
as stated before by celtigo, New Zealand has 4.3 million people. there are many countries with small populations that have their own league. Uruguay has 3.3 million people and they make some of the best players. They also have one of the most competitive leagues in latin America. There teams usually advance pretty far in Libertadroes and Sudamericana. I think it would be great for Canada to start their own league. They are not as cocky as the USA fans, so it will be much more pleasing to play them.
I don't deny MLSE's involvement in trying to stymie another NHL team in S. Ont., but the fact remains that Gary Bettman has been sh*tting on Canada since the start of his tenure. He did nothing to try to keep Canadian teams in Canada when we were going through a rough patch, and made it even more difficult for them by forcing Canadian clubs to pay their players in US$. Winnipeg and Quebec are solid hockey markets and now that the CAD has grown and with Bettman's great hockey experiment with hockey in the southern US proving to be a pathetic failure, they're more able to support an NHL club than pretty much any of these useless expansion teams that Bettman has brought in, not least of all Phoenix. Canada needs its own hockey league and its own footy league.
QC and Winnipeg would be the smallest NHL markets by far. Colisee Pepsi is a hole and would need complete renovation before it was ready or a new arena entirely, and somehow you'll have to overcome the persistent problem of linguistic isolation when attempting to sign players (*cough* Lindros *cough*). The MTU Center is too small as well. You need to slap another 1500 seats in there. Not to mention AHL attendance for the Moose has been mediocre at best and Winnipeg was not supporting the Jets when they left. Yeah I'd cut (after relocating one lucky franchise to Waterloo) Nashville, Atlanta, Florida, Phoenix, and maybe Tampa and a SoCal team, but not every move south has been a failure. I grew up in the Bay Area and my Sharks sold out the tank for every game last year. Carolina, Colorado, and Dallas has also been fairly successful. Just because you guys can't put together a team to win the Cup since 1993 is no reason to take your ball and go home And a Canadian soccer league would end the PNW tri-derby, which I imagine will be the best in MLS as VanSeaPort have more in common with each other than they do with people in Saint John and Oklahoma City. I think a CSL-1 would be a far better option for a Canada wide league, but even that likely wouldn't stop cross border creep (see the "Canadian" Hockey League)
There are many ways to see this,what I meant was,If you look at Australia footballwise/soccerwise in the early 2000s,what did they have?They had a World Cup appearance in 1974,a Confed Cup appearance in 1997,they had the now defunct NSL(National Soccer League),a few players in Europe,names that come to mind are those of Harry Kewell and Mark Viduka both at Leeds United at the time(and when Leeds was playing topflght football/soccer in the EPL).What happened not long after that was that the Aussies missed out on the 2002 World Cup after losing the return leg of their playoff against Uruguay.Anyway...fast forward to 2005,the Hyundai A-League is introduced as the top level of football in Australia.A few months after that,Australia qualifies for the World Cup for the first time in over 30 years by going through a playoff against Uruguay yet again.And they recently joined AFC.So in less than about 8 years,look how many changes took place. I said that Australia was a good example to follow because well just like Canada,Football/Soccer isn't the number one sport(yet not too many sports that can block the popularity of Football/Soccer,unlike the United States),both countries are big and a low population(considering the size of both lands),and similar numbers in terms of GDP per capita...And before all those changes occured in Oz,Canada and Australia were in a similar situation altough I'll add that theirs was worse if you consider the fact that they are ''far away from the rest of the world'' in a sense but anyway,in the end they still go it done and the 2009/2010 season of the A-League started a few days ago and 2 more clubs were added,in only it's fifth season! Now I don't believe that Canada can't do something along the lines of what the Aussies have done.But I said it in an earlier post in this thread,the problem that we have in this country is that nobody wants to start something of our own!Plus had this to the fact that most Canadians feel good with supporting canadian teams in american owned leagues. That's what I'm getting sick and tired of,that bad habit that Canada refuses to let go and always has to go knock on the US's door(MLB,NBA and now MLS).I know that the CFL is all canadian but I'm not sold to that sport...but if I get back to what I was previously saying,it's like saying:''Well,if the Americans don't care,us Canadians shouldn't care either'',I mean come on now!wtf!I'm sure today that most Canadian would follow and support a pro footy league as this is talked about from time to time on canucks footy boards.Back in 2006 I was hoping that Toronto FC would be denied entry into the MLS.Had it been the case,a potential canadian footy league could/would have been probably the best option and would have forced us to start something of/on our own.And now as you know,Vancouver will get in very soon and Montreal could be next.Heck even Ottawa popped almost out of nowhere and was interested in an MLS franchise all of a sudden.All this is because of one man....that m*therf*cker who goes by the name of Kevan Pipe,he started it all... Thumbs up to Australia! Oh and quickly,the A-League is shared between Australia and NZ and that is much more understandable.New Zealand has a population of 5 million and that population is pretty much sold to rugby.You've said earlier that both Scotland and Uruguay have there own leagues despite their low population and it's true!But those two countries have something that NZ doesn't have and that's the football/soccer history.Back in the 19th century,the first ever international friendly was played between England and.....Scotland!Plus Scotland has two famous clubs from it's capital in Glasgow Rangers and Glasgow Celtic.They play in one of the most famous derby on the planet,the Old Firm derby.Uruguay also has the history having hosted the first ever FIFA World Cup and having won the World Cup twice(in 1930 and 1950) and won a few Copa America aswell,If I'm not mistaking,more than Brazil actually!What does NZ have?A World Cup appearance in 1982,a few appearances at the Confed Cup that were forgettable....So New Zealand can be considered pretty much new on that stage so it was necessary for them to be part in the Hyundai A-League(With all due respect to NZ). Now I know that you know some of the things mentionned in the previous paragraph,but it was just to show that Uruguay and Scotland both have a long history with football while NZ does not.
My sentiments exactly. I've made those same points in the past only to be told that Australia doesn't have Canada's weather. Norway and Sweden on the other hand do have our weather (even worse actually), and they also have thriving domestic leagues (and real grass pitches!). I think that "C-League" has a nice ring to it.
Do some people think that it snows in Canada all year round?Although it gets very cold when it does,the Spring to Fall period which is about 7 months is quite good for outdoor sports.I never went to BC but I heard that when winter comes around,they get cool temperatures(around 8-9 degrees celcius) while we are stuck with -20 degrees celcius. I think that it is the nickname used for the Chinese Super League.
This has been covered but I will add that the idea of an all Canuck league with two divisions is an idea I agree with. Having 4 in the MLS, Vancouver, Edmonton, TFC and Montreal would be the cities I pick, followed by a first and second division of 12 teams each. The USL 1 and USL 2 would be the USA equivalent. Attendances would be alot smaller, say 5-6000 for div 1 and maybe 2-3000 maximum for Div 2. The Provincial and regional leagues(Pacific and CPSL, AMSL) would follow Div 2 and the PDL after that to establish a feeder system. I believe that having pro/rel with the worst Canuck squad in MLS and the Div 1 champion as well as the last Div 1 and first in Div 2 would create some rivalries and improve the quality of play. Like in Britian, successful t eams would have to meet strict infrastructure criteria to be promoted or remain in their divisions. I always thought having the 4 MLS team own or be associated with an equal number of Div 1 and 2 teams much like a fram team system would also support success. An example being Vancouver having/owning three Div 1 cities as their farm teams or "reserves" such as Victoria, Surrey and/or Burnaby or Richmond. Similar format would apply to the div 2 teams and the MLS Canuck teams.
I'd like to see something that avoids the use of either "soccer" or "football", keeping it neutral and everybody happy.
Should we? It depends on what criteria you use to decide "should" (as opposed to "could" or "would you like"). From a national pride perspective, yes. From a level of play perspective, no. A CSL would have a lower level of money and therefore play than MLS. From a breadth of play perspective, yes. A CSL would have more teams than Canada will ever place in MLS. From a player development perspective, maybe. See points two and three above. Do you want fewer Canadian players playing at a higher level or more Canadian players playing at a lower level? From a stability perspective, no. There are only so many cities in Canada capable of supporting a team at a national level. Assuming you don't want a four team league the failure of a team in one or two cities could take the whole league down with it. This is less likely if you run a league with access to all the best soccer cities in Canada and the US. From a current-state-of-reality perspective, no. MLS exists and a CSL (as we are discussing it) doesn't. MLSE has (from a Canadian soccer perspective) almost unlimited resources. When they wanted a soccer team, they chose MLS rather than approaching the Whitecaps, Impact, and CSA to try to start up a new league. Likewise Kerfoot and Saputo chose USL1 rather than the (existing) CSL or trying to start a new, truly national CSL. Why invest a huge amount of effort to create a Canadian league for the sake of having a Canadian league when you don't have to? National pride arguments are all well and good, and I even agree with them to some extent, but you'll note that the people espousing them are not the people who would be putting up the money. The money people have (so far) opted for the cross-border league option.
Four teams in the MLS, 16 teams in a first and second division of a Canuck league, followed be regional leagues starting with cities under 200,000 ending with metro city premier leagues. Much like the British system, there could easily be 7-8 levels in a Canuck system that promotes and relegates teams. I drafted how it would look but it becamne too large..but a third division would compromise the regional leagues that already exist such as Pacific, CPSL and AMSL.
Should Canada have it's own league? Yes, why the hell not. The only problem is finding suitable venues (which this country really lacks) and wealthy owners. I think we need to start smaller and grow upwards. The first step is something I've been calling for for a while, a "CSA Club License". A set of standards for clubs across the country that want to have their player contracts honored by the CSA. These standards would include minimum requirements for facilities, development programs and coaching certification. Once you have everyone playing by the same rules you can start to lump them into leagues. Every province (with exception, PEI could be lumped in with Nova Scotia or New Brunswick) should have it's own top division for mens football. If possible there should be province wide second division (only Ontario, BC, and maybe Quebec could probably pull this off). After that there would be a series of regional divisions. Every league would be linked by pro-rel. Now that we have the leagues we need to motivate these clubs to be bigger and better. The Voyageurs Cup would now act like a Champions League of Canada. Every league gets a minimum of 1 placement. The rest of the spots will be distributed by the quality of the league (ex. Ontario gets 3, Sask. gets 1). These teams will join the Big 3 in the hunt to be Canadian Champion. Now your asking is where will we find enough clubs to make all these leagues? The basis of this system is to give existing soccer clubs a chance to show themselves off at the senior elite level instead of at youth tournaments. Teams can be fully amateur and compete in the top division (although unlikely). The pro-rel system is designed so that everyone can find a level where they can compete at. More ambitious clubs will be near the top, while others will play in their local leagues. Once the league system is established it would be possible to cherry pick the best teams in terms of finances and create a national first division. However, unless these teams are drawing +5K a game it would just be a money pit and the provincial setup would be more practical.