The All-Encompassing Pro/Rel Thread on Soccer in the USA

#authentic

#sportingmerit

 

In other news not related to pro/rel the Tulsa Roughnecks bagged 5 goals last in a road win against Orange County grabbing their 4th point in 2 games. Perhaps a worst to first turnaround in the works or a trip to the playoffs is in the works.

 

Tulsa Athletic would be able to represent the US in the CCL in a borrowed high school track and field stadium, with lacrosse and field hockey markings on the plastic pitch.

#

 

Get back to us when San Marino is awarded hosting rights for the World Cup.

 

Trolling.

 

You're suggesting that 2026 is an endorsement of North American systems?

 

No. I'm suggesting that if FIFA wants to tie WC hosting to having pro/rel, it would start with being bothered with countries that are actually going to host. Of course, FIFA is more interested in raking in $$$ from the US than it is with enforcing that.

 

San Marino, population: 33,000. C'mon, man.

 

The most reasonable argument runs along the lines that communities shouldn't have to be ghetto-ized into bush leagues because a corporate office doesn't feel their market brings enough advertising dollars.

Now, the idea that FIFA would intervene for the opportunity to make less graft... I wholeheartedly agree that they're probably not going to be your knight in shining armor.

 

But... I do think that if we ever see pro/rel in the U.S., it will be as a market solution, not as a top-down mandate.

If a league like NPSL Pro or some spiritual successor finds success and is able to grow and have a modicum of stability: once it hits a certain size, I would not be surprised to see it there (especially since it's outside of the PLS, so more forgiving to the teams getting promoted, etc.). I would also not be too surprised if USL doesn't reach to pro/rel should interest in the league dry up when the MLS pipeline dries up and, especially, if a rival league, competing more or less at a similar level, has it.

But the key here, still, is we need the clubs, which is why, I think, if it's going to happen, it's going to be something along the NPSL side.

 

USL is hardly a bush league and MLS didn't evolve like most European leagues but was a result of a handful of businessmen willing to risk $100 millions.

 

Let's cool our jets here. All of the top drawing USL teams have MLS ambitions. Except maybe the Rowdies. I think we need to see what happens when USL is no longer seen as a path to MLS. League One is probably a better litmus test whether or not USL is bush league.

Not really relevant to what I was saying, though.

 

Enforcing what exactly? It's not an ironclad rule or requirement. It's a suggested guideline. So what, exactly, would FIFA be enforcing?

 

So I went to FCC’s MLS home opener. It was such an empty, inauthentic experience, and the other 32,249 people there felt exactly the same way.

I can’t tell you much better it would have been, not just if something were truly at stake, but if we had fans who understood that soccer and promotion and relegation were identical. Those are the real fans America needs. Maybe they can show up to future games show us what we’re doing wrong.

I understand they couldn’t this week, what with no tickets being available to anyone who didn’t want a fake, plastic simulation of true football. But Cincinnati won’t sell out the entire year, I’m sure our cultural superiors can make it once or twice

 

Some argue that it's a requirement, some that it's not... anyway, it wasn't me that raised this issue of what FIFA might or might not do so why don't you ask the poster that did?

 

Gibraltar has a similar number, most of its teams play in the same stadium and they have pro/rel.

San Marino had pro/rel then abolished it and put all the clubs in one division.

Point being: if pro/rel is a "must", there's no reason why San Marino should be excluded.

 

The San Marino system is similar to MLS with two conferences and an unbalanced schedule.

 

and? They can support 15 teams. The POINT is about the selective application/other factors involved in this discussion. San Marino's clubs/NT are allowed to participate in all FIFA sanctioned events.

They don't have pro/rel.

The issue with that though, is that there's no reasonable argument that says any of these places have any right to be in MLS. Literally zero reasonable argument. That simply isn't how business works, and yes this is about business regardless of what pro/rel people will say to the contrary.

USL is far from bush league btw.

 

There is no pro/rel because every team plays in the same division! I'm not exactly sure why this is your exemplar against pro/rel.

1/3 of the clubs are reserve sides (literally farm teams), but that wasn't even my point. Let's see what the Championship looks like after the speculation dies down.

 

They do now, yes .... they didn't before. They actually GOT RID of pro/rel. It's an example of the overall issue with the p/r debate. Things, such as this, exist that are swept under the rug or people (as you're doing here) try to dismiss it.

It's really hard to hold up FIFA mandates or anything from FIFA in regards to the US and p/r when there's a myriad of examples around the world of where they don't stick to their own rhetoric. It also exposes the p/r brigade as hypocritical at best.

San Marino is a singular point on the bigger list ...

There are 9 OFFICIAL reserve sides (if available information is accurate/up to date) ... that's not 1/3 of the clubs.

Why the need to try and justify it? USL is getting investment from NON MLS chasing enterprises as well. Fresno, New Mexico, Austin (the other group), Memphis, Hartford, Birmingham ....

 

I don't quite know how to counter the San Marino thing: the country, which is about size of a large amusement park, has all their teams in one division. So, no, there's no pro/rel because there's nowhere to go from/to.

I think you're also misinterpreting my original point: I'm just saying the most defensible point that the pro/rel set has is that teams should determine at what level they can play at: not the leagues to maximize revenue. I have a hard time understanding how any fan could really argue against this on a purely idealistic level, honestly. Note I also said that it was delusional to think that FIFA would intervene with regards to this. I'm not calling for the death of MLS or USL or that I don't understand how we got to where we are: just that in most ideal situation clubs should have some agency to their station.

Also, you're leaving out Reno and RGV which, while independently owned, are wholly run operationally by the Earthquakes and Dynamo, respectively. That gets you to 31%, so you can do the math for a more accurate fraction.

 

But again, let's check back in to the league when Nashville, Sacramento, St. Louis, and Phoenix are all gone or replaced with reserve teams.

 

Why? Literally gave you 6 non MLS aspiring NEW investments/clubs into the league. Why are you just dismissing that? Why, if they don't go to MLS do they have to be replaced with reserve teams? Who says they will be?

I actually didn't know about Reno so I looked it up. Appears that it is like a HS to JH level involvement. Hired Russell and SJ is leading the technical/x-o's of the team but the club itself is run by Reno folks (again, what I could find). I think that falls between an actual reserve side and just an affiliation like SAFC/NYCFC.

Still, why are you refusing to judge the USL as it is? It isn't like the assessment can't change if the USL does. It is quite clear they aren't making the mistakes that the NASL did.