Come on guys let's not get this thread closed as well. I am enough of a loser to have spent some time almost every day checking in on this or the other thread since July 31, 2014. I want to at least make it to 5 years.
I was referring to clubs that are either going to or aspiring to the MLS as being replaced with reserve teams. The point is is that USL Championship's financial situation is completely speculative right now: the teams on the high end of the spectrum all have MLS aspirations (including Louisville) and those that don't have massively lower attendances. They are almost identical to RGV. I think you're reading a lot more into what I'm saying about USL than I actually am: my point was that the league decides what level a "market" should play at, not the club and the club has no say-so on that. I wasn't using pejorative "bush league", but the fact that these "markets" have no way to advance beyond a league with actual farm teams.
a. There are two divisions. b. It's more or less the same setup as MLS, play the team in your division multiple times and the teams in the other division once. They're operated as independent businesses. The playing side is run by MLS staff but that doesn't mean they are restricted to MLS players. RGV has 4 Houston players while Reno has 11 San Jose players on their 29 man roster, Attendance-wise they're up there with the independent teams. The Spanish second division has reserve teams (normally) but it's hardly a bush league. I think most reserve teams will end up in League One.
But what you're speaking to is the speculation. It's the same either way. In some aspects a never ending speculative loop isn't good
This is a super pedantic reply. If San Marino's setup is "more or less the same as MLS" then these "divisions" would be far more like "conferences" and not "divisions" as we traditionally consider them. A club from either one of these can win the championship. Regarding RGV/Reno: The hybrid affiliation, a first for the USL, means that the Dynamo will be responsible for the soccer operation of the club, selecting players and coaching staff.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rio_Grande_Valley_FC_Toros Regardless of which corporate entity is footing the bill for each specific player, Dynamo has picked them and is training them, which sounds pretty "farm system" to me.
I don't disagree with this, but I'm not sure it's completely borne out with actual evidence? The actual number of clubs going bust in a promotion push seems fairly small? Regardless, I think we need to see what the long-term interest in USL League One is. There will likely (hopefully, for them! [except one - they can go to hell]) be decent crowds based on the novelty this season, but question will be how well the league can maintain interest in AA-level soccer once that wears off. Again, I'm not saying that this isn't possible, I'm just saying that's the litmus test to determine how well cities respond to being pigeonholed based on their market value.
It seems San Marino never had true pro/rel anyway: "Until 1996, the league had two levels, Serie A1 and Serie A2, and a relegation/promotion system. However, the teams promoted from the second level could also participate in the championship play-off against Serie A1's first teams" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campionato_Sammarinese_di_Calcio Seems to me all this - both before and after the change - is telling us is that 15 teams is too few to have meaningful pro/rel.
You're right to be a bit skeptical. I wrote a blog on just this subject but there's no evidence that they're going to be replaced by reserve teams. You still have some big markets out there that can support USL Championship teams (Cleveland, Detroit, Buffalo, Baltimore, Oakland, Jacksonville, etc.). I don't think this will happen. Besides USL never saying that League One was for reserves, moving reserves to League One does a couple of things. First, it creates a problem that the USL partnership already solved, namely the MLS reserve league would be resurrected and secondly, it would really mess with the Western Conference if reserves were moved down. I believe I've heard some rumors of RSL starting either a League Two or League One team to supplement the academy team (League Two would be more likely) or partnering with Park City or Ogden City FC. I think a lot of this idea of moving "B" teams down is wishful thinking on the part of USL fanboys. Regardless of whether the system was open or not, this would still occur. That's how the US sports ecosystem works. Let's say that Kingston Stockade could play their way up tomorrow. Do you really think that the techbro that owns them (and would rather spend money on a silly CAS suit rather than pay his players) could really afford to build a D2-D1 level club in Kingston NY of all places? There's only so many tickets to be sold in his community and so many sponsorship dollars to be had. You're looking at them becoming the Albany or Long Island Stockade before too long because the market isn't there to support his ambition (which I question that he even has).
Well, going bust and being in significantly worse shape than before are two different things. Here's the catch with the thinking though ... what about the clubs in pro/rel that "find their level" as we keep hearing? yes the "possibility" of promotion is there (as is relegation) but REALITY for those clubs is being just what they are. So what maintains the interest there? What's driving fans out to see Ipswich plow the rows in the Championship mid-table ? Rochdale has been in the 3rd/4th tiers since the early 20's (that I can find) and haven't sniffed the 2nd tier since the 50s ... so what maintains interest there? Clearly it isn't an issue in America ... SEE: American Sports If it doesn't work in soccer, then maybe soccer really is different after all eh?
Gibraltar has 17 teams with 2 divisions. No reason why San Marino couldn't have divisions of 7 or 8 with a single table. The underlying point is that FIFA nor UEFA have made an attempt at any point to enforce pro/rel just for the sake of it. The idea that MLS is crassly defying filter and that FIFA needs to come down o them, is sheer hyperbole.
LOL at "plow" (they're the "Tractor Boys") and "mid-table". Edit: your point stands though. They're doing alright at the gate despite looking destined for the drop.
I don't disagree with any of this. My point is only that it's really early to be popping the cork on the bubbly, proclaiming USL as an unmitigated success based on the high end attendances of certain teams. We simply do not know if we're looking at speculation or actual division 2 demand right now, which is why I think League One gives us a better picture, simply because there's not this element of lining up to catch MLS's eye. But they haven't kicked a ball in anger, yet, so we're just kind of in a holding pattern. It remains to be seen how much of a talent gulf there turns out to be between Championship and League One. It's certainly possible that it's less than expected and MLS might feel less inclined to keep them in D2. Especially if League One expands to allow smaller geographic footprints. That's a double edged sword, however: the more teams, the more potential for talent dilution, which widens the talent gap. Also, I think the only reason TFCII dropped (which opened the door for FC Dallas and Orlando) was because CSA was about to the drop the hammer on the Canadian USL Championship teams. I don't think anybody denies that a market (and, thus, any club(s) in that market) likely has a reasonable financial ceiling. The question is really about how that should be determined.
If you want to use a country of 33k with (an actually remarkable) 15 teams as an example of FIFA/UEFA not enforcing pro/rel, then go for it. I will merely lol. I certainly have more sympathy with that argument.
So not in the claimed "mid table". Ok. Don't think I've ever seen them as low as the third level before.
I don't know if that's an apples to apples comparison between League One teams and Championship. The vast majority of League One teams are located in pretty small cities ("B" teams excluded) and thus they're not going to have the drawing power of a Louisville City (and I dispute that they're using the MLS carrot, recent comments by the ownership indicate that that ship has sailed). It should be determined by the individual leagues and no one else. If MLS wants to exclude a city, that's their prerogative. The same goes for USL/NISA or whoever.
I'm fine with your general argument, but citations needed here. Who is to say that Charleston or Colorado Springs "deserves" to be in D2 over Madison or Greenville just because they were in the right place at the right time? The clubs should be able to work this out, not an office in Tampa. Also, Rochdale is 10 miles outside of Manchester. I think the fact that they can even have an independent club that has the agency to get to the 3rd division bolsters my point. I have no idea what this is supposed to mean, but it sounds fairly tautological.
That's why I "LOL'd" at "mid-table". Last time was 1957. Five years later they were English Champions. I actually attended a few games at Portman Road back when they were having financial troubles.
I might've used verbiage specifically there .... maybe. And yeah, they're done in the Championship after over a decade of being a 6th-16th mid-table club that whole time. A couple season after dropping from the Prem they had playoffs in 'em ... but honestly they've been a literal, middling club for over a decade in the championship, so what was keeping the interest there? What do positions 7th through 16th occupy in a 24 team league? Seems "mid table" is pretty good at describing those slots. Even they year they finished 7th they were rising to that after a shit start and weren't really chasing the last playoff spot. How's Blackpool doing these days? QPR? Who is to say that Madison or Greenville "deserve" to be in D2 at all? This though, is how business works. Entities that do before other entities get the "just deserves" of doing when they did. Being in the right place at the right time IS a huge part of it actually, in anything. In part, they have. Why is it that people in Madison are even going #FullMingo now anyway? Where was this rousing support, feeling, and interest in having a professional club at all 3, 5, 10, 15 yrs ago? Who are these clubs, supporters, etc to "deserve" something that they weren't even dreaming about when other clubs, supporters, etc were out there DOING? And that's the thing we've seen the FAN support BEFORE the club essentially give birth to the club (Philly, San Antonio). Why don't they "deserve" to have what they have the way they have it and not worry about it being taken away? That doesn't answer the question I posed. You spoke of AA level soccer and being pigeonholed by market value. Minor League sports in America answer both of your points here. The fact that Corpus Christi will never be an MLB city doesn't keep them from having a "third tier" baseball team that averages 5-7K any given year over 70 games.
So your saying the US should be modeling ourselves after San Marino? Or that because San Marino, a historical anomaly from the Middle Ages, get's to do it the US should too? That's honestly silly, the worst type of whataboutism, and used a lot around here to defend MLS. When ever someone makes a statement about how the "rest of the world does something" that's different than MLS, on cue I see a list of obscure leagues dragged up from the depths of Wikipedia to be held up as examples that MLS isn't really that much of an outlier. So really because the Malaysian First division does it that way MLS should too? The part that annoys me the most is it's so fan boy, chip on the shoulder, super defensive stuff that I thought was in MLS' past. The league can stand on it's on two feet now, defend it on merit not with obscure whataboutism.
I mean relatively: I'm not expecting Statesboro to average Sacramento-sized numbers. But the key is whether or not they can bring in attendance numbers that can be sustainable. In theory, D3's operating expenses should be relatively lower than the Championship's, so despite the smaller potential fanbase, it should still see if this is self-sustaining. Besides, Greenville is bigger than 5 Championship franchise MSA's, Tucson is bigger than 8, Richmond is bigger than 11 (and 1 MLS market), etc. I don't know that we disagree here, I just prefer an open league model.
This, exactly. If you're trotting out San Marino (SAN MARINO!) as your example, you're digging pretty deeply. It's fine to say "MLS won't have pro/rel because the billionaires who run it won't agree to it". I don't know why using San Marino as an analog for the situation in the United States is supposed to justify anything. I don't expect MLS to get pro/rel; I certainly don't expect FIFA to mandate it; but let's don't compare the richest and one of the largest countries in the world to microstates.