Going back to this: I was envisioning a sort of Division 1A and 1B type of scenario. Switzerland had this kind of system for a long time. At some point in the season, the top two divisions were realigned into three leagues: top two-thirds of the first division playing for the national championship, bottom third of the first division and top third of the second division playing for spots in the first division, bottom two-thirds of the second division playing to avoid relegation. Up to one-third of the first division could be relegated each season. Asia also had a lot of interesting league structures before the AFC restructured the AFC Champions League and effectively forced countries to adopt the standard European league structure. Kuwait (established enough to have gone to the World Cup in the 1980s) had an unusual league structure well into the 2000s with two stages of playoffs, where it was possible for the second division winners or teams as low as 8th of 12 teams in the first division table to win the national championship, and it was possible for a first division team to finish as high as 5th of 12 in the regular season and still be relegated.
Hey. We did beat your lot and humiliated the English 2010 World Champions. England humiliated by the Netherlands in World Twenty20 | Sport ... https://www.theguardian.com/.../2014/.../england-humiliation-holland-worl... 31 mrt. 2014 - More. World Twenty20 2014 ... The Netherlands, as they ususally do, beat England in a T20 contest. ... The Dutch captain, Peter Borren, who played in that victory over England five years ago, can depart a happy man. It was like the beating up by the Orange team of 2010 World champions Spain. 2014 was a bad year for world champions to meet the Dutch
Also, re: league structures reflecting local needs, consider Nepal, where for decades the three divisions played sequentially due to lack of suitable venues. Most of the clubs in the country shared a single stadium, so venue scheduling was made possible by playing the third division schedule in full, then the second division, then the first division. Promoted clubs would just keep on playing, because there was no reason not to keep playing. It was theoretically possible for a team to start the season in the third division and end it as national champions. It was also possible for a team to be promoted and relegated straight back within a single season.
The NBA also has a hard maximum individual salary, so it's impossible for there to be any competition in salary offers for the players at the top of the heap. LeBron James and Kevin Durant get paid the same no matter where they go, so the teams recruit free agents based on other things such as quality of teammates, opportunity to win, coaching, location, etc.
.... and how many leagues have 16? Where's the outcry for the majority of these pro/rel leagues to have the "recommended" 16 clubs from FIFA? ... oh, right, because only the US is held to any bullshit FIFA rec or suggestion.
Great pro/rel story from Germany. Of course the naysayers will scream that 1860 didn’t get a license, but the sheer emotion of Paderborn’s rise, fall and re-rise is quite remarkable: http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/49350819
This is partly true. Durant would have made more money had he stayed with Golden State. The players current team can offer a max contract that is greater in value than other teams. It's designed to help teams retain talent. That said, players of Durant's caliber can make up the difference and then some off of the court with endorsement deals, and other projects.
It's simply what folks like the constant naysayer as a big wallet protector doesnot get. MLS isnot about fans or soccer, it's just an investment opportunity for someone somewhere with a big wallet, discovering a well protected environment for his money. In Pro/Rel it's about soccerfans wanting to see their club meet challenges and overcome them. It's not the size of your city=market, or the size of the wallet of an owner or a cartel like league that determines whether you as a supporter of a club get's a shot at reaching the highest platform or not.
I follow my local USL club (Riverhounds) because I love the sport first and foremost, and the system has given my area a team despite that soccer as a whole here has barely existed in the local culture of relevance during my lifetime. Icing on the cake is the team has really improved under the new coach to a point where a playoff run wouldn't surprise me, and even a shot at the title--while still unlikely in the next few years--doesn't seem an utterly unreachable achievement barring a huge owner-spender buying his way into a cartel of championship contenders. Tickets are among the most affordable entertainment options in the city, we have a soccer specific stadium in a lovely location that manages to feel like a big night out despite its more modest stature, and the local soccer culture has been slowly building up a bit more each year. It's still very much niche, but the kind of niche I feel is inching closer to something more. In short it seems to be very much for the fans. Someday being in MLS would be great, but then again I also feel excited having seen my team do its part to help build up the USL into its current form. I'm a big MLS fan (I've followed the league longer than any other), but I think my dream scenario at this point is a USL Premier League. Probably won't happen in any manner that could keep pace with MLS, but still, would be cool and something I'd fancy more than a single elevator pyramid. But as far as right now in the present I watch for the local soccer, the individual games that build toward the possibility of playing for a trophy. The sport is the essence of the sport.
Had we stayed in Charleston, or at least lived there for more than 20-some months, I suspect I'd have a similar relationship to the Battery. Had season tix the one full year we lived there and probably went to over 20 games in total. I still have fond memories of our time at what was then called Blackbaud Stadium even though it was almost 20 years ago. I regret that we never made it back for a game, now that the stadium is being tore down at the end of the season. One last visit for old time's sake would have been lovely, but the few times we've gone back were always in the off-season.
Pro/rel was not created for that. Feyenoord has never been involved in a relegation battle since Eredivisie was founded in 1956. What do Feyenoord do with their huge profits?Over 40 million Euros since 2014 I believe.
I see this idea of a USL D1 competitor floated around a lot, and I can see why it seems appealing, but I do wonder what the point would be? That is, what is the advantage in having a D1 league vs. simply building up the Championship into a big budget league exactly where it is? Where would all of the clubs come from to fill out three levels of USL? Who is going to pay more than $10 million ($20 million, I guess, if the current model were to be applied) expansion fee to still be considered "MLS's friend with a great personality"? The obsession with the divisional designations in the US makes no sense to me: they mean absolutely nothing. The reason why the USL-C (or NASL before it) is perceived as a "minor" league has nothing to do with it being division 2 (because I guarantee that nobody outside of soccer nerds even is aware of a pyramid); it's because USL's budgets are significantly lower than MLS. I suppose if USL had pro/rel among its leagues it may make some difference, but I still don't see why you'd even bother with the sanctioning headaches. Really, if I was intending to start up an open pyramid, I would just have all of the levels sanctioned as D3 leagues and worry about setting the budgets and requirements internally at each level of the internal pyramid.
The point would be what you say: a big budget league. I didn't necessarily call for an official D1, but rather operated within the bounds of the established labeling system they went with. I don't care what they label their tiers or even how many they have as long as it could mean the highest level of USL being the best it could possibly be. What I'm talking about could just be the Championship's evolution to having a bigger footprint in our landscape.
Try telling that to supporters of Newcastle United, & Arsenal. Hell where were PSG before their Qatari owners took over? Look, I completely understand that European culture is different than US Culture. Europeans tend to travel a lot, yet at the same time they don't necessarily move a lot. At least not to the extent that people living in the US do. Because of this there is a greater sense of community in European Cities and Towns, and therefore a greater connection with the local sporting club. In places outside of the US, and Europe in particular sports are played at then local club, and not so much at one's school. In the US, this isn't the case. School sports are huge in the US. Clubs, not so much. US fans are not less passionate about their teams than their counterparts in other parts of the world. The sporting landscape is just different. Both sporting cultures have their pros and cons. In other parts of the world Politics plays a much larger role in Sports than it does in the US as well.
Honestly, other than the fact that USSF having to hand out divisional designations because FIFA says so, there's no inherent advantage to being D2/3/1/15. IMO if USL were to keep investing in facilites and salaries, why not get a D1 sanction? That way no one can argue that you're major league. It's really not that big of a hill to climb all things considered. That's one key issue for sure. USL is going to have 36 or so Championship clubs and it can then focus on making League One sustainable. I like the fact that USL is setting some pretty high standards for its League One affiliates so if in the event they decide to do p/r, all of its members are on somewhat equal footing in terms of facilities. There's already a gulf forming with the rumors that USL is thinking of arbitrarily kicking MLS B teams to League One. This would be an issue for sure but not an insurmountable one. I somewhat agree. USSF should have two designations. Professional and amateur. Divisions are meaningless. The XFL isn't "minor league" other than it doesn't have the cache of the NFL. USSF should have no say in how professional leagues operate and should just exist to enforce the rules of the game and handle the national teams.
I think they are. For example, they are likely to change their allegiances much more often than what I experienced in England. I can only recall one individual who changed his team - a guy in high school who suddenly became a QPR fan 'cos they were trendy. No one took him seriously after that. Here I see people do it all the time, especially when they've moved here from a different part of the country. I just can't imagine doing that. I'm a NE Patriots fan because that's the team I formed an emotional attachment to when I moved to Boston from England way back when. Heck, my twin daughters went to a game before they were even born... Back when the Patriots were crap and the 49ers the opposite, I'd frequently have people ask why I didn't follow the 49ers instead. F**k that.
I think there's a higher ceiling at being that, than most want to admit or even realize. There are ownership groups like the SPURS that would spend (relatively speaking) a nice chunk even if we forever stay at this level. There is no reason that the top of the USL can't grow 2x, 3x what it is now. That's going to happen by default as the sport continues to grow. There will always also be the PENN FC's of the world that are just fine at being what they are, but aren't ever realistically going to be more. There are PLENTY of those markets out there, especially with the (again, relative) ease of a soccer club vs other sports. I think it makes SOME sense. I mean it isn't just the payrolls that differentiate MLB and AA clubs. In soccer though they DO mean something. USL-C isn't making the CCL unless they win the USOC. No level below D1 gets auto entry into the international competition. That matters. That means something. In this sense, yeah they don't mean a whole heck of a lot. There's nothing stopping USL from having League 2 A, B, C ... with pro/rel between them.
A D1 sanction would likely give them some kind of direct qualification in CONCACAF competitions. Also it would have marketing benefit to not be "minor league".
I do agree that there is a portion of American fans that change teams when they move around the country. I would say that this generally happens when people move from an area that doesn't have a nearby team to an area that does, or in some instances a city that gains an expansion team. There's also a minority portion of folks who just like following a winning team (this is how many US soccer fans only follow the BIG clubs, that and they are ones with the star players). I'll use myself as an example. I grow up in Central New York State so my teams were and are still the Buffalo Bills, Buffalo Sabres, New York Yankees and New York Knicks, along with Syracuse for College Basketball and Football. I moved to Philadelphia in the early 2000's, and didn't have an MLS team. Philly was granted a team and I started following them as I could go to games. One other thing to keep in mind too. The younger generations aren't necessarily drawn to teams, but to individual players it seems. You see this a lot with the NBA, where people are fans of a certain player and will follow whatever team that player is on. The same can be said of fans of Ronaldo in America.
and So, while I think this is a reasonable argument, I'm not sure another D1 league would automatically get a CCL berth, either (maybe CL?). After all, the only way CPL gets to CCL is by either winning the Canadian Championship or qualifying via CONCACAF League. It's really up to the federation, I think. If, by some anomaly, USL-C became the largest budget league in the US (let's say Don Garber is swallowed whole by the inverted yield index), sponsors, advertisers, and media outlets aren't going to care which supposed divisional designations they belong to. They're going to want to make most money and go with whichever league would give them that.
I've only known one allegiance changer, a friend in college who went through three favorite NHL teams in three years. He also briefly got into soccer and for about two months went on and on about how much he loved Liverpool.
I don't know exactly how they would split things up, but direct (not cup-based) slots in either CCL or CL are something that only a D1 league can get. CPL gets a direct slot in CONCACAF League because it has D1 status. If that happened, the USSF would rush to give USL-C D1 status whether USL wanted it or not.
Good thing you didn't go to my high school... although people might have taken pity on you for your choice!
Yes of course it was. It's the consequence of the division in layers that makes it happen. The closed league is specifically created to keep clubs out. So it's aim is to prevent clubs from challenging the spot of the clubs in the sun. The layering of the Pro/Rel system is to ensure clubs that want to can challenge clubs spot in the sun.