You sound Trumpian. You have a very big brain. The best brain ever. And the people who disagree amount to an infestation who need to be eradicated.
It used to be "MLS bots" I believe my contributions to soccer twitter may have made the more accurate "MLS apologist" a more popular and less caustic description of the status quo mindset I tire of on a regular basis. My use of "clowns" is based on arguing in circles with people who clearly have no interest whatsoever in seeing American soccer move towards a more open system. Besides, once I muted and/or blocked about 8-10 regulars from BigSoccer who I recognized on twitter, a far more enjoyable experience has followed. And I think that says more about BigSoccer than it will ever say about me. I don't know if you can say it was designed that way. I always saw USISL, A-league, etc etc etc as being designed to accommodate different levels of amateur/semi-pro/pro franchises with the intent of exploring Pro/Rel when the time came. I didn't see MLS being designed as anything other than to be a "major" league at the top that avoided the foibles and excesses of the old NASL by using single entity as a facilitator, not an end game. I thought one of those excesses was overexpansion... so it was after hearing MLS was considering expansion to 28 teams and beyond while staying single-entity that I realized they want a major league/minor league dynamic that will make the hidden gem I believe is the Lamar Hunt US Open Cup to become increasingly irrelevant and eventually useless to Garber & Co.... (wonder what Lamar would think?) I remember when there were tons of clubs in D3 and a 24-team A-League in D2 with a proud Rochester Rhinos leading the pack. I don't mind higher standards and 3-5 year commitments that seem to have become the norm. I do have a problem with an overemphasis on net worth requirements and higher and more speculative expansion fees that look more like a pyramid scheme than a pyramid. I'm waiting for the next shoe to drop, which I figure will probably be a bunch of USL-C teams moving down. My local franchise should never have been allowed to move up to D2 from D3 in the first place. I've always seen the biggest benefit in terms of increased investment on players/teams for Pro/Rel to be successful would have to include a league that is at least perceived to be "major" or D1. The obvious first move to P/R would be USL-C and League One... which TBH looks more like rearranging deck chairs. I just wish P/R could have been USSF initiated between NASL and USL with the new NISA as a new D4. The least stratified from my POV seems to be at the amateur level where P/R has lesser benefits and makes less sense if the higher division requires bigger travel budgets when all clubs (except a handful) operate on shoestring budgets... which partially explains why the NPSL South Central opted to split into two (Heartland/LoneStar) rather than have Pro/Rel like what UPSL does... it'd be fun to see my new local club's undefeated U20 team win UPSL promotion, then win promotion into NPSL... but of course, NPSL is a summer league that may resolve its NY Cosmos/Miami FC problem by requiring all its summer teams be designated amateur...
But surely a nice little stadium built on the public dime for another team helped, as did a resident fan base. But i think It's perfectly possible for someone to start a team in the US and progress as far as Dorking Wanderers have. Look at Detroit City. They've gone from an idea to the third division (provisionally) in 7 seasons, albeit not through sporting merit.
Who are they supposed to play over those 15 years? How are they going to find the money to operate over those 15 years? The combination of geography and niche sport status makes it hardest to operate at the semi-pro or elite amateur level. It would be easier to play at that level if there were more other clubs to play against, because that would allow playing in smaller geographic areas and cutting travel expenses. But that really makes lower-league soccer in the US a chicken and egg problem. It's impossible to lift one team to that level unless a bunch of teams make a go of it together. To their credit, the NPSL is trying this, but without enough teams to really make it viable. For this reason, the breakthroughs in building a league system have come from the top down. MLS exists because investors were willing to lose money for years on the bet that professional soccer in the US would become reasonably mainstream. The USL's recent boom was the result of seeding the league with MLS reserve teams. The MLS2 teams enabled regional play and lower travel costs, which reduced the threshold for financial viability and allowed more independent clubs to join. At this point you could remove the MLS2 teams from the USL Championship and the league would most likely remain viable, but it would not have gotten there without the MLS2 teams. It boils down to this: a club doesn't exist in a vacuum. Its viability depends on the existence of other clubs at a similar level within a close enough radius that the club can afford to travel.
I 100% agree with this. That said, that's not all there is. There's a bit of entrepreneurialism on top of that. That's what separates the wheat from the chaff.
Not inherently "scary or illegal." My childhood NASL franchise had a symbiotic relationship with the Green Country Soccer Association, a huge regional recreational soccer setup that was as simple as giving out tons of free tickets to kids not old enough to drive... pretty straightforward. But some of these agreements with Pay-to-play outfits can get pretty sketchy... Example: *edited* "Team X's attempted youth soccer monopoly has backfired...families that are tied to club soccer are not attending the games. .....Team X forces ticket packages within the kid’s annual fees and increase the cost of uniforms 25% to help cover the losses the pro team suffers. And oh by the way, the hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of dollars parents are forking over for their club apparel enables the pro team to get all its gear FREE. Thanks moms and dads."
The 9000 club pyramid made up of currently existing youth clubs seems to be in your imagination. I said I don't believe every youth club wants a path to professional senior teams. Only that if there are some that do, the current system isn't setup for that. Going back to the most recent reference - the article about Dorking Wanderers - I think that level of growth/divisional climbing is somewhat possible, if NPSL/UPSL/USL2 are considered roughly equivalent to the semi-pro levels of the english pyramid. That could be a step towards much more more leagues, support, etc....
These days? This was from 2014 --- According to Pittsburgh Tribune-Review article – Judge Approves Riverhounds Restructuring Plan in November 2014, a feasibility study released after the team’s restructuring was approved, predicted that the team would lose $750,000 in 2015 and $284,000 in 2016 but make a profit of $130,000 in 2017. The study cited the Riverhounds’ development academy and its summer academy camps as driving force behind most of these anticipated revenues. --- I mean, they didn't extract it from existing youth clubs, they formed their own under US Club. Then Super-Y. Then backfilled into the ECNL when the GDA started and spots opened up. Note, I think if you're serious about trying to play professionally, they are the best local option. But yeah, they definitely leveraged the local striving parent pool to bail them out. I mean, they've since "partnered" with the youth clubs in the 4 or 5 highest income school districts, I'm sure that's just coincidence though and gives them a useful geographic dispersion that they couldn't get by working with the lower s.e.s districts...
I think we have different ways of "contributing". I chose not be a dick and a keyboard warrior online, but you do you I guess. Doesn't look like you're trying to win people to join your side. This is why no one listens to the Pro/Rel community because the loudest elephants in the room, like Tinfoil Ted discredits folks as "MLS bots" and pushing conspiracy theories on Twitter.
The Professional League Standards was designed, worked and agreed upon by MLS, USL and NASL back in 2010 and the current revision in 2014. There is nothing wrong with the way MLS is structured business-wise. I would argue that single-entity made MLS to what it is today. Original NASL would've survived today if it had single-entity, an centralized operation and a salary cap. Lamar Hunt would've want MLS as prosperous and stable as ever, granted the past mistakes original NASL had made when he was the owner of Dallas Tornado. USL or NISA clubs don't market themselves as "minor-league soccer" more like "Hey, come enjoy and support your local pro soccer team!" I see it as an alternative to MLS with teams in cities that are unexposed by MLS, like Tulsa, Memphis, etc.
The only teams I see that are dropping down to USL League One from USLC are MLS2 reserve teams. The rest of the teams are staying put along with new teams added in San Diego, etc. IMO, I think that's what's likely to happen first. Promotion/relegation between the USL leagues. The structure is there to make it happen. Just need to stabilize USL1 first, then with even amount of teams in each league.
If we're talking about the pay-to-play academy model, unfortunately its a symptom of the American society today. Money has to come somewhere, USSF isn't going to fund youth clubs because USSF has a small budget of 150 million. No one else isn't going to pay, which leaves the parents to pay or join a scholarship to help fund their child.
The US population exists in pockets. An increase in status can mean a huge increase in travel and time commitment. Amateur and semi-pro players would have to commit to spending their entire weekend traveling to an away game. Travel triggered the demise of the first American Soccer League, when the some teams refused to enter the Open Cup due to the time commitment. Back then it was a 16 hour each way trip from the Northeast to Chicago.
The irony of your first sentence is surprising.... was hoping for better. You're not one of the usual suspects.... yet. I've met more anti-Pro/Rel keyboard warriors on BS than twitter. Most of the folks I know who are solidly in favor of Promotion/Relegation for the USA don't even who Ted Westervelt is. I'll be civil to you, but not to the anti-Pro/Rel zealots who have been camped out for years on this thread in particular and the BS forum in general.
This seems a little too soon to tell, imo. It's very possible that clubs like Charleston could drop down. They're currently homeless (well, about to be) and League One would give them a lot more flexibility on a new stadium situation. But, it also makes sense for teams that are hoping for lower expenses to wait a bit for League One to have enough teams to split into conferences. At that point, who knows what the Championship may look like.
Who did the USA send? Final Standings of FIBA Basketball World Cup 2019: 1. Spain 2. Argentina 3. France 4. Australia 5. Serbia 6. Czech Republic 7. USA 8. Poland 9. Lithuania 10. Italy 11. Greece 12. Russia 13. Brazil 14. Venezuela 15. Puerto Rico 16. Dominican Republic 17. Nigeria 18. Germany 19. New Zealand 20. Tunisia 21. Canada 22. Turkey
The USA rolled out arguably its "C" team and still finished 7th. What's your point? Since 1992 the USA has failed to win the Olympic gold medal once. The USA has finished in the top 4 of the FIBA world cup something like 8 times since the 80s. This was the first time they finished outside the top 4 since 2002.
Just wondering, the USA is by far the biggest in number of players and the quality of them, so hence the question who they sent to end up 7th. Think the rest of the FIBA without the USA hasnot got the same number of players as the USA on it's own. So if it's the C team that ended 7th, they did shit as in quality that C team still should give those above them an even fight match at least.
It was likely even weaker than a C team. Wikipedia says: "Measured either by All-Star or All-NBA selections, the remaining roster ranked among the least accomplished of any US Olympic or World Cup roster made up of NBA players since they were first allowed in 1992." There were only two players on the team who were All-Stars (24 players selected at midseason, 19 of whom were American) and one who was All-NBA (15 players named at end of season, 11 of whom were American) the previous year. Only two players on the team had ever played for the US senior national team before. The team didn't even play together in qualifying, because the US played all the qualifiers without any NBA players.
Getting top quality NBA players to care about an international competition going on during the offseason is a tall order. The Olympics are a far bigger deal in basketball and it generates far more interest in terms of audience. A top NBA player isn't usually going to take time off of their short offseason and risk getting hurt. It's the same thing with the World Baseball Classic. Socer is really the only major team sport where top athletes regularly care about their national team. The FIFA world cup also allows players to make more money, FIBA, on the other hand, doesn't have the financial appeal for top talent. An NBA player can make as much shooting a car insurance commercial and make as much as they would for the whole tournament and not risk blowing out their knee.
Not just today. Many of the academies have existed since the 1970s. MLS academies are free (except DC United) and now the territorial restrictions have been dropped there will be more opportunities for kids across the nation. I expect free academies will become commonplace outside of MLS once training comp and solidarity payments are institutionalized. And remember that many academies, such as IMG are multi-sports, across all NCAA sports, so it's not just a soccer thang.
I don't think Americans associate team sports with patriotism the way people in other countries do. That may not be a bad thing.
We do--just three months ago one of our national sports teams won a world championship and got a TV audience of 15 million and a New York ticker-tape parade. There's just no interest in the FIBA World Cup, which has always been an obscure afterthought even for the most hardcore basketball fans.