Exactly. I can remember when the Wings were dominating the regular season and failing to reach the Cup in the mid 90s (before their back-to-back wins in 97 & 98). The Sharks have a recent history of doing the same. Or the Knights last year. Yes, the President's Trophy has some value, but the playoffs prove the "real" champion. In every sport, I think that we gravitate towards the playoff systems we currently have because it allows an underdog a chance to win it all. That's why fans haven't rebelled against Wild Cards and half the league making the playoffs (in some sports). It's why we get enthralled with the Cinderella teams during March Madness.
But if there wasn't a playoff, everyone would agree that they were the best team and thus the league champ. So, it's difficult to compare the two. But to maintain that MLS must have a playoff and it must involve numerous teams because "that is how we do sports" is more than a little bit short-sided. If MLS went to a single table winner = champ or a two conference, winners play one championship game, people would still watch, people would still accept the winner as champ. My point is the decision is not culture, not tradition, but money only.
I agree that wild cards and playoff expansions are all about the money, but when does that change (money decision) become tradition. I grew up with the STL Cardinals in the NL East. NL East winner vs West, then World series. My kids have only ever known the Cards as NL Central, with wildcards, etc... What was a money grab for me, has become tradition (or the norm) for them.
That's my point. We don't have to have playoffs and conferences as part of our sporting culture, but we have them. MLS will most likely keep them. They have no reason to dump them, aside from some vague notion of "soccer culture" from Europe. It was to the argument of soccer culture that I said that MLS will stick to the practices of the Big Four. It's worked for MLS thus far. Why reinvent the wheel?
Senate Bill 7 passes 44-4 https://www.ibj.com/articles/73440-lawmakers-send-funding-bill-for-pacers-soccer-st https://www.uslchampionship.com/news_artic https://www.bgn.fm/could-indy-eleven-join-m
----------------- Yeh, money talks, i get that. I used the word "nice", because I know now that the league is going to 30, probably 32 and god knows where from that, I makes it difficult for some these things to happen or continue with such a jammed calendar. After Don Garber recent interview that there will be no pro-rel at least in his lifetime because of the entry fees, the MLS with its single entity/closed system is almost a stand alone island compared to all our other soccer leagues. SO in effect, MLS is our standard bearer- has to be the top domestic league, have its team perform well in CCL, support players who support National Teams etc. etc. Will be interesting to see what MLS does from here on. '
Not sure about that. The most famous relocation of all happened in the 1950s, namely Brooklyn to LA. The most successful soccer team in US history, the one with the first 10,000+ soccer specific stadium, relocated literally after disembarking from a European tour. It was so sudden that they'd already registered for, and won the Open Cup as the Fall River Marksmen while competing in ASL as the New York Yankees. The regular season ratings on ESPN and UniMás/UDN are not dissimilar to NHL on NBCSN. Considering MLS is in fewer markets that's not bad. But America hasn't yet developed a tradition of inviting friends and family around to watch the MLS playoffs or the equivalent of the Winter Classic.
Detroit #30 Las Vegas and Phoenix next, if they can deal with the climate issue, the Carolinas and San Diego thereafter. The missing urban conglomerates in the North American top 50 would be Tampa, Cleveland, Pittsburgh and San Antonio.
Just fun info... Did you know that Hamilton, Ontario inquired about becoming an MLS City? According to this article: Forge FC Originally Considered For MLS, USL, and NASL http://northerntribune.ca/forge-fc-major-league-soccer/
i am picking Indy in that next 3...no one else has an advanced stadium plan likeindy, heck they may be under construction when the next competition starts.
MLS going with Indy would shut the door on Detroit. It would solidify the midwest with a bunch of rivalries. It would leave 2 major areas without a team - mideast (Charlotte or Raleigh) and southwest (Phoenix or Vegas). So if Indy can check all the boxes, particularly ownership&stadium&government cooperation, I can see MLS going with them.
Apparently the local government approved the stadium plan regardless if Indy gets an MLS team. And if I were in charge of MLS expansion I might flirt with Indy just to possibly help their effort clear any hurdles that are in the way, but I'd definitely hold off on granting them an expansion team. If it comes down to a choice between Detroit or Indy in the midwest - Detroit is still the bigger and more attractive market. Let Indy go crazy building a new stadium. MLS would be better off waiting for Detroit than pulling the trigger early on Indy. MLS could leave Indy (and their shiny new stadium) out there as an immediate relocation threat. Assuming a deal could be worked out with the Indy Eleven/stadium ownership, any team that needed a bargaining chip would have a ready-to-go new home waiting for them in Indiana. It would suck, but it still seems like smart business.
Has anyone heard anything from Detroit lately? Last I heard, they ditched the SSS idea and went with a seemingly unwanted football stadium that probably lost them an expansion franchise. Big market, yes, city back on the rise, people say yes, any new news about a/the bid, ???. If Detroit wants MLS, seems they would need to start from scratch stadium wise. Two NYs, two LAs, Miami, a downtown Chicago, Atlanta, Seattle, Houston, does MLS really need Detroit. Adding Indy is a sure bet for more big rivalry games and sellout crowds. Indy over Detroit, Tampa, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, San Antonio, Las Vegas, and IMO San Diego. If things go well stadium wise, Indy looks even better than Phoenix IMO. I say don't wait for Detroit, MLS doesn't need them. If/when MLS goes to 32, Indy and Phoenix yes, and I say Las Vegas, San Diego, or Charlotte over Detroit. Lots of buzz around Charlotte seemingly, I could see them at #30-32.
I hope you're right! I'm just skeptical about it because of how bad Garber has talked about the switch to playing at Ford Field. Maybe with the expansion fee being 200 million he would allow us in? Who knows.
Out of all the methodologies for defining population, citypopulation.de makes the most sense to me. For instance, it includes Washington, Baltimore and Arlington as part of the same urban agglomeration. Here are the top urban agglomerations based on their methodology (PR excepted). MLS cities are in blue. New York - Newark 22,679,948 Los Angeles - Long Beach 18,764,814 Chicago - Naperville 9,866,910 Washington - Baltimore - Arlington 9,796,147 San Jose - San Francisco - Oakland (San Francisco Bay Area) 9,666,055 Boston - Worcester - Providence 8,285,407 Dallas - Fort Worth 7,948,477 Philadelphia - Reading - Camden (Delaware Valley) 7,204,035 Houston - The Woodlands 7,183,143 Miami - Port St. Lucie - Fort Lauderdale 6,913,262 Atlanta - Athens - Sandy Springs 6,775,511 Detroit - Warren - Ann Arbor 5,353,002 Phoenix - Mesa 4,911,851 Seattle - Tacoma 4,853,364 Orlando - Lakeland - Deltona 4,096,575 Minneapolis - St. Paul (Twin Cities) 3,999,565 Cleveland - Akron - Canton (Northeast Ohio) 3,599,264 Denver - Aurora 3,572,798 San Diego - Chula Vista - Carlsbad 3,343,364 Portland - Vancouver - Salem 3,239,335 Tampa - St. Petersburg - Clearwater (Tampa Bay Area) 3,142,663 St. Louis - St. Charles - Farmington 2,909,777 Charlotte - Concord 2,753,810 Sacramento - Roseville 2,619,754 Pittsburgh - New Castle - Weirton 2,612,492 Salt Lake City - Provo - Orem 2,606,548 San Antonio - New Braunfels - Pearsall 2,537,852 Columbus - Marion - Zanesville 2,509,850 Kansas City - Overland Park - Kansas City 2,487,053 Indianapolis - Carmel - Muncie 2,431,361 Las Vegas - Henderson 2,276,993 Cincinnati - Wilmington - Maysville 2,272,152 Austin - Round Rock - Georgetown 2,168,316 Milwaukee - Racine - Waukesha 2,049,391 Raleigh - Durham - Cary (Research Triangle) 2,042,649 Nashville-Davidson - Murfreesboro 2,032,353 Missing from MLS 12. Detroit - Warren - Ann Arbor 5,353,002 13. Phoenix - Mesa - 4,911,851 17. Cleveland - Akron - Canton (Northeast Ohio) 3,599,264 19. San Diego - Chula Vista - Carlsbad 3,343,364 21. Tampa - St. Petersburg - Clearwater (Tampa Bay Area) 3,142,663 22. St. Louis - St. Charles - Farmington 2,909,777 23. Charlotte - Concord 2,753,810 24. Sacramento - Roseville 2,619,754 25. Pittsburgh - New Castle - Weirton 2,612,492 27. San Antonio - New Braunfels - Pearsall 2,537,852 30. Indianapolis - Carmel - Muncie 2,431,361 31. Las Vegas - Henderson 2,276,993 34. Milwaukee - Racine - Waukesha 2,049,391 35. Raleigh - Durham - Cary (Research Triangle) 2,042,649
Likely 28 and 29: 22. St. Louis - St. Charles - Farmington 24. Sacramento - Roseville Donny's fave raves: 12. Detroit - Warren - Ann Arbor 19. San Diego - Chula Vista - Carlsbad Almost Shovel Ready 13. Phoenix - Mesa 21. Tampa - St. Petersburg - Clearwater (Tampa Bay Area) 27. San Antonio - New Braunfels - Pearsall 30. Indianapolis - Carmel - Muncie Progressing 23. Charlotte - Concord 31. Las Vegas - Henderson 35. Raleigh - Durham - Cary (Research Triangle) USL Team but No Big Plans 25. Pittsburgh - New Castle - Weirton 34. Milwaukee - Racine - Waukesha Not Paying Attention 17. Cleveland - Akron - Canton (Northeast Ohio)
Using that logic you can easily get to 38 but you want a couple of non-MLS cities chomping at the bit to put pressure on any underperforming teams. So I would stop at 34 for now. I'm starting to like the idea that I think @barroldinho and maybe a couple of others came up with, which would cap single-entity membership but allow for additional "guest" teams to play on a pro/rel basis. In other words, the single-entity owners would have a MLS spot guaranteed but 4-6 top USL teams would compete in MLS each season on a pro/rel basis.
While population is one consideration, market saturation is another, and not just sports. SD isn't known as a great sports town, because why be in a stadium with everything else to do. So population and entertainment saturation is a big consideration hence the success in Portland and SLC, of course there are exceptions but when ranking cities where MLS could place a team, it's an important factor.
For 30-32, it is not who wants to be in MLS, but who does MLS want to maximize future TV contracts, because that is where the money is. TV wants a big national footprint covering all major population areas, and plenty of inventory to have a game a day on national tv (at least 5 of 7 days). The Big 4 pro sports figured this out and that is why they are rolling in dough. The obvious choices for MLS are (in any order) Charlotte (Raleigh in reserve), Detroit (Indy in reserve) and Phoenix (LV in reserve).
I think for 30-32, it's going to come down to which cities have investment groups willing to pay $250-300 million in expansion fees, and build a SSS at a cost of $300+ million. Going beyond that, expansion fees will likely grow beyond $400 million as the business grows. TV wants viewers. MLS is giving them more of those every year.
Is 36 teams a option in East & West divisions, Play your own division H & A that's 34 rounds, plus the playoffs with teams from both divisions Coming from Australia, my local knowledge is poor but it seems to fit your existing structure and would provide 18 weekly games
Unless Detroit has a St Louis like reboot, they are most likely out. I can't see them getting an expansion franchise within 30. unless a rich group comes up with prime land and a stadium deal soon, I don't see them getting in within 32. I don't believe MLS needs them for a big TV contract no matter the large viewership population. Indy > Detroit. Detroit is dead, they need a rebirth, MLS will not wait for them.