http://www.nasl.com/article/puerto-rico-islanders-join-nasl http://www.insidemnsoccer.com/2010/...h-official-join-north-american-soccer-league/ InsideMinnesotaSoccer speculate on which NASL clubs can meet the USSF D2 requirements and which will need a waiver. I only paste a few, click to read the rest of the blog. http://www.insidemnsoccer.com/2010/08/18/quelling-rumors-a-ussf-d2-update/ Here's a fan speculation on which clubs can meet the USSF D2 requirements: http://www.insidemnsoccer.com/2010/...nal-league-standards/comment-page-1/#comments Posted by Eric:
Good synopsis so far. I feel the big issue with the new USSF Div 2 standards is the US based teams rule. Both Montreal and Vancouver wanted to keep NASL squads post MLS joining. Even if MLS agreed to that, the USSF won't let those two deep pockets into the league unless they have US based franchises. Too bad. I do think that it may lead to a Canadian based 2nd division which would hurt Div 2 status for the NASL in the future.
I don't know if Vancouver's still planning on leaving a "feeder" team in the NASL. I don't recall them announcing one, and if they were going to field such ateam for 2011, you'd think such a team would be mentioned in the NASL D2 bid announcement. At any rate, I don't see why the USSF wouldn't allow Montreal's "feeder" team in, since it would just be replacing an outgoing non-US team.
I am just amused at how many people are apparently so certain that the USSF will sanction the NASL. Not saying it won't happen. Just saying that I don't see how anyone can be certain about it.
It just sounded like you had some inside info and knew what was going to happen. You seemed certain that people would be surprised...
Now that the reserve league is almost a lock to come back next year, It would be redundant for Vancouver to have a team in NASL.
You mean aside from the reserve league serving a completely different purpose than a developmental team in a lower league?
BTW, I got corrected on this part farther down the IMS discussion: Tampa Bay has managed to fit a field in Steinbrenner that meets the USSF requirements, so they should actually be in the 'meet all standards' list. And to fill out a little more detail on other part of it: Austin would need a stadium waiver for the field size. Edmonton would need a stadium waiver for capacity. From discussions I've seen elsewhere, Cooper *can't* handle the money calls. He's worth more than $20 million, but it's all wrapped up in ways that are not liquid.
I thought Tampa's field was only 104 yards long? The problem is that the USSF requirements on the IMS website say the fields have to be 110 x 70. They've got the 70, but not the 110.
You're right. My memory is so crappy, it's sad. So, Tampa doesn't meet the requirements after all. My initial list was correct.
The only reason I remembered that is because I had just finished reading the post and comments section and saw WSW and your discussion about it.
There is no "maybe" option in the poll, only yes or no. And people like to be positive for the most part, I assume. Also you make a statement of finality here as well. "There is going to be..." You don't know anything more than the rest of us, so why dampen the enthusiasm?
pc4th, who seems to live only to create polls (by the way has he ever posted in this forum before starting this mess?), actually isn't very good at it.
Sometimes I think he's just making the polls because people expect it and recognize him as "The BS Poll Guy." I mean, when I see "poll" in a thread title, I immediately know who the thread creator was. Internet fame, ftw.
Do we have any word on any other possible expansion teams? I don't think that the USSF would be so stupid as to not allow feeder teams to partake in the D-2...but then again this is the USSF we're talking about.
I would hope so, considering that USL isn't even applying for D2 status / sanctioning. I think it's all going to come down to how quickly NASL ownership can bring in help / additional investors for the troubled groups and how long USSF is willing to give them to meet these new standards. But I think they are going to be fairly hard line on the % of US based teams. That would make sense, they are the US Soccer Federation their goal is to build soccer here.
If US soccer goes states handing out wavers or exceptions to their standards... then ... well ... why have standards at all?
As a guideline moving forward. Standards are all well and good but if you kill off D2 entirely what good are they?
It makes perfect sense to grandfather existing teams in. You don't want to strangle D2 soccer by immediately applying rigid standards to existing clubs.