Who's excited? If it appears that we're excited it is because we're apparently responding to people, such as yourself, that have no reading comprehension skills. So, just to repeat myself here, and I'll try to use small words so maybe you'll understand this time, FIFA Congress passed a new rule/regulation last year that said from that point forward if pro/rel were implemented for the first time by a federation the only criteria that could be used was a team's performance on the field. This rule/regulation does not apply to existing pro/rel structures, but it was hoped they would get the hint and comply with the new rule/regulation. What this means is that if MLS were to implement pro/rel, they could not use financial requirements, buy-in requirements, stadium requirements, etc. to prevent a team from being promoted, or force a team to be relegated if they didn't meet those requirements. So, if MLS were to implement a pro/rel system that did have criteria other than a team's performance on the field it would be in violation of this rule/regulation, which, I'd imagine, is a touch worse than ignoring FiFA's wish that all counties have pro/rel and would actually be a sanctionable offense. Hopefully you understand the situation now and understand that just because other federations currently use other criteria to determine if a team is promoted or relegated in addition to their performance on the field, it does not mean that MLS could do so.
Could you be so nice, and post a link to this new rule by FIFA, as I'm lacking other comprehension skills beside reading ones, and couldn't find it myself. This is very interesting though. As it is in complete opposition with UEFA rules, being more precise: it's in opposition to UEFA club licensing which started few years ago. And UEFA is member of FIFA. Here is the basic link, where you can have see other links: http://www.uefa.com/uefa/keytopics/kind=128/index.html Even though at first glance this requirments are for international UEFA competitions, in fact UEFA encourages FAs to implement similar requirements in their domestic league systems. My home country started to implement these requirements under UEFA recommendations to its pyramid. Here it's a copy paste from one of the .pdfs on that site: The national association is encouraged to apply a licensing system to govern participation in its domestic competitions. For this purpose the national association is free to increase, decrease, or introduce additional minimum criteria in its national club licensing regulations for the purpose of entering the domestic competitions. It would be very interesting if it would turn out that changes implemented by UEFA and FIFA in the last decade are in complete opposition. Maybe your link could solve this question now.
My dear overexcited Yoshou, we both underestimated my comprehension skills -- AS I THINK I FOUND the rule, you were talking about, it's in FIFA Congress 2008 Agenda:http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/bodies/fifa%5fcongress%5f08%5fagenda%5f47752.pdf Here I copy-pasted the part that concerns pro/rel. I took the liberty and bolded some interesting parts: 13.2 REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE APPLICATION OF THE STATUTES 13.2.2 Sporting integrity – principle of promotion and relegation Explanation: In accordance with art. 2 (e) of the FIFA Statutes, FIFA is committed to preventing all methods or practices which might jeopardise the integrity of matches or competitions or give rise to abuse of association football. One corollary of this objective is the principle that entitlement to take part in a domestic league championship must depend primarily on sporting merit. This entitlement can also be made conditional upon the fulfi lment of particular fi nancial criteria set as part of club licensing procedures. There have recently been cases of attempts to facilitate qualifi cation for a particular competition and/or the issue of a licence through the implementation at short notice of procedures permitted under company law. Pursuant to the above-mentioned provision of the Statutes, such practices, which compromise the sporting integrity of competitions, must be combated and prevented. On the basis of the above, a new provision should therefore be included as art. 19 of the Regulations Governing the Application of the Statutes. VIII. SPORTING INTEGRITY (NEW) Art. 19 – Principle of promotion and relegation (new) 1 A club’s entitlement to take part in a domestic league championship shall depend principally on sporting merit. A club shall qualify for a domestic league championship by remaining in a certain division or by being promoted or relegated to another at the end of a season. 2 In addition to qualifi cation on sporting merit, a club’s participation in a domestic league championship may be subject to other criteria within the scope of the licensing procedure, whereby the emphasis is on sporting, infrastructural, administrative, legal and fi nancial considerations. Licensing decisions must be able to be examined by the Member’s body of appeal. 3 Altering the legal form or company structure of a club to facilitate its qualifi cation on sporting merit and/or its receipt of a licence for a domestic league championship, to the detriment of the integrity of a sports competition, is prohibited. This includes, for example, changing the headquarters, changing the name or transferring stakeholdings between different clubs. Prohibitive decisions must be able to be examined by the Member’s body of appeal. 4 Each Member is responsible for deciding national issues, which may not be delegated to the leagues. Each Confederation is responsible for deciding issues involving more than one Association concerning its own territory. FIFA is responsible for deciding international issues involving more than one Confederation. So, it seems you were somehow... somehow overexcitedly wrong.
I think FIFA's concern is more about clubs being promoted arbitrarily rather than earning it - take the reformed Fiorentina's jump straight from the 4th tier to the 2nd on the whim of the Italian league.
So what I'm reading here is that I shouldn't trust FIFA press releases? http://www.fifa.com/aboutfifa/federation/bodies/media/newsid=783663.html Bastards.
Exactly. I see you Americans are pretty fresh in following football, as here the first rule a child learns about soccer, is not the rule about offside, but the rule about FIFA press releases, it goes like this: "Don't you ever trust official FIFA press release, or at least check the small print"
Promotion and Relegation make soccer the most popular sport on the planet. To all of you who think that fans in Europe are just going to sit back while you take the future of their lower division clubs from them, think again. Yes, promotion and relegation would be better. But MLS is built to insulate owners from risk, and at the top of that list of risks is relegation. They are entitled to first div status, and would rather enforce mediocrity on our league than open it up. Institutional change is the only way. A brave President of US Soccer could change it all with a stroke of a pen. www.soccerreform.us
A couple of things: 1. There is no realistic way that pro/rel could be implemented in the US and Canada, under our current system. It simply will not work in a league or leagues, where franchise rights are bought and sold for that particular league. People forget that these are not independent clubs which join the league system of their own free will; these are teams which are formed after the franchise rights have been purchased from said league by said team. Furthermore, these leagues are private entities unto themselves, and are only affiliated with US Soccer, after of course paying an affiliation fee thorough the league (which, I imagine, is included in their franchise and league fees). In other words, these leagues are not mere designations which are administered and operated by US Soccer; they have to pay to be affiliates of the federation, and through US Soccer, FIFA. 2. As such, there can be no "promotion" or "relegation" between leagues in the US. MLS, NASL (in 2011), USL (if they survive), and NPSL are independent of each other, and there could not be any movement between them, unless a buttload of money changes hands, which would most certainly entail a USL/NASL/whoever team playing MLS $40 mil, and an NPSL paying the NASL/USL/whoever $750K (or whatever the NASL is going to charge for new teams), to be an expansion franchise in whichever league. That is not promotion; that is deciding that your team is ready to take it to the next level, and you buy into the next highest league. Likewise, any "moving down," unless it's from one USL level to another, would require an MLS team to pay the NASL/USL/whoever the $750K to join the league as an expansion franchise. Ditto for moving down to NPSL (although they are waaaay cheaper). 3 (okay, more than a couple; sue me ). Do you think for one second that an owner in MLS will tolerate his/her team being sent down to Division 2, even if their team went 0-30-2? No freakin' way. They didn't pay $20-40 million to end up playing in Miami in front of the players' families and the stadium staffers. They'll just take their ball and go home. Likewise, will any NASL/USL team risk folding up shop at midseason, because they can no longer compete financially, after having to upgrade their team and facilities to make the jump to MLS if they get promoted? Very, very doubtful. So, you end up with MLS losing a team a year, and nobody going up from D-2. 4. Do you all realize that this thread has been going on for almost eight years? I didn't read it all, and I'm sure that what I said was mostly preaching to the choir. But good grief, can we please give this a rest? It ain't happenin', 'nuff said, and all of the "Yeah, but what about if they did this..." isn't going to change it. And if they ever did try it, it would be a colossal disaster, and could destroy pro soccer in this country for years to come. Stick a fork in it, somebody! Please!
My vote for dumbest BS post of the millenium. The US Soccer president doesn't have that kind of power. If he even tried it, he'd be voted out in a week. That, or we'd be devoid of pro soccer for years to come.
More likely, you need a wooden stake driven through the heart with some garlic bulbs and a small crucifix on you in order to kill it. Because these pro/rel pimps won't die with their wet dream.
Stability? More people watched World Cup Matches in 2006 than World Series or NBA Finals games. We were the first independent member of FIFA north of Argentina (before Brazil) until the early 1920s. Soccer is here, has been here, and we are ready. Stability can't be defined as how well American sports team owners, entitled to first div status, can jam it into our domestic sports model. The league is unstable because the MLS single entity produces a stunted version of the game that can't capture the imagination of the average US soccer supporter. We can sit around and keep waiting for MLS to catch up with the popularity of the game, or admit it's a messed up model whose failure has nothing to do with how popular the game is in the USA. I vote for option B.
MLS is designed to shield investors from risk at all costs, and depends on xenophopes who blame "eurosnobs" for attacking the American game, by shunning MLS. In my opinion, any league that is permanantly entitled first division status, that strives for parity through enfoced mediocrity, should be shunned. It's not about protecting owners from risk, it's about providing good, unlimited soccer. It's a core philisophical division. MLS concentrates on new stadiums and new teams, not quality of play. Is it any wonder twenty five times more Americans watch pro wrestling?
Yes. It should be more popular among American soccer supporters than MLS very soon, seeing as WWE averages twenty five times more cable TV viewers than our entitled little first division. Crap? You mean like the Crap Shoot that is MLS?
All european sports have promotion/relegation. Their basketball leagues, hockey leagues, dart leagues, rugby leagues, even their American Football Leagues. Promotion/relegation has nothing to do with why the sport is most popular in the world. But please don't let facts get in the way of a good arguement.
If the FA would have adopted a single entity system that strives for parity via enforced mediocrity, we wouldn't be here chatting about soccer today. MLS problems are not due to the league's "infancy". They are due to a business model that cannot capture the imagination of the average supporter. Try and discuss the opinions, instead of diagnosing the facts.
Nope. I think our domestic sports model works pretty well when the league is widely acknowledged as the best in the world, and when teams are shielded from international competition. MLS is in no danger of being the best in the world, and our clubs are exposed to real international competition. Enforcing mediocrity in the name of parity is about as lame as it gets, and takes away from what makes the game great. And that's why MLS can't attract the average American supporter.
Okay, my opinion is that in America (canada) we do things the way we are used to, which is franchised teams, that are either in the major or minor leagues. Teams move cities from time to time, and leagues can choose to expand and contract at their will. That is what americans are used to and what works. In Europe, and other parts of the world they do it a different way. It's not better, or worse, it's just what works for the people that live there. There is no reason the "euro" soccer in america, just like their is no reason to "americanize" basketball in Greece.
Actually, you name some points to why Americans can't attract more fans, but promotion/relegation is not amongst them. If you were to greatly incrase the salary cap, and allow teams to sign quality players- I am convinced the following trickle down would happen. Better players = more media coverage = better attendence at games = better quality play = increased rating = increased TV and sponsorship dollars = increased interntation rep. Notice how this doesn't involve pro/rel
How do we know it will not work in MLS if you never try...I would do it for one season to see if their is widespread support for pro/rel amongst fans, leave one expansion slot open in MLS for the best NASL team and see what happens.
You know, you keep saying this but whenever you're pressed on how it actually would work you don't answer. So I'll ask yet again: How would NASL owning an expansion slot work within the single-entity structure where players signed by an NASL team would have to be signed by the league and teams owned by an independent investor would have to be added to the MLS single-entity, and conversely the team owned by MLS and players signed by the league would have to be released to a single owner?
If you like quality of play determined at a league level, if you like mediocracy enforced upon clubs to generate parity, if you like to rob supporters of the ability to improve their clubs, you like MLS. And that's OK. Most American supporters disagree.
I appreciate your optimism - and really wish it were this simple. MLS is built to protect owners from relegation. When parity is produced by enforcing mediocrity, it produces the crap shoot that MLS is famous for. What owner, in their right mind, would expose themselves to relegation in this crap shoot? That's why we need systemic reform. www.soccerreform.us