Wait, how did I make it off your ignore list? Or was I never really on? Thanks for the name calling though. Good to see you're completely out of rational arguments too!
Your Sounders remain safe in the MLS biodome. Don't worry, they will remain safely in their bubble as long as MLS is around. Saved from the harsh vacuum of real soccer.
You ever see the movie bubble boy? So sad to hear you won't be contributing - but glad you're fresh out of arguments.
You like a league that controls clubs, like Taco Bell controls it's restaurants. Why are you afraid to say it?
Your defense is: Close eyes tightly to any successful model outside of the USA. Ignore the fact that the league controls performance levels, and likely attendance levels, of every club. Stutter out insults to anyone who disagrees.
False. Your head probably exploded at the thought of having to fill out paperwork and you're just putting up a facade. You may feel less informed, but in fact, you got lawyered.
Because Scotland has a tiny percentage of the population, and GDP, of the United States of America. After a quiet period, suddenly a deluge of easily countered arguments. Come on y'all! Insults are easy to counter, as are comparisons to smaller economies and developing nations. I expect better!
According to Wiki: It should be noted that the Prime Directive is a Starfleet regulation, and thus only applies to Starfleet officers. Civilian citizens of the Federation are not bound by it. So, as a civilian, I am free to question your backasswards soccer model.
Just like we have questioned yours, and you have yet to respond with any concrete plan for how promotion and relegation will be implemented.
and what form will those population and GDP advantages take? Crowds of 200,000 at each game perhaps? Or maybe fans will pay $300 a ticket. Really, have you thought about what it would take for any MLS club to be able to afford salaries at a level nearly 50% higher than the NFL clubs pay? Because that's what you'd need to do to match the top clubs. Chelsea's wage bill (which doesn't include transfer fees) is double the NFL cap. any argument is easy to counter when you ignore the point behind it. by the way, Scotland hasn't been a developing nation for about 300 years.
The model is established, the transfer laid out. My only mission is to build a significant group of supporters who get it, so as to remove one leg of the unstable closed league rationale that MLS needs to keep their hold on the top of the pyramid. Next up - Sunil Gulati - an honest to goodness, walking, talking conflict of interest...
Yes, you are correct about Scotland. I was referring to earlier comparisons between the US, India and China made by other posters... By acknowledging the salary gap, you seem to be acknowledging that the MLS salary cap does limit the performance of every club. Alls I'm sayin' is to let individual owners decide how much to pay their players, instead of letting the league enforce quality of play on the entire league. How many times more is Chelsea's payroll than the MLS cap? Let's start there instead.
Show me where I'm wrong. And, while you're at it, answer some of the other 2000 questions you haven't answered on this thread.
Nobody on here as actually denied the fact that the single entity is somewhat controlling. You've constantly tried to make it out like we have. This is the definition of filler. Nothing, put into the context of something, to fill the gaps. Sadly for you the gaps are cavernous and your filler falls far short of the desired result. As opposed to your argument: Disregard the successful model for the American sports culture. Ignore the fact that nobody disagrees with you that there is a certain measure of control within the league model. Talk out of your ass in every direction possible hoping people are as ignorant and misguided as you are in order to trap a sucker. Not surprisingly you've completely missed or ignored the point once again. Your entire point was that the MLS was keeping Seattle's Premier level support from making Seattle a Premier level club. You blamed the system. A perfect example of your support was cited in an open league with the mention of Celtic. You then tried to shift the argument to Scotland's GDP and other issues with the country. So then it has much more to do with just the league model then .... a point which you've ignored/haven't comprehended the entire thread. Thanks for illustrating both perfectly. Nobody has disagreed with you on the basic premise that you don't like the model. That has never been the issue. No, you haven't laid out the transfer ... and in fact, have said that THERE IS NO MODEL FOR TRANSITION. So here we are with you caught in a bold face lie. You want to build a group that "get it." All we've asked, is WHAT THE ******** IT IS ! No, not for Europe or South America, but for the United States. We know "what" you're proposing .. we want to know "how" you propose to do it in the context of the United States and the way the business of sport is conducted here. You cannot, have refused to, and will not answer that question. That is why you are insulted and slagged of as nothing but dunce. Another bold face lie is that the closed league rationale is unstable. That is simply not true and with the slew of teams in serious financial trouble (as cited by an article I showed you earlier in the thread) that number a quarter of those across Europe in the top 53 leagues in your open system, shows that it is in fact much much more stable than the system you want. Lastly, you cling to the American soccer pyramid being a true soccer pyramid, which it isn't. As you are well aware the American game (and all sports) don't follow the same rules as those outside our borders. On that simple premise our pyramid cannot be the one you try to say it is.
If you believe that soccer is best run on a domestically focused, closed, single entity model, that we're not a soccer nation, that Americans cannot understand pro/rel, that there's a century long track record of successful open leagues v bankrupt closed leagues, I'm stumped. I'm not wasting time or space in here on the rest of your inaccurate reads on the IRS code.
No, it's the fact that in the United States it is best run as it currently is. Future, perhaps change and that is something that all of us here have agreed on/acknowleged. Other things need to happen first.
I cannot make a better argument for the need for reform than this post does. - Clinging desperately to the closed league, and the ''cultural" references to it, despite a century of failure when applied to club soccer. - Saying the US pyramid "isn't real" - Sky is falling arguments about open leagues, and one club in danger of imminent collapse - inferring that the sound, chain restaurant business model of MLS is the only lifeline for American club soccer. - taking posts out of context. There is no model for MLS, like McDonald's, to willingly divest. Without divesting power to individual clubs, a true system of pro/rel cannot be instituted. I use this to question the voracity of league officials who claim to embrace the concept of pro/rel, but depend on a false belief that soccer is a tiny niche sport, in need of intensive care that only they can provide. - bizarre claims that salary caps don't prohibit owners from building the best clubs they can. Yes, clubs like Celtic are limited by a host of factors. NOT by any arbitrary policies of the SPL. Hostage Mentality: Keep your eyes shut, believe that soccer would never survive without MLS, and that open leagues are foreign concepts uncomprehendable by the average American. That no businessman in their right mind could possibly run a top professional sports team outside of the insulating bubble of the closed league, profit sharing, and in the case of MLS and Arena Football, extra perks of the single entity. Whose the dunce?