http://www.nasl.com/article/uuid/19...-to-compete-for-the-championship#.Uw-OZfldX16 Spring and Fall Champion will host a semi final game against the two best non champions from those season and then the winners will play the final for the Soccer Bowl trophy..team with best combined sproing and fall record gets to host. Overall, i have to say while im not a huge fan of playoffs i think this format is the best ive seen as it rewards the split season winners adequately, gives a couple other teams a chance to compete, and incentives the spring winner to play in fall as the home field in final is determine by overall record.
I think this is a great solution. The split-season haters will like that they get nearly everything they want from this solution. It fixes the problem where the Spring season champion has no incentive to perform in the Fall. And the fact that two of the spots are reserved for the next best combined records means that in most cases you will get the four best teams in the playoffs. But the deviations from the traditional system still give the split seasons importance. The winners of each season are rewarded with the higher seeds. You still get the chance to make start from 0 in the fall. And fact that only 4 teams make the playoffs makes every regular season game meaningful. Sure, neither side will be getting everything they want, but really both sides have a lot to be happy about with this format. Edit: I basically said what Osack said, but the point stands
Oh yes this is much much better. It maximizes the interest of the Spring season, The fall season, as well as the overall season. Coming down the stretch of the 2014 season there will be more teams with something to play for. It assures that the club with the overall best record will be in the playoffs. That was probably the biggest problem having a club with the best season record not being in the playoffs made no sense
I don't think that is correct. The Spring and Fall winners get to host the semifinals but against the best remaining teams from the overall season, not the "best non-champions from those seasons". You could have the #3 and #4 seeds be teams that were not in the top two in either of the individual seasons. At least that is how I read it.
As is the case with any one of a number of other "traditional" (yet not "authentic") playoff formats. The anti-playoff people have long said they cheapen the regular season. Realistic people have said that giving teams something realistic to play for late in the season is good for business and fan interest.
The way I read it is that now they have established – or have made more clear – that the season is divided in three different parts: Spring, Fall and "The Championship". Each are somewhat independent of the other, but 'The Championship' is related in such way that one cannot simply ignore the other tournaments for the sake of the former. I like it.
I think it's an improvement, but I'm hoping for single season w/ top 4 teams making playoffs (plus a supporters trophy for the regular season points winner). We're partially there now. Maybe next year.
There is a "Single Season" which defines two or three spots at 'The Championship'. It also seeds the teams (1-2 and 3-4). Hence, there are two split seasons, one single season, and the playoffs. Now, they only need to add a "Shield" for the best team overall like in MLS.
Yes! Sorry, it was created last year, and I did not know. http://www.woosnamcup.com/ So I amend my comment above to say that, then, I wish the league pay attention to it like MLS does. There are for trophies teams should be aiming at: Spring League Fall League Woosnam Cup The Championship I would consider them in equal footing.
The 2013 winners: Spring League: Atlanta Silverbacks Fall League: New York Cosmos Woosnam Cup: Carolina Railhawks The Championship/Soccer Bowl: New York Cosmos
That's how it would have been last year: #4 @ #1: Tampa Bay Rowdies at Atlanta Silverbacks #3 @ #2: Carolina Railhawks at New York Cosmos Regular season results: TB 2-1(s); 1-1(f) ATL CAR 0-4(f) NY The final could have been Rowdies at Cosmos. In the Fall, Cosmos has beaten Rowdies, 4-3.
For all the convoluted crap the league does, if they're going to keep the split season, this isn't a bad way to go with it.
The is the only setup that gives the split season any legitimacy, so I'm fine with it for now. I still can't accept a format that creates the very real (and already experienced) scenario where the two best teams in the league for an entire calendar year are not seeded. At least this gets those two teams into the playoffs and gives them a shot to win it all. And I do like that the Fall now takes on more significance. I just don't get why a split season is needed to decide these spots. It's being different for the sake of being different, rather than adding anything meaningful or necessary to the game and the format. These changes do remove some of the ridiculous scenarios that were possible last year, so its a bit more than just lipstick on a pig in this case. But I won't become a fan of the split season, despite the changes.
I am fan of split seasons, so I am biased. But who doesn't?! The point of a split season is to increase competitiveness. The tournaments are shorter, so the climax is closer to the beginning, making harder for a team or two to put distance on the rivals. Also, it gives teams that started bad a second chance on the other half of the season because everybody start from scratch again. NASL, last year, opted for the current Argentine model. This year, it opted for something like the Uruguayan, where the season aggregate matters. I think they got it right.