That's overstating it, and not just by a little. Although those leagues have hundreds of clubs between them, only about 30 clubs in all three leagues combined are not in metro areas of over 1 million. The UPSL is especially clustered around major cities; six UPSL conferences are contained entirely within a single metropolitan area, and many more are contained entirely within two major metropolitan areas.
It's not unusual for UPSL teams to share the same stadium. The entire Southeast Conference Florida Central Division calls Young Pine Community Park home, and no fewer than 14 teams across 4 divisions base themselves at Lake Forest Sports Park in California.
To correct myself, Young Pine Community Park doesn't have a stadium, just a couple of pitches in the baseball outfield.
To correct myself, Young Pine Community Park doesn't have a stadium, just a couple of pitches in the baseball outfield.
Maybe I'm missing your point here, but very few of those teams in L2 or NPSL have another team in the same metro area, so New Orleans Jesters' competitors are from Gulfport (short trip) to Jacksonville (long trip); Inter Nashville's closest rival is in Huntsville, etc. Out west, this is even more extreme. Midland Odessa's conference includes Denton and Brownsville. Yes, the largest cities will likely have more than 1 (although generally not many more), but their conference will cover multiple states.
You mentioned hundreds of teams. If we leave out UPSL, for the reasons mentioned above, there are 175. Those teams play an average of 7 away games. Not arguing, just clarifying.
Just skimming the list, I've already counted around 40 or so in UPSL that also fit the profile, so I'm not UPSL is that much of an exception. This also ignores all of the regional leagues. I mean, yes, I guess I still misinterpreted the original point, but metro size really doesn't seem to have that much impact because there are lots of teams in very small metros that travel to other metros. It also ignores where a team plays in a metro area: I'm not counting teams way out in the suburbs/exurbs. I doubt many are making a trek from Islip or New Brunswick to catch Stockade matches, but I left them out because they're in the NYC metro area.
That's what I'm saying! Yet they'd fall into "metro areas larger than 1 million", despite being at the edge, rather than anywhere near the center. And lots of NPSL/USL2/UPSL teams are like that. But, regardless, it's hard to try to make much sense of the amateur game here without acknowledging college soccer's effect on the situation.
Why it's not smart to take money spent as a gauge to success. PSV spent more on the bench than on what they do play on the pitch. https://www.ed.nl/psv/psv-betaalde-...kansing-voor-de-jong-wordt-cruciaal~a631c674/ use google translate if interested.
The most extraordinary thing about the FFP row is that 6yo kids in the playground taking turns to pick sides and moving players between teams to keep it competitive have a more advanced understanding of fairness in football than the adult fans of clubs with wealthy owners.— Martin Calladine (@uglygame) February 18, 2020
They would want a system that lessens the competition. So how is the champions league doing that? That's what you need to explain. The current format of the champions league does reduce parity across Europe. Not disagreeing on that, and there are a lot of reasons for it. But the "Pro/rel" aspect of Champions league is NOT one of the things driving this. As a matter of fact it is one of the few counter weights, because it's purely based on where you finish not on how much money you bring to the competition. In a world where the Champions league participation was decided on pure financial importance you had better believe Man United and Arsenal would be there at the expense of Atalanta, Lyon, or Valencia.
In the Prem (or any domestic league) it lessens the competition by continuously stuffing the coffers at the top end. In the CL itself it expanded to let in lesser teams. We've seen the overwhelming corresponding of money spent and table placement in domestic leagues. The rich outspend their domestic counterparts and continually "promote" to the CL. That, in turn helps to create the separation of the top end from the rest of the table. We've had more than one person cite that exact thing in this discussion.
This is fun. Lower league soccer map. UPSL NISA NPSL USL (all) NCAA NPSL, USL and NISA It's all mapped in Google Earth so if you click on the link you can zoom in. Also, from the history vault. The 2018 USA Lower League Soccer map is now available! Click the link below to access!https://t.co/UPYydZJEnk pic.twitter.com/C9UocKNjYl— Roots Up Podcast (@RootsUpPod) March 9, 2018
And this has what to do with the pro/rel aspect of the champions league? Assuming that you would still have some sort of European wide competition.
I was referring specifically to the way Champions league places are being chosen. The argument was pro/rel is creating the lack of parity, and since the champions league uses a system that is sort of like pro/rel to choose it's places, and the champions league is helping the lack of parity, then pro/rel is creating the lack of parity. An argument I strongly disagreed with, although I don't disagree that the Champs league is growing the wealth divide, just the idea that pro/rel is at fault.
Only 3 Ascenso clubs are objecting: Cafetaleros, Correcaminos and Leones Negros. Several will become USL style affiliates or possibly reserve teams, at least in the short- term. The hiatus is supposed to benefit first and second division teams financially.