West Ham v Watford is looking like a tasty relegation six-pointer, as is West Ham v Aston Villa on the last day. But if I had to bet on it I'd say that the current bottom three will be the three to go down. At the other end of the table, there's even more than usual to play for given Man City's possible European ban.
To be honest, I don't really understand how sports holding companies work: I thought they were just LLCs for the owner to shield them from liability. Is SS&E's billions based on the valuation of the Spurs?
What I meant was that some clubs would react badly to MLS signing a player and unfairly assigning them to a particular club. If LA want Ronaldo and Ronaldo wants LA then MLS will help facilitate it. If MLS signs a player then allocates him to a particular club for marketing reasons other clubs may object.
... but I thought "playing for playoff spots" just wasn't the same? Oh wait, selective application of principle, that's right. If Villa shows like they did this weekend it will be a dreadful match to watch regardless of what is at stake. And no, there being something at stake doesn't make shit soccer NOT shit soccer. Oh yeah, vast-overwhelming majority of it is. 1.8B was the last valuation. Though they got some pocket money from selling the WNBA Stars and the AHL Rampage to Las Vegas. They've still got the NBADL Austin Spurs under the banner too. 5yrs ago the D-League franchises were in the 5-10M valuations ... I don't see them having dropped especially as the last few years they've become a type of "minor league baseball" type of attraction for celebrities and ownership groups. We know that the fee for a USL Championship team is 10M (IIRC). I'd say that SAFC's valuation would be more than that. For what it's worth transfermarkt has the squad valued at 5.5M (tops in USL). THIS ^ There's a rather large distinction between the two and the facilitation absolutely SHOULD happen and is absolutely the correct decision. The signing/sending for market purposes yes, is shit.
Watching the League Two playoffs I commented multiple times that there were shining examples of why these teams were in League Two.
Not sure what point you're trying to make.A fourth level playoff will feel like fourth level football.
That was my point, yes. I was agreeing with @HailtotheKing that just because it was a playoff game didn't mean the soccer wasn't still bad soccer at times (but enjoyable to watch).
A playoff game with something that simply doesn't exist in US closed leagues - a promotion place. I don't know what that poster wrote, but for me it's having something really significant on the line that makes sport great. Pro/rel adds significance that simply doesn't exist in US closed leagues.
Hummm so kind of a low bar when your defense is "at least we don't fix matches". Also a prime example of Whatabatoury". And for the record I would hope MLS isn't fixing matches I am not accusing them of doing that. And yes that's a problem in Italy, if you haven't been paying attention though Serie A is definitely the sick man of the four European Leagues partially because of constant accusations of match fixing that are hard to deny when we know it's happened in the past. So what's your point? That because Italy has a tradition of match fixing that goes back over 100 years MLS should be excused from manipulating the destination of players for marketing purposes? Going to have to draw me a road map to explain that one. (And yes for the record I do watch more Serie A games than MLS. Not entirely sure why I find it more interesting. Probably connected to the fact that my first exposure to club football was in the mid 90's when Serie A was king. But I only watch as a neutral, would have major issues watching Serie A through a specific club because of the history of match fixing) They are absolutely fundamentally different. They are not the same thing. This is what I hope. But I want to be clear, your argument seems to be, "this was necessary then but MLS should no longer need to do this." I just want to clarify that if MLS went back to this again you would be I think I understand you I just don't think MLS has closed the door on this, and I believe that most if not all owners would bite their tongues because of the increased value it would bring to the league as a whole. Imagine a world where Ronaldo will only come to MLS if he gets to play in LA and MLS shifts to NIKE . NIKE comes to MLS execs and the deal is a good one and even better NIKE well rearrange their contract Cristiano so his cap number isn't that high and the Galaxy can actually put a good team around him, which hey is also good for the league. This scenario is plausible. And my expectation is the owners and fans would go along with it.
The only part I have an issue with is Ronaldo's salary essentially being paid by Nike to keep his cap hit down. But I have no issue with Ronaldo saying "If I go to the U.S. I'll only play in LA" and I have no issue with Nike going to the league and showing them that getting Ronaldo and switching from Adidas to Nike would be a net benefit for the league.
My hope is you are right. And if you are then it would show a shift in the thinking of fans. Fair enough, and obviously we are dealing with a continuum not a binary right or wrong decision. But from this discussion it does appear that people in here who broadly support MLS way expanding the sport also agree that MLS should not intervene in transfers now like they have in the past. Is that a fair summary?
I support NYC FC, who happen to play in MLS. I also support the growth and stability of professional soccer in the US and MLS is the vehicle for that. I don't support a situation where the league and/or sponsors favor one team over another. As a rule I don't agree with everything MLS does or how it's run but if you live in America, or anywhere else for that matter, there are worse things to worry about.
I take offense with it, simply because Nike should push players they're paying for to play near their world HQ. Never mind that this happens to be quite close to the team I support.
It's the selective application of things that I refer to all the time in this discussion. MUCH WORSE things happen in leagues all over the place. MLS is the only one crucified for anything it does (in regards to our conversation). EVERYTHING done by say .... Italy or Mexico or Russia or wherever is justified or explained away. Should MLS or US Soccer be the one though ... ... half of this discussion is about the perception of MLS. It isn't whataboutism when I'm pointing out the fact that those with shit perceptions of MLS are flat out ignoring or justifying away things that are just as damning to leagues they hold as soccer gold. The way the money is funneled to the top ... I'm not so sure. I would be what? I'm stating fact. MLS had/did need to do things. If someone can't see or understand that then they truly don't and never did understand the fragile ice soccer was on when MLS kicked off. I think I understand you I just don't think MLS has closed the door on this, and I believe that most if not all owners would bite their tongues because of the increased value it would bring to the league as a whole. Imagine a world where Ronaldo will only come to MLS if he gets to play in LA and MLS shifts to NIKE . NIKE comes to MLS execs and the deal is a good one and even better NIKE well rearrange their contract Cristiano so his cap number isn't that high and the Galaxy can actually put a good team around him, which hey is also good for the league. This scenario is plausible. And my expectation is the owners and fans would go along with it.[/QUOTE] I 100% second what @JasonMa replied to this
Supporters are not gonna be happy!!!! After the resignation of Clemens Tönnies, Schalke have announced a realignment of the club. Huge cost cutting & new sporting goals.- Reaching Europe no longer a goal.- Marketing Chief Alexander Jobst: “Today is a watershed for Schalke. We can’t & won’t continue as before.” https://t.co/KDL9XTUFEc— Derek Rae (@RaeComm) July 1, 2020 A Championship Level club going into Administration???? 😧 “I’m shocked. I cannot understand what [the owners] have done.” 🤝 “When I sold the club it was in good condition! Perfect!”🙏 “I’m going to have to see if I can help Wigan in some shape or form.”Ex-#WAFC owner Dave Whelan reacts to the club going into administration. pic.twitter.com/utcFEEJZ6e— talkSPORT (@talkSPORT) July 1, 2020
Definition of Whataboutism: the technique or practice of responding to an accusation or difficult question by making a counteraccusation or raising a different issue. Me: Are you concerned that MLS, in order to make the entire league more marketable, will advantage certain clubs over others? You: Why don't you call out Serie A for match fixing? That is the definition of whataboutism, literally. I am not ignoring or justifying anything. By the way anytime you are using the pronoun "they" it sounds vague and to me is pretty damm close to a strawman argument. Don't use "they" give me specifics. In a perfect world use my own words, not what you think I think. And if you don't understand how a club paying it's own huge money to bring in a player is different than a league, helping a club to pay huge money than I don't know what else to say. At first yeah, we probably disagree after that but overall I agree there was a point where it was worth it. I don't think it's worth it now though.
Hard to see how there won't be a multitude of "minor league" teams going bankrupt all over the world. Administration/Chapter 11 may be the best outcome for many. Their main income stream has simply evaporated.
Well they are in Greece and Belgium. It's how they decide their league title and Euro spots. In Holland they have playoffs for Euro qualification.
We are just at the start of this storm. My expectation is that world sport as we know it is completely "restructured" and European football starts to look a lot more like American sports. Guessing we'll have some form of pro/rel, at least in the domestic leagues, but probably will be different than what we know now.