Sorry, I am European, so I am not familiar with the very concept of "expansion draft" (we never have any of that in any of our sport leagues, here in Europe), but doesn't the fact that most teams have "bought themselves" immunity to the draftleave little sense to the draft itself?
It forces teams to have to give up something like players or college draft picks in return protect their own players they value more while new clubs get some “good” players as well as college players in college draft. So even if there is no draft, because all teams had to pay for protection that means the new teams had got something they value in return.
Another example I forgot to mention, Chicago Red Stars had to trade an international spot to San Diego. That means San Diego can have 6 international players in the roster instead of the maximum 5 allowed. Chicago will only have 4 international spots because they trade it away. Unless another club wants that international spot for their own roster they could negotiate with San Diego by trading a player for it. Or more.
You're used to a system where there is generally an oversupply of teams. The problem isn't filling out a league, it's deciding how big is big enough. One thing to keep people from suing because they're left out is to add mechanisms like pro/rel. In the United States, we have the other problem. Not enough teams. You start with what you got. And part of that is getting everyone to invest in the group project (skin in the game is a common phrase). Part of growing involves adding new teams via expansion. As a league becomes more desirable and valuable, spots in the league have more value. But adding a team can limit the economic potential of existing teams. At some point expansion doesn't, by itself, make the financial pie any larger. Budweiser is giving the league X dollars in sponsorship per year, not X dollars per team. Same with Nike and CBS and so on. The more teams, the less revenue per team. A solution is to make expansion teams pay and "expansion fee". Now the cranks over in the MLS forum try to posit that as a Ponzi Scheme - original investors getting rich at the expense of expansion teams. Couldn't be further for the truth. The Expansion Fee is basically the same as buying stock. You're buying 1/10th (NWSL) or 1/28th (MLS) of the overall league. There's value in that. You're lowering the value of each of the existing teams and the Fee is basically your buy in. But nobody gives money for nothing. And teams with no players or assets are at a huge disadvantage against existing teams with rosters that have been slowly built over years. Part of the negotiations for expansion are mechanisms to allow expansion teams to get some immediate return on their investment. They need to have some level of competitiveness on the field in order to sell tickets and merchandise. A team full of raw rookies is going to get rolled. The players union tends to like these drafts as it can allow a player that is under contract and buried behind a locked in starter can have being taken in an expansion draft as an opportunity to get a chance to get on the field. Interestingly, both LigaMX and Major League Baseball have similar mechanisms that allow teams to take players from other teams - google MLB Rule V Draft, but I digress. Effectively it's a roster stocking draft. There's a balance to be found between starving expansion teams and giving them too much. I think we're seeing that SD and LA are in great positions, and I would expect the next two expansion teams to find the rules are a little tighter. Interestingly, MLS has been slowly phasing out the expansion draft as other player mechanisms come online. New teams, I believe, only can take 5 total players. But MLS expansion teams usually have a couple years lead time, and they start signing and loaning out players a year or so before taking the field, not to mention starting their academy systems. But when MLS was expanding from 10 to 12 teams or 12 to 13, 14... it wasn't that dissimilar to what the NWSL is doing. The main difference is the two different types of players the NWSL has: NWSL contract players and USSF/CSA contract players.
Blockbuster trade brewing, apparently (and I'm not posting in the Drafts thread since the trade leak doesn't have enough info yet to link it to how it affects any drafting yet): Alex Morgan to San Diego https://theathletic.com/news/san-di...rgan-from-orlando-pride-sources/TxVQJbV8HK5Z/
Roster status info starting to come out for teams ahead of the drafts. DC: https://washingtonspirit.com/2021/1...r-roster-statuses-entering-2021-22-offseason/ CHI: https://www.chicagoredstars.com/pos...d-of-2022-nwsl-expansion-draft-and-nwsl-draft ORL: https://www.orlandocitysc.com/news/...options-on-nine-players-following-2021-season RGN: https://www.olreign.com/news/offseason-roster-moves-announced-by-ol-reign LOU: https://www.racingloufc.com/news_article/show/1197630 Also, Steph Cox has announced her retirement: https://www.olreign.com/news/ol-reign-defender-steph-cox-announces-retirement
Trinity Rodman led the NWSL in "duels won" this year with 189. She is the only forward with more than 140. Morgan Gautrat was second with 177 and was the only midfielder with more than 160. I'm pretty sure the next three were Denise O'Sullivan (160), Taylor Kornieck (158), and Carli Lloyd (140). While "duels won" is not a stat that is entirely determinant of who the best defensive players in the league are (defenders usually have less contested duels because there are more loose balls higher up the field), it can show which midfielders/forwards are the most involved in the flow of the game. In order to win a duel, a player must be aggressive and have ball-winning ability, but they also must have anticipation to get themselves in position to contend for an inaccurate pass or a deflected ball.
so is this a good thing or a bad thing??? Jonathan Tannenwald @thegoalkeeper 1h U.S. Soccer and the USWNTPA have a deal to end the Federation paying the salaries of national team players in the NWSL.
It's a great thing. "Federation Players" to the NWSL were as "League Owned Teams" were to MLS. An unfortunate necessary piece to getting the league launched, but over time became a lodestone that was holding back future growth and advancement. MLS needed ten teams at the start for their corporate and broadcast partners. They had 6 owners. Several parties kicked the tires of buying Tampa Bay Mutiny, but a look at the books at both the team and league level was enough to send them all running away. When contraction happened, Horowitz wanted to continue operating the Miami Fusion FC, but his share of the losses of the three league-owned teams was crushing him on top of the normal league cash calls. He asked for a break from responsibility for league cash calls, but Hunt, Anschutz, and Kraft weren't interested. Clearing the ongoing deficits of covering teams you didn't own, was what helped open up the floodgates to expansion. As far as the NWSL, the fact that teams really don't control their star players is a big limiting factor moving forward. Having USSF pay their salaries was a financial necessity back in 2013, but most of those less well-off owners are long gone. More money is ready to come into the league, but the problem of player control is real. And it's a real issue if Vancouver and the NWSL want to strike a deal. The real question is who is paying for the CSA "Federation" players?
Are there still CSA players? I thought they ended that several years ago because the teams weren't actually playing the Canadian players.
10 Canadian players were considered allocated in 2021: https://www.cbssports.com/soccer/ne...wis-and-jane-campbell-return-for-2021-season/
I’m not sure what is blockbuster about this. Morgan averaged 5 goals a season while with the Thorns and about the same a season for Orlando. I didn’t keep tract of her time at Orlando, but she managed to be absent for club a lot while still managing to be there for national team call ups. whatever her credentials are internationally, Her club credentials aren’t all that blockbuster.
Not all blockbuster trades are related to on the field performance. Morgan is one of the few women soccer players that moves the needle from a business perspective. For an expansion side, it is very easy for San Diego to plug her into their marketing and she absolutely will sell single game and season tickets for their home games.
on field performance of the team drives sales. Single ‘stars’ drive hype. she might move the needle a slight amount the first year, but she was irrelevant to the Thorns marketing. Attendance grew from 15,639 her last year in Portland to 16,949 after she left and kept growing every year until the shutdown. Attendance was probably more important when the Thorns went on the road the first year, as attendance at away games was elevated above opponent averages. And at Orlando attendance stayed at a little over 5,500 for the three years before the pandemic. The test will be to see if attendance goes up or not there the first post COVID year. if the pandemic continues to depress attendance it won’t matter at all.
You just described exactly why Morgan is a good signing for an expansion team. An expansion team is all hype and the results don't really matter for the first few seasons. It's almost as if the Thorn are the only team in NWSL where support isn't an issue..
Most battles for loose balls (which is what a duel is) occur in the midfield, or at least before you get to defenders.
https://equalizersoccer.com/2021/12...ll-predmore-interview-capacity-schedule-cost/ NEWS Reign move to Lumen Field for home games to settle in Seattle, once and for all It took over eight years for the Reign franchise to play its first game in Seattle’s crown-jewel stadium, the downtown venue currently known as Lumen Field. Now, OL Reign will play all National Women’s Soccer League home matches at the 68,000-plus seat stadium going forward. On Wednesday, the club announced Lumen Field as its new home venue beginning in 2022, leaving behind the converted baseball field at Cheney Stadium in Tacoma for a return to Seattle. It is a change which will see one of the NWSL’s original franchises solve an existential problem regarding a permanent, suitable venue, an issue which drove the Reign to Tacoma in 2019 and which still hung over its head at Cheney Stadium. Moving to Lumen Field — which is home to the NFL’s Seahawks and MLS’ Sounders, who have long been at or near the top of league attendance — gets the Reign out of the NWSL’s worst remaining venue and into a stadium whose atmosphere is among the best in American soccer.
Okay.. Moving to Lumen doesn't "solve" the Reign's stadium problem. It just makes it a different one.. They'll be putting, roughly 6k fans into a bowl that holds, depending on configuration, 3-5 times that amount. It's very odd that they are pumping up the Sounders attendance numbers when, so far, there hasn't been any evidence that Sounders fans are also Reign fans.. In fact, there was a period of time where there was a degree of animosity between the Reign and Sounders fans..
Maybe them moving there they can work out deals with Sounders fans as well on season ticket discounts?