Last season: Norwich lost 6 of their final 7 and only drew the 7th. The last 14 match days they only got 3 results at all. Watford lost 9 of their final 11 and only won once. Burnley lost 7 of their last 9 but did manage 2 wins ... but were clearly better in the early/mid of the season 2 season ago Fulham lost 8 of their final 10 and didn't win at all, Brom lost 5 of their final 7 and didn't win at all, and SheffU lost 12 of the last 15 though with 3 wins. That doesn't really match up with what you're take is. Shit teams are shit teams, and suddenly having the stakes up doesn't increase their quality. Now, can anything happen with a team fighting against relegation? Sure, but so can a playoff contending team going to face a team that has nothing but spoiling the fun at stake. The numbers though, show that shit teams are shit teams and their fate hanging in the balance doesn't make them any better. Oh, and for Villa and the rest I listed ... I used the math that YOU were actually a part in developing/agreeing on, FYI. That's not what the numbers say ...
What numbers would that be? Numbers your crystal ball have given you? Besides as part of the 'big 6' haven't we already been told that Chelsea will finish top 6 every year between now and eternity!??
Search function is available... And I've stated several times, to include the post you just quoted, that I'm using math that this very discussion came to .... And 5 of the top 6 slots are occupied by who now? Oh, right
So if the 'same 6' (wasn't that long ago it was 4 no?) are destined to finish top 6 for the rest of time then surely Chelsea are playing for European football no? Again I ask how it is you know the future results before they are played? Do you have a crystal ball?
The next round of fixtures and what the clubs are playing for:- Forest (relegation) v Newcastle (Champions League) Liverpool (Champions League) v Fulham (Europe) Brentford (Europe) v Leicester (relegation) Southampton (relegation) v Tottenham (Champions League) Aston Villa (Europe) v Bournemouth (relegation) Wolves (relegation) v Leeds (relegation) - sometimes called a relegation 6 pointer. Chelsea (Europe) v Everton (relegation) Man City (the title) v West Ham (relegation) Brighton (Champions League) v Man Utd (Champions League) Arsenal (the title) v Crystal Palace (relegation) Of course depending on results over the coming weeks what each club is 'playing for' is subject to change.
US fans for the majority are just fair weather fans. If a team is doing bad it gets abandoned quick. Anyone thinking their local team would automatically get support because of Pro/Rel is living in lala land. MLS teams are already in the 1st division (no need to be promoted) and several struggle with attendance and viewership. USL is even worse. People won't suddenly pack a stadium of a team because they suck and could potentially be relegated. As people say "soccer is popular in the US MLS isn't" But it isn't only MLS it's domestic soccer in general that isn't popular. Even at USMNT level it isn't popular other than the casual fair weather fans that show up every 4 years. That's why USMNT struggles to even fill up 25k stadiums while other NT fill up football stadiums no problem. Pro/Rel won't fix whatever you guys think is wrong.
You just like to pretend so much of this discussion has never happened. We've spoken to this very thing before when Arsenal had a "down" year and were outside the top 6. That year, guess what teams made up the majority of those 6 slots. Yes, things happen but season after season in the top 6 positions there are 6 clubs that continue to show up over and over. You continue to TRY SO DAMNED HARD to make a point out of this (Arsenal or Chelsea or Tottenham being off for one season) but it isn't one. It's called track record, history of table since the $ changed the game, etc ... it's what happens. I only need my eyeballs and common sense to come to the conclusion about the likely standings from today into the foreseeable future.
So Newcastle........are they a 'top 6' club? What about former European champions Aston Villa and Nottingham Forest? are they a 'top 6' club?........................Everton were without question 'top 6' up until the last dozen years or so (fun fact Everton are 3rd on the ALL TIME English League table). Or do we change 'top 6' to 'top 8' (like we recently changed 'top 4' to 'top 6')? Or do we simply completely discount the first 140 years of English football?
I fully acknowledge that having relegation gives clubs at or near to the bottom of the table something to play for. But I don't see how Champions League or Europa League placement is an inherent function of a pro/rel system.
I don't think it is? Has somebody suggested otherwise? Obviously without pro/rel then a lot of those teams would have nothing to play for but clubs near the top still would. Promotion is THE goal for all lower league teams. Incidentally I would just like to point out that I am not advocating that the US MUST implement pro/rel, personally I can see that football in a country the size of a continent brings its own 'issues' of which having ONE league from East to West coast is one. England is ideal for the pro/rel system for so many reasons, obviously here it is by far the best structure and the promotion and relegation dogfights are a HUGE part of the game here. As a Chelsea supporter I have felt the agony of relegation and the joy of promotion, 28/04/1984 is probably the best football memory I have, it certainly matches the emotions of winning the Champions League - from that you can imagine how it feels when your club is relegated! The beauty of football is that no matter how bad being relegated is (and its awful) you always have another season to (hopefully) put things right (like Burnley etc), though of course it could get even worse! (like Derby etc), its a BIG part of the game here.
Just pointed it out, since this is the thread on pro/rel. Having something to play for is different than not having something to play for. For me, that's one of the two biggest issues. The other is the shallow roots the pro game has, and the corresponding weaknesses of lower divisions (although that part seems to be improving). I agree--I've said more than once in this thread that England is the one place where pro/rel is an absolute necessity; it would be bad for the sport to try and change it in England. Which, frankly, is why I think bringing English teams into the discussion of pro/rel in American soccer is a distraction.
It's not just about the top division. In all other levels of an integrated pro/rel pyramid, the prescence of multiple promotion spots provides interest from the top downwards and multiple relegation spots from the bottom upwards.
I can't disagree with any of your points. However, the MLS does suffer from the lack of pro/rel for a different reason: the bottom teams have no incentives to improve. A team can be bad for years with no consequences, and possibly still be profitable. That's not a good show to watch. You want teams that play as hard as they can, and executives that try to sign the best players they can. Because if they don't, they would miss the continental qualification or get relegated.
I have never seen any impact that P/R impacts this. Players are playing for their contract, game-day 18 roles, and starting positions every game regardless of if P/R exists or not. Coaches are playing for their jobs. Executives, yeah, you may have a point there. But if we're putting in a system just to punish some executives there are better ways to do that.
My experience is totally the opposite. Games with nothing on the line frequently lack the intensity of games where there is promotion or relegation at stake.
Now do Everton last season or any number of clubs who have saved themselves. Does it work with every team of course not. But every single one of us has seen a shit team get a string of results to save themselves. Happens annually. Now is this proved quantitatively? Not entirely sure. I think it is but I am not about to take them time to look up every club that has been in the relegation fight in March and see if their results improve. But it doesn't actually matter because everyone who follows the league believes it to be true. And when it comes to sports perception is more important than reality. But again I believe that in this case reality and perception are the same and I would be shocked if you don't see an uptick in form for clubs that are fighting to avoid relegation vs clubs that are already down or have earned mid table safety. Did you read my post? I agree that they are safe. I think any neutral believes they are safe. Like I said I would be shocked if they go down. BUT trust me this weekend is not a meaningless match for Villa fans. Not until they get 40 points or are mathematically safe.
That's all good an all but how would that help domestic soccer grow? There will always be bad teams with or without Pro/Rel. And as soon as a team is doing bad it will get abandoned. If it gets relegated? Even worse! Might as well just fold at that point.
Except they might win the next year, and they get a whole bunch of new opponents for fans to see. If the Rapids got relegated and instead of Seattle and LAFC we are playing Detroit and Colorado Springs…. the indignity! We’d show up because we expect to kill them. But we might not…. but it’d be different.
Everton did do better, Leeds was odd actually. They got MORE of their results (more of their wins and overall points) in the first 20 matches but did get the results against the "shit" teams in the last 12 matches or so. 50/50 I guess? Not really better but just the "right" results" is the best way to put it. However, Southampton who actually finished above both of them LOST 9 of their last 12 and only won 1 time. Since I did two years I looked at Burnley as well as they were the first one safe and despite being well above the final relegation slot were HORRID by losing 7 of their last 9, which just illustrates how terrible the three relegated clubs were. This illustrates the underlying issue though, especially in topics of discussion like this one. We NEED reality input into them otherwise false narratives and incorrect perception drives things. Nothing will ever progress if that's the case. By default SOMEONE will improve because clubs are playing each other but also there will be just as many or more of the ones like I pointed out because SOMEONE is on the other side of those matches. So maybe the truth is 50/50 and not just one or the other. Yeah, SOME clubs will uptick down the stretch but that means other clubs CAN'T ... so it isn't that "clubs get better do to fighting relegation" but rather "the shit clubs are separated down the stretch" Did you read read your post or what you reiterated here? "I agree they're safe (IE - you believe they're meaningless games) but trust me it's not" Which is why in League One there are already 6 teams playing meaningless matches with 10-12 left in the season ... and also 6 in League Two. Looks like 4 already playing meaningless matches in the Championship. Peterborough United were dropped from the Championship to League One for this season and have seen 20% of their attendance drop as well. They're 90 years old an in the richest/most popular/most followed pyramid in the world. Watford dropped from the Prem to the Championship and have seen 20% of their crowd vanish. They're 142 years old But sure, clubs no more than 25-30yrs old in a still developing domestic soccer market will stick around to see even lesser developed opponents and not walk away. Oh, and that's not even getting into the MAJOR vs MINOR sporting mindset here.
They're NOT meaningless matches though are they! Aston Villa are 9 points from Europe with 36 points to play for!!!! Tomorrows game and what they are playing for:- Aston Villa (European football) v Bournemouth (relegation avoidance). As previously pointed out what clubs are 'playing for' is subject to change over the progression of a season.
What foreign fans often misunderstand, is how big the Major and Minor distinctions are in the US. My brother rarely watches college sports, because as he says, "They're minor league." Pro/rel advocates should advocate for increased NCAA men's teams, instead of tilting at the pro/rel windmill. Large areas of the country have few to none NCAA programs. There is a forum where others would know more than I.
Why should it just fold? Do you think it won't be supported.? In other countries clubs are still supported even when they are relegated. Every year dozens of clubs in Europe "suffer" relegation and continue on often thriving These are clubs leaving leagues not that disimmilar to MLS in terms of attendance (in my cases MLS gets better attendance) going into leagues not that disimmilar to USC-C. How can they do it yet you are convinced that our cubs might as well be abandoned? Are they better fans?
Again I think it would take someone who had a real understanding of statistics with a lot of time to prove or disprove the hypothesis that clubs actively fighting relegation improve versus clubs who have already earned relegation or safety. We can both cherry pick examples either way and that doesn't prove or disprove either side. But your Southampton example actually backs up my point. They were in 10th with 13 matches to go. Soooo they were actually playing decently and then went into a free fall late when they were safe. Again that's my point. It's the clubs that already feel like they are safe that play poorly while the ones who still have something at stake that improve. You are assuming this is a false narrative. I think it's accurate based on what both players and supporters believe. But again whether either of us like it or not perception does matter. And it's not a stretch to draw a conclusion that a game involving teams with something to play for is going to be better than one involving teams without something to play for. And to take a step forward the more jeopardy the better. IE playing to avoid relegation vs playing for a higher playoff seed. There is a difference between what I, a logical neutral, will believe, and a Villa fan. So yes as a neutral I will not be paying much attention to Villa. But Villa fans still have a reason to get excited. Their next win will basically be the win that puts them over the edge. Two more and it's guaranteed, and there will be pints drank to celebrate mathematical safety. I spent the 80's going to meaningless Charger games. If anything people were annoyed when we won because it meant a worse draft pick.