Im not sure if anybody knew about this but i bookmarked this webpage that displayed the pts in single table status and its been updated for 08. Needless to say it looks even better than last year. Check it out http://www.settingthetable.info/stt/Default.asp
More functionality, but man, the single table they used to do was much nicer: http://www.rrac.net/singletablemls
Yes, my site has been revamped for '08. There's news for each team as well as a team chart documenting their position in the table as the season progresses. If you have suggestions for additions or find something I've missed or typed incorrectly, just click on the Contact link at the top. The simple URL is just: http://www.settingthetable.info Hope everyone likes it.
MLS Schedules are unbalanced. A single table isn't very indicative as if it occurs that too many dominant teams end up in one division over the other it would have an attritional effect on the other teams in that division who are forced to play them more often than teams from the other division. Perhaps soon when MLS has 16-20 teams they will go for a true single-table format and a schedule that represents the nature of such a format.
Nicely done. I'm not one of the people arguing for a single table but I find this entertaining anyway. My only objection is with the "wooden spoon". You seam to be trying create a faux-relegation slot, but really the only consequence of being last is that you get a better pick in the draft.
And yet they offer up the Supporter's Shield, the top 2 in a single table go to CCL, and the top four teams go to Superliga.
I'm aware of the endless BigSoccer discussion on the merits of single table and conferences. I made this more for clarity as far as the position of a squad in a single table determines where they go as far as CCL and Superliga and the last playoff spots. When you watch MLS games on ESPN and FSC, they don't always frame things in terms of those competitions and more in conference standings.
I like it. My one question is why not make a color distinction between the 5-6 spots and the 7-8 spots. In the lower right you have the legend to show what each color is for and you throw in a qualifier for the blue shaded teams. Maybe you could add another color to make it a more obvious separation.
When I first built it they still had the 2007 four wildcards in the playoffs instead of the now top three in each conference plus two wildcards. Typically they end up as they would in a single table, but not always. I'm still working on that.
Great Job....How does the playoffs work in MLS? Is it just 1 game or are their 2 games one home and one away?
Re: The wooden spoon. It's too bad that the worst team gets the best draft choice. They should give it to the best of the worst teams. Take the bottom four and give it to the one that finished the best. This gives teams something to fight for, and eliminates the teams tanking it to get the best draft pick. I understand the concept of parity, but last place teams shouldn't get anything.
The quarterfinals are two-legged (no away goal rule though), the semifinals are a single game at the highest remaining seed, the finals are a neutral location (this year at the Home Depot Center in LA)
For a SuperDraft choice? Everyone thought Nyarko was going first in the SuperDraft, he didn't end up going go until 7. It really doesn't make that huge of a difference in the SuperDraft if you get pick number 1 or 2 or 3... you are still going to grab a guy you think will have an impact on the team. And a team can simply make a trade up to the no. 1 spot, like KC did. The no. 1 choice of the SuperDraft is simply nothing to tank your season for.
So basically a team can be undefeated, lose a playoff game and they are not the number 1 team in the country. I don't get it
think of it as a league cup competition, coz it is. looks cool but I must echo someone's earlier comment that a single table without a balanced schedule is pretty pointless. MLS plays in conferences. deal.
yup. given the level of parity in MLS these days, a playoff is probably pretty appropriate. MLS gives a spot in CONCACAF to the winner of the regular season (who gets the Supporter's Shield), and regular season standing is used to determine who goes to SuperLiga, and who skips US Open Cup qualifying), but the winner of the playoffs is generally considered the champion for that year.
Or you guys could just go to this season's page at wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Major_League_Soccer_season
It's not pointless when you consider that your position in that single table qualifies you for certain competitions: 1-2: CCL 1-4: Superliga 1-6: USOC (tentative) 7-8: MLS Cup Playoffs
Nope, it's a change from last year. Now in 2008, it is the top 3 in each conference + the next two best teams regardless of conference. Basically, if the 5th place team in one conference is better than the 4th best in the other conference, then the 5th place team gets a spot.
As MLS grows in size and the schedule gets less and less unbalanced, the conferences become more and more meaningless. Likewise as MLS tries to make the regular season more meaningful by awarding more playoff spots to teams at the top of the table rather than at the top of their conferences, so also the conferences become more and more meaningless. There's no inherent conflict between single table and unbalanced schedules. Single table and balanced schedules are the ideal solution, but single table still works with unbalanced schedules. In Australia for example AFL and NRL are single table with playoffs, but the schedule is unbalanced. If the unbalanced bits are randomized, and rotated each year so that they become more balanced over multiple seasons, you get a fair system that doesn't reward some teams and punish others simply because they happen to be in a stronger or weaker conference than other teams. So single table without balanced schedule is not pointless. It still gives you a good approximation of the relative worth of the teams that season, and gives you proper seeding based on table position for the playoffs (or CONCACAF champions league, etc). You don't need conferences to do any of this. Conferences are a "solution" in search of a problem.
As MLS grows, the schedule will get more and more unbalanced again. Assuming that MLS doesn't want to play more than 30 regular season games, once hey expand past 16 teams (and it will happen) then they'll have to limit games against the other conference to make it work. Conferences won't be going away, even if they'll be somewhat superfluous/less important for a few years. Sure, there doesn't have to be, but if you have a situation where you can put teams in conferences and have similar schedules of all the teams within a conference, but greater differences outside of the conferences, then it wouldn't make much sense to go single table in that case. It's likely in the near future that we'll have teams play intraconference teams 2 times each and interconference teams 1 time each. Why get rid of conferences in that situation? But why would MLS schedule that way? Not only is it anti how they've always done it, there is no precedent in other US sports. MLS will do what is most sensible with future schedules which is to have conferences and play conference teams more often than non-conferences teams, in order to lessen travel and to build on local rivalries. It wouldn't make much sense for NY to play a team in San Jose more often than one in Philly or New England. You don't need single table either. Seems to me that single table with an unbalanced schedule is more of a "solution in search of a problem". There's nothing wrong with the current MLS system that awards some things on the basis of single table, but plans schedules and seeds the playoffs on the basis of conferences.
Actually there is, in the NFL, every division plays every team from two other divisions once (one division in their conference, one in the other conference) and those divisions are rotated every year in a set order.