Impact have an inside track on a treble this year. They've got the Voyageur's Cup and lead Supporter's Shield Race on PPG.
They didn't win the Supporters' Shield or reach the Champions League Quarterfinals. Considering the domestic competitions and Champions League use different schedules, if an MLS club wins the 2013-2014 Champions League would that count with 2013 or 2014 competitions (MLS Cup, Supporters Shield, U.S. Open Cup, and Voyageur's Cup) to be a possible treble?
The treble in the states is clearly MLS CUP, CCL, an US Open cup. I don't know why people here were stating other things as the treble. SMH For Canada it's the Canadian Championship, CCL, and MLS Cup
So, hypothetically, if an American MLS side were to win The Supporters Shield, US Open Cup, MLS Cup, and CONCACAF Champions League would you call that a quadruple?
Screw the treble. I'd want my team to go after the quintuple. US Open Cup, Support Shield, MLS Cup, CCL and CWC.
No!!! because a treble is winning the title of each tournament as the champion, not a side trophy for having the best record, supporter shield does not count into anything, just a best record shield, it's like winning the arc east title but not winning the Super Bowl, ur not a champion!
Regular season Champion? Playoff Champion? But yes over all, the playoff champion is considered the overall champion of MLS, regardless of how good or mediocre they did in the season.
It's hard to include the SS because we have an unbalanced schedule unlike most leagues. Because of the geography and time zone differences that probably won't ever change either. Teams here can beat up on poor teams in their division for more points than teams that say are in a stacked division. Not fair that way.
The conferences aren't so unbalanced as to warrant the SS moot. Is there any argument that New York didn't deserve it in 2013 or San Jose didn't the year before? Also, I hate to point out the exceedingly obvious, but New York and San Jose are from different conferences.
Please point me to a single person who has claimed that the East is stronger than the West at any point during the 2012 or 2013 seasons.
Look, I don't mean to start a big debate over the subject. It's just annoying how many people seem to give the SS little to no merit because of the unbalanced schedule. It's still balanced enough that it doesn't really effect it all that much. Especially when good teams drop points to bad teams on a regular basis. If we get into a season where a team that is clearly not the best team in the league wins the SS based solely on picking up all the possible points from multiple very bad teams, I'll start to change my tune. Until then, there is absolutely no basis for that statement.
I don't give the SS any merit because it's not the focus of the teams. I've said it before and I'll say it again: no coach ever lost their job because they didn't win the SS. Lots of coaches lose their job when they don't make the playoffs. If it's not the goal of the teams to win it, then winning it is simply a byproduct of the teams and not the focus. It's about as important as a conference championship even though it comes with the CCL spot.
There is a big difference between giving it merit and giving it focus, though. Certainly the SS isn't the pinnacle of MLS competition, but it still gets you a trophy and a CCL spot, and it's it's still a decent measure of who the best team throughout the course of the season was.
And just to make my opinion entirely transparent and going back to the original intent of the thread, I would definitely say a regional treble would be USOC, MLS Cup, and CCL, not including the SS. That still doesn't make the SS irrelevant or a poor measure of who the best team was.
But players and coaches don't really care about it, that's the point. When teams get near the end of the season they might add it to their wish list but it's not important. At least the USOC makes every game in the tournament count. The SS? It's an afterthought and should be treated as such.
Sorry, but if anything it's the tournament in which MLS teams can rarely be bothered to field a first-choice starting eleven that should be treated as an afterthought.
Some teams take it seriously and some don't, that's true. But I don't think any team takes the SS as seriously as some teams take the USOC. The same is true for fans. More fans take the first stages of the USOC seriously than fans take the opening games seriously as important for the SS. For better or for worse, parity means it's much more difficult to pick out the "big games" that would affect the SS race. That makes it basically impossible to follow it from day one of the season and give it any weight. Maybe if the league started marketing games they think are deciding games, but parity makes that nearly impossible. It comes into play for very few teams at the end of the season but doesn't motivate anyone.
Of the two, I would argue that USOC is much more of an afterthought than the SS. Have you seen some of the third round line ups MLS teams throw into that tournament?
Nothing that you are saying is invalidating my point. Teams don't play for the SS. Okay, fine. The SS is still a reasonably good measure of who the best team during the course of the season was. Its measure of goodness is not drastically invalidated by an unbalanced schedule.