I'm sorry, I wasn't detailed enough ... I was saying if we're comparing top vs top, from a USL standpoint, use Sac, Orlando, St. Louis, OKC, etc. Not the Charleston's & Harrisburgs ... and the TOP markets in the USL haven't been around forever, that's the head start that I was talking about. Sorry for not being clear. I completely agree that the NASL as a whole will always be better, that's not an argument worth making from anyone that doesn't agree ... I'm just talking about the ceiling. The USL Clubs that have a ceiling comparible to the MNU's, the SAS's have to catch up due to recent start dates. I agree, Senna and Campos types won't sign with Real Monarchs, much like they won't sign for the Harrisburg's of the world, but do you not think they could sign for a Sac? Or a St. Louis, or an Oklahoma City? Those won't have rosters FULL of development only players ... to say different is just a jaded opinion. Will playing the likes of Real Monarch's or LAII's keep a player like Senna or Campos from signing with Sacromento? I doubt it, but maybe, I am not them, I don't know. Having MLS scouts/coach's at games due to the USL connection may be a good thing, not a bad thing, maybe it doesn't matter, you go where the money is. I'm not sure credibility has anything to do with it, but I'm not sure what that means anyways so I don't really care to argue that. How does the agreement with MLS keep USL clubs from having the same opportunity for success in the USOC? I don't follow that, maybe I'm missing something. My bad if I brought this thread off topic ... every pro/rel thread should stay in the quick sand that is was intended to tool around in ! I agree, it's not about who's trophy is better thought! The reason it came to this is because pro/rel works between NASL and USLPro because the top of USL Pro is MUCH closer to the bottom of NASL (or even the top of NASL) than the NASL is to MLS.
517704035408027648 is not a valid tweet id NASL teams are under-reporting their attendance numbers. El oh el
Wait.. What? haha. Why would teams underreport their attendance? Well, other than fire marshall or "contractual" issues like the Galaxy do when they sell the grassy knoll tickets, but still report 27k.
And one is leaving ... why ? The other is built specifically to do the same ... why ? If you think Toyota Field would be here in it's present form if we were in USL Pro, your sadly mistaken. I mean quick, how many USL Pro stadiums are like that ? The best example was actually built as a D2 stadium with the intent on being an MLS venue a long time ago in a galaxy far away. Yeah, there'd be significantly less revenue. Toyota wouldn't be doing what they're doing. The Corner Store wouldn't have plastered their awesome sponsorship (literally on the wall in the locker room corner), etc etc. There would be sponsorship sure, but certainly not what we've got. Ticket prices ? Yeah no, not close to what they are now AND there wouldn't be 7-8K a match either ... and that's everywhere, not just here. Personally no, I wouldn't. I do know that a decent chunk of people wouldn't really give a crap anymore. It's the same thing as the people that won't bother unless we get into the MLS. How do (easily) the two biggest success stories (one of which is only one year) prove for the league as a whole ? Wouldn't the AVG of the league prove the league ? Seems a much more telling picture to me. There are always outliers ... which is why they are tossed in comparative analysis. Also, I pointed out already that despite Orlando's success they're pointing to what I'm saying about the ceiling ... Hell, even with the added MLS buzz this season and being overly bad ass on the field again they had their worst attendance. So a team that is no longer in the league, a team that has existed on the field for one season, and two clubs yet to take the field ? How exactly am I supposed to compare ? No, I don't think anyone with either of their statures (when they signed) would sign with a D3 club in America. I'm not saying that ... in fact, I've said nothing of the sort. I'm talking about the league and its status as a development league for the MLS (which it has become with the partnership). LA II, Real Monarchs, and they aren't/won't be the only designated feeder clubs. The rest of the league is set up with an MLS club to take players on loan for the sole purpose of giving them playing time in order to develop them. ... and that money isn't in USL. Not even close. No, a Senna or Campos isn't going to sign with a D3 club in America while they have any tangible worth left. How does the league sell itself to that level of player ? How do you sell your league/club to the fans when you're purposefully a developmental venture ? ... not as good as a NASL club can. It's about the loaned players. Ask Orlando: http://www.mlssoccer.com/news/artic...ned-players-wont-play-against-sporting-kansas
I'm not familiar with the "contractual" issues present in this situation, could you please enlighten me?
Because the people reporting the attendance numbers are being bribed by MLS to make the Cosmos look bad. Duh!
StubHub Center has attendance caps due to shared parking with Cal State Dominguez Hills. On weekends it normally isn't an issue (capped at stated capacity of 27,000), but on weekdays the stadium is contractually prohibited from opening to full capacity. Maximum capacity is 18,500 on Fridays, and something like 11,000 on other weekdays.
You're asking me to stop using Orlando as an example, so why are you doing the same ... from some link from 2013? Going forward I don't think you'll see much of this if any, so you can probably stop saying they have less of an opportunity in the USOC. Kinda bored about debating the other stuff ... I'm not asking you to compare markets that haven't started playing with existing NASL markets, I'm just not conviced that St. Louis would have a higher ceiling as an NASL member than a USL member, but I don't mind someone having a different opinion.
Thanks! Repped! I was aware of the weeknight issue, but didn't know about the berm ticket issue on weekends.
I didnt realize this was still a topic of discussion but I'll just say this....It will be great for American soccer when the Fox/ESPN MLS game of the week is "Live from (insert high school name here) stadium" with a 4000 capacity, turf and football lines. Who would not take soccer seriously in the US? I sure would!
That's just a specific point about the potential difference between a market as a USL club VS a market as a NASL club. The partnership with the MLS/MLS clubs presented this situation. It's up to the individual clubs and the agreement of the loan, but the potential exists there. The NASL doesn't have this. Of course there's also the matter of being cup tied. It's possible a USL club loses out on a loaned player being able to play in the USOC. Such was the case with Peay, Fochive and Tshuma in Portland as they were called back from their loans and played in the USOC and were tied to the Timbers. Then why, did you specifically tell me to consider St Louis and OKC as the top markets ? "I was saying if we're comparing top vs top, from a USL standpoint, use Sac, Orlando, St. Louis, OKC, etc."
Because they are successful lower division teams and are looking to move up to the top division. That is not a reflection of their being anything wrong with D3 vs D2, it is a reflection of D1 (MLS) having a cache that both D2 and D3 lack. Also, two can play that game... Minnesota United and San Antonio are built to do the same.. Why? How many D2 stadiums are like that? San Antonio's stadium is not a reflection of D2 vs D3, but is an anomaly for a lower division team in the US in general. Sacramento and Orlando says "Hi!" Seriously, San Antonio is an example of a very recent trend in lower division soccer. That isn't representative of D2 being superior to D3, but of San Antonio's owner being a "good owner". You're basically saying the owner of your team would suddenly not be a good owner if he were in D3... I'm not sure how that is applicable here. Fair enough, but I suspect the answer would be different if it happened in reality.. The interesting thing that I've noticed in the USL and NASL pissing matches is just how opposed fans of teams in one league are opposed to the other league and how willing they are to take up the shifting sands of their leagues to attack the other league... Perhaps it shouldn't be that surprising considering the amount of animosity between the two leagues though. *shrug* Okay.. Yeah.. If you're take away from OCSC's attendance this season is that D3 has a ceiling, then you really need to stop talking about D3 because you don't seem to have some very basic information about the league... OCSC's dropoff this season is not a reflection of a D3, but rather a reflection of them playing in a temporary stadium while the Citrus Bowl is being renovated and that temporary stadium having a limited capacity and a rather unfriendly landlord. Couple that with the ownership group taking those facts as an excuse to focus their marketing mostly on the 2015 season and not the 2014 season and you've got a down year for attendance.. Had this season taken place in the Citrus Bowl, I suspect they would have been closer to, or higher than, last year's attendance. Okay.. Another example of you lacking some basic knowledge about D3.. OKC is already in USL and they are playing in the football field of a private high school this season and, yet, are outdrawing two of NASL's teams. Next year they are moving into a renovated Taft Stadium (that was supposed to house NASL's OKC team), which should boost them even more, so.. Yeah.. Valid point on St. Louis, but let's not forget that St. Louis has been a sort of wet dream for soccer fans.. I remember people being up in arms when MLS was stiff arming Cooper over his lack of stadium and a decent ownership group, then when Cooper announced AC St. Louis there was an equally large group of fans that were lining up to call them the second coming.. Of course, the faith in Cooper was misplaced, but the aura of St. Louis as a soccer heaven seems to have survived untarnished. The proof will be in the pudding though and you are right that it is premature to call them a top market. Senna doesn't sign for anyone in NASL if it weren't for the Cosmos. The spending habits of the Cosmos are not an accurate representative of NASL in general. In fact, the owner of your own team complained about the Cosmos overspending and that it wasn't good for the league if they were going to continue doing that. Minnesota United is in a similar vein as the Cosmos. McGuire is one of the richest men in the country and has not tried to keep secret his desire to move MNU up to MLS. If you're going to discount Sacramento because they are "built to go to MLS", you also need to discount MNU, the Cosmos, and San Antonio for the same reason... While the Cosmos don't have any intention of going to MLS, they have said repeatedly they intend to act as a D1 team playing in D2... NASL teams take loans from MLS teams and have the same restrictions placed upon playing the loaned players against the MLS teams. So I'm not sure how this is an example of anything. Campos? Really? I'm really not sure he's the best of examples here. As a matter of fact, he is the perfect example of the kind of player that WOULD be playing for a MLS II team.. A player that is not quite ready to be on the first team, but with a good amount of talent that needs more playing time than he can get in the reserve league. If the Real Monarchs had been around in 2011 when RSL cut him, I'm not sure they would have cut him at all and may have just sent him down to the Monarchs.. Here ya go: For the MLS II clubs, they could use: "You want to play in MLS? Well, come play for the reserve team for X MLS team! Every game is a tryout! Play well on the field and you'll be playing for the MLS team in no time." For the independent clubs, they could use: "You want to play in MLS? Well, half of our games are played against the reserve squad for MLS teams, every game you play against one of those teams is a tryout for that MLS team." It is no secret that MLS scouting is a steaming pile of crap. What better way to get in front of people affiliated to a MLS club than to actually play for one of their reserve teams, or to play a good portion of your games against one of their reserve teams. The same way that minor league baseball teams sell themselves now.. Come see the star players of the future now and come have an inexpensive night out with the family and watch a good game of soccer while doing so. NASL teams have the same issue that USL teams in selling their product. I don't think there is any doubt that they have a better product on the field to sell and that, in theory, makes it an easier product to sell, but it is still "minor league" soccer and, as a result, is still a hard sell. Again, not a unique problem to USL. MLS teams often loan players to NASL teams and those players generally cannot play against the MLS team in USOC.. It'll certainly be an interesting situation if a MLS team ends up playing their MLS II team in USOC.. However, USSF is generally pretty good about making sure MLS teams don't play their affiliates, but they aren't always successful at that.
NASL doesn't have loaned players from MLS? This happens all over the globe where teams loan players to clubs and say they can't play vs the club that owns them (in whatever competition). You're saying the potential exists ... well, as long as NASL teams are accepting loaned players from the MLS ... the potential exists there as well. Those loan restrictions may not have come to the surface because the teams didn't advance and play each other, but they are still "potentially" there if that's all you're talking about.
Yes, a NASL club might have a player here and there (we've had Soto here in SA and he actually played for Houston against us when we beat them). That's quite a difference from having literally 3/4 of the clubs in your league facing this issue (according to agreements and clubs for USL Pro in 2015). What happens when LA II faces LA ? Or Real Monarchs face RSL ? Or FC Montreal faces Montreal ? It's also a different situation than having up to 5 players of your roster taken away from you in the competition due to the parent club cup tying them or facing their parent club. Some perspective: http://www.mlssoccer.com/news/artic...have-been-sent-loan-season-usl-pro-nasl-teams To start the season 51 players were loaned out to USL Pro/NASL .... FOUR were to NASL clubs.
3/4 is a little much.. MLS clubs are still limited to a 30 man roster, so a good portion of the clubs will be made up of academy players and players signed directly to the MLS II team. Take LAGII as an example, 7 out of the 23ish players on their roster are LAG players. The remainder are signed directly to LAGII, or are LAG academy players.
We don't know that LAII will ever face LA Galaxy ... we don't know that USSF will allow that to happen, unless it was for the championship after both were placed on opposite sides of the bracket. I understand that the odds of it happening are more for USL than NASL ... but you just said "potential for it to happen". And to be factual, they both have potential and it will be dealt with similar to issues all over the globe I would feel. It's not like it cripples the USL club to not have 3 or 4 players not be available for a game. I'm sure that USL club would gladly trade those players ability for that single game for having those players available for the rest of the year at no cost ... I'm sure of this ... because it's happening!
There will be 20 clubs next season and currently 15 have partnerships or are a direct side of an MLS club. 15 is 3/4 of 20. What can the USSF do if they both win games and the bracket turns out that way ? Actually that isn't how MNU was built ... the MLS stuff didn't happen until the Vikings started their talk. San Antonio wasn't founded expressly to land an MLS franchise, but was built with the possibility in mind, yes. SAC was established with the expressed intent to show that SAC was MLS material. The point, is that this type of investment happens in D2 much more than D3. Were we a D3 franchise we wouldn't have what we have. The point, is that we came into the NASL ... not USL Pro. At least here in SA it wouldn't really be about the pissing between the leagues but simply due to being a lower division/etc. Seems to me that MLS hype and a bad ass team would be enough to compensate for a few less commercials and billboards no ? 5500 capacity is would I could find for the ESPN complex ... they drew under 5K ... I did overlook that. I confused the NASL/USL franchises. Exactly ... where is that muscle in D3 ? That's part of the point. Explained above .... SAC was expressly built as "showcase for MLS" ... SA/MNU were not founded that way (although SA has had MLS flirtation for quite a while). FAR less frequent and doesn't constitute an agreement of up to 5 players per club. The NASL also doesn't have 3/4 of their clubs contractually obligated to take MLS loanees. I used a readily identifiable name. I agree with your assessment though. Here's a different one. Hans Denisson. Labels mean everything and we both know it. Being designated as the MLS development league places a cap on certain things. How many USL Pro players are on National Teams ? (honest question)
Pats are actually $9M under the cap which includes a roll over of $4.1M from last year. He didn't get lucky with Belichick he actually went out and spent to hire the man. Yes the Pats got lucky with Brady. The Dilfer thing is a joke when he talks about the Pats. Redskins,Cowboys have gone out of their minds with spending and what has that got them in the salary cap era(94-now)??? Combined they have 1 Super Bowl and 13 playoff seasons and 8 division titles. Pats since 3 Super Bowls, 6 Super Bowl games. 15 playoff seasons, 13 division titles. Pats have won 81 more games than the Redskins and 45 more than Dallas. During Belichick era Pats are +50 over Dallas and +70 over the Redskins. The Pats have tried to win championships every year but don't go out and be stupid with salary money. Biggest problem has been Pats drafting has been mediocre to terrible for 7 of the last 10 years not spending. Every other team and fan in the NFL would love the consistency the Pats have had over the last 20 years. On the Revs while Kraft has been terrible, in the era of 13+ teams Revs only finished in bottom 3 and that was 2011.
Thanks for the awesome responses so far, HttK. This kind of discussion can turn into a giant pissing match and its refreshing that hasn't been the case here. That being said, I'll be joining Blando on the sidelines. Until we see that actual impact of MLS's relationship with MLSII we aren't going to have anything more than a "I'm right, you're wrong" discussion here.
It's also 27 miles out of town. I would hope all questions would be honest questions. I do not believe anyone in DIII is on anyone's national team, unless it was a very tiny nation. Only a couple of DIII players are/have been in my memory. Erik Ustruck of Tampa Bay got two caps for Guam. I would imagine that, worldwide, almost no regular national team players would even play in a country's (any country's, whether theirs or where they happen to reside) second division, much less third.
To be fair, I think that "works" better in baseball than in soccer because of the decades of history of major league/minor league affiliations and the idea of minor league teams as being subservient to specific organizations, as well as the different relationship Americans have with the game of baseball. I have no doubt that for most folks, the scenario you describe is exactly why they go to lower-level soccer matches now. It's only the beer-and-scarf set with the "City 'Til I Die" tattoos who rattle their sabers about the glory of independence and all that. Unfortunately, those people are very loud. I go to the local games here as a thing to do with my son and (hopefully) see a good game on a nice night. (Totally as an aside, the thing I've noticed is that the soccer wasn't very good this year.)
No disagreement here.. But the hardcore fans for the independent USL clubs seem to sell their affiliation to the MLS clubs as a "best of both worlds" as they get the independence of being owned by someone other than a MLS club and access to players that are better quality than they normally would.
Didn't the entire Antigua & Barbuda team once play in D3? For some reason I remember that. Not too long ago. That is a bad point to make in this type of discussion IMO. Does having a bunch of players from the US Virgin Islands or equivilant make the D3 or D2 for that matter, a better league than without? Hope the sarcasm came across ... those actually weren't "honest" questions!