... I'm not sure why it's hard for people to grasp what I'm saying. It isn't THE cause, but a synergistic/exacerbating agent. There's like 1.5m in TOTAL prize money for the entire tournament. Yeah, that's not going to separate anyone from anything. ALSO, there's several other factors in both LigaMX and MLS that help keep that stratification mitigated (but you know that) so simply making a singular statement like this doesn't represent the context properly for CONCACAF
Does anyone else think the timing of Liga MX's decision may have something to do with Monterrey being rock bottom of the Clausura? They could otherwise finish as Liga MX champions and be relegated in the same season.
Monterrey are in ZERO danger. Remember Mexico has that 3yr thing. CHIVAS is the one that can shit the bed though Atlas has some big work on their part to make it happen. The Veracruz situation and Dorados before them and the entirety of the Ascenco only having like 4-5 capable teams is a much bigger issue than Chivas possibly being relegated though.
There was a notion Ajax roars away of the competition because of money superiority. They might win the title still, but with 10 matches to go and still meeting what we call over here the left side of the table clubs (=the top 9) it's far from a walk in the park. Feyenoord started the season disastrous under Stam and hoovered around spot 14 after 10 matches. Under Advokaat they havenot lost a match and are now getting AZ and Ajax back in the crosshairs. Next weekend it's supersunday as the top 4 (Ajax vs AZ and PSV vs Feyenoord) are locking horns. Ajax lost today against the first table left side opponent Heracles.
I don't have any idea what the source of this screenshot is, but it gives me great pleasure to think that you access this website on a Minitel.
Ajax might win the title still, but with 10 matches to go and still meeting what we call over here the left side of the table clubs (=the top 9) it's far from a walk in the park. Feyenoord started the season disastrous under Stam and hoovered around spot 14 after 10 matches. Under Advokaat they havenot lost a match and are now getting AZ and Ajax back in the crosshairs. Next weekend it's supersunday as the top 4 (Ajax vs AZ and PSV vs Feyenoord) are locking horns. Ajax lost today against the first table left side opponent Heracles. I've no clue what a Minitel is, but it pleases me to have brought some joy to you
They already canceled relegation for this year due to Veracruz being expelled from the league during the winter break. I don't know if those reports of a 5-year moratorium are official, but I think they still intend to promote one club this year if an eligible team wins the slot.
It's worth noting that this is a proposed change, it hasn't been finalized yet. I assume it will be, but it's not quite a done deal.
First I don't think any of this has to do with pro/rel. Now that we have gotten that out of the I agree with a lot of what your saying, but I why I still think the CL is generally a source of good is that a lot of these trends were inevitable. Honestly football is just a small part of the overall trend of economic globalization that's been going on since 1492 and has had gasoline poured on it with the advent of the Internet. Basically I am saying it's inevitable that the top clubs in Europe would want to play each other in money spinning matches. And with the top players wanting to play at the top clubs, and changes in European politics, law, and the Bosman Ruling making that even easier, it was inevitable that your 3rd 4th on down in the big wealthy leagues would be better than the Champion of Latvia. Meaning those matches would be more lucrative creating pressure to let those clubs in. And to be honest as an armchair fan I'd rather watch 4th place in England play 2nd in Spain than 1st in Latvia play 1st in Slovakia. Basically to make a long answer short, I think these trends were inevitable, and if UEFA didn't meet the needs someone else would and assuredly that system would be even "less fair" then the one we have now.
This is a good post though I do think a lot of this was UEFA not being bold enough and also wanting to make sure they got their piece of the pie. As a sports federation, the right thing to do would have been to call the big guns' bluff once in a while. As we've discussed before, there are elements of a Super League that would be somewhat unappealing to the elites in real terms. The truth is that they like the cozy arrangement of a steady supply of inferior teams to flex their muscles against on a weekly basis, with matches against bigger opponents providing must-see spectacles. However, I think that UEFA has tended to see just enough legitimacy in the elites' posturing to be unnerved by the threat of losing out on large sums of money. The problem of course, is that by catering to these outfits, they've actually perpetuated the cycle and allowed those clubs to become even more powerful than before. And while 1st in England vs 4th in Spain is better today than 1st in Latvia vs 1st in Slovakia, there's another couple of issues there: 1) Latvia and Slovakia now face a greater struggle than ever before to grow their domestic leagues into a relevant factor in Europe 2) If the money were spread around a bit more, 1st in Latvia vs 1st in Slovakia would have more chance of being a match you'd want to watch
That's actually what's been used by the pro/rel crowd in this thread (in terms of literally using it). Some of us have tongue in cheek or for comparison sake used it, but nobody (in this thread) that has seriously discussed the topic has used this "as promotion/relegation" There's several factors that play into that though, isn't there ... ... one factor that is consistent and takes zero personal opinion or bias into account is that these match ups are perpetuated and clubs like the Slovakian champions are continuously put into these situations by the system.
https://www.si.com/soccer/2020/02/25/mls-next-25-years-bob-bradley-promotion-relegation-arena-vela Bob Bradley wants pro/rel eventually. Pretty good interview. I can get behind everything he says (although don't tell the the NT forum about the academies shouldn't be necessary idea ).
He's not wrong on his view of the Academies. Forcing teams to do something they don't see value in is the definition of insanity. I agree that the home grown territories should be removed, and teams should be allowed to recruit kids from anywhere in the country. Although this would give the clubs in NY and LA a big advantage.
I thought HG territories were already being phased out? As I understand it, the status quo is nationwide recruiting, with territories being non-exclusive and each academy allowed a certain number of players from outside its territory that depends on the population of its territory. Portland, KC, and Vancouver make up for small populations by recruiting heavily outside their territories; there's a consistent pipeline from North Carolina to KC, and Portland has had several academy players from New York City.
The territories still exist, however, two years ago MLS removed the limits on out of territory players for "Big Market Teams." https://www.mlssoccer.com/post/2018...s-competing-head-head-academy-talent-far-home "Sporting Kansas City, FC Dallas and a few other clubs have been recruiting out-of-territory players to their academies for several years, but both Parry and Gonzalez said the competition has increased recently. That’s partially due to MLS last year eliminating the cap on how many out-of-territory players could be in a club’s system. Prior to the change, teams in MLS’s biggest markets could only have a maximum of two out-of-area players in their academy, while smaller market clubs like SKC could have up to eight." "With that restriction gone, more teams are now working their way into open areas like North Carolina. That’s created some recruiting wars among MLS rivals. Parry said SKC recently lost out to Atlanta on a prospect from South Florida and Gonzalez said Dallas often compete with Kansas City and Atlanta for out-of-territory prospects."
wondering if we would have to drop Really interesting especially considering his bosses are probably not in agreement. But Bradley has a history of speaking his mind in tough circumstances, probably figures if Hosni Mubarak, the Islamic Brotherhood and a Military Junta couldn't silence him then Will Ferrell doesn't have a chance.
He acknowledged it’s likely a different story for the owners. Regardless, not like he’s throwing around the word “cartel” or being disrespectful. The league employs him after all.
I don't think anyone in MLS has ruled out pro/rel indefinitely. Garber has said things like "it doesn't make sense today" and that "it doesn’t resonate with us,” Garber said."
There's ALWAYS been lip service to pro/rel from SOMEONE within MLS/working for MLS … everything PRAGMATIC though has been "not now" "doesn't make sense" "we're not thinking about it" etc etc because the league is focusing on the things it needs to do to get where it wants. When/if the variables change to the point of, and the time comes … yeah they'll deal with it. Because again, if it makes sense to change the business model THEY WILL … if it doesn't, they ain't.