If you think relegating your 6th-place team, which has not finished in the bottom four in any of the recent years, is a good idea, then yes, that's the point. Yes, so now there have been 2 out of 18 finalists who weren't SEC, Clemson, or Ohio State. How'd it work out for them?
Isn't pro/rel about more than MLS? If there was pro/rel then they wouldn't be valued at what they currently are, and you know that ... Though, what does that actually have to do with pro/rel though? I mean pointing to their valuation means what to p/r? Except, you don't need p/r to create clubs and have local football. Our system allows an infinite number of teams. Nothing about it is limiting the potential clubs that could exist. This isn't really a push back. I mean, no crap, those with the lesser/lower/not as big thing want the more/higher/bigger thing. I mean ... yeah, no crap. They do, just not in the same manners. There is a "fee" (read: dues) paid by clubs to the Prem each season and there are "Prem reqs" for stadiums etc. They're also an entity unto themselves working in co-operation with the EFL. Yeah, they are effectively acting as a cartel when you throw all of that on top of the fact they keep the media monies for themselves ... and use the little guys for fodder. I think you drastically underrepresented River's actual performance for those 3 seasons. The 3yr window said they sucked to the point of being relegated, as their performances over that time (even sitting in 6th) was worse than the other clubs, which again, is the point. I'd say that's much better than Leicester's fate after this one season seeing as how they'd finished 8th, 5th, 5th, 9th, and 9th the previous five years. Top half league club for five years and then OOOPIES one bad season and see ya! Yeah, that makes less sense to me than a running tally of performance over three seasons. The point is to be able to play for the NT ... and they did. So, pretty well actually. Bama CLEM OHST FSU ORG OK MICHST WASH ND LSU MICH UGA CINCY TCU In 9 seasons, 14 diff teams have had a direct shot at winning the NT.
Maybe they get a bulk discount and it's $2 billion and USSF puts up half or something. I don't know how the numbers would have to work. I guess the question is whether there's some pro/rel format that makes the whole pie bigger. Because then it's just a matter of how to blend it on the front end and how the percentages work on the back end.
USSF had $152 million in assets in it's last annual report. Where's it supposed to get $1 billion from?
I know it sounds weird but supporters can both be excited while still believing that it's actually more fun to follow their club in the lower division which makes sense. It's broadly more fun to watch your club win, and play more expansive football then it is to grind out 38 points. Now when I have heard this opinion expressed, be it in person, in print, or on podcasts it's always half joking and I have never heard a supporter actually advocating turning down promotion.
I agree that MLS franchise values would drop. We probably disagree on how much but a closed league is better for maintaining values no question. But also the closed league depresses values in USL. There's the obvious that you can't gain promotion and also the fact that MLS could come in and drop a franchise on top of you at anytime.
What conspiracy theory? I wasn't advocating any conspiracy theory, just reminding people that the premier league, for all it's issues, still has open promotion and MLS picks it's markets based on who can make the other franchises the most money. That is not a conspiracy theory it's a fact.
Well, I'd say it's lax regulation in the game, where the people who should have been considering what's best for the game as a whole, sold out in a quest for ever-greater TV riches. Yes, but most of the people in the world have absolutely no interest in US sports, and the drama and stories mean nothing to them. That doesn't mean they are run badly, or their format is wrong - just that being from foreign countries, they have no connection. I think you'd have to concede it creates drama that wouldn't be there if it didn't exist. Say the name "Jimmy Glass" to any proper football fan in England, and they'll tell you what he's famous for. They won't be able to tell you anything else about his career, but they'll tell you he's the goalkeeper who scored an injury time goal to keep Carlisle in the football league. Burnley fans of a certain age, while enjoying a return to the premier league, will tell you about the day when they came close to being the first team relegated out of the football league. When the relegation places were the re-election zone, before pro/rel was introduced, nobody gave a toss. Fans didn't invade the pitch celebrating being able to avoid needing to seek re-election. The infrastructure isn't really there though, is it? The equivalent would be England having a set of teams who play in 30,000+ capacity stadiums, with attendances to match, and then a gap where everyone below is like Shrewsbury and Exeter, or smaller.
Yep, but if they are valued at 500 Million today and the mere threat of them being relegated drops their value so much that the league is no longer viable than there is something fishy going on. In theory you are right, but this is where we get back into the major/minor debate again. So far no "Major League" has gone past 32 teams in the US. There is no specific reason why but clearly they don't see it as being in their best interest. And as you get larger things do get unwieldy especially around keeping the regular season relevant with a manageable playoff. But again this gets back to debates around minor league lower division. I continue to say there is a difference between a club/franchise that can make the "Major League" and one that can't. And I think American's will grasp that concept. Some responses on here seem to be hinting that pro/rel would actually be bad for lower division soccer in the US, so I wanted to make it clear that's not what people in Lower Division soccer think.
It's really up to USL to increase the valuations of their teams. There's nothing other than money stopping them from running their own D1 league.
It's not that they're lax, it's that FIFA, UEFA, CONMEBOL, CONCACAF, USSF etc have to obey national and international commercial and competition laws and football clubs are commercial businesses. They've managed to get clubs to agree to FFP but if big clubs start getting banned from UEFA competitions I can only see it ending in lawsuits.
Right,because the clubs at the top are charitable organizations just there to hand money out to the entirety of the EFL.... https://theathletic.com/4523592/2023/05/20/premier-league-big-six-newcastle-brighton-villa/ This game of musical chairs can be cut-throat. Build a team like Leicester who became champions with the 15th largest wage budget in a league that had only ever gone to the top three spenders? They’ll view you as an existential threat, flick the cartel switch and try to ensure you never get another sniff. That’s what happened in 2016 as the big six forced through changes to how overseas TV revenue is split. At the outset of the Premier League it was split evenly due to it being loss-making but in recent years overseas rights have overtaken the domestic rights, so the top six argued it should be based on where teams finish. Since 2017, 50 per cent of the increased overseas revenue is split evenly and the rest is split on position.
MLS fans who sit on their hands and lack passion have just achieved their goal of getting the President of L.A.Galaxy fired after a season long boycott and protests.
Phil Neville got 3.5 seasons to build his legacy in Florida. I don't think he would have lasted one season in a pro/rel environment.
I thought I saw somewhere that there was going to be a huge influx of funds related to WC26, but I could be misremembering or way off on how much it was.
This news is shocking to me as a die hard Wrexham supporter since late 2022. My authentic fandom feels threatened.
Sure. Just like there were millions from hosting the Copa Centennial in 2016 http://leastthing.blogspot.com/2018/04/seven-questions-for-us-soccer-on-ca2016.html Any real money from the WC I'm sure has already been spoken for...
That's true, but it also had internal pro/rel for almost all of that time. And of course that hasn't been the case for almost 40 years. And has never been true of the Premier League.
"His goal was selected as the 72nd greatest sporting moment ever by the Channel 4 programme 100 Greatest Sporting Moments. The goal was also ranked 7th in The Times newspaper's list of the 50 most important goals in football history.[2] His goal against Plymouth Argyle was number 15 in the 20 Goals That Shook the World on ITV4. The Puma boots with which he scored the goal were donated to the National Football Museum in 2014.[5]" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Glass That goal wouldn't have that status without pro/rel.
That''s nonsense, Leicester City got relegated while having the 7th highest wage bill in English football! They have more money than at ANY time in their history. Their relegation has got NOTHING to do with money and EVERYTHING to do with bad management and ultimately too many bad players!
Thatcher divided the country but I seriously doubt you could find ONE single Luton supporter anything but delighted at their promotion, whereas I could easily find 50'000 that are delirious at the fact they are going up. To be honest comparison with Thatcher is way off.