http://www.a-league.com/news/2002/news,2002,0734.shtml The article is headlined "USL to establish Hall of Fame at AOM in November" and talks at length about the establishment of a USL Hall of Fame. Below that is the following: A-League prepares for 2003 The A-League Executive Committee and USL finalized several details for the upcoming 2003 season during meetings at the A-League Championship in Milwaukee. The A-League’s 28-game regular season calendar will be between Friday, April 25 and Saturday, August 30 with three weeks of playoffs following the end of the season. The playoffs will consist of eight teams, playing two rounds of two-leg, aggregate score series and the A-League Championship September 20. The 2003 playoffs will feature four fewer teams than 2002 and one less round.
Bad move. What on earth posessed them to come up with a plan that will reduce the number of teams in the playoff race near the end of the year? Lets face it, unlike other soccer leagues, the A-League season at 28 games is relatively short. The league plays a wildly unbalanced schedule with some teams having a much harder schedule than others. Letting 12 of the 16 teams make the playoff rectifies that. The way it is now there are at least 7 teams guaranteed to make the playoffs each year, so that means we'll be seeing the same teams in the playoffs every year. Now it seems many teams may be eliminated weeks before the season ends. This will do wonders for the attendance at these games, if the aim is to decrease attendance.
I disagree. I think this is a good idea. 12 of 18 teams is just too many, in my opinion. It begins to make the regular season completely meaningless if too many teams get in to the playoffs. It's almost like one of those crap things nowadays when kids play sports and everyone gets a ribbon and told "Good Job," and there are so many different divisions that pretty much everyone wins a chamionship. It devalues the accomplishment. Which 7 teams are "guaranteed to make the playoffs each year?" I'm curious.
If the league played a balanced schedule then 12 out of 16 teams making the playoffs would be too many. However the schedule is wildly unbalanced. I'll just cut and paste a post I made on another board below as a response: I feel exactly the same. Theres far too many teams making the playoffs in most pro sports. However in the A-Leagues case, playing 28 games during the regular season is too few as far as soccer leagues go, and doing anything that will shrink corwd sizes from late July through August is just plain stupid. Can you imagine the crowd drop off in cities which teams have been eliminated so early? Also the article states that the regular season will end in the last week of August. So there goes the Whitecaps annual labour day weekend game, usually a big draw. With 8 teams only making the playoffs ther will be the same teams in it every year. Rochester, Charleston and Richmond are always shoo-ins to make the playoffs. Add Minnesota and Milwaukee to the almost guaranteed to make the playoffs teams. Seattle will be guaranteed to make the playoffs if they keep their payroll up where it is now. Montreal for another 4 years will be able to make the playoffs with a high payroll. Right there you have 7 out of the 8 playoff teams, that will be there for the next few years. Lets not forget, this also ends the chances of a Cinderella story happening for a team that just might have qualified when 12 teams made the playoffs.
Reduced Playoff Opportunities Krammerhead - Again, I must agree with you. This is getting a little scary! (Imagine El Paso @ Cincy on August 20,2003....Beuller? Beuller?) A balanced home-and-home schedule would justify a smaller playoff, but that is just not financially feasible at this level. So 8 teams - 4 per conference? Let's say the two division winners and then the two next best records. That way, a 3rd place finisher in one division can still qualify IF they have a better record than the other division's 2nd place finisher. I suggest that IF the league could somehow keep the schedule to playing only conference opponents (East & West). However, that could wipe out Cincy & Indiana in travel costs becuase they don't get shorter trips to Pittsburgh, Toronto or Rochester.
The schedules are not that imbalanced! In the divisions of 5, each team plays 24 common opponents out of 28. That's 85%. The divisions of four are a little worse, just 22 common opponents. Still 78%. Hopefully expansion will improve this. So that's just four games in the Pacific and South East Division against possible non-common opponents. Admittedly room for improvement hardly wildly imbalanced like it used to be (Vancouver vs Seattle game 6 anybody?)
not to me... i think that are too much teams in the playoffs.... we have 18 teams and only eight qualifyes to playoffs...
Fine, I won't argue my point anymore, I'll let the drastic drop in average attendance next season prove my point.
That's not the real imbalance: teams in the same conference don't play the same opponents the same amount of times, so teams with bad teams in their divisions get more chances for easy wins. Therefore, comparing them directly for playoff positions is unfair to the team with the tougher schedule.
Sounds to me like conference standings will no longer count. It will just be 1 & 2 from each division which means the best two teams from each division will make the play-offs. Sounds fair to me. Although it would be better if each division had the same number of teams.