Sean Wheelock interview with Phil Woosman "We use to have a competition called the Trans-Atlantic Cup. Two teams from our league, the winner of the Soccer Bowl (NASL's annual championship), and the one with the best record in the league from number of points gained in the season, would play against two top quality teams from overseas. We ran it for six years, and in no year did any of those foreign teams win it. That just showed exactly what a quality league the NASL was. It was such an amazing impact we had on the world, it wasn't just what was going on in this country. The rest of the world was impressed at what was going on. The Cosmos would go on tours pre-season and post-season, and they would be successful wherever they went, playing the top teams over there. (Wheelock's Note: The Trans-Atlantic Cup was held from 1980-1984. NASL clubs compiled a record of 13 wins, 3 draws, and 2 losses versus some of the top clubs in the world, including AS Roma, Celtic, Barcelona, and Sao Paulo.)" This seems like a great idea for MLS. Have the two teams with the best records around all star time play each other to determine who plays the winner of two international teams. The two losing teams play each other. I'd rather see that than the all star game.
Asking Woosman about the NASL days is like asking Giorgio Chinaglia for an objective comparison. I remember the TACC, and the modern-day equivalent would be for the two best MLS teams to play whoever is on tour for Champions World. In their view, it really was an off-season vacation to America, and the "so what, it's just a friendly" attitude generally prevailed. Of course, just like now, the US teams had a lot more to prove, and played harder. Also, a lot of the NASL teams (especially the Cosmos, who were in the TACC every time) played on the fuzzy concrete known as AstroTurf. It was a lot less forgiving than today's artificial surfaces. I have a better idea: Why don't the two best MLS teams actually put a little emphasis on an already existing internationa tournament that actually does have some meaning, the CONCACAF Champions Cup? Tom
Mostly MLS doesn't give a rat's ass about the CONCACAF CC because there's no incentive to win. The players get pittance of a bonus and there's no money at all behind it. However, now that FIFA will have (hopefully) their World Club championship next year, the winner of the CONCACAF CC will go on to compete in a tourney with the other 5 confederation winners (I believe Champions League and Liberatodores Cup winners will have a first round bye) that will have significant money behind it. Now that is worth something. Here's a quote from FIFA.com about it: "From 2005 onwards, the FIFA Club World Championship will take place each year with annual prize money of USD 15 million. In addition, FIFA will bear all of the costs for the teams and confederation/FIFA delegations." I'm pretty sure MLS would love to get their hands on even $1 million of that $15 million. Now that's incentive just to make it there which means they'll have to win the CC. As it is though I believe that MLS' reps to the CC will be the MLS Cup winner and the Supporter Shield winner (which means one of the two teams is going to be Columbus). Hopefully whoever wins MLS cup has a strong core group of players that they'll be bringing back next season. (DCU is the strongest canidate to win the CC next year that I can tell. Of course if they loose Nelson that will be a hugh hurdle). The FIFA CWC will be held Dec. 11-18 in Tokyo of 2005. That kinda sucks that it's after the end of the MLS season, however it's like only a month after so hopefully our boys (should they make it) will still be in their end of season form. I'd rather take it after the season than the pre-season concacaf CC.
MLS screwed the pooch. The two finalists of MLS Cup get in to the CCC. Columbus is getting shut out. It's on mlsnet right now.