What is the upside of this? From the perspective of NT player development, I don't care what league the players are in so long as it is the highest league where they will see meaningful playing time. I don't want to get into a big comparison of world leagues or a discussion of the difference between a top and a bottom team in the same European league. Suffice to say, MLS is a fine place for NT players who aren't going to get calls from teams like Bayern. Why blow that up to get three more CPL clubs? I want the best for the CPL but they aren't at MLS level right now. I'd like to see many more Canadians starting on MLS teams but the guys who are are getting much better experience than they would in the CPL. I'd rather expand on that then throw it away. And that includes things like the TFC academy system that has finally gotten its stuff together and is producing great young talent. Why cancel that to restart it as a CPL academy? Because the other thing is the money. It's light years apart. The lowest paid MLS player makes about $75 000 CDN. That's double the CPL average. So they wouldn't just be selling Cavallini and Osorio, they'd be selling almost everyone. I don't have 2020 salary numbers but looking at 2019 numbers and assuming absolute minimums for new players, TFC's Canadian youngsters (Fraser, Okello, Schaffelburg, Romeo, Dunn, Rutty, and Nelson) make a combined $575 k. That's basically a full CPL team salary for seven players. Finally, Forbes estimates the three Canadian MLS teams to be worth about $1.1 billion CDN. A CPL team is worth, what, maybe $5 million? No one is going to sell an MLS team for nine figures so that they can invest it all in a CPL team.
Again most teams pay like 100M+ to join MLS lest say min this moves gives the 3 teams 300M if not more then that the money to reinvest rebuild and plan for the future of Canadian soccer. Then CPL will be a top league. Maybe you guys are right maybe now is not the time to do it maybe CPL should grow more before this become an Idea but at some point I do think it needs to happen. It thought now would be a good time due to the players you guys have coming up. The new generation looks bright. And the issue was that to many Canadians get benched in Canadian MLS teams. so there not seeing meaning full playing time.
There's lots of untapped potential and young players around the country at this moment, CPL quality being higher than anticipated was due to the ability to get this talent at lower cost who will get all the minutes to properly develop and get better. I believe that Forge, Cavalry and York9 were playing above USL level while the rest adjusted their rosters to play at Cavalry and Forge level. York's lineup looks very dangerous making them a contender. Their facilities are already above what Central America leagues possesses. The budgets will increase rapidly while more of those young players in Canada will join the league while attracting young internationals from good academies such as America and Corinthians. 2026 will be a huge year for CPL and I think they will go "2.0" right after That's up to FIFA when the sanctioning exemption for the 3 MLS clubs expires which at that time, the exemption clause under FIFA Statute 73, which allows them to play in MLS will no longer apply CPL doesn't need to be "on par" with MLS, just a long term viable Division 1 league, the same way most European leagues aren't EPL or MLS isn't Liga MX. 6 years is a good amount of time for the league to grow organically and get it's expansions. 2026 is when I believe the league will take a big leap forward capitalizing on the world cup. They will go "2.0" by the end of this decade and will become a top CONCACAF league in both budget and level of play. CONCACAF will expand the Champions league around 2023 which at that point CPL should get berth straight into the tournament.
I don't think six years is going to be enough. The league says it wants 16 teams in D1. That would mean a net addition of one or two teams every year. I admire the ambition, but that's going to be tight, especially if, as the league says, the main obstacle to expansion is stadiums. Two questions: How do you define "2.0" as compared to how the league is today? How do you define a top CONCACAF league in terms of budget?
I'm not sure you've got this right. I'm not sure it would be VAN, TFC, and MTL profiting from their departure. They (or CSA) would be paying MLS a mountain of cash to get the teams out of the league. The loss of the Canadian market and all of the Canadian sponsors isn't going to be cheap and MLS is going to need to be compensated for that loss. I'd also be curious if MLS owns the brands. I'm also not sure how it is up in Canada, but down here in the US, MLS owns all of the copyrights and trademarks for the MLS teams. If it is the same up in Canada, the teams are going to have to buy their brands from MLS as well.
Would it be the Canadian teams selling them? The contracts are with MLS. When Miami and Tampa left MLS, the players weren't sold, there was a disbursement draft and the players were spread around the league. I'd be curious if there was a similar situation.
You're probably right since in MLS the contracts are with the league rather than the teams. But that's just another item to my point to javer that the teams would not be able to keep their players (even the youngsters).
I did a quick look on the Canadian Intellectual Property Office site and MLS Canada owns all of the trademarks for the Canadian teams (including the pre-MLS ones). It could also mean that MLS could sell MLS Canada to the CPL/CSA, which, again, isn't TFC, MTL, and VAN making money off the move.
The COVID situation definitely threw a wrench in their plan. I think the league doesn't want to deal with odd number of teams ever again so I'm thinking if there's expansion in 2021 or 2022 due to COVID, it will be 2 at a time but they could potentially reach 16 by 2026. What I know on expansion Laval/Montreal : There was a deal in place. The team was going to be backed by Saudis but they had to back off due to push back in Canada (not sure who, might be political). They are working on getting other investors but the Saudis thing was surprising. Quebec City : There were rumours about Lyon and that a deal was reached about a suitable venue. Can't confirmed if Lyon is involved at this point but groups are active in the city St.John's : Before COVID, city hall was supposed to discuss a plan to revitalize and upgrade the King Georges V Stadium as part of a broader project. Previous reports had said that a wealthy business man from Atlantic Canada was studying the market and feasibility Moncton has a suitable stadium. What's new to me is that there's a brewery from there that might be a major financial backer for the project. That's all I know for them. Fraser Valley is a matter on when with Langley being the most likely location. Saskatoon is also a matter of when with Belan Group and his Sask Series. He already gave the location of where the team would play I'm told that Kitchener-Waterloo is a matter of when. Plans is to drastically upgrade the University of Waterloo Stadium and changing the turf to meet FIFA requirements. I have heard of who the financial backer is and that's how I know this is happening pending the renovations at the stadium being completed Clanachan talked about another team in Toronto. I knew of the Pickering project to have a stadium near the casino complex. Since it's next to Scarborough, this could be it. The financial backer is a billionaire. This could also be Mississauga who are looking at building a stadium. If we're talking modular stadiums and/or renovating existing facilities, that can be done fairly quickly. Media Next media contract which expires in 2029. Not only will the CPL property be more valuable by then but the CanMNT post 2026 as well. All National teams (men & women) are bundle with CPL along with the Canadian Championship wish I believe will grow exponentially with the addition of more clubs throughout the country over time. The next TV contract will add the Division 2 league to the package and possibly expand the Division 3 offer (League 1 Ontario right went to MediaPro in this contract) MediaPro said that they wanted to launch a cable channel in Canada and it's all but assured they will be bidding for all CONCACAF events and MLS rights in Canada as they already have the rights to Liga MX in Canada. Salary budgets Salaries will drastically increase with the league's growth will capitalize on 2026. As the unionization process being imminent, the league will become more attractive to internationals out there. As I mention often, if CPL can reach the CFL metrics in merch sales and TV viewership, the salary cap being significantly higher is very realistic. Attendance Clanachan speaks of attendance goal for the league in long term of ~10k in attendance. This would put CPL at Portugal, Belgium level and above the Turkish and Scandinavian league who have much higher salaries, quality with in some cases, smaller population. The goal is ~10k average attendance Paving the way for Division 2 Having talks with CPL people helps you see what they are trying to do. This "CPL 1.0" with salaries below $1M, having to travel across Canada and having a good quality level in year 1 is also aimed to prove a point. A Canadian Professional league is viable in Canada with the right business model. The goal is when the time will come to launch a Division 2 league, it is to be operated at "today's CPL 1.0" budgets,,,less than $1M salary under an even more lucrative TV contract than what is implemented today making them way less dependant on attendances. Post 2026 era, the belief/goal is that the demand for football will attract business people to launch D2 teams as CPL will have shown that that level of operation is viable. There's already a few groups who are exploring the idea of a D2 league and how it would look like which would fall under CSB. In a nutshell By end of the 2020s, CPL --> 2.0 A D2 league would start around 2019 CPL level on all metrics bringing the gap between regional leagues (CHL model) and CPL with Pro/Rel That's not me talking as a fanboy but the plan that was explained to me from people in the know.I'm just buying in to most of it. Top 3 in CONCACAF, catching up the CFL give and take as they have a cap as of today of ~$5.3M. Tall order, but CPL has demographics on its side with the 2026 World Cup happening. Demographic change is starting to affect the CFL.Their decline (unless they change) coincide with CPL's rise.
No one knows what the opt-out clause is. I'm assuming the clause in Canadian team's case being somewhat different as external factors might force their exits. CSA certainly not paying a dime. Looking at the Chivas USA case, MLS bought back the franchise from the owners and sold it back to someone else. My understanding of the Single-Entity structure is that MLS would buy back their stake in the league which has greatly appreciated over time. TFC paid $10M and are now worth like over $395M, they definitely walk out with a cheque, a big one. Assumption/Speculation. MLS doesn't "own" the Canadian Market. They were only there in the first place because FIFA allowed it. There's no realm or dimensions or universes where FIFA/CONCACAF/CSA didn't protect their interest in the eventuality of a separation due to sanctioning or MLS protected itself in case that Canadians owners were utter disasters. That is simply NOT how business works and I doubt that MLS had the "legal might" that FIFA has back in 2007. You're projecting 2020 MLS to 2007 MLS... we're talking night in day of what that league was. While today, they don't need more clubs in Canada, back then, they REALLY wanted Major North American Markets. Unlikely they had such punitive clauses or the other parties would have simply walked away. MLS had simply no such leverage back then You are 10000% correct. If the 3 teams leave, they can't use any of their brands, names...IP is MLS property. They could try to buy it back but if I'm MLS, no way in hell I sell it back as another league would use them to their benefits. I can guarantee you that CSA/CSB wouldn't buy it if the price is too high. They could just start over. Toronto FC --> Toronto xxxxx Vancouver Whitecaps --> Vancouver xxxx Montreal Impact --> Montreal xxxx The name of the city is the HUGE reason why they would draw, not "FC", "Whitecaps" or "Impact"
This is true. Perhaps, however: That's because MLS forced Chivas USA out of the league. In the situation where the Canadian MLS teams leave the league, they aren't being forced out by MLS, they would be taken from MLS. I'm not sure how Canadian law works, but in the US, a company would expect to receive fair market value for any property taken from them. I didn't say MLS owned the Canadian market. What I said is that MLS would be cut off from the Canadian market and sponsors. As you noted above, we don't know exactly what the out clause is, or if there is even one, but just like FIFA/CONCACAF/CSA would want to protect their interest, MLS would want to protect their interest. And CSA really wanted professional soccer clubs in Canada. You aren't wrong that MLS really wanted clubs in major NA markets, but getting a MLS club in Canada was also a priority of CSA. It depends on what you mean by too high. Assuming MLS wants to give up the brands (and I'm not sure why they wouldn't), the brands aren't likely to be too much compared to the value of the clubs themselves.
The team having a stake in the league too as investors. The league owns the teams but each club operators own a financial stake in the league as well. It's not as one way as you're implying. Objectively, they have worked through who gets what and how much. No I dont believe that TFC having invested $10M walks away with the balance. It's more complex than that but them getting in this early makes it more likely that they walk away with a plus. Yes the league shares it's revenues but operators "spend" their own dollars to be in good standing within the league, which brought the league "value". Maybe it's way more in the middle than we both think, we dont know what's on those "opt-out clauses but 2020 MLS are more likely to be "aggressive" than 2007 MLS. That's 100% inaccurate. NFL has no clubs in Canada and they are making LOTS of money in TV contracts and sponsorship from businesses operating on both sides of the border. "BMO" operates on both sides. NFL pulls this off with the CFL existing, why couldn't MLS do it too? Nothing stops MLS from making money in Canada, but they have to put the marketing work that the NFL did. A team in Buffalo might not be a bad idea to tap in the Southern Ontario market like the Sabres and Bill's are doing. Detroit might be more attractive now? No one would be paying "damages" from losing the Canadian market. Can't lose something that isn't your property. Hard to say... The CSA wanted the women league more as the CSA financially invested in the NWSL to help start it up + subsidizing some of the Canadians salaries. The CSA didn't do any of the above for MLS. TFC owners at the time used the opportunity to apply for MLS after all levels of governments and CSA build BMO field for the 2007 U20 World Cup. The CSA granted them the sanction. Not saying they didn't want a pro team, but they didn't pursue it the way you are framing it, not like they did for the women in 2012 which was pretty bold. A certain Montagliani became CSA president that year. I doubt MLS allows clubs to use their brands that got big during their time in MLS to give a huge advantage to CPL. If MLS ever wanted to be like the NFL and have a following in Canada, such a move you kill their chance in attempting that.
The team does not have a stake in the league and being an investor in the league does not automatically come with a team. When Miami was contracted, Horowitz remained an investor in the league. The league has also sold shares in the league that did not come with a team. MLS is not the NFL and the value of MLS in Canada is largely derived from the presence of the Canadian teams. I’m probably phrasing it incorrectly? Having three clubs in Canada and the revenue that gives the league has increased value that wouldn’t exist without the teams. Think of it as US based company that has it’s Canadian operations shutdown. That companies presence in Canada is diminished because it lacks the physical presence of its Canadian operations. I’m not saying the CSA pursued it. My point is that it was mutually beneficial. I believe you are also wrong in the timing of events related to the construction of BMO Field. The CSA certainly got the funding from the governments due to the 2007 u20 WC, but MLSE’s involvement in the stadium happened before MLS’s interest in Toronto and CSA failed in two other attempts to build the stadium and it was only after MLSE’s involvement at the Exhibition Center location that BMO ultimately was built. CSA needed a tenant post WC to actually build the stadium and when MLSE pulled out of the University of Toronto location and the Argos pulled out of the York location and signed a 15-year lease with Rogers, the only real option was MLSE and a MLS team or lose the WC or risk having an empty stadium post WC draining the federations coffers. I don’t see a benefit of MLS keeping the brands, tbh. In a situation where the Canadian MLS teams are forced to leave MLS and join CPL, it would probably be a good idea for MLS to keep a positive relationship with them and their fans. It’s not a good idea to piss off the three largest club fanbases in Canada.
Aren't team's owners also shareholders in the league? Well under NAFTA, if Canadian laws affects a US business, said business can sue the Canadian government for damages. This doesn't includes "sports", nor is it the "Canadian Government" doing. When FIFA sanctioned MLS in Canada, all parties were aware of the conditional nature of the sanction and agreed with the terms. Youre assuming that only "2007" MLS legally protected itself... No, the CSA and FIFA would have protected themselves has well. We don't know what's in the opt-out clause for those 3 but I have major doubts that their withdrawal triggers compensation in the magnitudes you're referring too. USL didn't get a dime when they lost Ottawa, neither will MLS. This was done pre-Montagliani. Doesn't look like he believed it was mutually beneficial when he took office. Threatening to pull all 3 teams is proof that he felt this deal was one sided. You're right, MLSE was involved at Exhibition for the construction of the stadium. That's how they got the managerial rights to the stadium. They contributed $8M to the project but with the world cup being awarded to Canada, that stadium would have gotten built with or without them. From that point of view, I'd say you're right. MLS still doesn't have a relationship with CPL but Garber's answer on CPL was interesting Next question with CPL: Garber says there have been no talks with CPL at all, and that should change. Wants to help encourage growth. What it means for 3 MLS canadian clubs "still needs to be determined." 🤔🤨 #MLS— Miki Turner (@turneresq) December 7, 2018
Yes, but my point was that even if the teams are no longer in the league, the owners of the Canadian teams would not necessarily be forced to give up their share in the league. In the case where the teams are forced out of the league, I'm sure the lawsuit(s) will be interesting. And you're assuming MLS wouldn't have protected itself. It's safe to assume that all parties involved have protected their interests. USL's business is set up different that MLS's. The clubs are individual businesses that pay an annual franchise fee to play in the league. Also, Ottawa shutdown, it didn't change leagues. USL has exit clauses in their contracts that require teams pay the league a certain amount if they leave and that amount changes based on when they make the announcement. If Ottawa had changed leagues rather than shutdown, USL would have gotten paid. I'm not sure what your point is here? Montagliani's opinion on the deal doesn't particularly matter as the league and CSA are bound by the pre-Montagliani deal. The same is true with MLS. Perhaps, but having an empty 25k stadium that CSA was responsible for would have ended up being a drag on the federations finances. Having TFC in the stadium resolved that issue. MLS has already had an adversarial relationship with another league in one of their Federations, they would likely rather avoid that as it can get expensive. A cooperative relationship would be beneficial for both leagues and improves MLS's chances of retaining the Canadian teams.
Not if they knew in advance that this was a possibility due to conditional sanctioning and still agreed to the terms. FIFA, who would be the defendant here, would have legally protected itself from liabilities. I know that the best legal teams and lawyers on TV are Americans but let's pretend that the US has the monopoly of legal expertise. Due to the "exceptional" nature of this deal, the clause won't be as straight forward as you think it will. Until the sanctioning exemption expires. Perhaps if the teams were forced out prior to that exemption period, there would be ground for prejudice as the league has planned for those 3 teams to be there for X amount of time. But the sanctioning not being forever and the sanction being conditional under FIFA statute, which MLS and USSF agreed to, FIFA can pull the plug once it expires without prejudice under Statute 73 of their rule. They would argue that under Statute 73, clubs are NOT allowed to compete in another association league except under "exceptional circumstances" which no longer applies due to CPL being a Tier 1 FIFA sanctioned league. I mean they can try to sue...but good luck Not on the federation but on the City of Toronto. I think the Argos would have eventually became the tenants but having a team is better. How would that improve their chances of retaining the teams? That's a FIFA call in the end.
Why would American lawyers be used in a lawsuit in Canada. That would be a horrible idea... This is the first I've heard of the exemption expiring... Just having a Tier 1 sanctioned league does not eliminate other options for "exceptional circumstances". FIFA has also allowed situations where the gap between their current league and their home federation's league and historical connections. The Whitecaps, in particular, are coming up on 50 years of rivalry with Portland and Seattle, while the Impact have been playing in US leagues for almost 30. Again, depends on what the language of the agreement between USSF, CSA, and MLS is. If it is something wishy-washy like "as long as the arrangement is beneficial to Canadian soccer", then there wouldd likely be some fun arguments on both sides. Depends? Argos had a 15 year lease in Rogers and going that long without a tenant isn't good for a stadium and it remaining in a condition conducive to hosting sporting events. Not to mention the Argos were on the verge of collapsing when MLSE stepped in and acquired them in 2015 and that was after years of resisting pressure to acquire the Argos and move them to BMO. The better relationship MLS has with CPL, the less likely CPL is to make an issue of the Canadian MLS teams, which means the less likely CSA is going to make an issue of it. FIFA isn't going to force the teams into CPL if none of the parties want it.
US or Canada, wouldn't make a difference I've heard rumors on exactly how long they have, but haven't been able to confirm.— Miki Turner (@turneresq) February 5, 2019 The timeframe I heard was much shorter, but as I mentioned, I haven't been able to confirm (hence my reluctance to put it out there, lest I end up in someone's story myself).— Miki Turner (@turneresq) February 6, 2019 It's a topic not discussed in Canadian soccer but people in the know confirmed that the exemption has an expiry date which makes sense as there was no point talking about it until 2019 when CPL launched. At that point, all 3 clubs will have to apply and demonstrate how they qualify under statute 73 for an exemption which most believe, they won't be able to make the case if CPL is viable long term and growing. Theses are the exemptions: (1) clubs that are in close proximity to another member’s territory and have been long-standing members of the other league (Their best bet) (2) clubs that have moved because of political conflict or civil war in their homes countries (3) clubs located in member associations where there isn’t currently a professional league, * *(Used by the 3 MLS teams which won't apply once they are forced to reapply) (4) clubs in disputed territories Having been part of US leagues and MLS in particular isn't the same thing. TFC has been in MLS for 13 years while Montreal - 8 years and Vancouver - 9 years. They could try to argue clause #1 but we're far from Welsh clubs being in the English system (Pro/Rel) for around a century for some. Nothing refers to "gaps". Most leagues around the world have top 3 to 5 teams dominating with the rest of the league being average...nothing unusual about that. So for fun you could see a table like this: TFC MTL Forge Cavalry Vancouver Than the rest Let's be real. This had to be approved by FIFA who's using the same statute to prevent European leagues from creating their Super Leagues. FIFA has every reasons in the world to cover all their angles. A precedent would unleash the "wants" of much more powerful clubs and leagues than MLS and 3 Canadian clubs. Wishy-Washy? Nah, more like no one EVER thought that a Division 1 league would ever exist in Canada. You can just tell by the league's marketing approach theses past years and Garber's behavior and not keeping his word. Let's be honest, there was a sense that Canada was MLS backyard. Had they seen the CSA make such a move, perhaps your assumptions would hold more weight, but taking Canada for granted can be seen in MLS moves in Canada at every turn. I think it was MLS being legally careless or getting an exemption to reapply being the best they could get from FIFA. Canadians being nice is a "myth". CPL is made of billionaires owners who wants to grow and make money just as bad of the rest, they are just going differently at it in an more conservative and long term approach, not because they're broke. Somehow Canadians being the ones acting selflessly when there's an opening for them to profit from is fantasy and stereotypically naive. No businesses would pass on a chance for a monopoly, which is exactly what CSB (business arm of CPL) is aiming for. For the sake of being consistent, I'm pretty sure they will play politics as their influence increases within the CSA, that's inevitable.
I did not know that. Thanks! I'm not sure them being in multiple different leagues particularly matters considering the league structure in US. But, again, Vancouver has a compelling argument given the nearly 50 years of rivalry with Portland and Seattle across multiple leagues. Toronto's claim is easily the weakest given they don't really have any cross border rivals and have only been in US leagues for 13 years. I'm just not sure it would be an all or nothing situation. Nothing listed, but, as we know, FIFA has a habit of making up interpretations of rules. The difference being that none of the federations are okay with the formation of a Super League. On the other hand, UEFA also doesn't want to risk the clubs going to the EU courts to challenge the cross-border restrictions they have and keep throwing money at the big clubs via the Champions League. Precedent has already been set and regardless of what explanation FIFA would use to grant the exemption, it isn't going to be precedential. We should also avoid exaggerating what Canadian Soccer was like in 2006-2007. Certainly an interesting combination of assumptions there.. None of which were included in my comment. But, you do you.
The exemption #1 use the language "league" not association. I believe they would count the number of years they've been in MLS, not within USSF. Outside of Vancouver...no one cares about that cup they have out west. Heck, that was news to me that Columbus and TFC had a rivalry. That they certainly do! I'm just going with the precedent with the Fury, their sanctioned was challenged when CPL hadn't kicked a ball yet. That is sending a pretty strong message if you ask me. The CSA approved the Fury sanction knowing CONCACAF would shut it down. Within the CSA (Post Montagliani-era) there's no honeymoon with the status quo with MLS. CPL 1st season got people within the CSA pretty high on the league meaning not many would lament MLS being out of Canada. CONCACAF doesn't support it especially with their bid to boost the Champions League. Objectively, FIFA are more likely to side with CONCACAF and the CSA than MLS. Does the USSF care that much that 3 Canadian clubs competes in MLS? As you said earlier, FIFA can interpret their own rules however they like. I'm just saying that you should forget courts making the decision for them. I certainly don't, that's how I'm confident that FIFA did the legal heavy lifting, I'd never give the 2007 CSA that much credit Lots of people make those assumptions not specifically you. Just saying I dont see a scenario where CPL wouldn't want to control football in Canada
Thanks for your response. You've said a lot here so I'll just make a couple of points rather than going through everything: Two at a time makes scheduling sense. If there was a Saudi group that pulled out it was most likely at the Saudi end. Their king pitched a hissy fit a few months ago when Canada called out Saudi Arabia on human rights issues. He cancelled business deals, forced all Saudi students attending Canadian universities to come home, etc. The list you gave would get the league to 16 teams if they all panned out and no existing teams failed by 2016. I have no wish for the league to have anything but success but I'm still not convinced all these cities are going to be at that level long term. And this is part of the reason why. I agree that 10 000 is a good target number to shoot for. A national league can be viable at that level even without sugar daddy owners or if sponsorship takes a hit for some reason (like covid, for example). I just don't see cities like Moncton or St. John's ever getting there. I think it will be hard enough for much larger cities to accomplish. For example, Calgary and Edmonton both averaged about 3000 last year. They'll have to increase attendance by almost 25% year over year every single year to hit 10 000 by 2026. I don't know the salary numbers for the CONCACAF leagues outside MLS and LMX. I assume you're correct that a salary budget of ~$5 million would put them around third place. It would be a huge step down from first and second but the league would be in third. That would probably be enough to sustain a reasonable level of play in terms of attracting fans, sponsorship, and internationals. I hope the CPL succeeds beyond the expectations. I just think there's a lot of optimism in much of what the league is saying. Expansion will work out in a whole bunch of smaller and smaller cities. No existing teams will falter. We'll just somehow get from an average attendance of ~4000 to ~10 000 in six years. On the plus side, even if the league doesn't hit these ambitious targets it will be doing well on the way.
Sorry if I implied that CPL aimed to get an average of ~10k in attendance by 2026. It's a long term goal, there's no way that CPL gets there that fast. It will be possible when stadiums in Winnipeg, Hamilton and Ottawa draw as much as CFL which would compensate for smaller stadiums elsewhere in Canada. I think that Atlantic Canada can be very successful like Halifax despite their small size. As for Southern Ontario, some of those cities have comparable metro area population to cities in Europe who fill huge stadiums. CPL is a long term project, the goal is to get there eventually even if it takes decades...which makes it worth it for investors to get in early when the price for joining are this low. I have no doubt that Quebec City and Laval will work, same for Fraser Valley.
Going from clubs and leagues back to the "national team" in the topic title, Concacaf announced the WCQ format. https://www.concacaf.com/en/article...al-qualification-to-fifa-world-cup-qatar-2022 says there will be one path that ends with an Octagonal, which has 8 teams and 14 games each. The top five in the June 2020 FIFA Rankings, who are Mexico, USA, Costa Rica, Jamaica, and Honduras, will start in the Octagonal. The bottom 30 will be drawn in 6 groups of 5. The groups will be single round-robin, with each team hosting two opponents and going to two opponents. The games will be in October and November, and they will need to have three matchdays in one of those months because each team will play four games and have one matchday off. In March 2021, there will be playoffs between the winners of Groups A and F, B and E, and C and D. The draw will be in mid-August, and since what group winners play each other is decided, that is the only draw necessary to determine who plays who. The Octagonal, which will start in June 2021, will need a draw to determine the schedule. El Salvador (Group A), Canada (Group B), Curacao (Group C), Panama (Group D), Haiti (Group E), and Trinidad and Tobago (Group F) will be top seeds in Round 1. If both teams win their groups, you will face Haiti for a spot in the Octagonal. Of the five top seeds other Canada, how happy are you about facing the winner of Haiti's group. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification_(CONCACAF) lists the rankings without stating the pots, and Pots 2 through 5 (or B through E if they use letters) will be: 2: Antigua and Barbuda, Guatemala, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Suriname, Nicaragua, and Dominican Republic 3: Grenada, Barbabos, Guyana, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Bermuda, and Belize 4: Saint Lucia, Puerto Rico, Cuba, Montserrat, Dominica, and Cayman Islands 5: Bahamas, Aruba, Turks and Caicos Islands, U.S. Virgin Islands, British Virgin Islands, and Anguilla What team from the bottom 24 would have the best chance at beating you? Are there teams who you want to play at home but not away or vice-versa? Of the teams who won't finish ahead of Canada, do you have any you want to play? https://canadasoccer.com/concacaf-announces-new-format-for-fifa-world-cup-qualifiers-p162665 is by Canada Soccer. Edit: The top seeds in Round 1 were done using the FIFA Rankings. Of the top seeds, Canada has the second best FIFA Ranking, so they will face the winner of the group with Haiti, who has the second worst FIFA Ranking of the top seeds. In WCQs for 2018, Concacaf originally announced that there would be aggregate series where the best team played the worst team, second best played second worst, and so on, but they turned out to do the draw the normal way where any team in one pot could face any team in the other pot.
This is a much better format than what was originally proposed. It gives every team a shot at the oct, which is fair. Of all the minnow teams, the match up I'd least like to see is St. Kitts and Nevis away. I don't know why, but they always play us tough. Without looking it up, I believe our last two matches against them were a narrow 1-0 win at home and a 0-0 draw away.
You will get your wish because Paul Calixte posted that the top seeds will host the next best team. There are 6x6x6x6 = 1,296 combinations of opponents. There are three ways to host one of the bottom three teams. Therefore there are 3x1,296 = 3,888 combinations of opponents and sites for you.