It appears Chivas (plaing in HDC) and SLC are the teams for 2005. Even if Seattle wins out last minute over SLC, it appears we're dealing with 2 new west teams. How does this likely expansion affect the conferences? Does adding 2 teams in the west increase the likelihood that SJ or KC are moved to keep the conferences balanced or is the problem resolved by simply moving the re-branded Dallas or KC to the east. If the answer is moving SJ or KC any thoughts as to where? MOD-i didn't see this discussion around...obviously move this if this discussion is or has been going on elsewhere.
Probably been discussed earlier. Complicated by the fact the expansion will likely occur a few more times in the coming years. Assuming that the "confirmed rumors" are true (appears VERY likely at this point) for 2005, I think they would either move Kansas City or Dallas to the east, or possibly go back to a 3 division league, something like: West Chivas LA SLC/Utah San Jose Central Colorado Kansas City Dallas Chicago East Columbus Metrostars DC United New England
I like this idea the best of all I have seen. I think its easier to move KC or Dallas to the East. This way it ensures that when MLS expands again, hopefully it will mean at East coast city and a West coast city will get teams.
I agree with this post, except for the ruling of the MLS universe part. I apllied for this job a few years ago.
Seperate C-bus from Chi and KC? The only change I would make to this it to put C-bus in the Central, and Dallas in the East (Southeast?) division. BTW, with the Burn nickname going away, is the Brimstone Cup gone, too?
No. The Brimstone Cup is about the rivalry that was built on the field, not about the names of the teams. Incidentally, MLS will stay with two conferences, Kansas City will stay in the West and Dallas will head to the East. The geography isn't as important a consideration as rivalries, both in MLS and in other sports. It's pretty much the reason why Kansas City stayed in the West, while Dallas was moved to the Central, when MLS realigned to three divisions in 2000. Dallas had the rivalry with Chicago in MLS, while Kansas City has had long-standing rivalries with teams in Denver and the West Coast in the NFL and other sports. So I'm pretty sure that they'll move Dallas east to reunite them with Chicago, while keeping Kansas City with Colorado and the Western teams. But from what I've heard from people who should know, MLS is not going back to three divisions. Experience has taught them that the whole East-West thing works out much better.
2005 (2 divisions) East Metrostars DC United Chicago Fire NE Revolution Columbas Crew Kansas City Wizards West LA Galaxy San Jose Earthquakes FC Dallas Colorado Rapids Chivas LA SLC Saints 2006 keep 2 conferences adding East: Rochester Rhinos West: Seattle Sounders 2008 Keep 2 Conferences but split them into 2 divisions EAST Atlantic: NE Revolution Metrostars DC United Philadelphia Expansion Central: Rochester Rhinos Chicago Fire Kansas City Wizards Columbas Crew WEST Midwest: FC Dallas SLC Saints Colorado Rapids Houston Expansion Pacific: Chivas LA LA Galaxy San Jose Earthquakes Seattle Sounders Lengthen Regular season to 36 games, by playing division teams twice at home and twice away and all other teams once at home and once away. Then shorten playoffs by having divion winners of Atlantic and central and division winners of Midwest and Pacific play a home/away aggregate goals series with the winners playing in MLS Cup. Then even more years down the road getting to the 20 team league you add: Atlantic: Miami or Tampa Bay(giving Florida a second shot) Central: Detroit Midwest: Oklahoma Pacific: Portland or San Diego Sorry if I get ahead of myself, but I like to Dream!
The key is any SJ relocation, and the fact that Dallas and Houston HAVE to be together in the same conference. Add to this the fact that, after Seattle, MOST new franchises will be in the eastern part of the country. 2005 would look like this: West: Galaxy, Chivas, FC Dallas, SLC, Rapids, SJ/Houston East: KC, Chicago, Crew, DC, NE, Metro Obviously, if SJ goes further east, then KC stays in the West. 2006 would add Seattle to the West, Rochester to the East. KC can be the "balancer" until MLS goes to single table, which should happen when they hit 16, as that makes for an even 30-game season. Next season with 12 teams will have to see 32 games (4 X 5 in conference, 2 X 6 out of conference). 2006 with 14 teams will also see 32 games (3 X 6 in conference, 2 X 7 out of conference). Then single table at 16 teams and above, since conferences no longer make sense in terms of scheduling.
Next season with 12 teams will have to see 32 games (4 X 5 in conference, 2 X 6 out of conference). 2006 with 14 teams will also see 32 games (3 X 6 in conference, 2 X 7 out of conference). Then single table at 16 teams and above, since conferences no longer make sense in terms of scheduling.[/QUOTE] Is it unreasonable to think MLS would go to 4-4 team divisions and expand season by 4 games. Division games would mean more, more dates for added revenue and season record would mean more as only division winners get into playoffs and we can keep with American Tradition and still have playoffs
I'm not a fan of three conferences, but throwing two western teams into the league really makes three and interesting prospect. I think both of us would love to have a Chicago-Colorado-Dallas-Kansas City division...
But then, you'd be breaking up that potential Colorado-Salt Lake Oxygen Deprivation Cup before it even got started.