I once got stuck in Scotland for a couple weeks in late June, early July. Coming from Berlin, I brought light summer work attire. It was freezing, and I ended up having to buy a fleece jacket that I wore over everything. I did like that jacket, but everywhere else i wore it during winter.
Ok, wild idea based on league getting to 32 teams, since I don't believe Garber will stop at 28. My simple idea is a 31 game schedule, borrowing an idea from US college gridiron. You play reach time once this year and then rotate the next year. Example is LAG plays 16 home games this year and 15 away Next year 15 home and 16 away. That is awkward, but fair to all teams. You can divide the schedule up to where its about half west and half east I think it might build anticipation a bit say if the LAG- SJ game this year was a little testy or controversial, so that sits in the teams, player and fans all year and you can't wait to play them next year type situation. - Yeh, it would look odd to have a 32 team single table ! ========== IF not this, but some other "regular season" variation, then the MLS Cup must be fixed I personally like tradition of the Shield and Open Cup as all we need, but since the MLS Cup won't seem to go away, then I would change it to all 32 teams in and change it to a simple 4 round single knock out highest seed to the final that can be completed on 4 straight weekends for best attendance and give some rest in between. The first round could be 8 game on Saturday and 8 games on Sunday . Next round 4 games on Saturday , 4 games on Sunday . (allow for good TV options) Next round 2 games on Saturday and 2 on Sunday (all games on TV) etc....
I like the idea, but 2 issues: MLS still relies on gate as a primary revenue source, and this cuts revenue by between $500k to $2m in the 16 home game season and $1m to $4m in the 15 home game season, and that's just in ticket revenue (wide margin on MLS attendance). still with parking, beer etc, you can just about double those numbers for lost home game revenue. I kind of see MLS sticking to 34 no matter what. Also, an unbalanced schedule in MLS won't give the league a true champion. Home advantage is massive. As the league gets to 32 I think the shield will become 2 shields, each for a 16 team division
My parents and friend in Sunderland in July. I spent my teenage years there, which is probably why I hate godawful heat.
After a year, I had almost grown used to the weather on that God forsaken rock. Maybe not grown used to, but accepted. But then after we moved back to Tennessee, I realized the Stockholm syndrome that Blighty had held me in.
Stockholm has better weather than Edinburgh. Stunning city. OTOH, aren't summers in Tenn basically unliveable? I lived in Missouri just long enough to know that I would always favor a place that allowed me to put on a coat to get comfortable, because only so much comes off in the other extreme.
======================= I also should have added, slightly slimmed regular season gets rid of mid-week games , allows FIFA date windows, better gaps for USOC or CCL, later start to season or earlier end and makes room for slightly expanded MLS cup. = Another idea= A one week " International" week in middle of season. A Saturday or Sunday where ALL MLS teams play an international team. Then again on Wednesday, then the following Saturday is Allstar game. SO lets say we have 32 teams and each team plays 2 international teams this week, there are 64 "slots" for teams from around the world to come play MLS. I think its better for for MLS teams to be playing foreign teams, rather than the constant parade of foreign teams playing foreign teams. (although I don't think that will ever $top.) = Another idea= Open season with MLS Super Cup. Supporters Shield vs. USOC Cup winner (Assume I get rid of MLS CUP) Then the following Weekend is ' First Kick'- opening weekend Supporters Day is the last weekend of the season - fan appreciation type events and all games played at same time. The Allstar game is then the following week -hosted by the team that won the Shield. At that time, the Shield can be awarded in front of the home fans. I also think the Allstar game at the end of the season will be a better judge of who had a really good year at a player. I think this would also be a good time for the end of the season meetings with all the owners to go over how the season went and bring all your sponsors in to the see the "stars" of your league (so they hopefully continue to sponsor next year). = Another idea. Now that the Soccer Hall of Fame has a home and a stadium, bring back the Hall of Fame Game. Not sure what format that should be. Maybe a double hitter. Maybe a game with prior members of the Hall. Maybe USMNT and USWNT playing some one. = Another game I would like to see is once the Canadian Premier League is up and running, would like to see an annual game where the MLS Shield Winner plays the CPL Shield Winner. Kind of a Can-Am Cup. Then again, we may see a USA- Mex version of that first. Once again, not sure how that can be worked into such a crowded soccer schedule.
First, I do not believe for a second that MLS stops at 28. I think 32 is a gimmee. 34/36/38 is a real possibility. Once they get there (or maybe at 32) they will start to talk pro/rel as a way to cut dead weight and take over D2. Perhaps promotion as expansion at first when we hit the 30s. To the OPs question, divisions work well at 24, 27, 28, and 32, but not so well otherwise. However, at 28 you cannot keep playing you conference twice (26 games) & the other conference once (14 games). I think 38 is the limit. So, you have three choices: 1) Play everyone once (27 games). For the remaining 7, you have some choices. I would go with a rivalry/rotation split. Take at least two teams (I prefer 3) and play them twice. Every year. These are your "rivals." Mostly from your conference but exceptions can ne made. Take 4 other teams & play them twice. These teams would rotate. More often conference foes. You could take one from the other conference based on geography or organic rivalry/sizzle factor. Or just to rotate. Or go 4 rivals & 3 rotates. Heck, it does not have to be the same for every team as long as you get to 7. 2) Go to 4 divisions of 7. Play the others once (21), division twice (12) and one additional team an extra time (could be a rival or not, division or not). 3) Kill the idea of playing everyone every year. This is what MLS will do, because NFL.
This is my preference at 28 teams but I would call them conferences and mean it. 4 conferences make more sense for playoffs. The regular-season conference winners are your top 4 seeds. The rest of the playoff field are wildcards from across the league in a completely seeded tournament. I really like the idea of a final four which really increases the chances of the two best teams meeting in the final instead automatically East v. West. 4 conferences also helps with scheduling as the league expands since you are dealing with relatively small fixed schedules. 4x7 as you say above at 28 teams. Play the other conference teams home OR away but you still play the entire league at least once. Then at 30 teams (please always expand with even numbers) you would have 2 conferences with 7 teams and 2 with 8. Conference schedules of 12 or 14 games leaves room for 20 to 22 non-conference games. Teams could still play almost every team in the league. Then with another expansion of two teams you get to 32 total teams in 4 conferences. Teams would play 14 conference games and 20 of the other 24 teams. That would be done league-wide instead of favoring a particular division with a two conference/4 division setup. I think the 4 conference set-up works pretty well up to 36 teams. After that two separate leagues either side-by-side or upper-lower makes more sense to me. I don't see any value to a divisional set-up with in big conferences. All it does is limit the schedule and straight-jacket the playoffs.
I start from a different place, based on two ideas. 1. Viewed in a European context, the US population could well support four top leagues ( I don't think the US will reach 64 top division clubs, but it is potentially supportable). 2. In part because the potential is there to support a lot more top division clubs than we have, and the US will not go for pro-rel in, at the very least, the near term future (say by 2040). Question, how does a two conference split straightjacket the playoffs? If you have two conferences, and want, say, 8 teams in the playoffs, you take from from each, determined by the best records. If you have four divisions and want 8 teams in the playoffs, you take, what the four division winners and then the four teams with the best records. How is that different? When MLS gets to 28 the notion of playing everyone every year is going to go away by necessity. By the time they get to 32, and until 40) they have two European size leagues. with playoffs tacked on to the end. this is the path of least change for MLS, really. The league has already separated into East and West. The problem with divisions is that while there is some disparity (liquid) between conferences, there is more potential for it with divisions, simply because instead of a single season champ (with 20 or fewer) there are 2 with conferences, and four or more with divisions. Divisions have the potnetial to diminish the regular season. Uneven divisions are less than idea, and less ideal that two uneven conferences IMO. Conferences give the league the ability to expand 2 at a time and retain balance I can see MLS expansion eventually turning the playoffs into a champions league format. I actually think that could be quite an exciting approach, and could elevate both the regular season and the playoffs.
’m guessing what we’ll see eventually is MLS just breaks into two conferences that never play each other except for MLS cup. Which, to be honest, isn’t the end of the world. People can say we need, LA-NY games, but I don’t think that’s vital to the league’s survival. It’s not like those games are any more packed out or watched than any other game, and it’s the regional rivalry games that are most attended. So, I see not a stop at 28 but a stop at 32 with two 18 team conferences, playing 34 games a season, home/away, and leaving room for international and domestic cup and playoff fixtures. Model: *MLS East: Atlanta United Orlando City Nashville Inter Miami DC United Columbus Crew* FC Cincinnati Toronto FC Montreal Impact New England Revolution New York Red Bull New York City FC Philadelphia Union Chicago Fire Charlotte* Detroit* Indianapolis* Milwaukee* Alternates/D2: Birmingham, Raleigh, Pittsburgh, NY3, Ottawa, Tampa, Baltimore, Jacksonville, Cleveland, Rochester *MLS East Seattle Sounders Portland Timbers Vancouver Whitecaps Real Salt Lake Colorado Rapids San Jose Earthquakes LA Galaxy Los Angeles FC FC Dallas Houston Dynamo Austin FC Sporting Kansas City Minnesota United Saint Louis* San Antonio* Phoenix* Las Vegas* Sacramento* Alternates/D2: LA/Riverside, LA/Orange County, El Paso, Albuquerque, Omaha, Tulsa, Oklahoma City, San Diego, East Bay, Fresno
I'm doubtful. The only way you would see this is if the owners are going to make more money. It's possible that the travel savings is greater than the marketing potential of cross division games, but I'm skeptical of that.
Oh, sorry, I see you still have playoffs in there. At that point, why bother with a balanced schedule?
Because playoff standings are determined by conference standings? *shrug* While MLS certainly hasn't shown any indication about caring that in the past, if it does get enough teams to split the league into two conferences that never meet, is there a particular reason to have Western Conference and Eastern Conference teams meet?
Very true, but it is a way to organize a league that has history/tradition in the US. MLB was looking to gig interest by opening up regional rivalries (which MLS would have built into a two league setup). It fits the tradition of US sports while nodding to European league setups. There wouldn't be much point in eliminating inter league play at 28 teams, as home and away in league would be 26 games, so 8 interleague games would be left. At 30, that would be down to 6. At 32, down to 4. It would only be at 36 it would be a complete separation until MLS Cup. One advantage of the system is we'd get away from this weirdness of playing someone three times. It would allow for NY-LA matchups, but wouldn't necessarily have them every year (which could be a positive).
32 would make two conferences of 16. MLS expects to have 26 clubs in 2020 and 2021. Having two conferences of 13 with two games against each conference opponent and one game against clubs from the other conference would take 37 games. I have a proposal where conference opponents could be divided into "rivals" and "non-rivals." Rivals would play twice a year, Non-rivals would play once some years and twice some years with a rotation. Club A and Club B could be non-rivals but both could be rivals with Club C. This is different from divisions because if A and C are in the same division and B and C are in the same division, then A and B are in the same division. Divisions don't work well with 26 clubs. The amount of rivals and non-rivals could change so the format could work with more than 26 clubs.
MLS is gonna stick to 34 games, but this works. It just means clubs play 2x in conference and 10 teams out of conference. The rivals thing only really works if everyone has several, and some don't have any (SKC),
It's been a while since we looked at this and MLS has picked some franchises that we didn't expect. I still believe they will go with a 2 Conference, 2 Division format going for geographic proximity as priority. How would this work as an alignment: Eastern Conference: Metropolitan Division: NER, NYCFC, NYRB, DCU, Philadelphia,Montreal, TFC Atlantic Division: Columbus, Cincinnati, Chicago, Nashville, Atlanta, Orlando, Miami Western Conference: Pacific Division: Vancouver, Seattle, Portland, San Jose, LAG, LAFC, RSL Central Division: Colorado, Minnesota, St Louis, SKC, Dallas, Houston, Austin Games would be 2 versus in-division clubs and 1 game versus every other division. The remaining extra game would be against a sister-division club in-conference that depends on TV preferences. The only two pairs that would always play home-and-away matches every season would be TFC-Columbus and RSL-Colorado to preserve their rivalries. However, this alignment depends on St Louis getting the last franchise. If it goes to Phoenix or Sacramento, then they would get slotted into the Pacific Division and RSL would move to the Central Division.