I want to get this through everybody freaking head!!

but it means balanced schedule, right? can realistically only work up to 18 teams = 34 games season. Montreal will soon be #19, and #20 will follow to make it even.
Even if stop at #20, 38 games + Playoffs? I don't freaking think so.

Besides, playoffs after balanced schedule? I think it's really akward set up.

 

The A-League in Australia has single table + playoffs. I think Garber knows full well that its possible, but he league has no plans for it so he easily dismisses it by acting like single-table means no playoffs.

 

Never a fire around for someone to die in when you need one...

 

Then what are you complaining about? MLS is essentially already a single-table. The playoff teams are determined by overall ranking (not by divisional ranking). Divisions are just used for seeding the playoff teams, but other than that they have no purpose.

 

Dude, calm the ******** down.

 

A single table without a round robin schedule is as stupid as this thread...

and MLS isn't going to play a schedule of 38 games (once MLS is at 20 teams) or 46 games (24 teams) etc...

 

when it was only top 4 in a con get in didnt the LAg when the cup when they were 9th in the league

 

A 38-game schedule, with USOC, CCL, Superliga, and playoffs, fits into a very slightly extended American soccer calendar. Anyone who says it doesn't simply hasn't looked at it closely enough.

 

Please step back and think about it little bit.

I would rather have well established two tables rather than fcked up random single table.

 

What on earth would be the point of that?

Have one table comparing all the teams against each other but have them all play different schedules with inherently different degrees of difficulty but then measure them all against each other equally?

Am I the only one who thinks that is about the dumbest thing they've ever heard ?

 

Yes but LA came in 4th in their conference against all those teams who played the same exact schedule they did. It's irrelevant that a team in another conference that played a completely different schedule then LA finished with more points. (Edit - same # of points, fewer wins, better GD)

You can't really compare the two in that situation.

Single table without balanced schedule = stupid.

 

What I don't understand is why you want to get rid of the playoffs. I love the playoffs.

 

He doesn't want to get rid of playoffs.

He wants some weird stupid set up.

He just need to think about it little bit more.

I can understand he's relatively a newbie.

 

Eurosnobs are so unbelievably shrill.

 

Let's give him a break. He needs some time to think about it.
Right now he doesn't know what he's talking about.

 

I think there was some scarcasm going on.

 

Why not?

Brazil played with 26 teams (home and away).

The same teams also took part in:
-State tournaments
-Copa do Brasil (FA cup)
-Libertadores
-Sudamericana

I say this in the past tense because they reduced the first division from 26 to 20 teams due to demands from Fifa, probably as a condition to get the world cup.

 

Before you get destroyed by someone, it's because we don't have Brazilian weather, and can't play (essentially) year-round, and expect people to show up. 38 games is fine (though no one here seems to think so), but advocating 46 or 50 is a bit much.

 

Because it's not Brazil. It's for US+Canada.

 

Not dumb at all. MLS already does that now with teams #5 -#8 in a single table. And #1 overall is already first in their division, so we only need to do it for positions 2-4 and we're set.

 

MLS already does that which is undesireable thing. It needs a lot of improvements.
It's still devolping and expanding. Why do you want to stay with undesirable stupid set up.