I disagree. Unless by "part of MLS" you mean USL and other leagues have been taken over by MLS to be run as lower tier leagues. But MLS is not going to have 40+ teams
It's more likely than MLS allowing USL to hold quality markets and grow financially. It's likely the league will reach 40 and split into two 20-team leagues similar to how the AL and NL functioned before interleague play under MLB. Unlike football, hockey, basketball, and baseball, there's no limited supply of talent holding the league back or huge TV contract to account for (and there probably won't be for a long time - MLS, despite its new stadiums, market growth, and improved attendance, still draws infomercial TV numbers).
It would be very interesting. To see what the team contracts say. Would MLS have to buy them or could they walk away and join a new MLS league.
I can imagine the controversy if MLS bought them but it would connect the amateur leagues all the way to D1. But I'm sure people would interpret it as a way to suppress competition and someone would probably sue. Pro/rel would be a whole other issue. Instead of promoted teams getting $140M, like EPL clubs, they'd have to hand over $350M.
The vast majority of people have no idea what UPSL. Regardless, we are still decades, if ever, from relegation in MLS. Any other relegation is meaningless.
Question to those concerned: Why do you think there's a prayer USL could ever challenge MLS? Is it solely about the hope USL would utilize a pro/rel system? What do you honestly envision such a league looking like?
Not when MLS has the top ten metro areas. Plus I don't think the USL Championship will stop expanding anytime soon.
I don’t think USL needs to rival MLS.... but it should scoop up all the legitimate markets that aren’t in MLS. For example, let’s say Las Vegas is #30. This would be a model for the ideal USL. USL Championship / USL League One WESTERN CONFERENCE Pacific Division Oakland Roots SC Phoenix Rising FC Orange County SC Sacramento Republic FC San Diego Loyal SC Monterey Bay FC Central Valley Fuego FC (USL1) USL Spokane (USL1) Boise, ID (expansion) Eugene, OR (expansion) Riverside-San Bernardino, CA (expansion) Stockton - Modesto, CA / Reno, NV (expansion) Ventura County - Santa Barbara - Santa Monica - Hollywood - San Luis Obispo - Santa Maria, CA (expansion) Verdugo Mountains - San Gabriel Valley - San Fernando - Santa Clarita Valley, CA (expansion) Long Beach, CA - Victorville, CA - Bakersfield, CA (expansion) North Bay, CA (expansion) Dropped: Las Vegas Lights (MLS #30) MLS Reserve: LA Galaxy, Tacoma Defiance Mountain Division Colorado Springs Switchbacks El Paso Locomotive New Mexico United Rio Grande Valley FC San Antonio FC USLC Des Moines Oklahoma City Energy FC (moved from Central Division) FC Tulsa (moved from Central Division) Union Omaha (USL1) FC Tucson (USL1) Northern Colorado Hailstorm FC (USL1) Dallas-Fort Worth, TX (expansion) Corpus Christi, TX (expansion) Wichita - Topeka, KS (expansion) Laredo - Lubbock - Midland - Abilene - Waco - Killeen - Collegestation - Amarillo, TX (expansion) Texarkana - Galveston - Beaumont - Woodlands - Wichita Falls - Tyler - Nacagdoches, TX - Longview / Shreveport-Baton Rouge, LA / Lincoln, NE / Wyoming / Montana / North or South Dakota (expansion) Dropped: Austin Bold FC MLS Reserve: Real Monarchs, North Texas SC (USL1) EASTERN CONFERENCE Central Division Birmingham Legion FC Indy Eleven Louisville City FC Memphis 901 FC Pittsburgh Riverhounds (moved from Atlantic Division) Forward Madison (USL1) Chattanooga Red Wolves (USL1) South Georgia Tormenta (USL1) Fort Wayne FC (USL1) USL Lexington (USL1) Detroit, MI (expansion) Cleveland, OH (expansion) New Orleans, LA (expansion) Milwaukee, WI (expansion) Jackson, MS / Little Rock, AR - Ozarks, MO / Huntsville, AL - Mobile, AL - Montgomery, AL / Knoxville, TN (expansion) Grand Rapids-Lansing, MI / West Virginia / Toledo-Akron-Dayton, OH / South Bend, IN / Chicago, IL - Southern Illinois (expansion) Dropped: N/A MLS Reserve: Atlanta United, Sporting Kansas City, Toronto FC II Atlantic Division Charleston Battery Hartford Athletic Tampa Bay Rowdies Queensboro FC USLC Rhode Island USLC Buffalo Greenville Triumph (USL1) North Carolina FC (USL1) Richmond Kickers (USL1) Baltimore (expansion) Jacksonville (expansion) Virginia Beach (expansion) Rochester (expansion) Wilmington-Asheville-Piedmont Triad- Fayetteville, NC / Columbia, SC / Savannah-Augusta-Macon-Columbus-Athens-Gwinnett County, GA (expansion) Maine / New Hampshire / Vermont / Western Mass / Harrisburg-Lehigh Valley-Scranton-Allentown, PA / Albany-Syracuse, NY / Bridgeport-New Haven, CT / Delaware (expansion) Fort Myers-Daytona-St. Augustine- Bradenton-Gainesville-Pensacola-Tallahassee- Port St.Lucie-Lakeland-Melbourne-West Palm Beach, FL (expansion) Dropped: Charlotte Independence, Miami FC, MLS Reserve: New York Red Bull, Loudon United, Fort Lauderdale CF (USL1), New England Revolution (USL1) Note: Roughly I estimate that about 26 expansion spots should be on the table... which sounds like a lot... but this isn’t MLS expansion. USL expansion is much easier to enter the league. Besides, there are plenty of quality markets that should already have been in the league. And when MLS closes its doors on expansion (in the interim), USL will be the next game in town. Although I list it as 16 teams... you can break it into USLC and USL1. The idea is that we can have more teams if we reduce travel costs. USL1 is set up to be unsustainable... it’s not stable enough to be completely nationwide. It needs to be more regional. I would focus on promoting regional rivalries... getting good stadium situations... games on espn+.... academies... marketing... and selling players for cash to MLS. All teams should field academy teams in MLS Next. Once complete... should partner with MLS to redesign US Open Cup to provide the carrot to make these teams competitive.
While I think you have way too many teams, I have a question. Is there any agreement between these leagues as to players? I cannot see any possibility the MLS skips a potential player due to geographics nor should they. Ex: I cannot imagine a high quality player in say Pueblo is not going to be taken by the Rapids because there is a team in Colorado Springs.
Can I ask you to clarify your question? But if I understand you correctly... I believe that would be the case... except, what I’m a youth and it’s easier for my family to drive me to Colorado Springs than Denver? Or what if I like my chances at playing time? The environment? Or the opportunity to sign abroad when I’m old enough?
You basically answered it. Are all players open to all clubs? IMHO, a player's choice should come first regardless of where he resides.
I agree. I understand the original logic behind territories but then it seemed too restrictive. For example, if I live in Oregon, but my family is from Washington. And/or I just believe Seattle Sounders gives me a better chance to become a pro soccer player. If I’m willing to make the commute or whatever else required of me... then I shouldn’t be told no, I can’t play for them. That said, I do believe it should be a league mandate that every MLS and eventually USL club have at least one academy system in their home location.
Of note, it seems like a lot of teams. But I think it’s more realistic than we imagine. Hell, we now have the Northern Colorado Hailstorm FC and South Georgia Tormenta in the league... Although I’m very familiar with, I know Statesboro, GA is not some major metropolis. It’s not even Savannah or Augusta. Yet, they’ve been holding their own in USL1. If I just looked at the proposed “Atlantic Division” and picked the expansions teams.... This seems doable: USLC 1. Charleston Battery 2. Tampa Bay Rowdies 3. Hartford Athletic 4. Queensboro FC 5. USLC Rhode Island 6. USLC Buffalo 7. Greenville Triumph - 8. North Carolina FC USL1 + 1. Richmond Kickers 2. Baltimore, MD 3. Jacksonville, FL 4. Virginia Beach, VA 5. Rochester, NY 6. Greensboro, NC 7. Lehigh Valley, PA 8. Bradenton, FL ...That expands the national footprint. ...Reduces travel ~ especially for the USL1 clubs. ...All the markets selected have shown to support lower division soccer. So it’s realistic to expect pro soccer to function there. ...You don’t have to start there. But that is the long term goal. ...Investors will want to get into the game. MLS spots have dried up. USL spots are ripe. Furthermore, I see a lot more Tim Howard’s and Memphis, and Landon Donovan’s and San Diego... wanting to get into the action. ...I’m not a proponent for Pro/Rel with MLS. But I think it would make USL much more interesting to have it between USLC and USL1...especially because it shouldn’t devastate a club to go from USLC to USL1.
Who doesn’t have that??? Lol. In all seriousness, what’s your point? Of course, it costs money to have an expansion team. If we said, oh what about this and that logistic... there wouldn’t be a forum to discuss anything. That said, there are plenty of millionaires across the US and the globe that are itching to get a soccer team before it’s too late. Tepper just spent stupid amounts of money to land a MLS team. A USL team only cost a drop in the bucket to that. Ultimately, if potential owners see USL as a good investment there will continue to be willing investors who can and will jump on the bandwagon. And to be fair, I believe it’s a safer investment to spend $12 million on a USL franchise than $12 million back in the day for a MLS franchise. The US has proven now that I’ll support soccer.
If you want to go after cities you have to find investors. USL doesn't go after cities, it waits for investors to put together a business plan and approach it. Tbh I think USL needs to focus on expanding L1. The expansion fee is lower and the professional league standards are a lot easier to fulfill. Once teams are established in L1 they can look at the viability of self-promotion.
Part of that is true and part of that is not. I know when USL1 was looking at its foundation, it was quite intentional on markets and areas it wanted to expand. That doesn’t mean it accepted a low bid just because it wanted to be in that market but it can nudge potential investors. ...That said, I’m a bit worried that USL1 isn’t set up for success because I think the league is too small potatoes to be a nationwide league. It needs to regionalize for sustainment. I imagine it would be cheaper and better in the long term to consolidate USL1 into USLC and then develop a pro/rel system between them as I have mentioned. ...But to your point, I agree. I would push for expansion to happen in the USL1 rather than USLC. ...It shouldn’t be that hard to find potential owners in Detroit, Baltimore, Cleveland, New Orleans, Milwaukee, etc. this should be low hanging fruit for the league to get into these markets. Especially now that MLS is about tapped out.
This is what Peter Wilt said in response to a question about D3 travel costs No, not true and shortsighted. Incremental travel costs (flight vs. bus) range from 2% to 10% of total expenses for any lower division team. Even at 10%, they are not the "bane of any sports comprtition". No team goes bankrupt due to incremental travel costs.— peter wilt (@PeterWilt1) September 16, 2021
Point taken but 2-10% is still significant from an operational standpoint... and from a wear and tear perspective on the player. Not that we can’t play national games. BUT I believe it’s still preferred to have games closer than farther away. Hence, the point about travel on the USMNT players being a stressor.
The simplest way to cut travel costs is to cut travel, and the best way to do that is to have more teams. I think there'll be at least 15 teams by 2023 but only 7 will be west of Lake Michigan.