From Stockade FC 2016 inaugural (Div 4) season. Their travel expenses were 13% of total expenses. I would think the 10% is closer to the real number, not the 2%... https://medium.com/stockadefc/stockade-fc-end-of-season-recap-2016-c2e4d318b364
yes, bus travel to all 8 road games, one overnight stay though. From the article: Travel & Hotel — We had 8 games on the road this year, and within our North Atlantic Conference, we had to travel from Kingston, NY to Rhode Island (1x), Boston (x2), New York City (x3), New Hampshire (1x) and Maine (1x). Our title sponsor this year (front of jersey) was Trailways NY, the bus company based out of Hurley, NY that services New York state and the surrounding areas. Through this sponsorship, we were able to save a bunch on transportation costs (thank you, Trailways!) Also worth noting that our conference’s travel requirements are pretty modest (most of our opponents are a day trip away) compared to, say, the Midwest conference where teams are facing 12 hour bus trips and often paying for hotels (or flights). We purposely set up back-to-back games in NH and ME because they were the furthest away (5–6 hour drive) and took the squad on an overnight trip. We splurged on two nights in a hotel (so the players would be well rested for our Saturday match). The two night stay (and two meals) for 18 players + coaches cost $4500 (or about 40% of our overall travel budget). We really need to find a more cost efficient way to manage this scenario next season.
Where would you expand? If I had my wishlist... 1. Detroit, MI 2. New Orleans, LA 3. Cleveland, OH 4. Jacksonville, FL 5. Baltimore, MD 6. Milwaukee, WI 7. Boise, ID 8. Dallas-Forth Worth, TX 9. Riverside, CA 10. Virginia Beach, VA 11. Rochester, NY 12. Piedmont Triad, NC 13. The Valley, CA 14. Bradenton-Sarasota, FL 15. Asheville, NC (selfishly as a Greenville Triumph fan)
For League One, places like: Eugene OR Modesto CA Flagstaff AZ Bakersfield CA Santa Barbara CA Tucson AZ Reno NV Sioux Falls NE Billings MT Wichita KS Springfield IL Springfield MO Springfield MA Duluth MN Scranton PA Syracuse NY Albany NY Burlington VT Manchester NH Portland ME (already happening I think) Worcester MA Jersey Shore NJ Newark NJ Wilmington NC Virginia Beach VA Savannah GA Augusta GA Jacksonville FL Montgomery AL Mobile AL Lafayette LA Corpus Christi TX Laredo TX Waco TX Little Rock AK Knoxville TN Lexington KY Dayton OH Akron OH etc
So the mid-size city markets? I like it. I still think USL needs to get into the major markets that MLS leaves out. I.e. Detroit, Cleveland, New Orleans, etc. But I’ll say that my little team, Greenville Triumph has been a hit here. It definitely seems to taken root in the sporting culture in the area. And I’ll say, personally, I prefer to attend USL1 games in person than MLS games. Maybe as I’ve gotten older, I tend to like smaller crowds but that’s my quirk. In my ideal world, there would be a legit conference of... Greenville Triumph, Charleston Battery, North Carolina FC, Chattanooga Red Wolves, Memphis 901, Birmingham Legion, South Georgia Tormenta, Tampa Bay Rowdies...+ New Orleans, Jacksonville, Bradenton, Fort Myers, Greensboro, Columbia, Asheville, Jackson, Etc. And it might not ever make national highlights, but I would love to see the Greenville-Asheville match up. And I think it’s almost sinful that Greenville Triumph don’t play Charleston Battery. A lot of my family live down there, and I would like the reason to travel down there to see family and talk (friendly) trash to each other.
Another thing to add... I think all these USL1 and USLC teams must establish MLS Next teams sooner than later. To me, that’s how you make a team grow its roots in the town. How cool would it be to have your kid make the youth team... do well enough to make it to the senior team... and get recognized that way. edit... let me add that USL should be highly developmentally focused as a business model. Let’s say hypothetically Greenville Triumph produce the next Ricardo Pepi. They sell him to an MLS club for an affordable fee plus a percentage of future sales. Say $100k plus 10% of future sales. FC Dallas turns around and sells Pepi to Wolfsburg for $20 million. The Greenville Triumph would have just made $2 million dollars off one player. Now, that would be the high end. But do it a number of times and all of a sudden it becomes a sustainable model.
If the Canadian teams go to the CPL (as I hope they do, personally), I would like to see expansion: Las Vegas, Phoenix, and Detroit as locks for spots. That leaves one lucky winner between Indianapolis, Sacramento, and San Diego. Between those three, I imagine that San Diego would win out. It’s possible but not likely for: Milwaukee, Omaha, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Rochester, Buffalo, Baltimore, Birmingham, Raleigh, Tampa Bay, Jacksonville, Louisville, Albuquerque, San Antonio, Oklahoma City, El Paso, New Orleans, Greenville, Charleston, Chattanooga, etc. These are the markets that will have to settle for USL-C...unless they can come up big soon. MLS WESTERN CONFERENCE North: Seattle Sounders, Portland Timbers, Real Salt Lake, Colorado Rapids, San Jose Earthquakes South: LA Galaxy, Los Angeles FC, San Diego, Phoenix, Las Vegas Central: Austin FC, FC Dallas, Houston Dynamo, Sporting Kansas City, Saint Louis City FC MLS EASTERN CONFERENCE North: Philadelphia Union, New England Revolution, New York City FC, New York Red Bulls, DC United South: Atlanta United, Orlando City, Nashville SC, Inter Miami, Charlotte FC Central: Chicago Fire, Columbus Crew, FC Cincinnati, Minnesota United, Detroit Season.... Play home/away conference teams = 28 games... then you can +4 alternating home/away for regional games (32 games total) or +8 games adding home/away (36 total). Either way, if 30 teams is our max.... I would prefer to drop the Canadian teams and add Las Vegas, Phoenix, Detroit, and San Diego.
I'm all for this. MLS needed them at the time, but no more. The country has a league and it's top teams need to play there. It's no different than having Celtic and Rangers join the EPL. It has been stopped at every mention. But this is allowed?
There's zero chance Toronto will leave MLS voluntarily. As for the Whitecaps, I think the Cascadia rivalry is a big deal for both MLS and for Vancouver. Vancouver vs. Pacifica just doesn't have the same ring as Vancouver vs. Seattle.
With the changes in the CONCACAF Champions League, can Canadian teams fill any of the 4 MLS slots? That seems unfair when CPL also gets two slots.
That is correct at this time but it will apparently be changing in 2024. The MLS slots will be open to any team, US or Canadian. CCL 2024 slots: Entering in the Round of 16 1. LigaMX champ (MEX) 1. MLS Cup champ (USA or CAN) 1. Leagues Cup champ (MEX, USA, or CAN) 1. Central American Cup champ (UNCAF) 1. Caribbean Cup champ (CFU) Entering in the First Round 5. LigaMX next best (MEX) 4. MLS next best (USA or CAN) 1. US Open Cup champs (USA) 1. Canadian Championship winner (CAN) 2. Canadian Premier League top two (CAN) 2. Leagues Cup next best (MEX, USA, or CAN) 5. Central American Cup next best (UNCAF) 2. Caribbean Cup next best (CFU) Number of entrants (fewest, most possible)d MEX (6,9) USA (3,9) CAN (3,6) UNCAF (6,6) CFU (3,3) Only three for the USA would mean having all 3 Canadian teams finish in the top 5 of MLS and getting shutout in the Leagues Cup. AND probably one of the Canadian MLS teams failing to win the Canadian Championship although we don't know the exact process.
Hmm... considering that there are 6 spots open to USA but not MEX - MLS Cup champ, US Open Cup champ, and MLS next best four - doesn't that mean the USA minimum is 3? CAN teams aren't going to be in the USOC. Also, isn't the maximum 9? MLS Cup Champ, Leagues Cup champ, US Open Cup, next best four in MLS and next best two in Leagues Cup.
Yes, that is correct. I got to thinking about USA MLS teams and not the bigger picture on USA teams. . I'll edit it.
With MLS expanding to 30 teams, I am convinced that the league needs to split each conference into two divisions to keep up competitiveness and balance the schedule. I think this should happen next year or 2024 whenever the 30th team (assuming it’s Las Vegas) joins. I’ve thought about it so much I made an entire PowerPoint that you can view on SlideShare at this link: https://www.slideshare.net/StevePerlman3/major-league-soccer-30-team-realignment-proposal Here is how I think the MLS should look in two years: EASTERN CONFERENCE Northern Division DC United CF Montréal New England Revolution New York Red Bulls NYCFC Philadelphia Union Toronto FC Southern Division Atlanta United Austin FC Charlotte FC FC Dallas Houston Dynamo FC Inter Miami CF Nashville SC Orlando City WESTERN CONFERENCE Central Division Chicago Fire FC FC Cincinnati Colorado Rapids Columbus Crew Sporting Kansas City Minnesota United Real Salt Lake St. Louis City SC Pacific Division Las Vegas Villains (TBC) LA Galaxy LAFC Portland Timbers San Jose Earthquakes Seattle Sounders FC Vancouver Whitecaps FC I based the grouping of teams in the divisions on what would reinforce the strongest rivalries in the league and help create new ones. I considered regional cultures and competitiveness rather than just random geography like MLS has done so far. This is all to create more fun and emotional investment for the fans. They should have a core group of teams from their region to build rivalries and friendly competitions (think college conferences) rather than randomly compete with half the country where your team happens to be located. Some of you will argue that I am trying to force new rivalries that haven’t happened yet. That is a fair point, but as new teams come into the league, the rivalry landscape will continue to change. For instance, when St. Louis joins next year, there is a natural rivalry with Sporting KC. But I think the Fire should also be rivals to St. Louis based on the history of Cubs-Cardinals in baseball and Blues-Blackhawks in hockey. I would propose adding two games to the season for a total of 36. This would allow every team to play their divisional opponents home and away, and every other team outside their division once. So every team would once again play every other MLS team at least once a year. Something that hasn’t happened in MLS for a few years now. See the PowerPoint for answers on how the rest of it would work. Please let me know your (considerate) opinions, suggestions, or if you think MLS would ever actually do this. By the way, please keep the conversation on realignment to 30 (or possibly 32, it works for that too), and don’t start theorizing on a 40 or 48 team MLS, a creation of MLS 1 & MLS 2 with promotion and relegation, or any of that fantasy stuff. The point of this is to talk about what is best for the league in the next couple of years with a guaranteed 30 teams, not float ideas about MLS in the year 2042. Thanks.
I personally would see the league realign into three conferences of 10 clubs. This would spur rivals and reduce travel costs. And simplifies scheduling, if they would increase the schedule to 38 matches (same premiership in England), then everyone would play each other every year. 1) Plays all inter-conference clubs twice for 18 matches. 2) play all other conference clubs once, with rotating home and away every other year for 20 matches. EASTERN CONFERENCE Atlanta United FC Charlotte FC DC United Inter Miami CF CF Montreal New England Revolution New York City FC New York Red Bulls Orlando City SC Philadelphia Union CENTRAL CONFERENCE Austin FC Chicago Fire FC FC Cincinnati Columbus Crew FC Dallas Houston Dynamo FC Nashville SC St. Louis City SC Sporting Kansas City Toronto FC WESTERN CONFERENCE Colorado Rapids LA Galaxy Las Vegas Villains Los Angeles FC Minnesota United FC Portland Timber Real Salt Lake San Jose Earthquakes Seattle Sounders FC Vancouver Whitecaps FC Additionally, when MLS did expand to 32 clubs you could split the league into 4 conferences of 8 clubs and still maintain the 38 match schedule with having everyone playing each other every year. Play all inter-conference clubs twice for 14 matches and everyone else for 24 matches. EASTERN CONFERENCE DC United CF Montreal New England Revolution New York City FC New York Red Bulls Philadelphia Union Toronto FC Detroit * CENTRAL CONFERENCE Chicago Fire FC FC Cincinnati Colorado Rapids Columbus Crew Minnesota United FC Real Salt Lake Sporting Kansas City St. Louis City SC SOUTHERN CONFERENCE Atlanta United FC Austin FC Charlotte FC FC Dallas Houston Dynamos FC Inter Miami CF Nashville SC Orlando City SC WESTERN CONFERNCE LA Galaxy Las Vegas Villains Los Angeles FC Portland Timbers San Jose Earthquakes Seattle Sounders FC Vancouver Whitecaps FC San Diego * *Assumes Detroit and San Diego are next expansion sites.
I don't care how it's done, but Nashville needs to be with St. Louis. Lots of transplants there and rivalries in other sports.
SteveUSSF, We agree on the 32-team league divided into 4 conferences/divisions. This is where I think MLS will be by the end of this decade (if Garber gets his way) before hitting the pause button on expansion for quite a while. 32 Teams seems to be the natural stopping point for US pro sports leagues. NFL has stayed put at 32 teams for 20 years with no plans to add more teams. NHL just went to 32 teams. MLB and NBA have been at 30 teams for a while now, but could go to 32. Four conferences of 8 teams each will cut down a lot on travel. The Central conference is the only one with somewhat long distances between teams. That is just due to the fact that Real Salt Lake and Colorado Rapids just aren't close to any other team besides each other. (Denver is the same distance or closer to the other central conference teams as it is to the West coast teams). I based the four divisions/conferences roughly on the alignment of the major college conferences: Northern Conference: ACC Southern Conference: SEC Central Conference: Big 10 Western Conference: Pac 12 Maybe some will think that MLS rivalries should not be compared to college rivalries, but I think they are pretty ingrained into US culture. And yes, I know Real Salt Lake and Colorado Rapids are in PAC 12 territory. It's not an exact science. In addition to easy scheduling based on a 38 game season (same as EPL), it makes for clean playoff qualification. The top 4 teams from each conference qualify for the playoffs and are seeded into a 16-team competition bracket. It could also be just the top 3 team from each conference, with the winner of each conference getting a first-round bye. Instead of waiting for the league to get to 32 teams, I think MLS should go to this format as soon as Las Vegas (we assume) joins. It would be a 36-game season while at 30 teams. The 8-team conferences play 14 games with teams in their conference (home and away) and one game with each of the 22 teams outside their conference. The Northern and Western Conferences, with 7 teams each, play 12 games with teams in their conference (home and away), and one game with each of the 23 other teams outside their conference. Their 36th game would be an additional matchup with a team from the other 7-team conference. This is basically what the NFL just did by adding an extra AFC-NFC matchup to each team's schedule to make the 17th game in their new season format. I've thought through the MLS three conference alignment, and I just don't think it is as effective as four. MLS tried three conferences from 2000-2001, and it just didn't work. I'm happy to hear any other thoughts on this though.
@Paul Berry Corpus has a USL2 club and is building a sports complex featuring a 5k soccer stadium ... Originally wanted a jump to USLC but looks like USL1 is where the sights are at now https://nextsportsco.com/
Now that MLS Cup playoffs are a single elimination tournament it is not as dependent on the structure of the league as in the past. The regular would merely be used for qualification and seating for the MLS Cup playoffs. I would suggest having the top five clubs from each of three conferences for 15 clubs with the Supporter Shield winner the only club with a first round bye. The three conference alignment would also make it rather easier for scheduling purposes. If the league would agree to expand the regular season to 38 (the same as the Premiership in England), they could have a somewhat balanced scheduled with everyone playing each other at least once. This would be done by having each club within their own conference play everyone twice (home & away) for 18 matches, then playing each club in the other two conferences once (rotating home & away locations each season) for 20 matches, giving us a complete season of 38 matches.
I don’t think we should go with 3 conferences, but if we stayed at 30 teams, and decided to do so…. WEST LA Galaxy, Los Angeles FC, San Diego, San Jose Earthquakes, Portland Timbers, Vancouver Whitecaps, Seattle Sounders, Real Salt Lake, Colorado Rapids, Minnesota United CENTRAL FC Dallas, Houston Dynamo, Austin FC, Sporting Kansas City, Saint Louis City, Chicago Fire, Columbus Crew, FC Cincinnati, Toronto FC, CF Montreal EAST Atlanta United, Nashville SC, Charlotte FC, Inter Miami, Orlando City, New York Red Bulls, New York City FC, DC United, Philadelphia Union, New England Revolution What I guess this could look like…. Home/away in your conference (18 games), then rotate home/away outside your conference (+20 games = 38 games). The problem with this approach is, more games (if that’s not ideal), some teams are in whacky conferences (mainly Minnesota), and the wild card playoff due to odd numbers. At the same time, it would reduce travel and promote more regional rivalries.
P/R .... it might be doable if all the league money is shared. Everyone gets the same amount of dough from the leagues media and sponsorship, whether you're in 1st Division or 2nd. The only income disparity would be gate and merch.
I agree. IMO, the only realistic way we'd see p/r in American Soccer would be IF MLS bought USL from NuRock Soccer Holdings. While they're at it they should go ahead and purchase the NWSL too. Then put everything under one single entity roof. Sure, it would REALLY piss off the "purists" but it would provide a stable environment for the men's and women's professional games to thrive in. Not to mention it would provide a much better and more inclusive development pathway for boys and girls, coaches and officials.
But why do that? Why pay NuRock anything? MLS should announce they are stopping expansion at 30. They should then create an MLS2 league - no teams from current MLS cities. MSL2 starts in 2028 - that gives MLS2 time to add new cities as well as some USL teams to move to MLS2. Teams join MLS2 with a guarantee of pro/rel in 2035 (once the top 6-7 USL teams move, USL will collapse and MLS2 can have any of the teams they want.) You can have revenue sharing, but it must be unequal or there is little incentive to spend to get promoted or keep from getting relegated (maybe 65%MLS /35%MLS2) MLS will then control the First Division (MLS), the second division (MLS2), and the farm system (MLSNext). MLS should stay out if the Women's game. Individual MLS teams can add NWSL teams if they desire, but the league should run independently of MLS.