Building up the USL's W-League makes the most sense. They already have a league in place, could easily add a few more teams and can officially become Div I women's league.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Mechelle Voepel No, you can post whatever you want. Start an "I hate Mechelle Voepel thread". Fine with me. That's not my point. I'm just getting PMs from people about this. My post is more directed at them. Geez, people, don't take it all so personally that you gotta PM someone about it. It's just an opinion, and I'm saying, I don't care enough about your opinion for you to turn it into some kind of personal PM attack on me. That's just nutty. The other part of my post is, this thread is getting hijacked by Mechelle Voepel discussion. Believe me, I'm sorry I ever started it by even posting something here. Now, do you want to discuss Mechelle Voepel's merits as sportswriter? Fine with me, but let's move the discussion. That's all I'm saying. This thread is about WUSA2, which has very little to do with Voepel's writing ability, or lack thereof depending on who you talk to.
Unless some big named sponsors can be signed up, l this is the best solution. The USSF should insist that national teamers play in the "enhanced" W-League. If they do not play in the enhanced W-League, or a foreign equivalent (like the Swedish or German league) they should not be allowed on the national team. To make up for the mostly amateur league, the national teamers and other players should get a stipend. The enhanced W-League would be regional in nature, and the regional champions would meet for the national championship. Below the enhanced W-League, there would be lower divisions, also regional. Let us hold off on the promotion/relegation talk right now. So the structure would look like the current W-League structure, but "enhanced" with the national teamers playing in it. After a while, the league would try to establish a national "Super League."
Actually, MLS is doing quite well, and is certainly past the "can hardly support itself" stage. Stadiums have been built -- and will be built within the next 3 years -- and new investors have shown up, from Mexico as well as here at home. San Diego and Cleveland are on the Horizon for '05 with Seattle and Rochester likely to follow in '06. Club America seems poised to buy into the San Jose side. It's not that MLS can't do what the NBA has done for the WNBA, but that Phil Anschutz and the rest of the owners will only consider a partnership that makes sense. Right now, nothing about WUSA or those pumping for version 2 makes sense, so it's wiser to expand the mens league -- in cities and in new stadiums. One could say that without Phil Anschutz MLS would be on very shakey ground. More to the point, without AEG it would be, but AEG is committed to the league as part of a long term business plan that is independent of a single personality or CEO. This bolsters the confidence of other investors. There is confidence in MLS that has been lacking in WUSA from the start.
Why they didn't just do that in the first place? W-League was around LONG before WUSA. There were even 2 divisions of the W-League at one time. They would have had already in place a league office and infrastructure, sponsors, marketing, ect. Then the worry would have been just playing the game.
All of the W-League players would lose their amateur status if anyone is professional. Since many of these women are still playing college ball, they'd be taking a big loss in scholarship $$$. It was investigated and determined that a pro W1 and am W2 would not keep the W2 players from being painted with the same pro brush because they would be playing for the same organising entity (USL). This pro/am conflict also kept WUSA teams from using W-League teams as "farm teams" to develop marginal or injured players.
No chance in hell. The W-League is the women's equivalent to the PDL. A summer refuge for college players. To start paying players would be to risk the NCAA eligibility for all players in the league. USL is not going to promote the W-League into the void left by the WUSA's suspension.
None of those things are particularly advanced at the W-League level. As Andy mentioned, the W-League is a refuge for college players in the summer. Many (probably most) W-League teams don't look at themselves as would-be Division I teams. They have underdeveloped staffs, very small bankrolls, and not a lot of wherewithal, either. WUSA v2.0 would be better off starting from scratch than dealing with what 90% of W-League teams have put in place. One nitpick, though, it's not the status of individual players on a W-League team that would make a college player ineligible. A player can hold professional status (if they've ever been a professional) and still play in the W-League, and, in fact, can play alongside college players without jeopardizing said college player's eligibility. It's if the team is a professional team (I know, it's strange, isn't it?). And there is a certain dividing line (I can't remember what it is) that determines if a team is professional or not. Obviously, if players are paid, it's a professional team. But all the teams in the W-League are "officially" considered to be amateur teams, even though there are and have been players with professional status (as determined by USSF) playing in the league. I'm not sure that's true. The same organising entity oversees the A-League (pro) and PDL (amateur) and that doesn't make PDL players pros.
Is anyone besides us talking about this subject? If only I could find Uncle Boris' phone number. His buddy's been dumping a bunch of cash into Chelsea. Does anyone still answer the old KGB number?
WUSA Update In SD U-T Reporter Mark Zeigler is in his SIDELINES column that was in this morning's San Diego Union-Tribune. I'm not sure if there is a link available for this week's column, but here's a couple of quotes that I found interesting: "We should know in another couple of weeks if there will be a resurrected WUSA next year." "In the most likely scenario for a 2004 season, the eight WUSA teams would remain in their cities and play four regular-season games followed by by three rounds of playoffs (quarterfinals, semis and a final) from April to June." Zeigler concludes by saying that the Spirit office was vacated last month and that "most San Diego Spirit staffers have moved on to new jobs."
Re: WUSA Update In SD U-T I had similar concerns with regards to the Cheetorays selling most of their office/team stuff several weeks ago.... If there is a 2004....it seems like most teams will have to start from scratch again....getting new staff...getting equipment/supplies/etc. to run a business...etc. Will teams be centrally run from Atlanta (or NYC or wherever the league considers HQ) or will they be locally run?
Re: WUSA Update In SD U-T http://www.signonsandiego.com/sports/soccer/20031112-9999_mz1s12soc.html Both west coast teams have shut their offices. No front office personnel left. I would be surprised if WUSA gets funded in 2004. The TV outfits, Comcast and Time Warner in particular, departed long ago.
Re: WUSA Update In SD U-T Four regular season games, geeez Better than nothin', I guess. It's gonna' be hard to promote even an abbreviated "season" with no resources. But, perhaps it's a place to start (over).