Review: MLS at 30: Where the League Is and Where It Needs to Go

For example…

Your argument is that because MLS teams lose a lot to other MLS teams they’re no better or worse than Mexican teams that lose a lot to other Mexican teams. Allow me to point out how stupid that is: does this mean that the worst teams in the Prem this past season are worse than the worst teams in MLS? No, it does not.

Hey, I coached an undefeated U7 girls team back in the day, so I guess that puts me on the same level as Arsene Wenger lol.

 

You started this by concluding that the bottom of Liga MX was as good as an average MLS team based on a semi-final run that never happened.

I'm the one saying you can't draw conclusions from one result.

 

Should we put that much weight on a tournament that is played here on its entirety and conclude that MLS is better? That's what this is being based on.

 

I haven't done that.

 

No, it’s not, not entirely.

That’s what I mean by straw man arguments. If the goal is a never ending walkathon that’s a good posting style. If the goal is for soccer fans to share information and perspectives on the internet, it’s not a good posting style.

For myself, looking at results, it seems obvious that the top of Liga MX remains a step ahead of MLS’ best, and MLS’ worst are a step and a half ahead of Mexico’s worst. The middle, it’s inconclusive.

I base that on Leagues Cup and the CONCACAF CL results.

 

I think 34 is already a good number. That's in line with the 18 team leagues in Europe. You get fairly frequent agitation about cutting EPL and Serie A back down to 18 teams because 38 is a lot for teams also playing midweek.

30 would be in line with some of the "cold" leagues though, like Norway, Sweden, and Russia.

 

....

True but it would cut mid week games or games played through International windows. For example Vancouver playing without 9 starters in the coming International window cause of NT call ups. Those that are going to go see their team play will be paying a ticket to see a bunch of bench and maybe MLSNP players. Plus add the quality of the game will drop. With 4 games less a season the league can workout around these issues easier without rescheduling or lumping a bunch of mid week games.

30 is a good number, IMO, but not a good number for the network paying the TV deal.

 

Each conference currently has 15 teams......... with this plan two teams every week would have a bye. Also, what if your team's "rival" has a bigger rivalry with another team..... Who's Vancouver's rival? Who's San Jose and San Diego's rival? DC United? One of the Texas trio is going to feel aggrieved....

 

Leave it to MLS to invent "rivalries".

Why would 2 teams have a bye week if there are 30 teams? 15 games a week, just like this weekend is doing, for example.

 

What did they do the last couple years when there were extra rival games in the West to make up for 14 vs. 15 in the East?

 

Some of the rivalries are invented. Some of them are actually a thing. You can't argue that Seattle/Portland, Earthquakes/Galaxy and Toronto/Montreal aren't real rivalries.

There's definite animosity between New York City fans and those of a team that calls itself New York but has never actually played in the city (unlike the Jets and Giants).

And there are many other rivalries that have developed organically rather than being imposed by MLS HQ.

 

In a way, I agree with STR1 about the manufactured rivalries in MLS...but that was from the early days. Rivalries like Columbus vs. Toronto for the Trillium Cup come to mind, as well as whatever trophy the Chicago Fire and Dallas Burn used to play for.

While many fans like the two-conference set-up employed by MLS, many others wish the league would go to 3 or 4 divisions. With 30 teams now, there would be a way to go with divisions of 5 or 6 teams each. You could still keep a 34-game regular season schedule and maybe reduce the playoffs from 18 to 16 teams to keep fans happy and engaged.

Personally, my wet dream is to live long enough to see MLS teams in Detroit, Indianapolis, and Milwaukee. That would make for a fun Midwest-centric division running from Columbus to Kansas City to Minnesota. There are plenty of other locations in other parts of the country where MLS could enhance the rivalries that already exist, provided there's enough interest and money to install a new franchise.

 

What's the advantage of divisions again or more than two conferences again?

 

I don't know how much of an advantage it would be (or disadvantage, for that matter). With more divisions and fewer teams in them, it affords you the opportunity to play teams from other divisions more frequently than you do now? Maybe it's because the other 4 major sports split up their conferences in a similar fashion, and it's what I'm used to seeing.

I know MLS for a long time has wanted to cut down on excessive travel during regular season games. With MLS playing games less frequently than MLB, NHL, or NBA teams, I don't know why this is an issue. As for the cost of cross-continent flights for squads, I don't see that as a problem either since most of the recent teams coming into MLS have had to pony up some serious cash in expansion fees or paying for new stadiums or stadium upgrades.

The layout of MLS now would have some decent divisions covering the East, South, Central, and West portions of the United States and Canada. But, until it changes (if it ever does), I'm OK with the way the conferences are layed out now, so long as newer franchises that come aboard don't cause constant shifting of teams from one conference to the other just to balance things out.

 

They could do that now if they really wanted.

The Yankees go to the West Coast and play the Angels and Raiders before flying home.

The Metro Red Bulls could go to the West Coast and play San Jose on a Saturday and Portland on the Wednesday but the league has decided that they must make two nationwide trips 2 months apart.

Vancouver could play Dallas, Austin and Houston in one 7 day trip but they'll have to make 3 separate 3,500 mile round trips.

I'm running off to see if AI can create a MLS schedule that minimizes travel.

 

Creating a Major League Soccer (MLS) schedule that minimizes travel involves clustering geographically close teams, optimizing match sequencing, and ensuring competitive fairness. Here’s a simplified approach for a 29-team league (as of 2024), broken into regional groups and a sample scheduling model that prioritizes travel reduction.


---

Assumptions:

29 MLS teams

34-game regular season per team

Home/Away balance (17 each)

Minimize cross-country travel

Preserve rivalries

Weekly match frequency, March–October



---

Step 1: Regional Grouping

Divide teams into five regional pods to minimize travel:

Western Pod A (Pacific)

Vancouver Whitecaps

Seattle Sounders

Portland Timbers

San Jose Earthquakes

LA Galaxy

LAFC


Western Pod B (Mountain/Southwest)

Colorado Rapids

Real Salt Lake

Sporting Kansas City

FC Dallas

Houston Dynamo

Austin FC


Central Pod

Minnesota United

Chicago Fire

St. Louis CITY SC

Nashville SC

FC Cincinnati

Columbus Crew


Northeast Pod

New England Revolution

New York City FC

New York Red Bulls

Philadelphia Union

D.C. United

Toronto FC

CF Montréal


Southeast Pod

Atlanta United

Inter Miami

Orlando City

Charlotte FC



---

Step 2: Match Distribution Plan

Each team plays:

2 matches (home & away) vs 5 closest rivals = 10 games

1 match vs 14 other teams in pod/region = 14 games

1 match vs 10 out-of-region teams = 10 games


This keeps 20–24 matches within the same or adjacent regions.


---

Step 3: Sample Weekly Rotation

March–October (34 weeks)

Weeks 1–10: Pod-only games (local derbies & rivalries)

Weeks 11–20: Inter-pod but same region (e.g., Central vs Northeast)

Weeks 21–30: Long-distance inter-region matches

Weeks 31–34: Back to local pods for playoff build-up



---

Step 4: Travel Optimization Strategies

Pair away games geographically: e.g., Seattle plays Portland and Vancouver in one trip.

Stadium sharing adjustment: Avoid simultaneous home games for LAFC & Galaxy.

Use midweek matches for short-haul games only

Limit cross-country trips to 3–4 per team



---

Step 5: Schedule Generator (Conceptual)

You could build a scheduling model with:

Input: Team locations, stadium availability, rivalry data

Algorithm: Traveling Salesman Problem variant + fairness constraints

Output: Balanced, low-travel schedule


Would you like a sample 2-week schedule using this model or help building a tool to generate this kind of schedule programmatically?

The above took ChatGPT less than 2 seconds.

 

This is turning into You Be The Don territory...

 

A lot are invented. When MLS has its rivalry week some don't even make sense and/or don't even feel and treated as a rivalry but everyone runs with it. Don't see what the difference would be here.

 

This is what MLS should be doing.

 

Not every match during rivalry week is meant to be a rivalry. But there are genuine rivalry matches during rivalry week.

If everyone runs with it then that's good marketing.

Did the Trillium Cup begat the bet between the mayors of the two cities or did the mayors have a bet and someone named it the Trillium Cup?

 

Is how they do it, the La Galaxy played Redbulls and 4 days later Philadelphia Union, only one trip.

 

Philly play at Dallas on June 1 and at Houston on July 20, then at Vancouver on September 14.

 

Charlotte plays Redbulls May 28, 3 days later they play Toronto, so some teams make smart schedule and traveling.

 

Sorry...you're probably right.

What I think STR1 may have been referring to about 'Rivalry Week' is that not every match would be considered a rivalry. This is true. Only 8 of the 15 matches that weekend were pitting rivals against one another. San Diego vs. Kansas City? No. Colorado vs. Real Salt Lake? Yes. Minnesota vs. St. Louis? Marginally, Yes, but I didn't consider it among the 8 games from the weekend of May 17-18, although St. Louis, Kansas City, and Chicago are the closest MLS cities to St. Paul. So, if you wanted to, you could say there were 9 rivalry matches that weekend out of the 15 played.

New England vs. San Jose, while not a rivalry did pair a couple of MLS original teams against each other, with the nice backdrop of having Bruce Arena returning to the team that dismissed him in 2023.

They weren't scheduled against each other that weekend, but I think MLS is pretty pleased with the rivalries that have developed the past couple of years between Charlotte, Atlanta, and Nashville.

 

A lot of the rivalries are invented and forced by MLS. There are a few legit but most aren't. For example Atlanta one year "rivals" with Orlando then "rivals" with Nashville now not sure if they are pushing Charlotte or still sticking with Nashville. That's what I mean invented and don't even feel like true rivalries but it's marketed as a rivalry.

LAFC vs LA Galaxy and Portland Timbers vs Seattle Sounders has everything of a rivalry.