News: MLS owners approve fall-spring calendar and season format changes: Sources

Eh. While parity is holding back the creation of super clubs in MLS... (well, kinda, Miami says Hi!), it is still possible to lift the entire league up to a level that would result in MLS being more competitive in international competitions.. Well, the international competitions that it can enter. While there is still more growth necessary to actually win the competition, MLS is already competitive in CCC.

It wasn't that long ago that LigaMX teams would field their reserve clubs against MLS teams and have a very good chance to win. If they weren't winning at the end of the team, they'd throw on a couple of starting attacking players, score three goals, and call it good. Now LigaMX teams need to play their starters and, even then, they aren't guaranteed a victory, especially if they are playing away at the MLS stadium.

 

The only thing those international tournaments are really able to measure is the league's relative strength compared to Liga MX. It's the only domestic league MLS hasn't already clearly passed in quality that we play against regularly. MLS doesn't play teams outside of our confederation enough to reliably measure relative quality, never mind whether or not those opponents are taking those matches seriously.

 

I've said this before and I'll say it, the parity in MLS is the play offs. Not the forced complicated salary cap rules it has. Liga MX and Liga Argentina don't have all those salary rules but do have play offs and their champions vary too.

Puig was a big miss for LA Galaxy but what hurt them the most was Joveljic aging out of U22-I and they couldn't offer him a DP spot because...MLS. Joveljic scored 18 goals for SKC while Joveljic's replacement at LA Galaxy, Matheus Nascimento, scored a hig whopping ZERO goals.

 

Their midfield and Defense were also injury riddled on top of the salary budget casualties in each area. They lost Mikey Delgado and Brugman due to the Salary Budget constraints.

 

Spot on.
Us MLS junkies know our league's owners have long required revenue from ticket sales to supply their largest stream of income. This topic runs parallel with the lack of TV viewing numbers 30 years on for our MLS. The issue our MLS HQ has is that the most dominant sport on our planet, MLS is a really thriving league in our nation, yet soccer still needs to be cultivated in our sports crazed nation by MLS HQ that the sport is the ideal spectator sport best watched live and at a stadium. MLS HQ's marketing arm has still not marketed the sport itself so that sports fans are swarming MLS stadiums, that tickets to an MLS game are so in demand that regardless of the cold or the heat, being a fan means enduring some days of harsh weather. MLS HQ has got to get its product to matter more.
End game, the sport is an outdoor code of football is it not. Thus, for over 100 years of the professional side of outdoor soccer, ticket buying customers the world over have found the gumption to get out to their local team and endure whatever the weather throws at them that day. If there is a rain out, the match is moved to a later date in the Season. If the field is frozen, the match is moved to a later date. The switch to a late Summer start to playoffs in May facilitates this same allowance to easily rescheduled regular season matches. As it has been for 30 Seasons, with ending in the early Winter like playoffs are now, for sure, one cannot just move a playoff game to a date one month on. We already have rescheduled matches in MLS. Moving forward, if there is a regular season match in December or even March and there is a foot of snow on the ground the match can be moved to a future date in the Spring.

 

This is part of the beauty and problem of the salary budget. Parity keeps the domestic fan more engaged with a team which is historically the culture of American & Canadian sports leagues as worst to first is always a possibility. Yet when it comes to international tournaments playing teams who have an financial advantage, it becomes more difficult to compete.
.
As the budget has grown MLS teams are more competitive but a win rate of just one team taking the trophy in the last decade isn't really closing the gap. I also think MLS getting academies up and running over the last decade for almost every team is the biggest reason they started closing the gap so Liga MX teams play more starters instead of the reserves.
.
Hopefully as MLS moves forward it will be rare for what happened to the Galaxy going from champion to almost wooden spoon the next season. The current CBA has a percentage increase every year depending how they laid it out. I believe it was 10% the first year and 5% every year after if I remember correctly. Even if that stays consistent in the future, at some point 5% could get large enough to retain more key players as it jumps 500K this year. Part of the problem I would like to see changed in the future is a DP player having a maximum salary budget charge on the roster. This year it rises to $803,125 from $743,750. Almost 60K more taken away for players who could give the team more depth or retain more players on the roster after a successful season. I don't understand the point of tying up 60K the next year for a DP player who is making 3-4 million and up against the roster . Imagine $803,125 not counting against the budget for just one DP let alone $2,409,375 for three players.
.
With teams having a successful regular season and qualifying for CCC the following season, it would be nice to see teams improve their roster instead of trim the roster going forward. Parity would still happen but at a slower pace much like NFL teams as they usually build year to year, peak and then slowly decline with good management. In the next CBA just getting rid of the maximum player charge would give teams with one DP at the end of 2027 $883,438 towards the budget for the roster. Yes, some teams might stop signing DP players or spend less but I don't think it would be that drastic. I know this doesn't solve everything but it is a way for teams that want more spending on the roster to improve the overall roster without actually having to add actual revenue other than teams covering the cost of the entire DP salary.

 

There's nothing "forced" or complicated about a salary cap. Sports leagues don't grow out of the earth in some natural process. They're all made of rules, they're all an agglomerated body of decisions made over the years. A league where dynastic power is limited is no more "forced" or unnatural than one where it is encouraged.

 

<sarcasm>
The MLS doesn't need a salary cap any more than the original NASL needed a salary cap. Isn't that right, NASL? NASL? NASL? Bueller? Bueller? Anyone? Anyone?
</sarcasm>

 

Except…if you look at Shield winners, it’s the same story->different clubs have their moments in the sun, and then fade. Didn’t LAFC and the Revs set points records in consecutive years? In this 6 year decade we’ve had FIVE! different clubs win it. Five!

In the last 10 years, EIGHT! different clubs have won the Shield. So no, it’s not the playoffs. It’s the league’s structure. A lot of people think it’s the playoffs, but it’s not. We all can look it up.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supporters'_Shield

So, what “hurt them the most” was MLS’ structure forcing them to let one of their top players go, much like successful NFL teams bleed starters to the salary cap every year. QED.

 

There are simpler ways to simplify the rules while spending the same amount. Liga MX proves this and they don't deal with a salary cap.

 

MLS doesn't even have a balanced schedule. Teams go years without playing others. It's why MLS Cup > SS.

I don't how people think this is a great idea.

 

This has been beaten to death many times. Most of MLS owners aren't being held back by the salary cap, they simply just don't want to spend regardless of the rules that are in place or lack of. If they keep cost down they maximize profits. Plus with the MLS revenue sharing (TV contract, sponsorships deals, expansion fess etc) each owner is guaranteed a piece of the pie regardless if their team wins MLS Cup or ends in last place. Nothing will force them to overspend to "keep up" when winning MLS Cup is just a $300k money prize.

 

Thats a different topic.

This is the topic.

8 different clubs have won the last 10 shields. That’s parity, and it isn’t the playoffs.

 

Going back to 2015 in Liga MX and without the need of complicated salary cap rules and going by what would be an equivalent to their SS winner, they have 6 different winners out of 9. So what's the difference? Play offs give different champions too just like they do in MLS and now in Argentina. Why are 2 leagues without the need of restrictions giving out similar outcomes as a league that is supposedly built to give random outcomes?

 

That’s still a different topic

I replied to your post because to me, the only way to interpret it is that you’re saying MLS’ cap isn’t the reason for parity, playoffs are. Playoffs are why MLS doesn’t have superteams. If you meant something else, hey, I’m all ears.

In that vein, I looked it up, and found that no, playoffs aren’t the reason MLS doesn’t have 1-3 super teams, because if it’s playoffs, then those super teams would dominate winning the Shield. And I looked it up and found what I found.

 

The play offs is what creates the parity and what causes different outcomes as to who wins MLS Cup. It isn't the salary cap. Argentina and Liga MX have no salary cap yet produce different champions just like MLS because of their similar format of having play offs. You keep on insisting on the team with the most points but again, Liga MX and Argentina also has different teams finishing at the top each calendar year. And just like in MLS, the team that finished with the most points in the regular season is rare they win the play off championship. It happens though, just like in MLS sometimes, but it is rare. So we have 3 leagues that have similar formats but 1 of those 2 leagues is always said that the reason of the salary cap is to have "parity" and what causes MLS to have different SS winners and MLS Cup winners. Liga MX and Argentina have similar outcomes without the need of salary cap. Oh..and they don't have super teams either.

 

How come multiple teams from the bottom of the salary pool aren't getting into the playoffs and occasionally winning in those two leagues? Much like Champions League in Europe, it's very rare for teams with small budgets to advance all the way to the final. Part of getting to a championship is a winning season and qualifying for the playoffs. This is where the parity starts and part of the weakness of MLS competing in CCC. One years champion is burdened with trying to build on a roster to compete in a new competition while shedding players who want to increase their wages. I'm not talking about the stars of the team but key young players and journey man. Dejan Joveljić for the Galaxy would be a perfect example. Remove him, Marky Delgado & have Riqui Puig out for the year first to worst can happen quick. Although the salary budget increases each year, until the increase is more significant you'll be at a disadvantage to a team that is free to spend in league and international competition.

 

There's a subtle argument to be made about how roster construction and usage are different in the regular season because the playoffs exist, like there might have been a repeat SS winner this year if Miami didn't have bigger fish to fry. But it's easy to go too far with that argument. We can go back to the NASL for a case of a league where there were playoffs but not spending balance, and the Cosmos had like a 90% win rate in playoff series over a period of several years.

 

Wait, it was sunny and 60 yesterday in Denver????

Empower Mile High Stadium seats 76,125 and is in a little valley just west of downtown Denver. Mostly sunny and 60° today. pic.twitter.com/Wi8P9DcNFX

— Mike Clemens (@MikeClemensNFL) December 14, 2025

 

Nice afternoons this weekend in Denver, but cold nights. Please let us have day games.

 

MLS news: in 2027 Minnesota United will definitely be in a new division with Chicago, St Louis, Kansas City, Cincinnati and Columbus

who knows when this will be officially announced but I got my info from 2 people inside the league today

— Bruce McGuire (@dunord) December 16, 2025

MLS news: in 2027 Minnesota United will definitely be in a new division with Chicago, St Louis, Kansas City, Cincinnati and Columbus who knows when this will be officially announced but I got my info from 2 people inside the league today

 

If we can take this as fact, then looks like San Jose is going to peel away from the other Cali teams and be with the PNW + Colorado/Salt Lake.

 

Not necessarily - I see two possibilities:


North: Montreal, Toronto, New England, NYC NYRB, Philadelphia
South: DC, Charlotte, Nashville, Atlanta, Orlando, Miami
Midwest: Columbus, Cincinnati, Chicago, Minnesota, St Louis, Kansas City
Southwest: San Jose, LA, LAFC, San Diego, RSL, Colorado
West: Vancouver, Seattle, Portland, Dallas, Austin, Houston


North: Montreal, Toronto, New England, NYC NYRB, Philadelphia
South: DC, Charlotte, Nashville, Atlanta, Orlando, Miami
Midwest: Columbus, Cincinnati, Chicago, Minnesota, St Louis, Kansas City
Southwest: LA, LAFC, San Diego, Dallas, Austin, Houston
Northwest: Vancouver, Seattle, Portland, San Jose, RSL, Colorado


I wouldn't be too surprised if they lump Cascadia and Texas together to keep California together.

 

Ehh I don't see the first scenario happening personally, just because the league seems to be emphasizing geography over rivalries somewhat (see DC United). If I had to pick another possibility, it'd probably be San Diego + Colorado/Salt Lake and the three Texas teams; at least the two Eastern groups seem to be set in stone.

 

Yesterday, on the Unfiltered Podcast with Tim Howard (@TimHowardGK) and Landon Donovan (@landondonovan), MLS Commissioner Don Garber gave a long but interesting answer about the possible changes and friction that current roster construction may face.

“There are two aspects of… pic.twitter.com/b5duPJKBKP

— José Roberto Nuñez (@JoserNunez91) December 17, 2025

Yesterday, on the Unfiltered Podcast with Tim Howard and Landon Donovan, MLS Commissioner Don Garber gave a long but interesting answer about the possible changes and friction that current roster construction may face. “There are two aspects of it: What is the structure and the dynamic around ‘how many designated players, U22s, which brought in a ton of great players, and can you spend more money?’ And we’ve got to figure that out. We need more media money. The new Apple dynamic will help us there. The deal is shorter. We will have a better future, I think, with them or someone else in the years to come. We will figure it out, like we always do.” Worth a listen/watch.