Well, having promotion/relegation does not necessarily mean you have to do it like it's done in Europe. You could open a single one-year only slot for the previous year's A-league champion. Unless they win the MLS Cup, they are replaced by the next years A-league champion after one season. You would effectively have A-league promotion without MLS relegation. Not saying it's a great idea, just saying it would be another way of doing it.
I've suggested a 'temporary' promotion system before. That would be maybe 3 A-League teams get to play in MLS. When the season ends, the 2 best A-League teams move up while the two worst A-League teams in MLS would move back down. This would mean that the best A-League team in MLS would get to stay up as long as they could play well. Ultimately, if a Rochester stayed up for a number of years, had good attendance, and wanted to pay, MLS could even offer them a permanent spot.
Pro/rel works in MLS like this: 1) MLS expands to 16-18 teams (whatever the final number is determined to be). 2) A few years pass. MLS becomes financially stable and starts to make a little money. 3) MLS signs an agreement with the USL/A-League. MLS works with the A-League to become a strong and stable second division of 16-20 teams. We'll leave the discussion of what to do with the Canadian teams to a later time. 4) A few more years pass. MLS and the A-League (or perhaps the entire USL) corporately join together. If it's decided to split of the Canadian teams into their own league, this happens at this point (with significant help from MLS for a little bit). 5) MLS announces that commencing next season, pro/rel begins. Both divisions are covered by a common sponsorship and television contract (meaning each get an equal share of each regardless of division). This ensures we don't wind up like England (where the Premier and Football Leagues are separate entities, which is why there's such a big income gap). Note that the earliest this happens is 2012 or so.
OK, I'll try... An A league team probably averages around $500,000 salary. Rochester might be a bit above that due to their bigger attendance. A MLS team spends about $2 million on salary. A League teams play two games a week, mostly in their region to limit travel expenses. MLS teams have to fly around the country every other week, not to mention that most do pre-season trips out of the country to train. Biggest problem--the MLS is not profitable yet so the Owner/Operators have to kick in to support the teams that are losing money. I believe that Rochester would be marginal in terms of making a profit right away. The current owners could probably handle that loss but what about supporting San Jose for years and New Jersey until they get their new stadium? Currently, Rochester is doing pretty well. They would be wise to enjoy their new stadium and build up their fan base before thinking about moving up.
I don't even know if college football fans would stick with their team once relegated. I'm remembering that the Ivy League used to be the most popular, best-attended conference in the nation. Now, only THE GAME draws sellout crowds. I'll just say this. Never is a long time. If there ever became an inexpensive form of air travel, maybe the Kalamazoo Kingdom could afford the trip to Portland, Seattle, even Los Angeles and Washington. That said, I can't envisage a scenario in which the owners at the major league level would ever accept such a system. They only have to look at what happens to relegated clubs in Europe. Financial catastrophe. Beyond that, I've always liked the difference between the American League and the International League, between the NHL and the AHL. I think the farm system has its own appeal.
Well, Europe offers that too - reserve teams. Not exactly the same thing but they basically represent a farm system of sorts. Any opposition I have to Eurpean-style promotion and relegation is solely based on the financial reality of it. I think it absolutely would make the league a hell of a lot more interesting...at least for a couple years before it folded. As discussed above, any American system of promotion and relegation would have to exempt certain teams (ie, existing MLS teams). Otherwise it wouldn't work. It would only slightly resemble European promotion and relegation.
The scenario for the introduction of promotion and relegation is the same one that all other countries have followed. In order to have a league in the first place you need a certain number of clubs, say 12. Then more teams form, and have to be accomodated somehow, maybe minor leagues but equally, maybe lower divisions. The factor is the ease with which a club can be formed. If the MLS has SSS of around 20k capacity, average gates of 15k, with a very large pool of US players of similar ability to choose from, there could be hundreds of teams how do you organise them?
LISTEN !!!! MLS will have 20 teams and investors will want to join, finaly they create MLS II with 20 teams each with their own SSS , Sponsorship,TV would be as a package under the MLS label covering all 40 teams from both divisions. any other questions ? Never its a long time
You think the resident billionaire benefactors, who have spent millions in getting this league started, or any other investor who coughed up a good chunk of change to buy into the league are ever going to let someone who cough up chump change by comparison to buy an A-League frachise come in and join the big time via promotion? And quietly take it up the you know where financially as their investment goes in the toilet? If you do, I have some swampla... i mean beachfront property to sell you.
6) Promotion/Relegation is based on performance in your conference, thus maintaining the regional schedules of the lower league and the national footprint of the upper league I'd add a 7 about why it won't happen, but I think others have covered it better than I could.
Re: Never say never... I've never been impressed with this argument because it ignores the increased interest relegation/promotion creates. Of course, we won't ever see it in America, but it can make economic sense.
there is a big difference between something that "can" make sense and whether something "does" make sense. the reality of the situation right now is that MLS is in a building stage. any talk of relegation at this delicate stage of the league is woefully out of touch with those realities.
Re: OK, I'll try... Thanks. So even if they could spice up the A-league by adding some form of temporary promotion, there would still be a huge financial barrier for even the best A-league teams.
Re: Re: Never say never... So your saying that a potential investor wont care that his MLS investment could devalue into becoming an investment into PSL side within 2 years, because it will create more interest with this magical relegation? And why should the current MLS owners essentially let A-league and PSL owners gain equal membership when they have invested far less into their clubs then they have? Because it might benefit people they have absolute no reason to care about, at their own expense? Thats nonsense.
Very interesting stuff, fellas. There's a couple of things that occur to me as an outsider. Firstly, regarding the salary cap. This is much easier to implement in sports which no-one else plays. Whilst that pretty much covers most main-stream American sports it most definitely does not include soccer so, while you can easily place a salary cap on a Baseball player how can you limit the income of a prospect such as, say, Tim Howard at ManU? Whilst the number of players that are likely to be exported from MLS at the moment may be limited, in the future it may increase to an extent that makes applying salary caps more difficult. Clearly, that's not a problem at the moment, though. However, this cuts both ways. If players are exported for sizeable fees, which may happen increasingly in the future, this provides additional income to further expand both the league and the income of the players in it. MLS then becomes a sort of super-feeder league to Europe, at least initially. Over a period the situation may stabilise to more or less parity with leagues placing greater emphasis on those aspects they find attractive. In the EPL we prefer a faster game but with, (allegedly), less skill - In Italy they prefer a slower, more technical, build-up to attacks. Obviously, the balance between income and attractiveness of play has to be met but, without relegation, that's less of a factor. West Ham have gained something like $60-70m over the past couple of years from selling players but they were relegated - not a problem for MLS. The dynamics of this are quite interesting from a business perspective. The other thing I find fascinating is the business model regarding MLS being a single entity. I tend to think that MLS is in a similar position to the old firm, (Celtic and Rangers), in the SPL. If the old firm could leave the SPL and join the EPL they probably would. Without that option, however, the old firm need the rest of the SPL and vice versa. Without the rest of the teams in the SPL who are they going to play??? If the income of MLS increases year on year and it can increase the number of teams from it's current, rather low, level the I think single entity will be maintained but if it did start to contract the possibility of altering the MLS league to include other, non-franchised, teams would have to be looked at by the management. You can't afford to let your teams play people who haven't paid the joining fee - you can't afford to lose $100m dollars either. Personally I tend to think that promotion and relegation is an attractive idea in for the long term and would add to the leagues interest and thus increase attendance levels overall but probably won't happen for, maybe, 15-20 years. By that time a dedicated fan base may be established that will turn up no matter what.
Re: Re: OK, I'll try... I think that perhaps this thread is going in the wrong direction. There's very little chance of an A league team joining the MLS for a season, but maybe we need to start thinking about changing the structure of the US Open Cup. Or maybe setting up some kind of A League/MLS challenge series. It's not that big of step since MLS teams have always been playing friendlies with A league temas.
We already have relegation. MLS has it; the A-League has it; all our leagues have it. Teams that don't make the playoffs are relegated to the golf course, the beach, and other forms of early vacations. It's the American way. Seriously, playoffs are an important part of American sports -- as natural for us as promotion-relegation elsewhere in the world. Let's leave it at that for the time being.
This line of thinking bugs me. A couple reasons. 1) Besides playoffs, another important part of American sports is not caring about soccer. 2) Soccer is unique in that it has cup competitions (sort of like playoffs) during the season, no other sport does. 3) Soccer also has internationals during the season, no other sport that Americans care about does. The point: soccer is unique. So the argument that just because other American sports do it doesn't mean soccer should. Besides, more than one sportswriter has suggested pro/rel for baseball, and isn't that the "most American" sport?
I can see a situation where pro/rel may actually be necessary, but that's not in the near future by any means. If FIFA is serious about keeping the numbers down for 1st divisions, MLS would probably have to split into 2 divisions similar to the rumored "Phoenix" league in England a few years back if there are too many teams or potential cities that want teams. I'm sure the league don't want a cap on the number of teams it can have, but since Garber is serious about trying to keep in line with FIFA, having two divisions with pro/rel may be the only way to accomodate the number of cities that could have a team. Again, this is a long way off and would only occur if many conditions are met.
FIFA regulations of 18 teams per Divisions? What BS. EPL is not changing soon from 20 teams to 18 teams. La Liga is not changing from 20 teams to 18 teams. French First Division is not changing from 20 teams to 18 teams. And beside these leagues, there are many others that have more than 18 teams in the first division. If these leagues change to comply with FIFA, then MLS will get in line. Right now, I don't think they are. Forever is a longtime, but here are the obstacles for relegation/promotion in MLS mostly financial reasons. It is not that relegation/promotion is not a good idea, it is, but financially, it is a BAD IDEA. I want MLS to lives, not be extinct after a few seasons after it enforces regelation/promotion 1) MLS is a single-entity. Until single-entity is lifted, there will be no relegation/promotion. It is most likely that single entity will be around for another 20-30 years. 2) MLS investors (imagine yourself one) will not want to be demoted to second division and thus losing millions of dollars. [Investors are in it for the money more than the sport, why would they want to lose money? and interest from promotion/relegation can't offset the money lost] 3) Travel (in order to have relegation/promotion, you will need single table, which eliminate conferences that was set up to create rivalry and reduce travel) Remember the distance from LA to NY is the same as London to Israel. It will not happen because of $$$. Thus, right now, I don't see it happens for another 50 years or so.
I think there's a bunch of people looking at it from the wrong angle. **my idea 14 MLS teams in "MLS Division 1" 14 MLS teams in "MLS Division 2" Divisions can always be renamed later. Each team plays each other of the 13 opponents twice during the regular season. 26 games total. When the schedule first is released in the late winter/early spring, a team plays home one week and away the next. After the all-star games (double header, division 2 followed by division 1), the schedule repeats itself. Same teams, other location. If DC starts the season at New England, they'd start the second half of the season hosting New England. All league games are on Saturdays, leaving the week free for open cup games, travel, etc. MLS Division 1: Top 8 teams go to playoffs. Each leg is 2 game aggregate. MLS Cup final is 1 game. Bottom 3 teams get relegated to Division 2. This leaves 3 teams in the middle who are neither good enough for post-season play or inferior enough to be relegate. Division 2 follows the same scheduling format, with the top two teams going up automatically, and teams seeded 3-6 going to a playoff where each game is 2 game aggregate. It's can be very much like England's first division. 8 teams at the bottom of MLS Division Two go home early. **back to reality** Or something like this. Promotion/Relegation will probably not happen with the a-league, so MLS would need to expand and promote/relegate from within itself rather than another league.
That looks a lot like Division I-A and I-AA. Do you know what the attendence and TV revenues are like for I-AA? Other than Montana, Georgia Southern, Youngstown State, Appy State, and a few others, those figures are pretty much nil. Here's the thing. When you're talking about countries smaller than a lot of states, these systems sound nice and all. You have to remember that, as large as America is, no one can sustain a truly national lower division. The PDL is really eight regional leagues, the PSL is mostly along the Eastern Seaboard, and in the A-League teams play division opponents up to six times because of the travel expense. Or better yet, look at Minor League Baseball. Even at the AAA level, the two leagues are regional: International League in the east, Pacific Coast League in the west.
if you read all the posts you should give me some credit where its due, i mentioned MLS I and MLS II few posts back, ...i agree with you and its the way to go sometimes down the line when we get enough investors and franchises and SSS