NASL Files Federal Antitrust Lawsuit Against US Soccer

If they did, it makes complete sense why they voted the way they did.

Just based on the statements and excluding the new clubs.

I think the vote would have been 5-3. (4-3 if San Fran abstains due to financial problems)

NY, Miami, and PR are basically NASL D2 or die. Plus they have relatively new ownership who don't care / were unaware that a major reason for division standards is the NASL.

Jacksonville has a new owner who has owned the team for less than 3 months and seems to have a plan/personal money that is dependent on remaining in the NASL in it's current iteration.

I would assume San Fran would support the lawsuit because there was already a planned USL San Fran team at the time of the lawsuit.

Indy, NCFC, and FC Edmonton would likely have bolted if there were no exit fees.

The thing I find interesting is that the 3 teams that have made the strongest efforts to expand their teams via youth teams, women teams, or community engagement seem the most stable.

 

The pending expansion teams voting while some current teams did not is bizarre. If they're voting because they've put up money for next season, limit voting to only the teams which have done so. If not, don't include them. The teams looking at leaving are doing so in part because of stupid **** like this, so excluding them makes no sense. (Other than North Carolina, which could be argued to have a conflict of interest.)

But to see the Cosmos, Miami, PR, and the newbs vote this way makes sense. There's no USL spot for any of them. This forms a simple majority of the votes if NCFC is forced to abstain and the new ones are allowed full votes.

But what kind of majority is required for this sort of action? I would be surprised if it was simple majority, so it's necessary to cut out as many others as possible. If you're not certain about Jacksonville or Indy, then North Carolina and Edmonton must be excluded on reasonable sounding grounds, and hold the vote at a time and place that makes it hard for the swing votes to be present.

I think the causality may run the other way more; they developed these other aspects because they are stable.

 

I'm not sure about that. When I heard Palmer on Neil Morris' podcast, he repeatedly made the point that he deals with people who don't really comprehend divisions. He even sees the amateur teams in which he's investing as sort of "divisionless" in the minds of fans, sponsors and broadcasters.

He also thinks the exposure of having his brand on Armada jerseys on the Armada broadcasts he makes a local channel air (because he's one of their biggest if not THE biggest advertiser on that channel) is worth a couple of million dollars. I don't understand that math.

 

Hey NASL. If division 3 status is so bad, why is USL kicking your butt?

 

Because of the conspiracy between MLS and USSF duh!

 

Bill, the point about not having any good coaches was true back in the 1990's when I was coming up playing travel teams. That ancient history is where the now-outdated trope of not having any coaches comes from. It's not true anymore but first impressions die hard. I view it as similar to the older folks at my office being surprised which core urban neighborhood I happily live in because they only remember when it was "dangerous."

I made state ODP teams, played with and against guys who made MLS and ended up training overseas. For the record, I was from Newark, DE which is a stop on the Northeast Corridor and sandwiched between Philadelphia and Baltimore. My teams weren't as talented as the likes of FC Delco (the travel team that Ben Olsen played for) but we always played in the same league as them and played them tight.

Guys my age didn't have much in the way of good coaches when we were coming up. It was mostly dads who had never seen the game before. That included the travel teams and ODP/regionals. My dad was actually the best of them all because he knew from basketball that a two-footed player is more effected that someone who can only use their primary foot. Most of the coaches had no concept of what makes a good soccer player. One of my travel team coaches said he wanted a "strong, scrappy" team rather than a skilled team that sometimes pushed over by less skilled but bigger kids. I'm glad I got off that team.

My first actual coach was when I was middle school aged who played at a D1 mid-major in college. He was the first coach to figure out that I belonged as a withdrawn center mid rather than a forward just by looking at how I touched the ball, distributed, and moved. I was first exposed to pro-level coaching until when I was in high school in the late '90s. I trained with a coach who played pro in Poland and had a cap or two in a friendly for the Polish National Team. It was a huge, huge step up from what I had experienced before. There were some not-so-great guys from the British Isles who were paid because they had accents. Good with training but not as good with making decisions on the ball, defensive shape, and making runs off the ball.

I'm now 36 and am lucky enough to still be able to play rec league in the open age group (knock on wood!). I'm playing against guys who are 15 years younger than I.(the goalkeeper on my team was in diapers when I was learning to drive!) The guys who came up in the 2000's and early 2010's were all trained by ex-pros and it shows. They are better at making decisions on the ball and making runs off the ball than guys my age when we were younger. I'm lucky that I'm able to adapt but I make sure to tell those guys how lucky they were to have better coaching. They tend to sort of space out because the world I came up in is so far removed from their experience. There are former MLS, pro D2/D3 and college players on every street corner now. Many of them make excellent coaches.

We have come a very, very long way with building player development infrastructure. We have plenty more growth to come but we should also celebrate that we came from nothing to get to a good pro league and a national team that makes the knockout rounds at the World Cup. If the difference between what I experienced and the guys 15 years my junior is any indication, we have a bright future.

 

About 6-7 years ago, I saw Chris Carrieri trading a team of boys who looked about 12.

Of course, he wasn’t exactly the most cerebral player ever, so he might have been a crappy coach.

 

I'm not going to comment on the college stuff.

But in terms of professional sports, I believe the USA, and in particular the NFL, has gotten most of it completely right.

Money should not be the opposite of competitiveness. That is, because your owner is wealthier, your club should not have a better chance to win. Every club should have a chance to win. Every year.

The NFL does a lot wrong - especially the way it moves teams - but it is a far superior model of competitiveness, and thus fairness to fans and supporters, than any Euro soccer league.

 

Saw this over in Reddit.

918545470149898240 is not a valid tweet id

 

If, like me, you haven't the time (or ability to decipher the legalese) to read the entire motion, here is a good article to tease apart USSF's arguments.

 

Curious expression, wouldn't that imply they had any significant chips to be played in the first place?

 

It appears USSF's motion to dismiss has been denied (secondhand from thread in NASL forum).

This would be a correct decision, because a motion to dismiss essentially means "even if everything you say is true, we still didn't do anything illegal." The judge must view all facts in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. As such, the factual allegations made by USSF in the motion to dismiss are largely window dressing and would be almost completely disregarded. I would expect this suit to go away at summary judgment, not at this stage.

 

Chip and a chair

 

Oh look another NASL vs the World article....

http://www.espnfc.us/north-american...ds-sum-tried-to-terminate-the-new-york-cosmos

 

I'm going to state emphatically, right now: the offer from SUM does not say what Commisso says it does..

 

People act like these non-compete clauses are something they never heard of. You aren't going to pay for a failing business and then say they can operate a new competing business with those funds. In essence the Cosmos old owners could have taken that 5 million and used that to start a new soccer team in NY. They can easily say they weren't trying to kill competition but protect their 5 million dollar investment they they made in the Cosmos assets.

 

Let's say NASL gets the 12 teams next year, what's the over/under on the number that fold this time next year, 5?

 

Well the “league” (Rocco and Silva) is willing to pay for and move up 7 NPSL teams next year. So I’d say over 5.

 

Who would the 12 be?

If Edmonton, San Francisco and (I would wager) Puerto Rico bail, that's five, plus Cal and Gang Sign FC. That's seven.

Any team that has not begun business operations yet is a candidate to be in the under category. So if they have Atlanta (good luck) and four NPSL teams they bankroll, I would set the over/under at 3.5. Place your bets.

 

Rocco is Dan Borislow with better people skills.

 

fixed your post

 

this sums up ussf's argument in a nutshell.

 

Didn't they suspend operations of the Cosmos at the time MLS made the offer?

If so, what's wrong here? Cosmos were kaput until Commisso arrived.