NASL: USL applies for D2 status?

Discussion in 'NASL' started by Darkwing McQuack, Dec 13, 2014.

  1. Darkwing McQuack

    Darkwing McQuack BigSoccer Supporter

    Nov 11, 2011
    Morrisville, PA
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
  2. Sam U El

    Sam U El Moderator
    Staff Member

    May 31, 2013
    Seoul Korea
    Club:
    New York Cosmos
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    All this is doing is confirming what people have been saying there really isn't a pyramid in US Soccer and MLS is trying to squeeze out any competition.
     
  3. Darkwing McQuack

    Darkwing McQuack BigSoccer Supporter

    Nov 11, 2011
    Morrisville, PA
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I wouldn't put the blame on MLS (unless evidence is found) but I don't like the move of USL trying to get D2 status.
     
  4. Sam U El

    Sam U El Moderator
    Staff Member

    May 31, 2013
    Seoul Korea
    Club:
    New York Cosmos
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I don't think they would even try this if it weren't for the MLS partnership... Which also is directly related to their expansion explosion.
     
  5. Darkwing McQuack

    Darkwing McQuack BigSoccer Supporter

    Nov 11, 2011
    Morrisville, PA
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    No they probably wouldn't because USL is definitely using the partnership with MLS to one up NASL. However I doubt MLS is masterminding all this. They are to self centered for that, lol. It's just another chapter in the ongoing feud between NASL and USL.
     
  6. SoccerPrime

    SoccerPrime Moderator
    Staff Member

    All of them
    Apr 14, 2003
    Club:
    Real Salt Lake
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I doubt MLS is pushing it, why would they? But having MLS on their side will certainly embolden the USL who has always been a rival for the NASL.

    Not sure what the point of it all is to be honest. Most of the non-MLS owned USL clubs don't qualify for D2 (more than $20 million from at least one investor, 5k stadium, etc). USL Pro would kill it smaller teams to do this.
     
    oneeyedfool repped this.
  7. Darkwing McQuack

    Darkwing McQuack BigSoccer Supporter

    Nov 11, 2011
    Morrisville, PA
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Could be possible they are trying to use the D2 statue to cut some of the fat off and leave the smaller teams behind.
     
  8. Sam U El

    Sam U El Moderator
    Staff Member

    May 31, 2013
    Seoul Korea
    Club:
    New York Cosmos
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I agree that if it is true this would be a new escalation in the feud between the two organization. But I think below the surface there is abit more in play here. At the end of the day if NASL isn't able to maintain it's sanctioning or you make it redundant than the league dies or is simply a shell. If USL gets D2 sanctioning and has a partnership with MLS you've basically locked out NASL and simply wait till the league caves and pick-up the viable teams and integrate them...
     
    markmcf8 repped this.
  9. Jossed

    Jossed Member+

    Apr 23, 2011
    Club:
    New York Red Bulls
    #9 Jossed, Dec 13, 2014
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2014
    Not pushing it, but you would be naive to think this would happen without MLS's blessing. And like Bill Archer said in the other thread, Sunil Gulati and the USSF might have a hand in this. Bad news for the NASL if true.

    We'll see if this is hot air or a nuclear bomb thrown on the kooky world of lower division soccer that will greatly change how it looks in the next decade. The soccer wars never end, they just change battlefields. And the USL now has a superpower behind them.
     
  10. Prosoccercdn

    Prosoccercdn Member+

    Aug 6, 2011
    Club:
    FC Edmonton
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    I don't think anything will come of this, its likely just usl trying to talk up their league.

    Usl Pro serves its purpose as MLS's minor league perfectly well in D3 as is.
     
  11. Bubba1971

    Bubba1971 Member+

    Nov 12, 2010
    Los Angeles
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    The rumor is that USL may split into second and third division leagues, very possibly with pro/rel between the two. Again, just a rumor.
     
  12. ceezmad

    ceezmad Member+

    Mar 4, 2010
    Chicago
    Club:
    Chicago Red Stars
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    But I have been told that uslpro is already the best more professional league below mls ;)
     
  13. Kolyn

    Kolyn Member

    May 15, 2012
    Waterford, Ireland
    Club:
    Fulham FC
    I don't see how NASL would lose its sanctioning. They meet all the standards at present if I'm not mistaken? And Traffic just sold on Fort Lauderdale to comply with the one owner per team rule. If the LA rumour is true, they'll be in 3 time zones (which was to happen in year 6 which is 2016 IIRC.) They are also meant to have 12 teams by then. Peterson is saying there'll be that many by next fall (which seems to point to LA coming in for then). Of course there's the Atlanta issue but the last time the league owned a team that was Minnesota which as we know, found a solid investor and became one of the league's best teams. OKC and Virginia are announced (although both could yet fail to appear) and there's chatter elsewhere (Toronto, Hamilton, Hartford). To be fair to NASL, they've jumped through every hoop the USSF threw at them and been quite stable beyond their initial issues with St Louis, Baltimore and Puerto Rico.
     
    oneeyedfool and revolution1776 repped this.
  14. cflsteve

    cflsteve Member

    Jul 21, 2013
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Both could be sanctioned at the D2 level.
    Right now with the requirements being lower for D3 the USLpro has expand by over 10 clubs, not including the MLS owned clubs. Some of those clubs are affiliated to MLS clubs and some are not.
    Some that are affiliated, like Charlotte, with the MLS club being on the other side of the country are just likely short term.
    Going forward with the standards being the same for both leagues. If an expansion or current USLPro club does not want to be someones minor league affiliate. Joining the NASL could be a better choice. If they are looking to have their own academy system and develop their own players, being in a league with clubs of similar set up could be preferred.
     
  15. Joe Berard

    Joe Berard Member

    Sep 1, 2014
    Clearwater, FL
    Club:
    FC Tampa Bay Rowdies
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I'd love to see Sacramento Republic, Oklahoma City Energy , Rochester Rhinos, Charleston Battery come over from the USL, Rochester and Charleston are solid franchises and both have a SSS, Sacramento we all know about their success, Okc could merge with okc nasl
     
  16. Joe Berard

    Joe Berard Member

    Sep 1, 2014
    Clearwater, FL
    Club:
    FC Tampa Bay Rowdies
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Sacramento would make a good in state rivalry with the LA club
     
    Flex Buffchest repped this.
  17. Kolyn

    Kolyn Member

    May 15, 2012
    Waterford, Ireland
    Club:
    Fulham FC
    A lot of the USL Pro clubs don't meet D2 standards in terms of ownership/stadium size etc. Was the ownership requirement not part of Rochester's jump back from NASL to USL at the start? I'm guessing there isn't much beyond Sacremento and maybe OKC Energy?
     
  18. cflsteve

    cflsteve Member

    Jul 21, 2013
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Rochester was one of the first USLPro clubs to be a nearby affiliate to a MLS club in NE Revs. Likely at the time they chose the model of being an affiliate club. Whether this changes as MLS clubs are probably going to want to take a more active role with their affiliate we will have to wait and see i guess.
     
  19. Kolyn

    Kolyn Member

    May 15, 2012
    Waterford, Ireland
    Club:
    Fulham FC
    But initially they joined the TOA split and then moved back to the USL camp even before there was any news of this affiliation thing.
     
  20. Knave

    Knave Member+

    May 25, 1999
    I've been working through them on the MLSN&A thread, and a surprising number of current USL Pro teams either already meet most every D-II standard, or pretty readily could.

    Only a couple teams would obviously and almost certainly be left in the cold. The rest? D-II is possible for them.
     
  21. Prosoccercdn

    Prosoccercdn Member+

    Aug 6, 2011
    Club:
    FC Edmonton
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    Which specific teams do you think meet the D2 financial requirements because apparently most D3 Usl Pro teams do not.
     
  22. Knave

    Knave Member+

    May 25, 1999
    Read the thread on MLSN&A starting here and couple posts down: http://forums.bigsoccer.com/threads...ng-for-d2-status.2014412/page-3#post-31534634

    There are a lot of question marks (ownership info is hard to find, let alone net worth info), but so far I've found only a few teams that almost certainly couldn't meet D-II standards.

    One of those teams may be bought by Philly, and the other I could see falling under LAFC's umbrella in a year or two.
     
  23. Prosoccercdn

    Prosoccercdn Member+

    Aug 6, 2011
    Club:
    FC Edmonton
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    So the top 8 in your chart would presumably meet financial standards as MLS owned farm teams but those would also be the ones that really have nothing to gain by moving up to D2. They serve there purpose perfectly well in D3 developing their players as is and have no real interest in winning championships, no point spending more $$.

    The other 15 teams - theres no proof they meet the financial requirements, we can assume the majority don't as when the initial standards came in in 2010 from ussf usl declined to apply for D2 Sanctioning and instead received D3 sanctioning. If there's concrete bonafide proof post it but the consensus that I've seen by knowledgeable people like Kenn is most usl pro teams can't.
     
  24. SoccerPrime

    SoccerPrime Moderator
    Staff Member

    All of them
    Apr 14, 2003
    Club:
    Real Salt Lake
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Don't let Knave fool you, there are lot a holes in his "USL Pro is D2 ready" theory. ;)

    Biggest common missing element? Having one investor worth in excess of $40 million (was $20 million but it was updated this year to be 40). Until this summer his beloved SacRep wouldn't have qualified, and they will be in MLS before too long.

    Who has that much? Definitely Sac, probably Charleston, Richmond. H-burg if Philly bought them out but of course their stadium is a negative.

    Who doesn't?

    Rochester?
    Pittsburgh?
    St Louis?
    Colorado Springs?
    Charlotte?
    Arizona?
    OC Blues?
    Austin?
    Wilmington?
    OKC?
    Tulsa?

    And then there are the MLS USL teams that are playing in smaller than required stadiums. One theory is that to make the reqs, the MLS-owned USL teams will just switch back to the main stadium. But thats a cost. Is it worth it?

    Of course, they can change the reqs by 2017 and none of this will matter.
     
    TheJoeGreene, Sam U El and Prosoccercdn repped this.
  25. Prosoccercdn

    Prosoccercdn Member+

    Aug 6, 2011
    Club:
    FC Edmonton
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    Imho if they change reqs by 2017 it would only make sense to make them tougher. NASL is gaining more moneyed owners as time goes by and costs usually rise so standards would be raised not lowered to accomodate D3 usl pro, that would be a farce.
     
    The One X and Sam U El repped this.

Share This Page