Note: I’m not sure if this is the right place to post this, but… More teams, leading to more and stronger local/regional rivalries. League Structure Expand to 36 teams*, with 33 from the United States and 3 from Canada Split into 2 conferences of 18 teams * New teams: East Conference: Detroit, Tampa Bay, Raleigh (?). West Conference: Phoenix, Sacramento, San Antonio/Las Vegas Regular Season 34 matches per team Played only within the conference This creates a fully balanced schedule, improves competitive fairness, and significantly reduces travel. It would also increase interest in the playoffs, as interconference matchups would only take place in the postseason, starting from the first round. Conference Identity The top team in each conference is crowned conference champion, with a newly created trophy awarded, potentially with unique names and designs to strengthen each conference’s identity. Tradeoff: No overall regular season winner. Supporters’ Shield / MLS Club of the Year. Instead of rewarding the best regular season record, it would Reward the best overall MLS club across the entire season. Based on performance across all competitions, not just MLS. Aggregates results from all competitions into a single ranking using a coefficient-based system with competition weights and criteria to be defined. MLS Playoffs and MLS Cup Playoffs: 20 teams Top 10 teams per conference qualify All rounds are single-elimination matches Interconference matchups from the start. Adds variety and avoids repetitive matchups Byes: Top 2 in each conference (4 clubs) go directly to the quarterfinals Play-In Rounds: Lower-seeded teams enter a two-round play-in. Round 1: Cross-conference matchups, e.g., 3rd West vs 10th East, 4th West vs 9th East, etc. Round 2: Winners are ranked based on their MLS performance up to that stage (including Round 1), using criteria such as regular season ranking, win percentage during regular time, and goals per game. Matchups are then set as 1st vs 8th, 2nd vs 7th, 3rd vs 6th, and 4th vs 5th. Final Rounds: Quarterfinals (top 4 teams host against the 4 Round 2 winners) → Semifinals (could be played over two legs) → Final (held in a host city) There is no forced interconference final — if the two strongest teams come from the same conference, so be it. In this sense, conferences would have less influence in shaping playoff paths, which partly offsets the greater importance they gain during the regular season.
I'd rather see MLS live by their sword, stop expanding and continue to spend on talent. Then, it is my hope that USL will fill all of the massive voids in this huge country and deliver to us true organic homegrown and cultivated football clubs. In any event, for any way we eventually do it, the future is bright and the ball is already rolling towards that end.
I get that perspective, and I actually agree with part of it, especially the idea that the United Soccer League can play a key role in filling gaps and building more organic, local clubs across the country. But I don’t think expansion and investment are mutually exclusive for Major League Soccer. The reality is that MLS still has huge untapped markets (ex: Phoenix, Detroit, Northern California in Sacramento or San Francisco), and expansion, if done carefully, helps: grow the league’s footprint increase relevance nationally and create more local rivalries At the same time, I completely agree that spending on talent is critical. Without raising the level on the pitch, expansion alone doesn’t move the league forward. Where I see it differently is this: MLS can grow as a top-tier league, while USL develops a deeper, more organic pyramid underneath. It doesn’t have to be one or the other. A stronger structure at the top (clear format, better competitions, more meaningful games) actually creates more space for USL to grow underneath. I agree the future is bright, I just think it’s not about choosing one path, but making sure all parts of the system evolve in a coherent way.
Furthermore, I’ve seen that the United Soccer League is planning to launch a new Division I league in 2028. Personally, I don’t think the United States Soccer Federation should sanction it. In most football systems, there is one clear top division. Having multiple leagues at the same level, especially at the professional tier, creates fragmentation, confusion, and weakens the overall pyramid. The United States is a large country, but structurally it should still aim for a unified system. Strengthening the top level One key step toward building a stronger and more coherent system is the continued expansion of Major League Soccer. As mentioned, in the medium term MLS could grow to 36 clubs, expanding into new US markets and increasing its national footprint. This would also reduce the incentive for USL to pursue a rival Division I league. At the same time, the presence of Canadian clubs should be viewed as a medium-term structural question. By the end of the decade, Canadian teams could transition to the Canadian Premier League, strengthening both systems. Defining the role of USL Instead of competing at the top level, USL should focus on reinforcing the pyramid. Its role should center on: lower-tier professional leagues (Divisions II, III, and potentially IV) player development, including in partnership with MLS collaboration with other leagues and entities to structure semi-professional and amateur levels below Division III or IV, ideally with longer (more than 26 weeks) and more stable calendars The priority should not be competition between leagues, but in collaboration building a coherent system from top to bottom. Separate and specialized systems If MLS and USL are not competitiors could be possible to work together at other levels. For instance, a more structured ecosystem also requires clearer separation between different layers of the game. Reserve and development football MLS Next Pro should function strictly as a reserve and development league. It should not include independent adult teams, except in the case of U21-type development clubs It should include USL reserve or U21 teams, forming a unified development environment This system could be structured in divisions, potentially with promotion and relegation between development teams Youth development (U19 and U17) The United States should establish a unified national youth system. This system should integrate MLS Next and USL Youth Competitions should be structured by age groups (U19, U17) and divisions (U19 Division I, U19 Division II, U17 Division I, U17 Division II) Promotion and relegation could exist within each age group to increase competitiveness Use a two-season structure, such as separate Fall and Spring competitions, to increase even futher competitiveness, player motivation It should also be open to independent clubs that invest seriously in player development, even if they do not have professional first teams, provided they meet defined standards. These structures would strengthen player development and significantly improve the transition to professional football.