Looks like home and away playoffs for next year official. Looks like next year MLS will switch to the traditional home and away playoff format. www.mlsnet.com Thank the Lord I say. Maybe this will lead to greater excitement and give us a better chance to see the games on ABC or ESPN. That is unless its too confusing for the average American sports fan to understand and ABC elects to not show anything again.
OK, first off, the front page of MLSNET says "OP-ED", which means it's an editorial, a subjective column. Second, the end of the column says "Young's views and opinions are not necessarily those of Major League Soccer." So, this is no more official than it was 20 minutes ago.
Not offcial...but MLS wouldn't put it on the webpage if it wasn't being considered...seeing how bad mlsnet is and how it never updates anything and to find anything out about the league you have to search and dig around other sites, (including mostly bigsoccer)...I still take it with a grain of salt, but to me it shows its being considered, and he made some good points and since its on the MLS webpage obviously they are seeing the 6 points he made...
Except that none of the six points are particularly strong: ElJefe sez: OK, so let's just do away with the first leg and just make the whole thing single elimination. ElJefe sez: Great. Let's take the most cynical group of people on the soccer pitch and put more emphasis on their contributions. Besides, I'm trying to figure out how exactly "away goals are better than home goals" is inherently good. Think about it: It rewards teams for being cynical bastards in front of their own fans, while scoring buckets of goals against the other teams' fans. ElJefe sez: And every second counts for even more when you're playing only 90 minutes, instead of 180. So by that standard, single-elimination is better. ElJefe sez: A single-elimination give even better definition. One game for all the marbles, period. ElJefe sez: Except for one thing: Home-field advantage is marginal, at best, in a two-leg system. It's so marginal, in fact, that it's not 100% certain whether it's better to have the first match or the second one at home. Sure, if you have the second match at home, you know what exactly you need to do to advance, and you have a greater chance of doing it at home, and you get to establish the standard for away goals. But I would argue that the first match at home is better because it gives you a better opportunity to jump on your opponents from the get-go. Certainly, home-field advantage in a two-leg system is nowhere near as great as in a best-of-three or a first-to-five, where a team potentially gets two out of three games at home. ElJefe sez: They're such a classic format in soccer, that the biggest freaking soccer tournament in the known universe doesn't even use them. Sorry, two-leg fans, but this guy did no wonders for your cause. I'm not even sure why MLSNET put his op-ed on their site. Maybe they're just throwing a bone to you slavish conformists. Moreover, it doesn't even answer the most damning flaw of a two-leg system in an MLS context: Home-and-away gives very little reward to the team that finished with the better record in the regular season. All those very weak points that he made put together don't even make up for that one flaw.
Whoa, I never said I wanted two-legs...My old signature before they wre taken away from normal members used to say goto Single Elim...and this is mealingless, but i have it on my computer and i work on it all the time...its about 5 pages long, but the jist of it is this... 2007 - 16 Teams 31 Weeks 30 Games: Each Team; 27 Saturday Games, 2 Wednesday Games and 4th of July Game (Wednesday) Home and Home against each team Season Starts Saturday April 7th (1st Saturday in April) * - Mid Season Break (July.-.-June World Cup Years) Season Ends Saturday October 27th (4th Saturday in October) Top 8 Teams Make MLS Cup Playoffs – 1 game Playoffs 1st Round of Playoffs is November 3rd (1st Saturday in November) 2nd Round of Playoffs is November 10th (2nd Saturday in November) MLS Cup Final November 17th (3rd Saturday in October) Neutral Site Yes those are 2007 dates by the way...hah...I have alot of time on my hands...but as you can see my preferred style of playoffs was single elim...
Any article on a contemporary topic that refers to a match played before 1996 should immediately be tanked. There is one way to make a home-and-home work: Away goals don't count double. If the series is tied after both matches (i.e. two ties or one win, one loss for each team), the higher-seeded team advances. The higher seeded team also has the choice of opening at home or on the road. Sachin
Well, if it was two-goals aggregate, the Burn would be playing right now. I too wish they would do away with the entire dam playoff stuff. I really do. The teams play each other so often now, they are freakin friends half the time. Attendence sucks, and until they control 8 stadia, it will suck. So yea, two game total goals works great for me. One game is too little, cause in soccer the freakin worst refs can screw the entire game in three seconds. A whole season in the hands of Gus St. Silva. Oh yea, I'm for that.
I thought winning was the key. Dallas didn't do enough to win the series in three games. Why should scoring the most goals in a series decide a series? Yes score the most goals is exciting for the fans, but a team doesn't really care if they win 1-0 or 4-0. Dallas won the first game, lost the second and couldn't defeat Colorado at home in the third. How in the hell do they deserve to advance based on scoring more goals in the first two games? You're aren't arguing here for it, but isn't a single table, no playoffs Champion decided by wins, draws and losses?
Different Options Single Game Knockout + Better record gets homefield advantage + Schedule is set - sizeable chance that teams advance on a shootout Home and Away Aggregate + The entire duration of both games matter because you can be down 3-0 and pull a goal back in the 90th minute and it isn't meaningless + Schedule is Set - Better record is near meaningless - I have never liked away goals advancement First to 4 + Even after a tie in game 1, game 2 can be a clincher + Better record gets homefield advantage if the series is tied after 2 games + Instead of H&A aggregate or away goals in the case of a split you get a third game. - Nondefinite schedule harder to secure in advance First to 5 + Better record gets homefield advantage if the series goes 3 games - Nondefinite schedule - Evidently a strange feeling concept to a lot of people Best 2 out of 3 + Better record gets homefield advantage + Easy to follow format - Nondefinite schedule - Will be too many series hanging on a shoot out If I had to choose I'd say first to 4 and 6 team playoff (conference champs get a bye)
Wins are key. The American public wants wins. They don't want silly tiebreakers (away goals, aggregate). They also are not that interested in league games. MLS really doesn't have much overall appeal to the average American TV watcher except for a championship game and maybe semifinal matches. To do well on American TV the best option is probably a single game knock out playoff series with the semis and final on ABC. I'm not sure the average soccer watcher is interested enough to watch much else. It would help if MLS had at least 16 teams though so that more of the country would be impacted by the MLS regular season.
Wow, its tough to find worse logic than in point 6 of this article. The argument there is that having 2/3 of the games at home is a nice advantage, so having 1/2 of the games at home is an even better advantage. Huh? Having that second leg at home sure was a big advantage for the Quakes and Wizards in the Champions Cup this year, wasn't it? How exactly did Basle prove themselves superior to Celtic by losing 3-1 and winning 2-0? And why should we expect that the results would have been any different had they played the games in the opposite order?
My comments on the moronic Op-Ed written by Mark C. Young and published on mlsnet.com... Opening paragraph: "The existing points-based system is too short to fit with the traditional American multi-game playoff format, and is completely alien to soccer formulas used in the FIFA World Cup, the UEFA Champions League and the Copa Libertadores." If a three game series is too short, what is a two-leg series? Too-too short? MLS is not being sold to potential customers in India (the World Cup), Belgium, or Paraguay. Who gives a crap how that atiquated two-leg/aggregate goals series is used throughout the World? The NHL used it in its early years and dumped it. Point #1: "There is nothing more tension-filled and exciting than the second game of a home-and-home series with the result hanging in the balance." There is nothing more emotionless and boring than the second game of a home-and-home series with the result already decided. When the home team wins the first leg of the series by two or more goals, they go on to win the series 83.9% of the time. This happens roughly 31.0% of the time in UEFA cup competitions. If LA defeats COL at home in the first leg at home by 4-0, the series is over. When the away team wins the first leg or gets a draw in the first leg, they go on to win the series 85.7% of the time. This happens 43.8% of the time. If NE draws with CLB at home 0-0, they're done in a two-leg series. Point #2: "The away-goals tiebreaker puts more emphasis on coaching strategy." I thought this was the beautiful & simplest game for a reason. Managers and coaches have little say it what happens between the lines. At least that is what is supposed to happen. Crap, FIFA doesn't want Managers on the touch-line spewing forth their intelligence, which is why they created the "Technical Area". This was the most idiotic point this guy came up with. Point #3: "In the current MLS playoff format where is the incentive for teams to play hard throughout a non-elimination game? Did the Galaxy ease up in Game Two of their 4-1 loss to the Wizards in round 1, knowing that Game Three would be in Los Angeles? Did Colorado take the same approach in their 4-0 loss in Game One of their semifinal with LA? In a home-and-home series, the away goal is so important, that a side playing away from home and even trailing 3-0 still has an incentive to play hard for that critical away goal till the final whistle. The game stays relevant for 90 minutes and playoff tension stays in the air." To begin with, the KC-LA game was an elimination game. KC just handed LA their rear on a platter. LA didn't ease up. I do understand his point and it is valid, to a certain point. Once Colorado went down 3-0 to LA, the game was over (only once has a MLS team come back from three goal deficit). Colorado was just playing for pride at that moment and not to get injured. But what about ass-whupings in a two-leg series. I've already mentioned above that a blow-out in leg one pretty much insures the series is over. My numbers were based on the home team in the first leg winning by two or more goals. When the away side wins by two or more goals in the first leg they go on to win the series 97.9% of the time. So 86.6% two or more goal victory in the first leg pretty much closes up the series. Why even hold the second leg? At least now Colorado can go back home and get a win or a draw and live to fight another day. This is why two-leg series are a joke. Did anybody really think Kansas City had a chance against Morelia in the CONCACAF Champion's Cup after their 1-6 pasting? Did anybody really think Washington had a chance against Comunicaciones after their 0-4 pasting? Com'n, get real. Point #4: "For a playoff system to capture the attention of fans and media, it must be easy to understand and embrace its sports’ traditions. The current system doesn’t meet those standards, a two-leg series does. This weekend the Revolution was held to a 0-0 tie by the Crew in New England in Game One of their semifinal series, meaning a Game Three is now guaranteed. So where does that leave Game Two in Columbus?" MLS calls them "series", not "ties". This is understandable to their audience. If you don't understand that the first team to five points wins, then you don't understand how league standings in soccer are calculated. This is so simple my cat can figure it out. Three points for a win, one point for a draw...first to five advances. The only difference from the MLS standings is that it is the team with the points is in first place. Game two has meaning for both New England and Columbus. If Columbus only gets a draw, their hard work in New England over the weekend could go to waste (home clubs win 74% in MLS playoffs). Columbus needs to win game two. They can then go and play for a draw in New England this Saturday (this is the one clear cut similarity with a two-leg/aggregate goals series: the playing for a draw). New England should be playing for a draw on Wednesday. This will even the series at two points and make game three a winner take all. They can't let the game get away from them or they are down 4-1 in points. Wednesday night will be a...how does Mr. Young put it?...tension-filled and exciting. The Colorado-Los Angeles game on Wednesday falls into the same category. Point #5:"Home-field advantage is even more valuable." Bull! In MLS, home clubs have a winning percentage of 61.5% during the regular season. During the playoffs this jumps to 74%. Having the chance to host the all-important game three is vital in the MLS playoffs. MLS has used three games series since its inception. The team with home field advantage has won the series 65% of the time. The team that hosts the second leg in a two-leg series in UEFA cup competitions has won the series 55% of the time. The three game series is perfect for a playoff format in MLS. It gives importantance and relevance to the regular season by giving the higher seed (something to shoot for during regular season play) an advantage. Since playoffs are used in American leagues and have been for 70 years, with only one exception, they are going to be a part of MLS. Point #6:"Two-leg ties are the classic soccer format". And they are flawed when you need to decide a league Champion and this is what the MLS Cup Playoffs do. If you want to give in to neutrality - which is what FIFA, UEFA, CONCACAF, etc. do when they have TOURNAMENTS - and equality, then a two-leg series is the way to go. This is what is needed in a tournament when team names are pulled from a fish bowl to decide the pairings and fairness in the draw is paramount. In MLS team names aren't drawn from a fish bowl. Nothing should be neutral or fair about the MLS Playoffs, not when the seeding is based on the regular season. Use one game winner take all or two-leg formats in cup competitions; such as the U.S. Open Cup.
Great post Preston...not a big deal but are you saying you would want MLS to use single elim or 2 legs or best of 3 or first to 5 or what...just wondering what everyone would prefer...
give me home and home allows mls to go weekend only games (a week to prepare for the lower seeded team and 2 for the higher seed) means no weekday playoff games playing dates are guarranteed (no, we might play a third game) minimizes the number of games to be played and makes players more rested for the final (home and home or remain one off?... perhaps for a different thread)
Alternative Tiebreaker Query: What would happen if you did a home-and-home, but threw out the "away goals" tiebreaker, instead having the HIGHER SEEDED team automatically advance if the aggregate goals are tied ? Wouldn't this encourage massive attacking soccer by the underdog? Then again, if the road team (i.e., higher seed) wins game one by a score of 1-0, then the underdog needs to win by at least two goals to advance in the return leg -- meaning that if the higher seed goes up even 1-0 at home, the the game is effectively over (since the underdog will have to score three unanswered goals). On the other hand, assuming the underdog goes up 3-0 in the first game, then all bets are off if the higher seed pulls even one goal back before the whistle, since a 2-0 win at home for the higher seed in the return leg is certainly achievable (i.e., fans will likely still buy tickets and show up). This solution has at least one MAJOR point in its favor: it's now a MASSIVE advantage to be the higher seed. I imagine the statistics would bear this out, given how many UEFA home-and-homes are decided on "away goals" already.
Its either 90 min and done or just a points race IMHO Some sports writer wrote a solid article on the relation of American college football and Euroland's big time association football clubs. Some very good points. Its on a thread around here, but I can't remember. I say that to bring this up. What if MLS HAS NO PLAYOFFS. Thus being like our very traditional college gridiron. A soccer purist should be happy as the League Champ is decided in the worlds league standard (our Supporters Shield) Finally, The U.S. Open Cup becomes the 'playoff' format so coveted by the MLS big wigs and the Open Cup crowns a true National Champion as it involves all USSF levels.
Re: Its either 90 min and done or just a points race IMHO I concur. Not to match what other countries do, but mainly because I'm sick of seeing crowds at 1/2 the size in the playoffs (and yes, I know why, I'm not asking). Teams are paying the same rent for half the revenue and spotty TV coverage. That seems like bad business unless there's an obvious point I'm missing. If we have to do a playoff, do 1 vs. 2 in a one-game championship at a pre-determined venue, ala MLS Cup. Junk the rest.
Tired of seeing those small playoff crowds, eh? How about if there were no playoffs as you suggest? How big would those crowds late in the year be when your team has no chance to win the Supporters' Shield by mid-July?
There is more than one right way to have a playoff system. I like single elimination the El Jefe way. The one thing it lacks which Peter Wilt seems to think we need is more of an emotional connection between the fans and the team. A home playoff game will do that. Nice post PNE - here is my rebuttal: Actually, it is being sold to people who live in the US who are from India, England, Mexico and 204 other recognized countries around the world. Not sure why you think its antiquated. It is used in the UEFA Cup, to determine WC playoff spots and countless other tournaments. It is a pretty intriguing way of doing things. If that LA/Col game 1 was held in Denver, as it would be in ths scenario - what LA fan wouldn't want to show up at the victory party for Game 2. Where did you get those stats? What % of the time is the first leg won by 2 or more goals? What % of thetime does the away team win or tie the first leg? You have good stats but they don't mean much withouth the frequency of which they occur. We here in Dallas have our issues with coaching strategy. It was a weak point. Anybody watching Carlos Valdearmma walking around in minute 80 like he was playing "pin the tail on the donkey" could tell the team had given up. Again you bring up the exception, not the norm. What about Game 2 Revs v Crew - that game would mean everything - now it may be irrelevant. An irrelevant playoff game in a 3 games series is the joke. You sir, have a very smart cat. I would like to be its agent. It is obvious the public does not embrace it. Th emedia does not understand it. I have heard MLS announcers call it "Best of 3" and "1st to 5" in the same game. Which is it? This point is debatable. But what hoem field advantage is there if there are only 8000 fans there to begin with? 1st to 5 is the New Coke of playoff formats. Fans think it is crap - it needs to go away quickly. You bring up a fair point - but the fact is MLS fans are voting on the format by staying the away. I am happy with "single elimination" or "home and home". MLS needs to simplify the format and maximize attendance oppportunity. The current system is a failure. And whoever brought the idea up should be fired. If I brought up a new product idea at my company that had this level of success, I know I would get canned. Course, if they knew I spent this much time on bigsoccer at work, I would get canned for that too.
If any of you had a chance to go to the Rose Bowl for game 1 v. Colorado, you'd love the playoffs. Unbelievable atmosphere. You could absolutely feel the playoff electricity.
Re: Alternative Tiebreaker This is a good idea. It should be noted that not every home and away series uses away goals, CONCACAF Champions Cup is an example. They say that it encourages the away side to attack, but it discourages the home side to really go for it. Why shouldn't an away side have to face an onslaught? Its supposed to be difficult to succeed on the road, but away goal rule makes it easier. Perhaps the higher seed should also have the choice of deciding if they would like the first or second game at home.