According to this article, it appears that the USSF might be changing their CCL allocations to the following: Two MLS Cup finalists Supporters' Shield Highest MLS point total that has not otherwise qualified. It looks like there is some confusion among participants whether the USOC will land a CCL bid.
Well, if this is true (two finalists, SS winner, team with best point record) then there wont be qualification from Open Cup. It's simple. And I think that that should be implemented.
According to the comments on this Crew Xtra post, though, even Mitchell himself is not sure who gets the final call on how CCL spots are reallocated. And if Concacaf gets the final call, then either Bliss is well-connected within it to know what Blazer and co. are thinking, or he's speaking more to the recommendation that the USSF will present in the meeting in October. Of course, we have to assume he knows what he's talking about, but then that begs two questions: 1) Why would Concacaf no longer want the US Open Cup champ in the tournament? Perhaps because they would think that the Supporter's Shield runners-up would be more competitive...but they already have precedent for accepting D-II teams in the Champions League, and they could set a standard limiting eligibility to USL-2 teams and up. 2) If not them, then why would the USSF want to kill off any competitive incentive (outside of the prize money) for MLS teams to take the tournament seriously? Although if it were their initiative, then we'd have a much better idea of how mucy pull MLS has in the Federation's dealings.
Why not give bids for the CCL to the MLS Cup winner, Supporter's shield winner, then allocate the remaining slots to the teams with the most points at the end of the season? Forget about that MLS Cup runner up nonsense. Why give a team a spot in the Champions League for losing? Send them to the Superliga or some sh*t LOL I agree though, this (along with my idea) would kill the Cup. I guess we could send the Open Cup champ to the Superliga too
You know, I could live with that as a Plan B. Then if a 2nd-division team wins the Open Cup, it could look forward to a) two home games against Mexican teams, b) a shot at $1,000,000 (with no MLS-style restrictions on how much money can be given to the players), and c) no chance to "embarrass US Soccer" in the Champions League. Of course, no MLS team, especially none of those in New Trinidad - whoops, I meant New England, would ever put the club game here in ridicule with their performances in the CCL.
I would like the U.S. Open Cup winner to stay in the CONCACAF Champions League as long as USA keeps four spots.
If they decide to take the spot away from the USOC winner, they should start with the 2011 USOC. Most, if not all, players and fans approached this current USOC with the knowledge that it is a ticket to next year's CCL. If that reality is all of a sudden changed, that would be absolutely terrible and irresponsible of the USOC organizers.
In the absence of promotion and relegation that would be a horrible decision by the USSF. It's their job to grow the sport on all levels and I think MLS has been given enough advantage with its status as a closed league.
Also, since we don't have pro-rel here, if they take away the CCL spot from the US Open Cup, then they're effectively and formally shutting out all lower-division teams in our country from world soccer.
Could also be the fact they might be using coefficients rule soon. If that were the case, I'm sure the USOC would be the first to go for a USA bid.
Quite possibly. Perhaps our fourth spot being converted into a 4th spot for the Caribbean, or a 3rd for Honduras? Fine by me, but if it gets handed over to Canada, something is gravely wrong. And as far as this Open Cup is concerned, all the remaining teams are in MLS, so I'm sure that some clarification will be forthcoming soon.
Well, I think it would be horrible if the USOC lost the CCL berth. 1) If MLS loses a spot, take it from the MLS Cup runner up, that is a crapshoot. That's how NY got in last year. Ugh. In order, the spots should be: 1) MLS Cup champ, 2) Supporter's Shield champ, 3) USOC Champ, 4) SS runner up. If CONCACAF were to adopt some sort of UEFA Cup thing eventually, I cold live with USOC going to that, but not Superliga, which is crap. 2) It will kill the Cup. 3) If MLS teams can't win the Cup, then they deserve to lose the spot. 4) Seems like USL teams have done just as well vs. Mexican teams as MLS ones, if not better, lately. Puerto Rico would have ousted Cruz Azul if away goals counted, and been in the finals. Last, MLS has a defacto extra spot anyway with Toronto, Vancouver, and Montreal all set to be in MLS soon. That will pretty much lock Canada up.
I like the way it is now because that ensures that champions go to the champions league. Cup Champion Supporters Shield Champion Western Conference Champion USOC Champion
Are you saying they don't deserve a spot? I agree. However, the galaxy does have that hardware on their mantle, for what it's worth.
I know the west is better than the east, but that is just a minor division with in MLS, it is better that the 3rd spot went to the SS runer-up. I mean will some years the eastern "champion" will get the spot? The only champions officially are the MLS cup and the US open cup Champions. The SS winner is more of a "champion" than any of the conference winners. I can just Imagine Mexico giving CCL berths to their group "champions" lol!
Agreed. The first spot that should be taken from the US is the losing MLS Cup finalist. Why they would get a spot ahead of the USOC winner (who actually WON something) is beyond me. The conference winner means nothing.
i disagree. To win your conference, you have to qualify for the playoffs, then win 2 playoff rounds. That's more difficult than winning the USOC.
MLS needs its teams to be more competitive in the CCL, the only way to achieve this end is to send the best teams. Winning the Open Cup is def not the best way to prove that you are a top team. Winning the Open Cup is waaayyyy more of a crap shoot than getting to the MLS Cup final. The way that teams sit regulars during most of the USOC, it basically only proves that you have a deep squad. This + expansion draft every year hardly proves the strength that a team will have during the NEXT season. Look at Seattle and the loss of guys like Le Toux because of their performances during the USOC. To be honest, the top 4 teams at the end of the season in points should go to the CCL. But because of our playoff system, the MLS Cup Champ must be represented. Therefore send the MLS Cup champ and the top 3 teams behind them not already qualified. The Superliga needs to be developed and expanded to act as a "second tier" tourney al'a the Europa League in Europe. Send the USOC winner and MLS Cup runner up (if they haven't qualified for the Champions League) + other mid-table teams to it. Include other CONCACAF nations along with Mexico. That way, most teams get some sort of tourney action during the next season.
1. That would be the best, but again that would kill the US Open cup, it would not be fair for lower division teams. Also USSF gets the 4 spots not MLS or is that wrong? 2. No superliga does not need to grow, we do not have enough quality teams for CCL and people want to start a second concacaf tournament. Superliga is nothing more than a bunch of friendly games between MLS and FMF. I like the "tournament" but let’s not think it is more than just friendly games please.
Bronx you said winning the US open just proves you have a deep squad. I would argue it also shows you know how to manage a tournament during the season which is what CCL is. Having a deep squad and managing a tight schedule is what you need to compete. The Sounders have shown that they take these tournaments seriously more then most MLS clubs. I think that it would be a mistake to take away the winner of the US Open cup's spot. The loser of the MLS Cup should go because that could potentially be a team that barely made the playoffs had a good run and then lost the final