Beckham-mania has raised the level of interest in MLS worldwide, which is great. Media coverage in the U.S. and Europe is unprecedented. But once these new MLS viewers take a good hard look at this unfair and confusing playoff scheme, the tidal wave of jabs and criticism will flow like beer at Octoberfest. It will be open season for so-called Eurosnobs, American soccer-haters and witty Brit broadcasters who call MLS "Mickey Mouse." And they will be right in their attacks. You cannot defend a playoff system where 60% of the teams make the playoffs and it takes five minutes to calculate which wildcards get thru. MLS fans like us have debated this FOREVER, but I fear the league will lose all the good will/momentum of 2007 if this issue is not adressed NOW! If I were Don Garber, I would use the occasion of the "fantastically successful" SuperLiga Final to announce that MLS is continuing to give the fans of soccer compelling and passionate action by adopting in 2008 an NFL-style 6 team playoff system. The current system was needed as a "transition format" during an unbalanced-division year, when the "widely popular Toronto FC joined the ranks of MLS." But in 2008, with the return of San Jose, MLS will begin a "new era of exciting competition that rewards regular season performance and guarantees thrilling post-season matchups by the best teams in the league." Garber has to get in front of this issue and tell people NOW why MLS is/will be great and they should continue to watch. In fact, "The best is yet to come!" That way, newcomers can say, "Alright, this is a little weird now BUT next year it will be awesome! I can't wait!" A single table with the top two teams getting first round byes would be nice, followed the next four clubs. But East and West conferences are still OK and, dare I say it, something casual American sports fans expect. Make it simple, something that a two second glance at the standings can be seen by all: Three teams per conference. No cross-conference wildcards (allows for unbalanced schedules) #1 gets bye #2 hosts/#3 in single game winner plays at #1 single game Conf winner plays other conf winner in MLS Cup (Neutral site for now) Look at the current standings and tell me this would not be awesome! It's a total no-brainer! Every team in the hunt will fight to the end for playoff positioning, not coast. The last few games will be tooth and nail thrillers. Without the weak total-goals home and home series the playoffs would remind people of the World Cup late stages, where one loss and you are out! It would be great TV and be something that casual sports viewers could get into, EASILY, right after the World Series. Not only would this announcement preempt the slings and arrows of naysayers, it would energize fans who have stuck by this league through thick and thin. The bottom line is that MLS can and must get better, but this bogus playoff system is the achilles heal that will be exposed VERY SOON.
It isn't going to happen (not this year, anyways), but I've thought for years that this basic setup (top 6 teams or top 3 from each conf, top 2 get a bye) is the way to go, at least until the league gets up to a minimum of 16 teams. More than half the teams making the playoffs is a bit of a joke. I'd rather see 2-leg ties, at least in the first round, but that's just quibbling about details. Nice idea, though.
Why not leave the playoffs as it is and slowly increase the league to 16 or more teams? That builds up tradition - something which is apparently valued by many soccer fans in this country.
We'll have 16 teams by 2010. And 18 by 2012. 8 is fine and is certainly getting better now that we've moved the number of teams up. If you notice the 8 teams making the playoffs this year are the good teams who you feel could win any game and are quite a bit better than the rest. Do you really expect Colorado or Toronto (especially away) to compete on any given night? I could however see Columbus knocking off Houston in a 2 leg series though.
Have each conference winner plus the next four with the best record. Seeded based on record, top two getting a bye. Each round is one game, top-seed at home.
Even with 16 teams half the league will still make the playoffs. This has been the stigma of the NHL for years and it has stuck even after they increased their ranks. Look at the NBA, it has losing teams in the playoffs EVERY year. The regular seasons get neutered, even with 30 or so teams. I really believe that less is more, and fewer teams in the playoffs creates more tension, more reason to cheer your side on late in the season. And for those who might say a better team in the East might not get thru while a lesser club does in the west, too bad. That third place team would still have to earn their way on the road to the Cup Final. NFL fans can truthfully say the Steelers ride to the SuperBowl, all on the road, was awesome to see as and was certainly no fluke. My main point is that the world's media, ESPECIALLY knowledgable footy experts, will tear MLS to shreads once they get past the initial discovery phase. AND, long-time EPL, La Liga, etc supporters who Garber supposedly is reaching out to will just laugh at MLS even more than they already do.
A. I think you are blowing this out of proportion; B. I don't think they will; and C. I don't really care. Let them laugh. First, it is not as if we are the first soccer nation to employ a playoff system. Mexico has had divisions and playoffs for a long time and I believe many South American countries do as well. They see our playoffs kind of like a cup competition. Second, fans that euro fans that live here will have to accept the fact that American sports have playoffs to determine a champion. Third, I think the number of teams is fine. Yes, too many get in now, but let's leave it at 8 and grow into it. If you reduce the number and start giving byes, then teams would be able to get to MLS Cup by winning one game. If you are going to have playoffs, then there has to be some effort to get to the title game. Right now with 8 teams, you have to play 3 games winning 2. If I were going to do anything I would get rid of the home and home first round, but the owners don't want to do that because they want at least one home game for every team in the playoffs.
Is it really a great long term plan to have 8 teams make the playoffs, then just have a home and home? Borrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrring.... Although it is fun watching Colorado play like garbage all year then knock Dallas out in the first round. I'll give it that.
And what impact will that have? Even if I agree with you arguendo, who cares? We already have this system, and have had it for a few years now, so why would they be laughing more in year (I think) 5 of this system than they did in year 1? You're not making any sense, you're just making an argument by "authority." (Sorta.)
I don't see your point. The NBA had a 16-team playoff format in the Jordan era, back when there were 27 teams. The Bird/Johnson era had 23 teams and 16 still qualified. What stigma? The NBA and NHL of today doesn't suck because of their playoff format.
Not sure what that had to do with anything. If something is clearly awful, why continue it as tradition? Atleast make it somewhat competitive first before you indoctrinate it into tradition, no? All we have now is something close to another dull NBA clone. I guess that is what you guys are used to so it is familiar. As for myself, I'd rather see something more interesting than the status quo.
It's a double standard. No one judges traditions by whether or not they make sense or would be feasible. Period. Unless it's America, then we need a different measuring stick.
Who are you, Big Soccers Mike Eruzione? I'll be over here talking discussing the playoffs as you for some reason drape yourself in the American flag. Please join us when you are through. I am sure you have some other reasons to support the format aside from national pride. Do you believe in miracles Roehl?
You know, for years I've held on to the "well it's always been 8" argument as the only reason left for letting in so many teams but now that I finally have a horse in the race (TFC) I really do think that Chris' idea is the best. Frankly, this year we don't deserve to make the play-offs. It's still unlikely that we will but even that outside hope seems silly at this point. Further, I really liked it when MLS switched to home-and-home aggregate goals (because it's more "soccerish" than play-off series) but now that we get closer to the play-offs I realize that the argument for single games really does make more sense. If you're going to have play-offs MAKE THEM SPECIAL: Less teams and less games! Cup-game atmosphere is special in the UK precisely because of the whole "done in one" simplicity. Further, make hosting a play-off game EVEN MORE SPECIAL! I know the whole idea of giving every team that makes the play-offs one game to host is at root a financial decision but really from what I've seen play-off games are worse attended than regular season games. If getting to host 1 (and only 1!) play-off game per season maximum were instituted (the outcome of the plan suggested) and only 4 of 14 teams (next year) got that honour it would make both the regular season more important AND THE PLAY-OFF GAMES! This is part of what makes the NFL's format so compelling: Limited entry and limited games in the play-offs. Personally I'd prefer the league to drop conferences for a variety of reasons it's not worth arguing over and just go top 6 make it in. I only bring it up because conferences preclude some potential Cup finals from happening. I've always thought it stupid that the Yankees can't play the Red Sox in a World Series. Wouldn't it be much better if any two teams could meet each other in the Cup Final thus leaving open the potential of two rivals facing off? Chris' plan also shortens the time it would take to play the play-offs leaving more time for a balanced schedule season if the league expands past 16 teams (which has been mooted). I'd shorten the time they take even more and make the play-offs even harder for lower seeds by playing the quarters on Tuesday and Wednesday night (5 at 4; 3 at 6) and then playing the semi's on the Saturday and Sunday immeadiately after (lowest remaining seed at 1; 2nd lowest at 2). That way teams with a lower seed have have an even more difficult play-off road to the Cup final. Just like the NFL. C'mon MLS... get'er done! Mike.
You said it yourself: you are impressed when an Englishman says something. Not many soccer fans go to England and ask why concepts A, B and C are in English soccer when concepts X, Y and Z could work better. They're traditions, and they stand without judgment. There's no American flag here, that's for sure. It's a double standard, plain and simple.
You hit the nail on the head. And those games draw such lousy attendance too. My scenario would hopefully make late season games more meaningful and increase the attendance league-wide. Second leg matches can be awesome (the lauded San Jose/LA tilt comes to mind), but why even bother with first leg matches which are almost always conservative snoozers? The coaches and players always say "Well, tonight didn't really matter anyway, its what we do next week that counts." On the other hand, the very nature of a single game do or die affair automatically makes it more exciting. Games like that classic Nick Rimando PK East Conf final at RFK in Adu's first year, that was tension at every moment. Could a first leg match EVER reach that level of excitement? I'm a broken record on this one. When I become Commish maybe I'll get what I want.
Oh, I absolutely agree with you. If I recall, Lamar Hunt was really the driving force behind the concept of every team having a home game. I have no idea if his sons are the same way or if there are other new owners that have taken up that cause, but if not then I hope they revisit the issue.
I was impressed with that Englishmans statement, true. He supports something with more integrity and more competitive than what you support. Simple as that and a weak attempt at spin to boot. Aside from a greasy basket of fish and chips, I careless what standards or traditions they have in England. I only watch the Premiership with a half an eye. I even think the Royal Family welfare program is a bit of a joke. They are not my concern though. The bottom line is, American or not, the tradition of a team finishing with the best record playing the eigth best, even-up, is ludicris. It's just not all that well thought out. It promotes mediocity. It is unfair. Gimme 4th of July fireworks until kindom come, but please lets put MLS-styled playoffs out to pasture like we did celebrating Lincolns and Washingtons Birthdays seperately. Somethings are just overkill and need to be tapered back. God bless America!
People around here always say that when it suits them. It's not true at all. I don't hear basketball or baseball fans whining when the team with the best regular season record doesn't win the postseason. All I know is that MLS fans get bombarded with Eurosnob complaints telling them that there are no merits in what MLS is doing, and that they should change. But when someone suggests changes for the international or European game, like goal line cameras or instant replay, it is never an argument about the merits of those changes. It is always, invariably, absolutely about tradition. American soccer never gets afforded that sort of consideration, and I am sick to death of this double standard in this sport.
Maybe others are coming from that double standard, I don't know. All I can speak for is myself. Pretend for a second that is is the first year of MLS and you were assigned to come up with the format, would you really draw it up the same way we have it now? My guess is that most people, American, Euro or Asian, would do it a bit differently. Tradition is about the only thing it has going for it.