Proposing a new expansion/pro/rel format

I am not a fan of Pro/Rel in the slightest. I know that it's common in all European Sports, but I don't think it works here. Over there, brand new clubs start at the bottom and work their way up. Here, owners buy into a league, and if their first season is 0-14, so be it. However, for the spirit of the OP on this thread, I will suspend fact and logic, much like I do when watching a good Sci-Fi movie, and discuss on merit alone.

The plan seems feasible enough, but it doesn't create the level playing field that I assume P/R is supposed to. There is nothing that stops a Fulham, Everton, or Man City from spending as much as they want on talent, therefore the possibility of going from a Championship club to one competing for a Premier League title is very real. In the scenario laid out by the OP, clubs starting out in MiLS are treated like second class entities, rather than full fledged clubs, trying to win the top club prize in the USA. Relegated clubs are relegated for a reason. Why give them an artificial advantage, simply because of their former status? In football, there are the Haves, and the Have Nots. This goes one step beyond that, and forces promoted minor league clubs to be branded as a club playing in a league they don't belong in. It makes very little sense to impliment a system based on fairness and quality of play to be this unfair to the teams who showed the highest quality in the lower league.

*switches hats*

Any Pro/Rel system is doomed to fail from the get go for economic reasons in the USA. Consider this. European sports use Pro/Rel in Basketball. Do you think FIBA could ever tell the NBA they need to impliment Pro/Rel between the NBA and the NBADL?

 

FIFA couldn't care less whether or not we have pro/rel. FIFA would only be concerned if there were a large number of already-existing, top-flight-capable clubs. That's what pro/rel is for -- to deal with the problem of too many clubs, not enough league spots. We don't have that problem here. (And we're not the only country without pro/rel, either.)

People need to stop looking at FIFA as this white knight, Defender of the Purity of the Game. FIFA cares about the integrity of the game only as far as it keeps the money rolling in.

Outside of the BigSoccer obsessives, fans don't give a sh*t.

How does adding the risk of being dropped down to a minor league increase the value of the club? Sorry, it doesn't work that way. Club value is based on potential revenue. The only way pro/rel would increase the value of the club is if it somehow increased attendence.

------RM

 

1. FIFA pressured Autrailia A-League to implement pro/rel with World Cup hosting opportunity card. FIFA can do same thing to US. A-League promised to do that.

2. Garber said that "our fans scream for it, and even our coaches scream for it" I was surprised that even coaches want it implemented.

3. If you broaden your footprint, you get increase revenue. Look at ManU FCB Chelsea AC Milan, Real Madrid, Bayern Munchen, Celtic etc... they got global footprint. MLS clubs don't even have national footprint. It's not simple issue.

 

MLS bringing in pro/rel isn't going to move MLS clubs any way towards having the worldwide footprint of Man Utd, Celtic, Real Madrid etc.

It might give them the global footprint of the New York Cosmos though.

 

has the NBA just been formed within 15? Was Fiba created long before the NBA? NO

 

Thank You. I think the biggest piece of evidence for pro/rel is that quote from garber saying the COACHES want it. Coaches are the most trusted people in MLS because they neither are biased to the fans or the ownership. And the part about the footprint is very important as well. Did anyone say that it could bring MLS to ManU status? no, but would it increase the leagues status, yes. MLS has tremendous upside being in the worlds largest market but it faces the problem of trying to get over the hill of being a mickey mouse league as some people like to refer to it to a respectable league that players would play in. Leagues gain respect from many things like history, quality of players, facilities, etc. Pro/rel falls into this as well. Being an age old concept pro/rel gives mls history just by being associated with it.

Just a thought. What if MLS reaches a point of overall profitability of significant value, and MLS pledges to fully return the expansion fees to all teams except for $5 mil. (i say $5 mil. because that is the same fee that teams would be charged to enter MLS2 ) If MLS 2 started off with a modest 6 teams MLS would already have $30 mil. in the bank. Im not sure what the numbers are that every team has paid so far but if MLS pays 1 mil. or however much they can give to each team each year they can eventually pay off the fees and the economic side is no longer there.

 

All due respect, but who gives a flying F what the coaches want? I'm more concerned with MLS becoming a stable buisness, and keeping D1 pro soccer on the map in the USA for a long time to come.

MLS founders lost $350 Million Dollars in the first years of the league. I would rather see those investors get their investments back before we start monkeying around with returning expansion fees. Do you think that MLB, the NFL, the NBA, or the NHL would ever consider that, even if the team in question went belly up or were even contracted? If we're worried about age old concepts, we should have waited for USL-1 to become the top flight league, and done it all organically. By inventing clubs to play in the top flight league rather than promoting the best existing clubs when MLS was founded, MLS set upon a course of a closed system. If we were really after soccer history, the Seattle Sounders wouldn't have beaten DC United in the USOC. The NASL didn't care for that trophy, if they did they would have played the Washington Diplomats, complete with a 35 yard offside line. I'm also not concerned with what the conception of MLS is right now overseas. MLS is in its 14th season, they still have 4 years to go before they eclipse the longevity standard of the NASL, the soccer league with the highest TV ratings and international credibility in the history of US football.

 

The people that care about what the coaches is not a small number. The owners care about what the coaches opinions, the players do, and so do the fans. So now that thats answered any more stupid questions?


And for the people that have it in their mind that players/coaches/fans dont have influence on MLS just look at the recent toronto situation. Youre telling me that DeRo's complaining didnt have anything to do with the grass and also its obvious DeGuzman wouldnt have signed with TFC if they didnt promise him that they would get grass

 

That's quite a leap you're making there. Assuming that's accurate about coaches desire about it, my next stupid question comes down to this. Do you really think the MLSPA wants to be put in the situation where their families general livelyhood can come down to who gets injured or suspended when? The SES, which is basically incompatible with a fluid league structure, unless we start all these half assed "socialism by regulation" by laws. Why fix what clearly ain't broke, just to make MLS more like soccer leagues from Europe and the rest of the world? I'm all for grass at BMO, but there's a gigantic difference between changing the playing surface at a particular stadium, and throwing away an economic model that has kept MLS from the franchise instability that plagues startup leagues in every sport, and kept the buisness alive during the lean times.

As for my stupid questions, please keep your debate civil. As a fellow Philadelphian, you should be able to see the need for courtesy in these debates, even when you don't agree with a particular post or poster.

 

Yes we have what we have to start up and survive during the lean times.
The question is for the future. If the owners are satisfied with some profit in their system with mediocre product, single entity closed system. I guess that's it, good for the owners. Good luck, it's hard to get back those fans who left because of those shoot outs and countdown clocks not to mention earning new fans.

 

If you take a look at MLS' all time attendance figures, the shootouts and backwards clocks had little impact on attendance. MLS is having a tough time with attendance because soccer is still not accepted totally as a sport in the USA. As recently as "The Simpson's Movie," Homer, while on a vision quest, blurts out that soccer will never be accepted in the USA. MLS will be fine, as more and more learn the sport. There are two generations of American sports fans who treat soccer with all the credibility of professional wrestling, but Pro/Rel is going to make them see the light? To this day, whenever you see an American sports fan watching soccer for the first time, what's the first question you get asked? "What's with the clock? Why is it going up and not down? Why doesn't the game end at 90:00? How come the Ref can let it drag on as much as he wants?" These questions are quite common to those uninformed fans, assuming you don't get the ones that immediately start screaming, "Get this ************ soccer shit off the TV, and put on a real sport!" These are the fans that aren't filling US stadiums, not those casual soccer awares, who will go see their father's EPL or Serie A club for nostalgia during their once a decade stop in their hometown. MLS is fourteen years old. Can you imagine what it would be like if we started comparing the acheivements of a 14 year old to companies that have been in buisness for parts of three centuries? Many casual USA fans got turned off by the "Soccer is coming, and the other sports are all going to die" attitudes of NASL fans in the 70's. They had those bonus points, and that 35 yd offside line, but they were the next big thing. They didn't need a Pro/Rel discussion, because there was so much franchise instability it almost seemed like Pro/Rel existed.

Sure, teams like AC Milan, FC Barca, Real Madrid and Manchester United can draw well here, but only because it's one game per region per year... Do you think that Chelsea in Salt Lake City would get 50,000+ for a full 38 game season? It's a novelty, and anyone with recent European ties will get out to a game because it's the only shot they get. Why did NFL Europa fail? It wasn't a novelty, it was a sport that was taught, not grown up with. Even in cities that the NFLE failed in, you can still draw 50000+ sellout crowds for the Detroit Lions, for gods' sake. Let MLS grow as it is supposed to. Seven years ago, we had a 10 team league that was losing money every year. Today, we have a 15 team league, with 3 more on the way. By the strictest sense of the word, MLS has never had a franchise fold. They are starting to turn the corner in terms of finally making money. You want a comparitive argument? Try the WNBA, which also started in 1996. Where are they at in terms of franchise stability, profitability, attendance, and community relevance? Scary thing is, in some circles, the WNBA has more credibility as a sport than MLS. Chew on that one, and tell me why I'm so silly for wanting MLS' continued growth, albeit a slow climb up the mountain.

 

MLS is not in agreement with you. MLS realized there are plenty of soccer fans in US, thus they switched their grand marketing strategy and now the primary marketing target is those crowd who are familiar with soccer and follow high level soccer world wide either club or national.

They first thought that if we have pro soccer league, then soccer fans will automatically follow, so let's concentrate on general American casual sports fans, hence introduce shoot out, count down clock, etc. that 'Americanize' the sport. They realized it was not the way.

Garber and owners whenever they have chance they say they are trying to bring genuine soccer to MLS on the field and off the field.

Yes MLS started to get some momentum, now is time to get real careful and take advantage of the momentum, soccer fans are not dummies and they got plenty of other options unlike NFL or NHL or NBA or MLB.

 

What do we have now? Imitation soccer? Soccer Lite? I can't believe it's not soccer? I'm sorry, but this makes no sense, IMHO.

I agree with this 100%. However, the momentum is slower than one might think. MLS still can't get a consistent English Language timeslot on any channel other than a soccer themed one. MLS is still devoid of coverage in any mainstream media. I haven't seen a MLS highlights show on ESPN since 2001. MLS is just starting to turn the corner. Let them walk before they run. I submit that what we're starting to see is MLS gains at the expense of the big 4. MLS is the only pro sports league that has any growth potential at all in America. Let them exploit that before we get crazy and turn the whole system upside down. Americans are just getting the hang of this. When the USMNT can sell out a gridiron stadium, or when MLS can have a non MLS Cup Final, All Star Game, or FirstKick on national OTA television, America will be ready for the changes we have been debating. Until that happens, the USA is still not ready for soccer on a mainstream level, and if New York is relegated in favor of Rochester, I don't think it will do that cause any justice.


EDIT: In an earlier post, I used a derisive word that I have seen in the asterisk censoring. I meant no attack to anyone by it, and if any were offended, I'm sorry.

 

That's what Garber and the owners keep saying whenever they have chance.
(refer to the expansion press announcement from the owner of the latest expansion team, Vancouver)

It's probably marketing propaganda trying to wash away images it has developed for many years as a mickey mouse league. Once you screw up, it's not easy to fix it and turn it around.

Why do they say that? to appeal to it's primary marketing target audience, the soccer fans in US who follow high level soccer world wide already.

I agree, it's slow process and pro/rel should be viewed as long term league design.
There are number of different ways to develop pro/rel accommodating current environmemt.

However, I must disagree if someone say because of the single entity, revenue sharing, blah blah blah business blah blah, we can't and shouldn't have pro/rel.

 

That's much stupider that I would have given Donny G and the boys credit for. Then again, only a REAL Mickey Mouse organization would name a team the Mighty Ducks.

My objections to Pro/Rel are indeed based on SES, revenue sharing, and the need for a stable league. Truth be told, however, my biggest objection is that, quite frankly, I think it is stupid, and I don't understand the point of it. I get the whole relegation battle at the end of a season, but promoted teams never do a damn thing in the EPL, which is the only top flight league I've been more than a glancer at. Instead of fighting for the last playoff spot, they fight to not be sent to the minors. Is that a better way? No, it's just different. I'm perfectly happy with the American format, and I see no reason to change it. If it would generate a whole new interest and credibility to the sport, I'd be in favor of it. I just can't wrap my head around the concept that the Minor League Champions are more deserving of a MLS spot than a team that's been there since the beginning and suffered all the growing pains. If USSF were serious about Pro/Rel. FCNY and Tampa Bay would be starting in USL-2, not USL-1.

 

Thanks for refreshing my memory; I'd forgotten about that. Still, I'm curious as to what FIFA's reasoning was, as this seems out of character for them. I mean, this is an organization that let us have a countdown clock and the shootout for four years, and they pressure Australia to implement pro/rel? There must be something else going on.

While I admit you have a good counter example, I stand by my contention that FIFA is not going to demand pro/rel out of the US. There's just no need for it, no backlog of existing clubs screaming for entry to the top flight. I could only see FIFA getting involved if a second league made a credible play for Division 1 status (as someone else conjectured).

Garber says lots of things, a lot of them bullsh*t. He's also gone on record about how important it is for MLS clubs to do well in international competitions, while backing up that talk with nothing.

And forcing a pro/rel system on a country that doesn't need one is going to help us achieve this how, exactly?

------RM