I'm not sure if I agree with this.. Based on comments from USL's commissioner/president/whatever it seems like the main driver behind getting USL DII status is more than a semantics thing, nor is it about raising the standards of USL's franchises. The whole point is that there is a quantifiable value to the DII label that isn't present in DIII and that potential owners, players, and agents are interpreting that label to not choose USL. If this is accurate, then there could be a "real world" impact upon NASL as one of their arguments for choosing them over USL (We are DII, USL is DIII) could evaporate.
Highly recommended listening on this topic: The Soccer Morning shows from this past Tuesday and Wednesday featuring the NASL and USL presidents. http://backheel.com/author/soccer-morning/
Hmmm.. It'll certainly be interesting. For the NASL teams that don't "self-promote", or are sent to the dustbin by a MLS team moving into their market, is a merger an option? The Cosmos went out of their way to denigrate MLS and proclaiming that they chose NASL because they wouldn't be under MLS's boot.. Will the Cosmos be open to joining USL where they will not only be under MLS's boot figuratively, but literally? Tampa's owners and Traffic were part of TOA and broke off from USL because they wanted to run their own league, will they be open to moving back under USL's banner given the events that resulted in them leaving USL in the first place?
I'm really excited about tomorrow. I'm currently several days behind on my podcast listening and I should be listening to SM's Tuesday and Wednesday podcasts tomorrow. Based on my twitter timeline, there was a lot of good information coming out in both of those interviews.
I think NASL is fairly strong as it is (saying this as someone who attends a decent amount of Railhawks games). That being said, if USL were to receive Div 2 status, it's hard to see what the long-term future is for NASL. They could possibly lose more markets to MLS, and at that point some sort of merger (or teams just moving from NASL to USL until it collapses) would seem slightly inevitable. The problem is, even if "they" said right now they would implement relegation in 2030. The logistical hurdles of transitioning from where we are right now (in regards to MLS, NASL, USL) to what a true pyramid would look like is hard to fathom. The key issue is that I would imagine some sort of payout would have to be made to existing MLS owners to mitigate against future risk. Where would that money come from? If true free agency still doesn't exist, how could that co-exist with Pro/Rel? What about the draft? How many teams take part? MLS has a salary cap, the other leagues don't. How does that get resolved? How would it affect broadcast contracts? Imagine: "Oh great, both NY teams just got relegated at the same time" Even if it was decided that it was definitely going to happen, the road to Pro/Rel seems like a rough one. And for the record, I'm fine with the status quo, and pretty much indifferent to the idea of pro/rel and a true pyramid.
I've been listening regularly for only a couple months (but 'The Best Soccer Show' for much longer), but i thought the Wed one with the NASL president was quite possibly the best single episode of that show I've heard. Jason Davis will undoubtedly be a reliable name in Soccer media if he hangs in there long enough to surf the rising tide of soccer popularity. He's excellent at doing a 1-man show, which is an insanely difficult thing to do in radio.
From what I can tell, he's already gotten that with most of the soccer media. His problem is the medium hasn't gotten there with anyone outside the soccer media. Soccer Morning has struggled to get sponsors to the point that it was a week away from going away before Soccerly swooped in and saved it until Soccerly ultimately went under. Most of Jason's guests are other journalists (amateur and professional) and he doesn't seem to get non-media guests, except for lower division leagues. I'm not sure if that's because Trevor only hits up journalists whenever something happens in the soccer world, or if the non-media potential guests are just ignoring his requests.
While the other leagues don't have a hard cap like MLS, there is a "soft cap" for the other leagues called "racking up massive debt and going out of business because of it".
A sinking ship might make the choice for them. Tampa Bay's majority owner is Bill Edwards. He took over in late 2013. Traffic is down to one team. I think the whole Team Owners Association thing is more of a distant memory with many of the original parties gone. Even the Cosmos, with their Elmont stadium looking more like a pipe dream each day, might change their tune. Plan B?
We've got a local Sacramento Republic podcast run out of Sac State. It's a college radio show, so you've gotta be a bit forgiving about the production, but he gets some pretty decent guests on from time to time. Well, he had the USL's executive VP Jake Edwards on in his latest show. It's a good interview. See the link below for a list of topics covered. http://www.recklesschallenge.net/beemans-republic-conversation-usl-executive-vp-jake-edwards/ While there wasn't a whole lot of news broken that wasn't already out there, there was one very interesting bit of information that is worth posting here. I transcribed it: Unanimous. It's not just that the majority of current USL owners want to pursue DII. It's that every single one of the existing owners wants that. That I did not expect.
Let's hope so. It makes to much damn sense for everyone, and soccer in the US. It also requires ego, past issues a d emotion to be put aside. I have been hoping that eventually there would be consolidation, maybe it could happen sooner than I thought. MLS had to get to a point where it was so dominant, and USL had to become viable, for something like this to occur. I actually believe the stronger ownership groups that have come into NASL recently, who don't have the past baggage of Marcos in their history, would actually be more open to a merger. A stronger, more stable league, with a wider footprint, can only help their financial situation. Fingers crossed that the owners of NASL aren't BS puritanical fanatics. Then again, that has really only come from one team at this point, and a handful of fans.
I'm not sure how long you've been listening but we've had countless players, coaches & executives on the show. We don't have players on as often as some sports daily shows for two reasons. The first being that there aren't many players that are particularly interesting or engaging on-air, mostly as a result of extensive media training. The second is that our broadcast window falls during most east coast club training schedules & is far too early for west coast players.
Hey, look who's here! Personally, as long a you've got a good, informative show and the podcast is posted in a timely manner, then I'm a happy listener. Plus, often as not, player interviews are kind of banal.
I think a merger would be impossible now because of the MLS reserve teams. Playing in a league with (and, heaven forbid, losing to) the Red Bulls reserves wouldn't really fit the Cosmos' goals.
I really like the Monarchs name. I wish both the MLS and USL teams called themselves Salt Lake City Monarchs. Imo, it sounds much better.
I like the concept of naming the USL team something different, but using similar branding. The FC2 crap should be phased out immediately, or at least use other city names. Such as Atlantic City Red Bulls or something.
I agree. I just think Salt Lake City Monarchs sounds so much better than Real Salt Lake. And, Real Monarchs SLC? Talk about all over the place. I just think Monarchs is a good name and no other team has it like, Royals or Kings. But, I'm not a huge fan of the (insert team name) II either.
Though I wonder about antitrust issues. I haven't really looked into the legal issues, so this is all speculative. But as I recall MLB has a special antitrust exemption, so I don't think it has to worry. But MLS has been arguing that it's not a monopoly in its industry in part because it's competing with other soccer leagues domestically and internationally, right? So if it assumes too much control over lower-tier leagues, courts might start taking that argument less seriously.
Of the nearby cities to New York, you pick Atlantic City? Why should the reserve team be named anything other than New York Red Bulls 2/II/B? It's a reserve team, the sole purpose of which is to help the first team. It shouldn't have an independent identity, because it's not independent at all, it's the exact opposite of that.
This was my thinking as well. I'm not a huge fan of the names because of how they sound, BUT, I understand why they're named those names and it makes sense with what MLS and USL are trying to accomplish. What does it matter if it's Montreal Impact and Montreal Impact II or FC Montreal? It's still the same process whether they have the same name or not.
USL players should be seen as a developmental league if they are still in USL at 23 years old they should probably hang it up.
Monarchs is terrible, and I really think a Galaxy supporter shouldn't be advising anyone on team names. Galaxy might be the worse name of the lot, but at this point in time it has the history behind it not to matter. Anyway, the RSL abbreviation is part of the American soccer lexicon at this point.
The only antitrust law that MLS could violate would be one of exclusionary conduct. Someone would have to show that MLS is using its power to actively prevent competing soccer leagues from forming in the U.S. Which is of course next to impossible since people don't form soccer leagues in the U.S. because of MLS intimidation. They don't form soccer leagues because it is a terrible investment. There is nothing stopping a bunch of billionaires from forming a competing league with pro/rel and all the other things that would make Tinfoil Teddy hot. The only thing that is stopping them is reality and sanity. And MLS is not obliged under the antitrust laws to open up play to other clubs not affiliated with MLS.
I understand the reasoning, but see no harm in branding the II club. Since some have made the connection to MiLB, can someone tell me where Boston Red Sox II play? Or New York Yankees 2? Or Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim Dos? I simply feel as though the reserve clubs will draw bigger crowds without the silly 2 branding, and playing in front of crowds larger than what LAGII played in front of last year is ultimately better for development imo.
In MLB, the teams do not own their minor league teams, they are affiliates, and these affiliations do change from time to time. It's not the same thing as MLS clubs that own their USL counterparts. The people you are marketing to are the ones who will attend reserve games in addition to the games of the parent team (if it's instead of, you failed), especially when they play in the same stadium or really close by. A different name won't help that.