Correct. Which makes the comment that "If you're borrowing, you're liquidating said % or portion of the equity and REMOVING IT from your stake." completely incorrect. Pesky facts.
I think the NFL changed the rules so any owner can use franchise value as collateral, for example to raise funds for stadium construction. But the point is, given you can borrow against (likely vastly increased) franchise value, you can hardly claim poverty and no cash. You have a simple way of obtaining cash just like, as you say, any "independent business".
No. That is wrong. The homeowner is still the one in control, of when to sell and to whom, for instance.
So answer this question then: You have a 500k mortgage, you've got 300K equity meaning you owe 200K. You then take out a 150K home equity loan (borrow against the asset/liquidate stake you have), what is your equity after the HEL? Is your equity more, equal, or less than before the HEL?
Anyway, what y'all are talking about is EQUITY FINANCING and want to guess what that entails/means ....???
You mean the MLS where the last 7 finals have had at least one of Portland/Seattle/Toronto? Or LAG were in 4 of the 7 before that? Sure, anything can happen in a knockout tournament - form is temporary afterall - but I'm starting to get some "big 2-ish" vibes from the class is permanent side of the house...
Since 2009 a total of 13 clubs have made the MLS Cup Finals and directly played for the championship. 7 clubs have gone 2 or more times. That's a far cry from "big 2-ish"
Talent tends to rise to the top in sports as in other things so it's not surprised that even in leagues that try and produce parity you see some of the same usual names. This happens in the NFL as well where it's really hard to keep a team at the top for multiple seasons. The reverse is also true that you often see the same teams at the bottom, because they have bad leadership. So even with draft picks and salary caps they are still S***. And this is where pro/rel is good, because those clubs/teams/organizations with poor leadership can be replaced with potentially better ones.
Toronto have only made it past the first round of the playoffs 3 times in 15 seasons. They made the final all 3 times. Seattle and Portland made long-term investments in good quality DPs and they both have experienced American coaches who know how to peak at the right time. MLS is sooo predictable that last season: the lowest spending team in MLS won the Western Conference a team that hadn't finished in the top ten since 2014 set a points record a new team won MLS Cup without a recognized star player Portland will be interesting this season. They are now the lowest spending team in MLS and Valeri and Blanco are past it. However the Charas keep on giving.
Indeed. And if a "potentially better one" is not up to snuff, they themselves will be replaced. Meanwhile... Detriot Lions.
Well that sort of happens anyway, it just takes longer. Look at Chicago, perennial underperformers, they get new ownership and out of that awfully located stadium. They're still rooted to the bottom of the Eastern Conference but there's a plan in place. Houston got new investors but that hasn't worked out. Herrera is the next step to redemption. Cincinnati finished in the bottom 2 in their first 3 seasons but have started this season with a bang. They'd probably be starting in League One playing in front of couple of thousand in a pro/rel scenario. The oft derided Colorado put together a plan, brought in some quality MLS players like Trusty and Acosta (now switched with Kaye) and win the Western Conference. San Jose and Vancouver desperately need fresh blood in the boardroom and in the front office but I'm not sure pushing them off a cliff is going to help. Their fans and local media are their biggest critics. Toronto go from never making the playoffs, to reaching MLS Cup final 3 times in 6 years to wooden spoon contenders again. Now they're trying to integrate young players while betting on Bob Bradley and Isigne to lead them. The advantage of not throwing teams off a cliff for having one bad season is they get time to build. SKC are probably going to have to go through a rebuilding phase as their team and coach are getting old. MLS has two divisions of 14 teams. They are aligned regionally. Personally I'd end inter-Conference play during the regular season and have inter- Conference playoffs. Take Notts County for instance. M likes to say blame the "organization" but there's no "organization" to blame, we've just had a series of bad owners and bad managers and we are where we are based on our performances on the field. To be honest if we were anywhere but England I don't think we'd exist any more, other than as a AFC playing in a public park.
And his ridiculously high $500k salary... It's good to see players like Parks, Zelalem and Gloster back in MLS after trying their luck at a higher level.
I'm just going to leave the words of this Italian journalist here. You know, for those P/R fans who still like to claim that it makes every game/more games "meaningful". https://www.espn.com/soccer/blog-ma...er-top-leagues-follow-heres-how-it-could-work
Toronto has only made the playoffs in 5 of their 15 seasons in the league. Seeing as Valeri no longer plays for Portland....Also, Blanco isn't necessarily past it either. He's definitely slowed down due to injuries the past few seasons.
5 times in 15 seasons, twice they got knocked out in the first round, the other 3 times they made the final. Definitely not a Chelsea or Man City despite consistently being one of the big spenders. I forgot Valeri had gone. Blanco is still valuable but he's mainly being used off the bench. Portland are no Chelsea, Man City or even Spurs. In terms of spending they're currently the Norwich City of MLS.
The Detroit Lions got to an NFL Championship Game in the 1990s. There are Premiership clubs that haven't gotten to the final four in that time.
Which is the way it should be. No reason to prop up a team that in your words has had “a series of bad owners and bad managers”.
Their failure is consistently rewarded with the best draft choices. Even so they haven’t won a single playoff game since then and have only qualified as a wildcard in a league where rather more than four teams get to the playoffs.
Round 37 out of 38 and half the Premier League teams (can’t ignore Chelsea and Man Utd just because they played their 37th game earlier) still had something to play for. Sounds like a very high percentage of regular season games are meaningful.
Everton came back from 0-2 down to win 3-2 against Palace, a win that secures safety from the drop - epic scenes at Goodison, its moments like this when the true value of promotion and relegation can be seen. Now its down to Burnley or Leeds on the last day shootout.
Yes, the Detroit Lions that have made the playoffs 3 times in the last 12 season As opposed to Southampton who have "made the playoffs" twice (two Europa seasons) in that same time span. Detroit has had more winning seasons, more "playoff" appearances, and less times in the bottom quarter of their respective league than Southampton has in this same time period. Do go on about them though ...
From the article: Sure. But you don't need to use the playoffs to necessarily determine the champions, or those all-important European places. Whoever wins the league can be crowned champion and get all the accolades. Call whoever wins the post-season something else. --- So it's just an end of season league cup? Cool...