With MLS apparently headed to expanding to 30 clubs. What do you think the league should do when it comes re-alignment?
I prefer 4 conferences once the league gets to 28 teams. Play conference opponents twice and then most other conference teams once. You would have to play one of non-conference team twice to get to 34 games. That means teams within a conference would be playing almost all the same opponents. And playing the entire league. Playoffs within the conference to get to a final four. The final four would be seeded by record which increases the chances of the two best teams making the final rather than East v. West. Expansion would add one team per conference to get up to 32. At that point teams would be playing 14 conference games and could still play 20 of the other 24 teams. Rotate those opponents and teams would play every team in the league at least every two years. I like that better than divisions within two conferences.
I'm sure if they expand to St. Louis, Phoenix and Sacramento that would easily put Minnesota in the East or Central with Chicago. But the best bet would be three conferences with ten clubs in each conference.
2 Conferences, 15 teams each. Regular Season: Conference VS Conference, home and away games. 30 games. Playoffs: 16 teams. Conference Playoffs (R1-R2-R3), National Playoff (R4, 2 legged) and MLS Cup (R5). Total: 36 games.
They won't re-align for 30 because they will be at 32 a year or two later. Now, if they get to a point where they really are going to stop (likely 32 or 36) then they may switch to a 2 Conference (16 or 18) with 4 divisions setup (8 or 9 teams).
This type of realignment could actually settle the seemingly endless debate about Pro/Rel. Look at these conferences the way college football sets itself up. There are 5 conferences (at least 5 main "power" conferences) covering specific parts of the country. There's no reason to believe that if MLS keeps expanding that once day 4 or 5 conferences of 10 teams could be a reality. A conference for the Northeast, Southwest, Midwest, Great Plains, and West Coast could exist all under one MLS roof. Hell, our one country is just as big as Europe. We might as well have a league with enough teams for every major city that wants one! Thoughts?
Although it's not official, I think we can all pretty much accept that the league will hit 32 to be in line with the NFL and NHL (now that Seattle is official). Under this scenario, the NHL's model makes the most sense. the league can establish East with two divisions and West with two divisions at 28. Balancing the announcements/start dates of the next four will allow them to maintain balance within the conferences throughout. Add two per year or even straggle them like the NHL has done since its last realignments following Atlanta's relocation to Winnipeg. What will be interesting is what MLB and the NBA do with expansion when MLS passes them in number of teams - especially since MLS is having better success at building stadiums than either of those two leagues.
I see you say that that it is not yours but why does the Shield winner likely play a tougher opponent (#6) right off the bat than the two and three seeds? I still don't like three conferences. 33 teams (an odd number) is a deal-killer for me right off the bat.
If they were stopping at 30 clubs, then the two Conference, three Divisions each would work best to keep the number of games per season to 34. If the plan is 32 teams max, then just split each Conference into four Divisions and fill the spots as they join.
Well, I clearly see 2 possible endgames, both with 36-40 teams. If one goes beyond 32 teams (38 game schedule), the idea of playing Div/Conf foes twice & everyone else once fails. Either do not play some teams at all, or pair down the number of teams played twice. 1) Baseball Model 2 Conferences of 18-20. 2 Scheduling options. A) Play H&A in conference (34-38 games) and not at all outside. Save that for POs & USOC. If they go to 38 games, there could be limited non-conference scheduling if total # teams are under 40. Either rotating or with fixed non-conf rivals or a combo. B) Play everyone once, with a certain # of 'rivalry' games per team making up the balance. Works until you get past 38 teams. 2) NFL Model. 2 Conferences with at least 2 divisions in each. Possibly 3 or 4. More variance here depending on # of teams per division. Play division foes twice. Still cannot play everyone once beyond 32 teams (everyone once & div twice = 38 games). Everything from now until the endgame (say, 2030 or a bit later, 2026 if they stop at 32, which they won't) is re-arranging things to make it work best with the # of teams for that year & the geographic distribution.
Next year should be interesting, as 2/1 model no longer works for a 34 game schedule. And divisions would be unbalanced. Options: 1) Keep the 2 Conf setup, keep 2/1, bump to 38 games. Play 1 non-conf twice. Chicago in West. 2) Keep 2 Conf, play conf twice, do not play some teams in other conference. Stay at 34 games. Could go 14/12 for a year. Or flip the Fire. 3) Keep 2 Conf, play everyone once + certain teams twice (fixed rivals and/or rotation). This would hint at divisions in the future. Stay at 34 games. 4) Go to unbalanced Divisions of 9/9/8. Play Div foes twice (16 or 14). Play everyone else once. An additional non-division team or two twice. Stay at 34 games. I like playing everyone at least once, so #2 is the only one that really bugs me. So MLS will go with #2. Again, it seems to me at least one of the five following has to go next year: 1) 34 game schedule 2) 2 Conferences with no divisions. 3) Playing every team at least once a year. 4) Playing conf (div?) foes twice yearly. 5) Schedule dynamics being the same for each team.
I think MLS would like to stay at 34 games for a bit, especially with the international schedule in flux (Nations League, new CONCACAF format, etc). So #1 is likely out. But the CBA is up this year, and by 2022 we are going to have more than 28 teams. So maybe we broach discussion of more games (up to 38), but the players will want something in return. And they did just lop off some PO games, so maybe they will choose option #1. My feeling is MLS will just stop guaranteeing every team plays each other once (#2 from above). Stay at 34.
Do 6 divisions for 2020, and space out the vacancies so that no one has to change divisions at all until the league goes beyond 30: Pacific - VAN, SEA, POR, SJ, (SAC) Southwest - LAG, LAFC, DAL, HOU, (AUS) Northwest - RSL, COL, SKC, MNU, (STL) Southeast - ATL, DCU, ORL, MIA, (CLT) Atlantic - MTL, NE, NYRB, NYC, PHI Central - NSH, TOR, CHI, CIN, CLB This would be 14/12 in 2020, 14/13 in 2021, 14/15 in 2022, and then 15/15 when Charlotte is added.
North: 1. DC United 2. Philadelphia Union 3. New York City FC 4. New York Red Bulls 5. New England Revolution 6. Toronto FC 7. Montreal Impact 8. Detroit* South: 1. Atlanta United 2. Nashville SC 3. Inter Miami CF 4. Orlando City SC 5. FC Dallas 6. Houston Dynamo 7. Austin FC 8. Charlotte* East: 1. FC Cincinnati 2. Columbus Crew 3. Chicago Fire 4. Minnesota United 5. Sporting Kansas City 6. Saint Louis* 7. Phoenix* 8. Milwaukee* West: 1. LA Galaxy 2. Los Angeles FC 3. Seattle Sounders 4. Portland Timbers 5. Vancouver Whitecaps 6. San Jose Earthquakes 7. Sacramento Republic 8. Las Vegas* 14 conference games + 24 alternating home/away yearly games outside conference = 38 games total.
You removed two current, long-time MLS clubs and replaced one with Milwaukee... As great as Milwaukee would be for a derby with the Fire and an even closer rival for Minnesota, I don't think they are really on the radar. Sac & StL look to be all but in, based on earlier reports of exclusive negotiations for 28 & 29. Charlotte seems to be heading that way for #30. With the steam Vegas has across most leagues, the long-term interest by MLS, and the success of the Lights, Vegas might be able to steal a potential 31st slot, should Charlotte take 30. As far as a 32nd team, Phoenix has virtually no traction and Detroit has been dead. Indy is somewhere in there as well. Indy seems more likely than Detroit and still offers a close rival to Chicago. But I agree that the typical American structure of two large divisions split into a total of four smaller divisions will be the model.
My bad, I forgot about rapids and RSL.... updated: North: 1. DC United 2. Philadelphia Union 3. New York City FC 4. New York Red Bulls 5. New England Revolution 6. Toronto FC 7. Montreal Impact 8. Detroit* Contenders: Pittsburgh, Baltimore, Rochester South: 1. Atlanta United 2. Nashville SC 3. Inter Miami CF 4. Orlando City SC 5. FC Dallas 6. Houston Dynamo 7. Austin FC 8. Charlotte* Contenders: Raleigh, Birmingham, Tampa Bay, Jacksonville, San Antonio, New Orleans East: 1. FC Cincinnati 2. Columbus Crew 3. Chicago Fire 4. Minnesota United 5. Sporting Kansas City 6. Real Salt Lake 7. Colorado Rapids 8. Saint Louis* Contenders: Omaha, Milwaukee, Indianapolis, Cleveland, Louisville, Tulsa, Oklahoma City West: 1. LA Galaxy 2. Los Angeles FC 3. Seattle Sounders 4. Portland Timbers 5. Vancouver Whitecaps 6. San Jose Earthquakes 7. Sacramento Republic* 8. Las Vegas* Contenders: Albuquerque, Phoenix, San Diego, Riverside, San Francisco
I would love to hear the reasoning behind some of these. Rochester, for example, has been out of contention for over a decade. They don't even have a USL club any more! Omaha is too small; they may have had a shot a few years ago, but that ship has sailed. Several of your contenders are too close to existing markets (very doubtful on 3 LA or Ohio teams). If you are going off of media market size alone, you're missing a lot of how this league and the Big Four determine franchise locations.
Don’t think too much about it. I’m just trying to make the largest markets in the area without a team.
If MLS goes to 30 with all teams being active within 3 years, I think the 4 divisions with 8 teams in 2 of them and 7 in the other 2 would be the most desirable. East---Montreal, New England, NYCFC, Red Bulls, Toronto, Philadelphia, DC United. South---Charlotte, Atlanta, Miami, Orlando, Nashville, Austin, Dallas, Houston North---Columbus, Cincinnati, Chicago, Minnesota, St. Louis, Kansas City, Colorado. West---RSL, LAFC, LA Galaxy, San Jose, Sacramento, Portland, Seattle, Vancouver. You could put RSL in the North to keep its Rocky Mountain Cup rivalry going with the Rapids. Although this assumes the league is still married to the idea of playing all of your division rivals twice each year. If MLS insists on keeping a 34 game regular season, playing all divisional opponents twice will be sacrificed, no matter how many divisions or teams in each division there actually are. The one thing I don't really like about the model I've presented is the fact that the North division spans 3 time zones. Optimally, being spread out over 2 zones would certainly be preferable.
If we do sit on 30 teams for a while, (e.g. three or more years,) then six divisions of five teams each sounds pretty preferable to me. However, if 30 is a relatively passing phase en route to 32, I would like to see something fairly flexible made... IMO, if 32 is going to be the stable number for a while, I would like to forgo conferences altogether and just have pods, where you play everyone in the league once and three teams in your pod a second time, and there's your 34 games. Something like... LAG/LAFC/SJE/SAC RSL/COL/PHX/LVG SEA/POR/VAN/NER* CHI/SKC/MIN/STL ATL/ORL/MIA/CLT FCD/HOU/AUT/NSH CLB/TOR/FCC/MTL NYRB/DC/PHL/NYC *Yeah, this suggestion kinda screws over NER, but aside from the fact that there are 3 northwest teams and 5 northeast teams, everyone else slots together fairly nicely, both geographically and with current or expected rivalries, so I figured one misplaced northeast team was better than having a cascade of not-quite-right fits. This alignment is kinda dependent on all three of SAC/PHX/LVG getting in, though, and no Detroit, so things could certainly get messier...