Yet Another Pro/Rel Idea.

This suggestion, or a variant of it, has come up before. The first major problem is that MLS is single-entity, so there's no way for an independent team to join the league. The NASL/USL teams that have "joined" MLS really closed down their team and the owners bought into the MLS single entity and used the same name, logs, etc, of the old, now defunct, NASL/USL team. I can't see it being worth the trouble to add and remove a team every season from the single-entity, if that's even possible.

That aside though, what happens if the top 4 MLS teams are the 4 promoted teams? You're going to relegate the 4th placed team, which may have just won MLS Cup? How does that make sense?

This is just another hare-brained scheme to force a pro/rel system onto a structure that doesn't need it.

 

The article was interesting, as was the comment about having pro/rel based on attendance, although I doubt that'd do much for improving the quality of play...

 

It sucks, just like the rest of the "great pro/rel" ideas for our domestic league.

 

What a silly idea that is... As Jasonma said, what happens if all four "un-20s". Make the playoffs and #4 wins the Cup... Or #1 wins the SS and is then bounced in the first round while the other three advance?

I've said it before and I'll say it again, the only way MLS gets pro/rel is if MLS splits into two and they promote and relegate between those two divisions only.

 

I've said the same thing before about other inane pro/rel ideas that could result in the MLS Cup winner getting the drop....another well thought out idea.

On a note of slightly less insanity than relegating the champion while letting the last place team stay up because of seniority in the league, am I alone in thinking that a 46 game regular season (with or without playoffs) might be a little too long for many casual fans?

 

I'd a say a 46-game League season is too long for all but the ultra-hardest-core fans.....with FIFA breaks, etc, would there even be an offseason?

 

No, thank god. That's an easy way to fight the sting of relegation "Sorry, Whitecaps fans, but we're going down. But make sure you show up next Sunday as your NASL Whitecaps take on FC Edmonton. Derby Day!!"

 

I was thinking the same thing--at halftime of the 2017 cup final, "In other games this week, the semifinal losers opened their 2018 seasons in style with convincing wins, while the Red Bulls win their second game in a row to take their record to 2-0-1 through four weeks of the campaign."

 

If this format was implemented, it should be revised so that pro/rel for the "un-20s" is based not simply on their position in the standings, but on reaching a certain threshold. For instance, if all four "un-20s" finish with 40 pts or more, they all stay in MLS another year, and no teams are promoted. If one of them fails to reach 40 pts, they are relegated, and one team is promoted. If two are relegated, two are promoted, and so on.

 

its really up to USSF. Not MLS. So no matter how many times you say it, it doesn't make it true.

With your scenario you sort of have pseudo-pro/rel with a franchise model system all under the same brand. You don't have organic club growth with a multi-tier league system which is one of the more exciting things about pro/rel.

first the franchise model must go, single entity must go. Then we can more towards pro/rel.

the franchise model is a disgrace and travesty. It doesn't belong anywhere near the beautiful game.

 

Yeah, because Russian and Middle Eastern oil tycoons buying their way to the top is so much more beautiful.

 

Yet, somehow ... you regurgitating the same stupid shit is supposed to make it true.

Irony much ?

It's not pro/rel. The clubs that enter MLS are separate entities from that which competed at the lower level(s). A very small handful, if any, of the players are carried over. Ditto the coach.

Yes, we do have organic club growth and a multi-tier league system. You should GOOGLE the "American Soccer Pyramid" ... it just might blow your mind.

Why ?

and Why ?

Franchise/single entity has worked wonders for this league ... the franchise model also is the model of choice for the most successful sports league in the world (the NFL) and 3 more of the top 10 (MLB/NBA/NHL). Why in the blue hell wouldn't the MLS want to be like them ? This is of course completely ignoring the fact that we have a certain way of doing things in terms of our Sporting Culture and Business here in the US.

No, it isn't. Prove otherwise.

Neither does idiotic, wreckless ownership. That though, doesn't stop 75%+ of European clubs. Running clubs into administration doesn't belong anywhere near the beautiful game ... but uhhhhhh

 

Yeah, I don't see how a business model where the teams with the most money can bludgeon their opponents into irrelevance makes the game more "beautiful." Do we really want to adopt a system that makes every team in MLS other than Seattle, RBNY and the Galaxy second-class citizens?

 

why do you think that would be the case?

Look at France. 5 different champions in 5 years. Montpellier won the league this year for the first time ever.

Look at Germany, Japan, Holland.

La Liga is not the norm.

 

Look at MLS. 3 different champions in 3 years. Salt Lake and Colorado won the league for the first time ever in that group.

 

LOL, yeah and starting 5 years ago moving backwards Lyon won 7 in a row. This year was the first in the last 14 that Lyon didn't finish in the top 3.

Since the league went to 20 clubs in the 1965-1966 season, 12 clubs have won the French Title. However, of the available 46 titles (one year Marseille was stripped and nobody was awarded the title) ... HALF are taken up by 3 teams (Nantes/ST Etienne/Marseille) and Lyons takes up another 7 and Monaco another 5. That's 35 of the 46 right there.

Germany ? Ok, 1992-1993 was the first year of the current structure/etc.
- Bayern Munich has won 9 of 20 while Dortmund has won 5. Bremen was won it 2 times. 16 of 20 by 3 clubs.
- Overall Bundesliga titles in German history (established 63-64) ? 49 titles ... 21 by Bayern Munich (and they've never gone more than 4 years without since they won their first). Dortmund and Gladbach each have 5.

Japan ? J-League established in 1992
- 19 titles .... 13 by 3 teams (Kashima with 7 , Jubilo/Yokohama with 3 each)

Eredivisie ? Introduced 1956-1957 season.
- 23 titles for Ajax, 18 for PSV, 9 for Feyenoord ..... That would be 50 of the 56 titles.

You're right, other top leagues have at least one more club in on the action.

 

This cannot be said enough. "It is 100% up to MLS; not the USSF". The USSF would never abandon their crown jewel and throw their hat in the ring with NASL instead. Never.

And we will never, ever have organic club growth like England had. Never. My mill team simply cannot play a national 5th division game against teams in Sacremento, Green Bay, Austin, Jacksonville, and Buffalo.

Just a hint: Single-entity has created the most stable start-up soccer league in the history of the world and the most successful American soccer league ever AND a new major-league sport in the US for the first time since the 50s. Arguing against single-entity is going to be a losing battle for you.

Right, the owners deciding who should and should not be elected to the League that year! Travesty! The founders of The Football League, the founding fathers of the game, would never have put up with that. Right? ....right?

 

I still don't see any advantages for pro/rel anywhere in the world. I think Americans are simply used to the idea that those who live in small cities don't necessarily get a major league team. I didn't realize Wigan was so close to the city of Manchester until reading another of these threads. But to an American that is as absurd as wanting a Wilmington, DE, or Camden, NJ, team to be in the first division instead of a Philadelphia team.

Pro/rel is the Epcot center of American soccer.

 

I actually think this is kind of sad. I cringe at the thought of having the "Irving Cowboys" as much as many of my friends here in SD hate the idea of the "Chula Vista Chargers."

Nevertheless, cities that might be able to sustain their own professional soccer team (D1, D2, or D3) don't get teams because they're either overshadowed by a neighbor (I'm thinking Ft. Worth, with no professional sports teams) or there might just not be any room for the league once its expansion has peaked. Practicality aside, pro/rel gives those smaller cities some hope that they could have a D1 team at some point...

 

Those don't go together.

Nothing is keeping cities from having any of a D1, D2, or D3 team currently. Yes, at some point MLS expansion will stop and the league will be "full" and there will hardly ever be any movement in and out. However, with our 4 other major sporting leagues we do see that it does still happen. Weak markets/failing clubs are weeded out and other markets are given a shot.

Many cities have D2, D3 etc etc etc ... the "top" tier league has absolutely nothing at all to do with that, nor dos it hamper them in any way (unless someone wants to be a moron and go off about an MLS club being in a city not allowing a D2 or D3 club to exist ... to which I'd point out NY and LA)

 

Kind of harsh on EPCOT there...

 

Over the past 8 days, I've seen teams in Lynn, Boston, and Worcester play in the lower divisions. "Being in the shadow" of the Revs doesn't hurt lower-level soccer. Unless you've been in the stands at a PDL or NPSL game recently, you're part of the problem. Don't blame MLS for your own shortcomings.

 

I think many American promotion/relegation advocates shamefacedly agree with the Jim Romes of the world: that soccer is a boring sport. And so they constantly propose schemes to "make games more meaningful" since they can't enjoy the sport for its own sake - by taking your advice, for example.