TFCRegina Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 http://www.tsn.ca/soccer/story/?id=296379 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucklefan Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 "CKAC is reporting that the Impact have one of two options, either attempting to create a rival circuit with other rogue league owners or potentially wait and join MLS Division II which is being discussed as potentially launching next year." This sounds good to me, if MLS2 comes true next year, this would be the better choice for Montreal IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ag futbol Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 This can only be good for the league. It leaves option for something like Spain where you can have the big club in top flight and the jr clubs playing in the lower levels of the system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the biologist Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 There's no plan at all for an MLS 2 division for as soon as next season an MLS spokesman told CKAC today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vancouversoccerman Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 There's two similar threads in the USL section as well...maybe combine them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vancouversoccerman Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 This is going to get real interesting, real fast. I understand a lot of the reasons behind the dispute, but I'm still wondering what the end game is here. The teams that are leaving have the richest owners in the league. USL1's future is pretty bleak without them, as they'll be left with only a few stable franchises, and maybe a few Cleveland-Style USL2 bump-ups. It might turn out to look a bit like the APSL of old (El Paso, Mlwaukee, Richmond & Hampton Roads, anyone?). A new league would depend a lot on who's waiting in the wings to join after Vancouver & Montreal leave. It would make sense for Vancouver to have some sort of feeder team, if MLS loosens up the rules a bit. I think the prospect of a MLS2 could more appealing to the current MLS owners if other investors are footing the bill. They'd get the best of both worlds: Player development on someone else's dime, and new cities being groomed & developed for future MLS expansion (Don't hold your breath for promotion/relegation...do you really think anyone's going to get to join the club now without paying the $35 million?). In fact, they could even make it a requirement that any new city that courts MLS would have to prove their viability in MLS2 first. An MLS2 could theoretically be as large as they want to make it (think PDL-size!). Either way, next season should be fine, loss of Portland aside. We know the existing teams should be able to hold onto & attract decent players (USSF sanctioning assumed). Besides us diehards, the casual fan really only recognizes our guys and the Whitecap's name. I suspect it's very much the same elsewhere in the league. I don't think this was a high stakes game of chicken gone wrong. Although we just found out about the TOA in the last month, they've been organized for almost a year now. Whatever they're doing, I think they have a plan. I think their owners are also smart enough to know not to drop an ultimatum if you're not ready to get your bluff called. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFCRegina Posted October 28, 2009 Author Share Posted October 28, 2009 Actually you could have promotion/relegation within a system like MLS. MLS is sort of the planned economy of sports leagues...to the point where it's extremely restrictive. Because of the huge revenue sharing agreements, you could easily have a 2nd division and have pro/rel. All you need is a pro/rel fee agreement. If you're relegated, you receive a one time pay off or a payoff over time or a payoff for your continued existence within the structure to compensate for being relegated. This is easily feasible... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ag futbol Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 I think the bottom line about promotion and relegation is: when you see teams in Europe starting to talk about making their own leagues and effectively eliminate it, how likely do you think MLS is to establish it here? MLS as a league is going to organize itself in a way that maximizes money. That’s done by having the biggest teams in the first division, in the spotlight, no matter what. It isn’t happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ed Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 TFCRegina, please read this: For the 1000th time, North America's sporting model is the FRANCHISE. You do not spend millions on a FRANCHISE that might end up in the 2nd/3rd/whatever division. Promotion / relegation are for yer furriners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpg75 Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 No kiddin', i wish people would give it a rest, promotion/relegation is not happening in MLS as long as franchise fees are being paid to join the league. The only acceptable rebate for being relegated is getting 100% of your franchise fee back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
masster Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 quote:Originally posted by jpg75 No kiddin', i wish people would give it a rest, promotion/relegation is not happening in MLS as long as franchise fees are being paid to join the league. The only acceptable rebate for being relegated is getting 100% of your franchise fee back. TFCRegina made some great points. I don't know why you guys get so upset whenever somebody brings up promotion/relegation. We know it will never happen, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't happen. Because MLS chooses not to, doesn't mean that we can't critisize them if we so choose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmcmurph Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 quote:Originally posted by jpg75 No kiddin', i wish people would give it a rest, promotion/relegation is not happening in MLS as long as franchise fees are being paid to join the league. The only acceptable rebate for being relegated is getting 100% of your franchise fee back. Agreed it most likely (think astronomy type numbers) won't happen. But what is to stop a winner of MLS2 being given the option of paying 40 million to the team they bump down? Very few if any would bother and if a MLS2 team did state that they had the money and wanted to go into MLS it would make for a very interesting season as all the bottom teams would be fighting tooth and nail to avoid it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFCRegina Posted October 29, 2009 Author Share Posted October 29, 2009 quote:Originally posted by Ed TFCRegina, please read this: For the 1000th time, North America's sporting model is the FRANCHISE. You do not spend millions on a FRANCHISE that might end up in the 2nd/3rd/whatever division. Promotion / relegation are for yer furriners. Ed, please bother to read what I have wrote: I said it could be done. Nowhere did I say it would happen, nowhere did I say it was recommendable. I just said it was possible and MLS could probably do a better job of any league in the world of minimizing losses to franchises (if you're capable of making that inference). As someone who specializes in sports economics, I know a few things. 1. It's best for all fans if there is promotion/relegation because it leads to competition to survive. 2. It will never happen because teams don't want risk because it devalues teams. Does not mean that it is not technically feasible. The roadblocks are with the ownership and leagues, which have the Congress and Parliament in their pocket. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 There are lots of things that are technically feasible but are so unlikely for a whole host of practical reasons they might as well not be feasible. Methinks you are playing a game of semantics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFCRegina Posted October 29, 2009 Author Share Posted October 29, 2009 Methinks people get upset over stupid things and then try to backpedal their way out by arguing that people are arguing semantics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpg75 Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 MLS is like the CSA, power is not centralized and the inmates run the asylum. If the existing MLS owners don't want it (and why would they!?), it ain't happening. Nothing to do with politics and parliament and everything to do with $$$ and power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jeffery S. Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 Just to comment that in fact in some sports the North Americans do respect pro-releg. Like in Davis Cup divisions, you can fall out of the top tier, and have to play to get back in. Technically both the US and Canada are in the top flight of the IIHF and could be relegated with continual bad results, which is not likely. There are a few other international sports that are tiered like that. NCAA divisions are not pro-releg of course, but implicitly suggest tiering, and a team consistently doing well at Div 2 or 3 could consider a step up and apply for it. But it is international play, or university play, and not club play. So its different, I know. Though the point is that it is incorrect to assume that in no case such a system would not be accepted in North America. We have to understand not making the playoffs the equivalent of being relegated, and making them the equivalent of being promoted (or making a UEFA spot) in pro North American sport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ag futbol Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 quote:Originally posted by TFCRegina Ed, please bother to read what I have wrote: I said it could be done. Nowhere did I say it would happen, nowhere did I say it was recommendable. I just said it was possible and MLS could probably do a better job of any league in the world of minimizing losses to franchises (if you're capable of making that inference). As someone who specializes in sports economics, I know a few things. 1. It's best for all fans if there is promotion/relegation because it leads to competition to survive. 2. It will never happen because teams don't want risk because it devalues teams. Does not mean that it is not technically feasible. The roadblocks are with the ownership and leagues, which have the Congress and Parliament in their pocket. It's much more difficult than you are making it out to be. These franchises aren't symetical. The loss/gain between promoted and relegated clubs would be dis-similar. But the most important road block here is with regards to TV revenue and other such agreements. Anyway you cut it, a "2nd best" league is a de-valued property compared to a highest one. Sure, let's not kid ourselves, even within all the major leagues there are teams who are so bad they might as well be in the second tier. But the point is those teams have this illusion of competing every year and that strikes a tone with the consumer. The north american fan is simply not conditioned to accept promotion or relegation. Heck, no fan is. Even in europe you see the impact of being relegated. The subsidy is not a terrible idea, but ultimately it's taking a slice out of a smaller pie. And while promotion / relegation might lead to competition to survive, let's keep in mind MLS competes not only with itself, but globally for talent. Are MLS fans going to be better off with promotion/relegation if overall you're decreasing the stability of franchises due to smaller revenue bases? Not having such a system in place could potentially be an advantage to the league (and it's fans) as it's clubs are afforded more stability and they can structure themselves in a way that makes the most business sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmcmurph Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 quote:Originally posted by Jeffrey S. We have to understand not making the playoffs the equivalent of being relegated, and making them the equivalent of being promoted (or making a UEFA spot) in pro North American sport. That is probably the best description I've heard. You get to play in the Super Tournament at the end of the year if you are good enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyrus Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 quote:Originally posted by tmcmurph Agreed it most likely (think astronomy type numbers) won't happen. But what is to stop a winner of MLS2 being given the option of paying 40 million to the team they bump down? Very few if any would bother and if a MLS2 team did state that they had the money and wanted to go into MLS it would make for a very interesting season as all the bottom teams would be fighting tooth and nail to avoid it. Didn't the Scottish first division do something like this for years? Promotion in name only, based on incredibly strict stadium requirements, which no team in the second division could meet, which ensured that no one could be promoted unless they built a massive stadium, which would be stupid to build while you were still in the second division. Which ensured no demotions. Or maybe I just dreamed that once while I was drunk. My memories of conversations in Scotland are occasionally incomplete. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nazzer Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 Can someone please direct me to a quote from Mr Garber saying there will be some new MLS2 league? I'm having trouble finding the only relevant fact while trying to sift through the conjecture in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFCRegina Posted October 30, 2009 Author Share Posted October 30, 2009 It was a rumour at the time of post. Quashed since. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheeta Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 ^^^ It wasn't so much that increased min. stadium requirements were imposed it was how they were imposed. After the fact, as it were. It looks bad when one club is saved from relegation at the expense of a just promoted club only because the SPL board chose to change the stadium requirements in the off-season. That was years ago already and I don't think the stadium requirements are outlandish, even for the small Scottish clubs. Just an example of the infastructure deficiencies which were rampant in Brittan at the time. Couple of seasons ago Inverness had to play their home fixtures in Aberdeen for a season while their park was brought up to snuff. If Inverness can afford it, I'd think most clubs could. (Although Livingston went near bankrupt improving their grounds a few years ago). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamboAl Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 The criteria for Inverness CT at the time was a 6,000 seater stadium, and I think still is. Barely half the current clubs in the First Division would meet that criteria today; and those who can't (e.g. Ayr United, Ross County) probably couldn't afford to do it without probably bankrupting their clubs. Call me old school, but that's unfortunate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoyleG Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 quote:Originally posted by JamboAl The criteria for Inverness CT at the time was a 6,000 seater stadium, and I think still is. Barely half the current clubs in the First Division would meet that criteria today; and those who can't (e.g. Ayr United, Ross County) probably couldn't afford to do it without probably bankrupting their clubs. Call me old school, but that's unfortunate. Inverness got in to the SPL because they got an acceptable stadium sharing agreement (Aberdeen). At the time, the standard was set at around 10,000 seats. Falkirk is more of an example as they had won the 1st division title but were denied promotion on stadium issues. It was that case that led to the changes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.