No MLS season = No TFC in NCC???

[Moldy9]

All the talk from Toronto bias soccer reporters during the mini war between NASL and USL had people believing TFC would be crowned Canadian Champions and automatically qualify for the CCL without MTL or VAN having a league to play in. What happens if there is no MLS season? Yes TFC still belongs to a league therefore they probably could compete, but the players wouldn't play as this is a labour negotiation.

Want to hear some objective comments.

[Tuscan]

It really depends on whether the players strike or if they get locked out. In either case, if it comes time for Vs Cup games, I'd assume TFC would have to respectfully bow out of the competition. It would be a total disaster, and would offer some new fuel to the fire of the anti-soccer sports media in this country.

[Moldy9]

you know what they say any media attention whether positive or negative is good attention. Even better because it would happen to Toronto FC, who we all know gets the most media attention whether deserving or not, and the next thing you'll know is Dobson, DeVos and Reed will be blogging non stop about this. Unfortunately, our biggest sports media outlet, the almighty TSN, has been shying away from soccer and promoting more hockey and more hockey and the CFL and more hockey. I'm really starting to wonder if Hockey Canada, the Leafs and the NHL pay TSN for coverage/air time or vice versa because how come the CSA's MNT get no coverage, footage, or story whenever they play??? How can the score between the St Louis Blues and Florida Panthers be more important than this countries National team? sorry for going off topic.

[Kevin83]

Because people want to see hockey. The ratings tell the story... everyone wants to watch hockey, soccer - not so much.

[Cheeta]

It really depends on whether the players strike or if they get locked out. In either case, if it comes time for Vs Cup games, I'd assume TFC would have to respectfully bow out of the competition. It would be a total disaster, and would offer some new fuel to the fire of the anti-soccer sports media in this country.

Well Garber said they're be no labour action (lock out), but the union hasn't returned the pledge. By the end of the month one way or another things will have to be settled or at least in a more comfortable position or else the completion of the 2010 MLS season depends on the union's good will. Be very surprised to see MLS handing the players union that sort of leverage.

So if things aren't settled by the launch of the season, or looking like they could be shortly after wards, I'd expect the league to lock out the union as a sort of lesser of two evils move. And if I'm not mistaken Ontario labour law does not allow for replacement employees in the event of a union lock out. Open to correction but I also believe that's the case in New York state, Ohio, and Washington (and maybe others).

My point being that it doesn't matter how the CSA was going to handle the USL/NASL difficulties, that is a moot point. If the MLS players union is locked out TFC cannot field a team with replacement players, full stop. End of story. That option is out of the franchise's hands.

In the event of a strike I agree that for all concerned it would be better if TFC voluntarily withdrew from the competition, that is to say if the league was operating during a strike with replacement players. The optics would be very poor to say the least.

LOL. I almost hope it comes down to a strike and the league goes with replacement players. A) How crap would that league be? And I'd be curious to see who from amongst the fans & players (including NASL) would cross the picket line, be it real or symbolic.

[TheKottonmouthed1555362307]

Well Garber said they're be no labour action (lock out), but the union hasn't returned the pledge. By the end of the month one way or another things will have to be settled or at least in a more comfortable position or else the completion of the 2010 MLS season depends on the union's good will. Be very surprised to see MLS handing the players union that sort of leverage.

So if things aren't settled by the launch of the season, or looking like they could be shortly after wards, I'd expect the league to lock out the union as a sort of lesser of two evils move. And if I'm not mistaken Ontario labour law does not allow for replacement employees in the event of a union lock out. Open to correction but I also believe that's the case in New York state, Ohio, and Washington (and maybe others).

My point being that it doesn't matter how the CSA was going to handle the USL/NASL difficulties, that is a moot point. If the MLS players union is locked out TFC cannot field a team with replacement players, full stop. End of story. That option is out of the franchise's hands.

In the event of a strike I agree that for all concerned it would be better if TFC voluntarily withdrew from the competition, that is to say if the league was operating during a strike with replacement players. The optics would be very poor to say the least.

LOL. I almost hope it comes down to a strike and the league goes with replacement players. A) How crap would that league be? And I'd be curious to see who from amongst the fans & players (including NASL) would cross the picket line, be it real or symbolic.

I think you would see a good handful of player cross that line if they have to. Most of them will have no real future outside of the MLS in pro soccer. A lot of these players can't afford to lose a year of their career. I really think the MLS has the strength as their just isn't enough big name players in the league to cause a stir by not playing. Not enough players who cannot survive without playing a full year. The 2 players who clearly could will probably just extend their loans in the case of a strike/lock out, Beckham and Donovan won't be affected by this I don't think if they can extend their loans.

So really how many players in the league can really take the chance and sit out a year? From my understanding the players can't go play elsewhere if they are locked out or strike.

[Free kick]

Why does it always have to come down suspicions of regional rivalry and partisanship. Most discussions are just that, discussion. The insiuation in the first post ( in this thread) is that any discussion related to USL/NASL and the V-cup was tainted by partisanship. But it wasn't! it was a legitamate concern. If Montreal and Vancouver are not in a sanctioned league, then its fair to ask what happens to the V-cup. Similarly, if the MLS players are still on strike or lockout when the season starts, then it will be e legitamate concern. Nobody wants to see the V-cup not contested. Fortunately the issue with USL and NASL was resolved, hopefully this will be resolved as well.

Personally, I always try to give objective opinions and I think that most people do so as well. But as I read between the lines of your post, I get a sense of hand wringing over the fact the V-cup is in jeopardy because of TFC/MLS and not because the USL/NASL dispute. "Phew its all MLS's fault, thank god for that eh!?"

[Admin]

Because people want to see hockey. The ratings tell the story... everyone wants to watch hockey, soccer - not so much.

But that is a catch 22.

Promote and ye shall receive.

[loyola]

Why does it always have to come down suspicions of regional rivalry and partisanship. Most discussions are just that, discussion. The insiuation in your post is that any discussion related to USL/NASL and the V-cup was tainted by partisanship. But it wasn't! it was a legitamate concern. If Montreal and Vancouver are not in a sanctioned league, then its fair to ask what happens to the V-cup. Similarly, if the MLS players are still on strike or lockout when the season starts, then it will be e legitamate concern. Nobody wants to see the V-cup not contested. Fortunately the issue with USL and NASL was resolved, hopefully this will be resolved as well.

Personally, I always try to give objective opinions and I think that most people do so as well.

Exactly, this was legitimate concerns, just like the TFC V's Cup presence is a legitimate discussion and the hypothetical question about Vancouver being allowed to field their MLS players if they get to the Concacf CL 1/4 finals in 2011.

If MLS and the players union don't get things worked out by the start of the V Cup, I don't expct TFC will be part of it.

[Mr.Impact]

There won't be a strike! This is North American Soccer we're talking about.

What bargaining power do the players have?

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

.....or turning it around a bit a prolonged strike is an unlikely enough scenario that this topic isn't something people should be worrying about too much at this point. I don't think there is any way the Players Union could make a strike last given the major financial problems that would soon be faced by the recent NCAA graduates making 50k or less and the large portion of foreign players who have no long term stake in the league and are just looking to cash in as much as possible in the short term. Odds on it's all about taking things to the brink to extract the maximum number of concessions at this point.

[tmcmurph]

There won't be a strike! This is North American Soccer we're talking about.

What bargaining power do the players have?

New stadiums in NY and soon Philly. New team entering a league with lots of promo and season ticket sales marketting (oh never mind we have strike, be sure to come back once it's over!), several teams (TFC, Sounders) with 20-30k fans each week. A lot of the players are not giving up much in salary because they are low paid to begin with. The stars can (and some already are) capable of landing Euro jobs, others can go back to their native countries in central/south america, others could play NASL/USL.

They may not have a great position but it's now or wait another 5 years without freedom to move once released by a team.

[Mr.Impact]

New stadiums in NY and soon Philly. New team entering a league with lots of promo and season ticket sales marketting (oh never mind we have strike, be sure to come back once it's over!), several teams (TFC, Sounders) with 20-30k fans each week. A lot of the players are not giving up much in salary because they are low paid to begin with. The stars can (and some already are) capable of landing Euro jobs, others can go back to their native countries in central/south america, others could play NASL/USL.

They may not have a great position but it's now or wait another 5 years without freedom to move once released by a team.

Not to mention that 8/11 starters on every team are replaceable.

[tmcmurph]

Not to mention that 8/11 starters on every team are replaceable.

Touche

But on the other hand what have those 8 out of 11 got to lose? Minimum wage?

That does bring up an interesting point. If the deal can't be reached do the owners bring in scabs? Play the season with "replacement" players until a deal is done? Yuck, shudder, flinch!