What exactly does "Second Division" mean in NA?

[alberta white]

^ now that last line, Ted, make A LOT of sense.

[stevensandor]

Ted: Yes, NFL does negotiate three national TV deals.. with REGIONAL blackout stipulations. So, local markets still influence what gets put o TV. And if the Seahawks are 0-14, their game still plays in the Seattle market rather than a battle between two top-flight teams.

And the NFL also cedes territorial rights to all of its teams... it won't plop an expansion team in Chicago, for example, without the Bears saying yeah or nay first.

Remember, because each of the North American leagues have a mix of somewhat artificial equalizers (drafts, salary caps), they tend to stick together. When MLS had its labour strife back in 2010, Don Garber and co. were hearing from all of the other leagues. They were asked not to set any strange precedents that would influence the other leagues' business models. When NHL had labour issues, all the leagues sent lawyers to the offices on the Avenue of the Americas. When the NBA had issues, the same. And the commissioners are portable. An NBA guy took over the NHL. An NFL guy moved to MLS.

MLS doesn't exist in a vacuum.

And, in the past, when I have spoken with Garber, he has said on more than one occasion that FIFA understand the "unique" makeup of MLS... and that it won't apply that 20-team standard to North America. That message has repeatedly been issued by MLS.

[ted]

Steve: I know you are new here so let me bring you up to speed. I have been arguing that pro/rel is not appropriate to the NW soccer landscape for years (A New CSL, 1999; Canada United, 2000). I have no illusions that it will happen.

I have just been arguing that it is technically possible and that there may actually be a business case to be made that a two-tier system would be beneficial to both the development of the game and the bottom line of the owners.

The chance of anyone with $$ actually bothering to really consider it? 0.001%

Not like those odds have ever shut me up before.

[-Hammer-]

I'd really like to say, it would probably make more sense for a Canadian 2nd Division, if only because you could really save on travel costs. It would also make sense to run it like the CHL, have it be three leagues (Western, Ontario, Quebec/East Coast) and then the winner and supporter's shield winner of each league advances to a six team final. Then the winner of that gets the #4 position in the Canadian Championship. You also have a perfect MLS player loaning setup, where Vancouver can draw from the Western teams, TFC can draw from the Ontario teams and Montreal can draw from the Quebec/East Coast teams.

But that requires a lot of owners, which we don't have in Canada yet. Lets see what happens with NASL for now and if it reaches the point that it's making money, we could see if we could get enough owners to make a Canadian 2nd division because right now, NASL is a short term expansion for Canadian soccer because of the USSF restriction on 75% US teams.

[Macksam]

So no, cooperative TV deals that every team gets a slice of is not only NOT impossible but is the model of perhaps the most successful TV sports deal in North America.

If it could work for any other North American league besides the NFL, MLS is it.

[Opie]

And part of the discussion of a far-future where pro-rel could happen is predicated on having at least as many NASL teams as MLS. IF we had two full-time professional leagues running successfully with 20 teams each then joining them into a two-division league (D1 & 2) would be possible and, to many people, preferable to a two-conference league (East - West).

But in any case, how about we worry about getting to the point of having 40 successful, full-time professional teams in North America first before we start fantasizing about how to merge them into one.

No need to fantasize. And there is no need to merge. The NASL will never have 20 successful full-time professional teams to merge with MLS. Because MLS is still expanding, the best markets want into the league. Garber is already looking at Miami, Minnesota, and Atlanta. Three current NASL markets. San Antonio, San Diego, North Carolina, Detroit, and Orlando are also mentioned. And then maybe Ottawa and Edmonton. MLS will have the best markets in North America in one league. So you will already have what you want.

When MLS reaches their breaking point, and there is still demand for teams, they'll establish a MLS2 where pro/rel could be possible. MLS will never pro/rel with something they don't control and own. But we are talking 20 years from now.

[alberta white]

The English football league founded in 1888 with a second formed four years later. However the four Pro divisions we see today were only ratified in 1958. Thats a sixty year gap.

what was consistent throughout that time was the FA CUP. unseeded and full of suprises, hench its importance to English football and Identity.

As many have mentioned in the thread, these things take time.

[-Hammer-]

No need to fantasize. And there is no need to merge. The NASL will never have 20 successful full-time professional teams to merge with MLS. Because MLS is still expanding, the best markets want into the league. Garber is already looking at Miami, Minnesota, and Atlanta. Three current NASL markets. San Antonio, San Diego, North Carolina, Detroit, and Orlando are also mentioned. And then maybe Ottawa and Edmonton. MLS will have the best markets in North America in one league. So you will already have what you want.

When MLS reaches their breaking point, and there is still demand for teams, they'll establish a MLS2 where pro/rel could be possible. MLS will never pro/rel with something they don't control and own. But we are talking 20 years from now.

That's just it though, MLS is already a 19 team league. Realistically, how many more teams can you sustainably add until you are at said breaking point? Sure, everyone wants a top division soccer team, but how many can you have until the season becomes ridiculous and starts to overlap too much with the other sport seasons and hurting TV revenue? You also have to keep in mind, MLS still charges very high franchise fees, and so long as there is in the owner's minds, I don't think you'll see promotion/relegation, unless you have a lot of revenue sharing to the relegated teams, who likely won't be bringing in TV revenue.

I really think that's the clincher, I don't think any MLS owner would concede their share of the TV revenue (of which I'm sure is entrenched as part of MLS's agreement with the various teams) and certainly knows they would take an attendance hit if their team got relegated. At that point, you have to ask, are the top teams in the league making enough money to make covering these losses desirable for the league as a whole, and I would say no at this time.

[alberta white]

^ One.

[Macksam]

That's just it though, MLS is already a 19 team league. Realistically, how many more teams can you sustainably add until you are at said breaking point? Sure, everyone wants a top division soccer team, but how many can you have until the season becomes ridiculous and starts to overlap too much with the other sport seasons and hurting TV revenue?

MLS has already broken so many traditional soccer rules with playoffs and an unbalanced schedule. The league will have no issue going to 28-32 teams in the future. My guess is the league will probably stick with 34 games per season going forward and just make the schedule even more unbalanced as it adds more teams in the mix.

[alberta white]

Actually, its the unbalanced schedule that really turns me off of the MLS.

Whats the point of following a team if they don't get "a fair go" at the title?

[Opie]

Actually, its the unbalanced schedule that really turns me off of the MLS.

Whats the point of following a team if they don't get "a fair go" at the title?

What does "a fair go" at the title even mean? You make the playoffs. You can win the title. Everyone has a chance. Just like the NHL, CFL, NBA, MLB, and NFL.

That's just it though, MLS is already a 19 team league. Realistically, how many more teams can you sustainably add until you are at said breaking point?

Alex Ferguson thought MLS could support 40 teams and two leagues. While Sir Alex knows almost nothing about North American soccer, even he can recognize that North America is as large as Europe. And therefore cannot be compared to just "one" European league.

I have no number in my head, but they are not stopping at 20. Or 24. Or even 28.

[-Hammer-]

Once more though, you are looking at two leagues in order to sustain a schedule that large and unless MLS is making money hand over fist, I think you will be hard pressed to convince the current owners of relegation without a large amount of revenue sharing.

[alberta white]

What does "a fair go" at the title even mean? You make the playoffs. You can win the title. Everyone has a chance. Just like the NHL, CFL, NBA, MLB, and NFL.

With 19 teams in a league each team plays all the others Home and Away.

Thats 36 games (obviously you don't play with yourself). It's fair and equitable... and obvious.

[argh1]

With 19 teams in a league each team plays all the others Home and Away.

Thats 36 games (obviously you don't play with yourself). It's fair and equitable... and obvious.

But is a balanced sked a good thing given the geography of NA.

How can you build rivalries?

If Europe was in the same state of development should Turkish teams play Swedish teams in a balanced sked?

Look at it this way.

Euro league have relegation....the same as NA leagues. Except that relegation in NA means you don't make the playoffs and lose out on $ generating games.

Outside of Russia most Euro countries are smaller geographically than most Canadian provinces. All of GB could fit into Maritime Provinces.

We think a 2 hour drive is a commute in GB that would be a days adventure.

[alberta white]

The answer to the geography question is been played out this Saturday. It’s called the European Cup.

Okay, that sounds a little condescending so I’ll try and explain what I mean.

Consider the MLS playoffs as similar to the European Champions League. (Skip the groups and think of it as straight group of 16 stage)

Currently a mediocre team in the MLS can make the playoffs by virtue of been in the weaker conference, where as a stronger side in the other conference loses out as it has stiffer competition to deal with through the main body of its season, thus it is not a true reflection of the team’s ability throughout the season. Couple to this the fact that a team pushing for a playoff place in the East may be slated to meet weaker opposition from the west in a one off game at home. The same cannot be said for another team pushing for the same spot in the west, who’s one of game, is away against the top of the other conference.

This is in some way analogous to teams from say, France and Germany Schlepping across the border to play the odd game in three against teams from each other Leagues and have those results recorded into their national completions.

Imagine the scenario where Borussia Mönchengladbach were denied entry to the UCL, because Bayer 04 Leverkusen had beat up on AJ Auxerre 6-0, whilst Munich had to play PSG to a 1-1 without the reciprocal opportunity for Borussia Mönchengladbach to do the same.

What has happened in North America is that which always happens. Money has won out over competition. The potential for a balanced equitable league has lost out to the need to put product on the TV screens.

For instance go back say thirty years, take away the money away and just go for state leagues controlled by the USSF, the smaller ones been combined into singular leagues. So that only 20 divisions existed, be they pro –am our whatever, Propose a competition that meant that the top two teams from each division, and one only from the apparently weaker ones progressed to national playoff system. Then you would have a North American version of the UCL.

Crazy notion I know but that’s exactly how the game started in Europe. Maybe, if the USSF, whilst been a national body, had set itself like UEFA then perhaps North America would have had a football association that controlled its sport; rather than a company in MLSE, which owes more to the World of Hulk Hogan than and CM Punk, rather than Ferenc Puskás the Busby babes.

You could argue that the EPL is not longer equitable due to the money involved. But remember where Man city were 10 years ago and remember It’s just as easy for the next Rich Arab to take a liking to Mr Hollows Tangerines and turn them into the Dogs Genitalia. But the point is they still have to play the same amount of games as everybody else.

It’s why last Saturday was quite as frankly, wondrously bizarre as Borussia Mönchengladbach sounds in English.

As for Rivalries. let them happen. Don't try and Push them. If that was the case FCEdmonton would not exist, as it makes no commercial sense to have a team in Alberta without a counterpoint in Cowtown. Still, it got going against the Caps. and there is plenty of 'sport' with the Dark clouds.

Perhaps because the NASL is slightly above Bush League it helps not to have the suits telling fans what to do.

Try and explain the brighton / Crystal Palace rivalyry in terms of economics? You cant. But its there never-the-less.

Also, currently back in the UK a 2 hour dive now sadly consitutes a commute. If its through central London: an Expensive 2 Hour Commute!

[-Hammer-]

Anyways, right now NASL seems to be nothing more then a brewing ground for the next possible MLS franchise (see Montreal/Vancouver). It's a place for a potential owner to "test the waters" to see if they'll have the support to make an MLS bid. Talent and performance aren't the deciding factor into getting into MLS, it's sheer fan support and having an owner willing to spend the money for a franchise fee/roster.

To you Alberta White, I would argue not only the Premier League (Which lately has been a competition between Man U. Chelsea and Arsenal with only now Man City getting into that mix) but Serie A (AC Milan, Inter Milan, Juventus), La Liga (Real Madrid, Barcelona) and Bundesliga (Bayern Munich, Borussia Dortmund). I'll say the season structure is more equitable then MLS, but the absence of a salary cap in Europe means little in the way of league parity. Pretty much, whoever has the largest fanbase to generate money or the owner with the deepest pockets and commitment is who wins. Thankfully it hasn't got quite as bad as MLB and the Yankees though.

[alberta white]

To you Alberta White, I would argue not only the Premier League (Which lately has been a competition between Man U. Chelsea and Arsenal with only now Man City getting into that mix) but Serie A (AC Milan, Inter Milan, Juventus), La Liga (Real Madrid, Barcelona) and Bundesliga (Bayern Munich, Borussia Dortmund). I'll say the season structure is more equitable then MLS, but the absence of a salary cap in Europe means little in the way of league parity. Pretty much, whoever has the largest fanbase to generate money or the owner with the deepest pockets and commitment is who wins. Thankfully it hasn't got quite as bad as MLB and the Yankees though.

Totaly agree on the salaries front, but thats pretty much been the case since Jimmy Hill and the PFA broke the Max wage structure in the early 1960's. but the bigger clubs have always payed the bigger wages. Previously thought, it was determined on how many bodies you got through the doors, and how much your Chairman / owner could "reappropriate" rather than on any vast commercial opertunities and speculation. The salary caps in the MLS however is really only making sure that the Money stays within the Enterprise rather than as some

philanthropic endeavor to take greed out of the game.

One thing I will say for City. The money may come from the Middle east but, according to the city fans on the ground, The owners are spending shed loads of cash within the city in an effort to maintain the clubs community roots. This somewhat counterpoints against the views of the Fans of (relativley) recent champions Blackburn. Who feel the Venkies are trashing the good name of their club which was revitalized by Local Hero "Uncle" Jack Walker who spent his retirment money on the club he supported as a boy.

We Leeds fans also refer to "Uncle" Ken Bates, but with far less affection.