Garber hints at change to 'Canadians as internationals' rule.

[jpg75]

Mexico and Colombia implemented playing time quotas for their domestic players, it seems to be paying off.

[Macksam]

4 hours ago, TRM said:

Our best bet is to agitate and harass MLS into treating our players fairly. 

This is what we should be devoting our resources towards? Forget setting up a national league or improving our regional D3 leagues but this? 

[Macksam]

4 hours ago, TRM said:

Also they have to have been in the clubs system for at least 2 years. I'm okay with all that but the point is that they have ZERO minutes guaranteed just because they are German. Those they have to take. 

They also have way fewer pro sports for their kids to aspire to. No NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL. The vast majority of their talented athletes choose soccer. Never going to be that way here. 

Saying never isn't a good thing. The NHL and NBA are the only two leagues that are taking talented athletes on a consistent basis. When the CPL stabilizes, kids who who can't afford hockey and don't have the physique for basketball will choose soccer.

[Unnamed Trialist]

10 hours ago, Michael Crampton said:

We don't need a league to fulfill either of those objectives. We need clubs. Let's start creating some.

Clubs without competition totally misses the point. Clubs mean nothing. Competition does. From early on too. 

In fact, if that is what you are suggesting, I'd agree. We need clubs competiting in leagues, from age 8 up to 19 then, if it were possible, in the same city or region, a pro club in a league. Or semi-pro. 

Nobody has ever developed as a player without being tried against someone doing things better and challenging "development". A club with no competition is essentially conning its players since it is not putting them to the test, perhaps for fear of being exposed as not doing its job right.

[Michael Crampton]

6 hours ago, -Hammer- said:

However, lets also look at your picks, Osorio, Hamilton, Babouli, Teibert, Bekker, Aird and Chapman all play on teams which have a 3 player Canadian game day roster requirement, and are typically in those slots.

That is simply incorrect. MLS has no game day roster rule in relation to any type of domestic, Canadian or otherwise. Those players make the game day rosters because they're good enough.

[Unnamed Trialist]

6 hours ago, Macksam said:

Besides selling talent to bigger leagues, we can do a lot better than the Irish league. The Irish league is good for Ireland's small country, not ours. The investors involved with the CPL have ambitions to be a much bigger league than something that draws 2000 people on average.

I too believe we could be better than Ireland, but not much, at least not at first. I mean, I know Irish clubs are weak, oddly in fact, probably the weakest league in relation to quality of player pool there is, for reasons we can figure out. 

But not a lot better, and what does it matter? You have to start somewhere. It is proven you do not have to be objectively that good to get fans out, just look at USL Cincinnati, they go because they want to, and it's third tier. They also know that, but go anyways.

It matters simply to have teams with players who are pro, who can be 100% dedicated to football, and then competing. The more the merrier. It is not automatically a way of ensuring national team success (England has probably the widest base of players making a living playing the game, more than in any other country, but that does not really help at the top), but it is a general principal. The clubs who do well will have the joy of victory, their players will be scouted more, they may make transfers to help the coffers. They'll develop local talent over time, most anyways.

[TRM]

3 hours ago, Macksam said:

This is what we should be devoting our resources towards? Forget setting up a national league or improving our regional D3 leagues but this? 

I'm all in favour of a some regional D3 leagues. That was the report that made sense. So where is it? Nowhere. And nothing is being done on it as energies are expended on the pipe dream of a national "D1a" which in reality will be no better than a D3 or D2 at best league.

Don't misunderstand me. If some group wants to drop 6-8 pro teams at any level into the Canadian mix I'm all in favour of it but (huge but) if the idea is to go head to head with MLS or ignore our 3 largest markets I see no future for it.

[-Hammer-]

2 hours ago, Michael Crampton said:

That is simply incorrect. MLS has no game day roster rule in relation to any type of domestic, Canadian or otherwise. Those players make the game day rosters because they're good enough.

Ahem

http://pressbox.mlssoccer.com/content/roster-rules-and-regulations

DOMESTIC/INTERNATIONAL

In 2016, a total of 160 international roster spots are divided among the 20 clubs. In 2008, each MLS Club was given the right to have eight international players on their roster and expansion Clubs were given the right to have eight international spots for their inaugural season.  These spots are tradable, in full season increments, such that some clubs may have more than eight and some clubs may have fewer than eight. There is no limit on the number of international roster spots on each club’s roster.

 

Domestic Players

• U.S.-based Clubs: For U.S. Clubs, a domestic player is either a U.S. Citizen, a permanent resident (Green Card holder) or the holder of certain other special status (e.g., has been granted refugee or asylum status).  There is no limit as to the number of U.S. Domestic Players on a U.S. Club’s Roster.

 

• Canada-based Clubs: For Canadian Clubs, a domestic player is either a Canadian Citizen or the holder of certain other special status (e.g., has been granted refugee or asylum status) (“Canadian Domestic Player”) or a U.S. Domestic Player.  There is no limit as to the number of Canadian Domestic Players on a Canadian club’s roster.
  • There is no limit as to the number of U.S. Domestic Players or Canadian Domestic Players on a Canadian club’s roster; provided, however, that a Canadian Club is required to have a minimum of three (3) Canadian Domestic Players on its roster at all times

 

However most end up on the bench so it doesn't really matter regardless, because you are correct there is NO gauruntee on minutes and that is a problem. I'm not going to say those 7 guys are without merit because they have talent, but most wouldn't have got half the development attention they have if they didn't have to be there to fill those 3 spots. They, and many more players who are rotting in the USL or playing pub league right now would be benefiting from more clubs playing at a higher level, developing them and getting them meaningful minutes.

[TRM]

Hammer I think you misunderstood the "no game day roster rule" part. I took it as you can start all 8 internationals plus 3 domestics if you want or you can start all 11 domestics or if you've traded for more international spots start 11 internationals.

In that respect BHTC Mike is correct.

Those players make the game day 18 and starting 11 on their own merits. As it should be for the top level of the pyramid.

[JDub]

3 hours ago, Macksam said:

When the CPL stabilizes, kids who who can't afford hockey and don't have the physique for basketball will choose soccer.

I will slightly disagree with this.  My 7 yr old son plays soccer and to get him in an academy where he receives coaching that isn't volunteer parents is almost as much if not the same as playing rep hockey.  So the kids that can't afford hockey most likely can't afford soccer other than your local clubs house league which puts them back to volunteer parents coaching and no development.

[TRM]

5 hours ago, jpg75 said:

Mexico and Colombia implemented playing time quotas for their domestic players, it seems to be paying off.

http://www.starsandstripesfc.com/2016/7/15/12196292/liga-mx-mexico-10-8-rule-foreign-players-limit

"Known as the 8/10 rule, the rule requires each team to name at least 8 players born in Mexico to the starting XI and bench for every game and correspondingly limits 10 foreign born players to each match"

"Now, technically the Liga MX rule will require at least 1 Mexican born player to start (with 7 on the bench). But beyond that one starting player and the subs, it doesn't have to play them."

So no different from what I'm suggesting. Playing time at the top of the pyramid is never guaranteed or given. It is taken.

[-Hammer-]

27 minutes ago, TRM said:

I'm all in favour of a some regional D3 leagues. That was the report that made sense. So where is it? Nowhere. And nothing is being done on it as energies are expended on the pipe dream of a national "D1a" which in reality will be no better than a D3 or D2 at best league.

Don't misunderstand me. If some group wants to drop 6-8 pro teams at any level into the Canadian mix I'm all in favour of it but (huge but) if the idea is to go head to head with MLS or ignore our 3 largest markets I see no future for it.

First off, technically Leauge 1 Ontario and the PLSQ cover this niche, even despite being predominatly youth development clubs. Second, sadly division 3 leagues are predominatly handled by the local provincial associations at this time, so the CSA can't drop D3 leagues and clearly doesn't want potential Canadian soccer investors investing in the USL where they have very limited control and sway over development, policies and most importantly how much the salary floor is because the USL's floor doesn't make ends meet. Third, even if it's a D2 league, that's far better then investing in the USL where the CSA has limited control over development and MLS teams and where player pay isn't likely to improve any time soon.

To the second point, if you want to drop 6-8 pro teams, how else do you plan to do it? Are you going to wait on MLS to drop teams in Canada, despite their comissoner publicily stating he's not looking to put anymore teams in Canada. Do you suddenly wantonly support the NASL knowing that the league is hemoragging teams with what's going on in Rayo and Ft. Laurderdale, and even in the best circumstances..would only net you two more teams? Do you open the gates to USL, lose all control over development and be bound once more to the USSF, in a league with very low levels of play and salary floor and cap you can't control in a league shared by MLS farms making marketting even harder?
 

20 minutes ago, TRM said:

Hammer I think you misunderstood the "no game day roster rule" part. I took it as you can start all 8 internationals plus 3 domestics if you want or you can start all 11 domestics or if you've traded for more international spots start 11 internationals.

In that respect BHTC Mike is correct.

Those players make the game day 18 and starting 11 on their own merits. As it should be for the top level of the pyramid.

Once again, doesn't change the fact that Canadians are getting top end minutes needed to improve in MLS. Be that through not developing them because they aren't worth as much on a contract as a US player, because there isn't a desire to create more tier 1 canadian teams and clubs, because there isn't a desire to invest more cash into a local academy, because MLS's priority list is ordered Profit, US Development, Canadian Development and/or because you simply don't need to start them at all

[-Hammer-]

I also want to be clear here, I applaud the MLS for what limited amount of development it has done for our national team, and for Canadian soccer. I certainly applaud them for raising the image of the game in our country (or at least in certain regions) and I'm not for saying the second the CPL comes around we kick MLS to the curb. Far from it.

What I'm saying is we've pretty much reached the limit of what MLS can do to develop our national team. We now need to do something more ourselves and put it in our hands to start making the World Cup. We cannot rely nor expect MLS to develop our national team, nor should we. They are a US based league, we just happen to be there because they want some stable markets.

[Michael Crampton]

40 minutes ago, -Hammer- said:

Ahem

Ya know, when you're going to double down on being completely wrong, there are better and worse ways to do it.

[BCM]

9 hours ago, Macksam said:

Besides selling talent to bigger leagues, we can do a lot better than the Irish league. The Irish league is good for Ireland's small country, not ours. The investors involved with the CPL have ambitions to be a much bigger league than something that draws 2000 people on average.

Okay, you selectively quote and ignore the point on talent production - the very reason most people want a Canadian league.

But even on attendance - Of course investors have ambition - Edmonton's attendance is pathetic, even though they're near the top of the table. Fath had ambitions and plans to pack their small field (I can't call it a stadium) and move to larger grounds. Ottawa had ambitions for larger attendance. It hasn't worked out.

I suspect we'd be like the USL - some teams would draw well and others struggle. Cincinnati draws over 15k, Sacramento likewise, places like St Louis pack a small stadium - but others struggle to get over 1000 a match. How's TFC II and Montreal FC looking as far as attendance, to bring that point close to home? Incidentally, no one in the Irish league draws 2000, that's the average - the top teams draw 4000+ and the bottom teams struggle for 1000. It's strange, but again just like the USL and NASL.

We will be just like Ireland - a small league with a larger leagues shadow hanging over - MLS will always be the better league, the league players aspire to play in, the league that pays better and the league with more of a following and prestige. This is not to say the league will not be worth watching - I agree with @Unnamed Trialistthat on the whole our teams could eventually probably be better than the teams in the Irish league - but again, that's not the point. From a MNT perspective, the main point is providing more chances to players and improving our player pool.

I certainly hope that we can have 10,000+ fans at every match (I would jump at 6,000, actually) and that we can produce a pipeline like Ireland to higher level teams and the national team - but we cannot expect it. 

 

[jpg75]

26 minutes ago, TRM said:

http://www.starsandstripesfc.com/2016/7/15/12196292/liga-mx-mexico-10-8-rule-foreign-players-limit

"Known as the 8/10 rule, the rule requires each team to name at least 8 players born in Mexico to the starting XI and bench for every game and correspondingly limits 10 foreign born players to each match"

"Now, technically the Liga MX rule will require at least 1 Mexican born player to start (with 7 on the bench). But beyond that one starting player and the subs, it doesn't have to play them."

So no different from what I'm suggesting. Playing time at the top of the pyramid is never guaranteed or given. It is taken.

That's a brand new rule that has increased the number of foreigners from 5 to 10 (and most Mexicans are condenming) and that's not what i'm talking about. About a decade ago the Colombian league had a quota for young players (270 minutes for U21's a game i think) and the Mexicans tried something similar.

[BCM]

5 hours ago, jpg75 said:

Mexico and Colombia implemented playing time quotas for their domestic players, it seems to be paying off.

Japan built the prestige and quality of their league on Brazilian imports. Worked with stunning success on the pitch and in quickly building fan interest. Quotas (ie limits on foreign players) in the MLS have paid off big time for the US!

Malaysia and Indonesia banned foreign players - killed off their chances in the Asian regional tournaments - where the money is. Malaysia brought back the foreign players and now does well in the minor championship division.

Scotland tried to institute a U-21s quota but it was quickly abandoned.

Point being, what may work in one place may not work in another.

I'd love to see the minimum Canadian requirement raised for the CND teams - but even doubled to 6 all the teams would easily meet it now with the homegrowns. That, in addition to treating Canadians as locals in the US, would add a few Canadians to the player list in MLS - but really, how many would it add? Five? Seven? Is this going to make a huge difference to our player pool? Both current rules are unhelpful but these changes are not the panacea some think they will be.

[TRM]

19 minutes ago, jpg75 said:

That's a brand new rule that has increased the number of foreigners from 5 to 10 (and most Mexicans are condenming) and that's not what i'm talking about. About a decade ago the Colombian league had a quota for young players (270 minutes for U21's a game i think) and the Mexicans tried something similar.

If you have links that would be great. I didn't find anything on that from my searches. I'm always interested in various approaches.

U21s would be the equivalent to our USL-Pro teams which I support quotas on whole heartedly. Or were they U21s playing on the top division teams that were getting 270 minutes (3 players for the full 90)?

[TRM]

48 minutes ago, -Hammer- said:

First off, technically Leauge 1 Ontario and the PLSQ cover this niche,

No they don't. There are whole regions of the country that have no D3 and there is no end of season national championship. Almost nothing of the Easton report is implemented.

 

48 minutes ago, -Hammer- said:

To the second point, if you want to drop 6-8 pro teams, how else do you plan to do it?

Allow expansion of USL-Pro. Quit blocking pro teams from forming by a constant stalling tactic of offering " future maybes" "looking into" "evaluating" "doing due diligence" on the pipe dream of CPL being formed and being D1 quality.

It is 9 months into 2017 and we've been hearing this for half a decade. When do you admit they have nothing and will do nothing? 2018? 2019? 2020? Or do you just go on hoping that "this time they mean it" forever and sacrifice the opportunities that are viable?

 

 

[-Hammer-]

45 minutes ago, TRM said:

Allow expansion of USL-Pro. Quit blocking pro teams from forming by a constant stalling tactic of offering " future maybes" "looking into" "evaluating" "doing due diligence" on the pipe dream of CPL being formed and being D1 quality.

It is 9 months into 2017 and we've been hearing this for half a decade. When do you admit they have nothing and will do nothing? 2018? 2019? 2020? Or do you just go on hoping that "this time they mean it" forever and sacrifice the opportunities that are viable?

So the first, your plan for making a pro league is to further invest in a farm league run by the USSF. Despite the fact that the USL is far harder to market then the CPL by it's name alone, in a league where developing for the Canadian men's national team is even less a priority and the level of play and pay is exceptionaly low. Don't give me the lame "but they have independant teams" arguement. The AHL used to have independant teams and they all went under because the NHL teams poached their good players or bought them out.

Please cite specfic articles or sources where the CSA actively said "We are starting up a pro leauge" from 5 years back. It has certainly been talked about (mainly because the current MLS path hasn't really been working for us) but I don't recall the CSA every publicly saying "Yes, we are working towards a new high end pro league." just reports that we should start one.

Frankly to be honest with you, I'd rather wait in limbo forever then condem Canadian soccer future to the binding of Canada's soccer future exclusively to the USSF's whims. If you can name me one team in the last two cycles who qualified for the World Cup without thier own national league, then I would take such a proposistion more seriously. There is no point in going down the USL road to start making the hex, only to hit a dead end towards making them cup and find that because we don't control the league, we can't effect change and have to back track over BOTH MLS and the USL at that point. We are also not going to see a World Cup here in Canada, and all the infastructure spending and higher profile for the game in this country without our own league.

[TRM]

10 hours ago, -Hammer- said:

Please cite specfic articles or sources where the CSA actively said "We are starting up a pro leauge" from 5 years back. It has certainly been talked about (mainly because the current MLS path hasn't really been working for us) but I don't recall the CSA every publicly saying "Yes, we are working towards a new high end pro league." just reports that we should start one.

This has been covered thoroughly in the CPL thread. If you have no plan why put a moratorium on new NASL teams for a year in 2011 and USL-Pro currently? 

 

Quote

Frankly to be honest with you, I'd rather wait in limbo forever then condem Canadian soccer future to the binding of Canada's soccer future exclusively to the USSF's whims.

Then you are happy with no further expansion of pro soccer in Canada. You are happy to wait forever with ZERO new opportunities? I'm not. I'll take a bird in the hand rather than 2 in the bush.

 

Quote

If you can name me one team in the last two cycles who qualified for the World Cup without thier own national league

Canada in 1986. Why limit it to the last 2 cycles? Just to cherry pick data that suits your point? 

 

Quote

We are also not going to see a World Cup here in Canada, and all the infastructure spending and higher profile for the game in this country without our own league.

The odds of us ever hosting a world cup are close to nil with or without a domestic league. Get serious. 

It is tough but that is the road the CSA chose when they allowed TFC into MLS in 2007. That ship has sailed and isn't coming back. It is a moot point now that the 3 largest markets are in MLS. For better or worse we are tied to MLS and should get on with making it work. 

This excuse of not having a league of our own holding us back would only be valid if the CPL would be MLS level or above. It won't be due to budget and many other issues. 

 

[-Hammer-]

45 minutes ago, TRM said:

This has been covered thoroughly in the CPL thread. If you have no plan why put a moratorium on new NASL teams for a year in 2011 and USL-Pro currently? 

 

Then you are happy with no further expansion of pro soccer in Canada. You are happy to wait forever with ZERO new opportunities? I'm not. I'll take a bird in the hand rather than 2 in the bush.

 

Canada in 1986. Why limit it to the last 2 cycles? Just to cherry pick data that suits your point? 

 

The odds of us ever hosting a world cup are close to nil with or without a domestic league. Get serious. 

It is tough but that is the road the CSA chose when they allowed TFC into MLS in 2007. That ship has sailed and isn't coming back. It is a moot point now that the 3 largest markets are in MLS. For better or worse we are tied to MLS and should get on with making it work. 

This excuse of not having a league of our own holding us back would only be valid if the CPL would be MLS level or above. It won't be due to budget and many other issues. 

 

To the first, no it hasn't. The CPL thread has mainly been based on Rollins reporting on the subject and a couple articles that the Ti-Cats made in the Spec and some dropped maybes by Vic. Not once did the CSA come out and yes "Yes, we are working on a pro league" The closes thing was the CUSL which never got past the business model phase.

No, I'm not happy about it, but I fully believe we can raise the profile of the game in our country high enough with our national team, our women's team and our MLS teams to start a sustainable pro league, which becomes substantially harder to create if we waste our efforts on the USL where our development will always been hamstrung and bound to the US.

Because the quality of play in the game has substantially changed over the course of a decade. Because back then most of CONCAAF wasn't anywhere near as good as it is now. Because the last few cycles have not been CONCAAF cycles where Mexico or the US gets a by through qualifying like in 1986. Because roster cohesion is a much more important factor now a days. It is also worth noting Canada in 1986 was coming off the NASL folding some mere 3 years prior and still had the CNSL at the time, so we did have our own pro league. It's level of play way low though and couldn't sustain the development the NASL once provided (as all domestics were North Americans in the NASL) hence why the CSL came about.

To the world cup odds, I am. FIFA has often cited a a domestic league as one of their requirements for a bid.

That's just it, there isn't any way of making it work. MLS has outright said it is not interested in expanding into Canada any time soon, and the CSA has no ability to force the MLS teams to give Canadians more minutes. How else are you going to get solid playing minutes and solid paying wages for developing players? Your plan is, put effort into expanding an AHL style farm league (which have always struggled in Canada) without only lining up to join, in the hopes that somehow the level of play and interest will rise to the point where MLS teams who don't need to field Canadians are going to develop Canadians out of pocket in the USL. It's far FAR more absurd.

No...it's valid because roster cohesion is a thing, it's valid because we don't have enough players playing at the D1 or even the D2 level in this country, it's valid because MLS/USL's development for Canada has been lacklustre and will continue to remain lacklustre as they are a US league focused on US development, it's valid because apart from the few spots on MLS and NASL (which is having other issues) there is no where a Canadian fresh out of an academy to go and make a living playing the game.

[pint]

11 hours ago, -Hammer- said:

So the first, your plan for making a pro league is to further invest in a farm league run by the USSF. Despite the fact that the USL is far harder to market then the CPL by it's name alone, in a league where developing for the Canadian men's national team is even less a priority and the level of play and pay is exceptionaly low. Don't give me the lame "but they have independant teams" arguement. The AHL used to have independant teams and they all went under because the NHL teams poached their good players or bought them out.

Please cite specfic articles or sources where the CSA actively said "We are starting up a pro leauge" from 5 years back. It has certainly been talked about (mainly because the current MLS path hasn't really been working for us) but I don't recall the CSA every publicly saying "Yes, we are working towards a new high end pro league." just reports that we should start one.

Frankly to be honest with you, I'd rather wait in limbo forever then condem Canadian soccer future to the binding of Canada's soccer future exclusively to the USSF's whims. If you can name me one team in the last two cycles who qualified for the World Cup without thier own national league, then I would take such a proposistion more seriously. There is no point in going down the USL road to start making the hex, only to hit a dead end towards making them cup and find that because we don't control the league, we can't effect change and have to back track over BOTH MLS and the USL at that point. We are also not going to see a World Cup here in Canada, and all the infastructure spending and higher profile for the game in this country without our own league.

Say the CPL gets to a point where it also needs a lower division for Academy products to play in... would you then be fine with the CPL using USL as a farm system similar to MLS? or would you want a solely Canadian reserve league set up?

[Ansem]

4 minutes ago, pint said:

Say the CPL gets to a point where it also needs a lower division for Academy products to play in... would you then be fine with the CPL using USL as a farm system similar to MLS? or would you want a solely Canadian reserve league set up?

Canadian reserve league only or have the academy compete with the other D3 CHL style system.

[Complete Homer]

10 minutes ago, pint said:

Say the CPL gets to a point where it also needs a lower division for Academy products to play in... would you then be fine with the CPL using USL as a farm system similar to MLS? or would you want a solely Canadian reserve league set up?

I'm bullish on the future of L1O and it's equivalents. I think slotting a reserve side in there (or Quebec or the eventually BC) would be adequate.