Canadian Premier League

[MrSabiondo]

On 9/21/2016 at 7:14 PM, Futballer said:

Correct they are  restructuring the Group 1 Business plan to make it Theirs as we submitted our Business plan to the CSA and Hamilton to Join us in Launching the CPL or C-League.

Are you willing to share a general idea.  This can be via e-mail is you want for confidentiality purposes.  

I say this because I am part of the 3rd Group who until know has been playing the wait and see game, but if your proposal makes more sense as to that other Hamilton one (it's pretty much DOA).  We'd be more than willing to add support to your groups proposal.

[nolbertos]

3 hours ago, Ansem said:

Anyone gets the feeling if down the road the 3 MLS clubs becomes a barrier to CPL or it`s viability, CSA could evict MLS from the 3 cities so that CPL has sole monopoly in Canada?

I think as long as

• the 2 Toronto teams can thrive and co-exist
• A Surrey team can be founded and co-exist with the Whitecaps
• A Montreal team is Implemented and working
• MLS doesn't oversteps its boundaries and challenge CPL outside the 3 markets

They could coexist, but down the road, CPL will need to be present in the 3 markets.

I know alot of people make think Surrey will support the CPL, but if Surrey, doesn't even support the Lions (Surrey, Langley, Chilliwack, Abbotsford) is the supposed heart of the BC Lions fanbase, then doubt they'll support CPL.  The Whitecaps have a long history all across Greater Vancouver and they hold clinics regularly all across Greater Van.  There also rumours that the Whitecaps are looking for a permanent place for the USL franchise as being in UBC is very uneconomical long-term and location wise far and so far, looks like Surrey is getting more enticing for them, as nothing has changed in the municipal halls of Vancouver, Burnaby, New West and Coquitlam to warrant a renovated ballpark for a USL franchise.   The only way a CPL would even survive would be to go to Abbotsford, but might as well go the Island then and put a team in Victoria, as they'll get the same number of spectators.  Vancouver doesn't work like the GTA with spread our municipalities that could support other teams.  Even the Abbotsford Heat from the AHL moved out 2 years ago from Abbotsford, because people would rather watch Canucks, Surrey Eagles and Vancouver Giants games, than the local team.

Edit:  Forgot to mention that driving distance from Abbotsford to literally anywhere in Greater Vancouver is 1-2 hours, depending on traffic, so tells you how fickle and loyal the fans are out there, that they'd be willing to drive ALLLL the way to downtown Van to watch the Canucks / Vancouver Giants, than something much closer to home

[Pqhbv]

14 minutes ago, MrSabiondo said:

Are you willing to share a general idea.  This can be via e-mail is you want for confidentiality purposes.  

I say this because I am part of the 3rd Group who until know has been playing the wait and see game, but if your proposal makes more sense as to that other Hamilton one (it's pretty much DOA).  We'd be more than willing to add support to your groups proposal.

Sounds like MLSE to me. 

[Complete Homer]

I am part of a fourth group. We offer to bring chips and beer

[GuillermoDelQuarto]

11 minutes ago, Complete Homer said:

I am part of a fourth group. We offer to bring chips and beer

[MrSabiondo]

1 hour ago, Pqhbv said:

Sounds like MLSE to me. 

Toronto Maple Leafs S.C. FTW

[Gopherbashi]

10 minutes ago, MrSabiondo said:

Toronto Maple Leafs S.C. FTW

TFC 1A

[MrSabiondo]

3 minutes ago, Gopherbashi said:

TFC 1A

Ontario's other team!

[ironcub14]

1 hour ago, nolbertos said:

I know alot of people make think Surrey will support the CPL, but if Surrey, doesn't even support the Lions (Surrey, Langley, Chilliwack, Abbotsford) is the supposed heart of the BC Lions fanbase, then doubt they'll support CPL.  The Whitecaps have a long history all across Greater Vancouver and they hold clinics regularly all across Greater Van.  There also rumours that the Whitecaps are looking for a permanent place for the USL franchise as being in UBC is very uneconomical long-term and location wise far and so far, looks like Surrey is getting more enticing for them, as nothing has changed in the municipal halls of Vancouver, Burnaby, New West and Coquitlam to warrant a renovated ballpark for a USL franchise.   The only way a CPL would even survive would be to go to Abbotsford, but might as well go the Island then and put a team in Victoria, as they'll get the same number of spectators.  Vancouver doesn't work like the GTA with spread our municipalities that could support other teams.  Even the Abbotsford Heat from the AHL moved out 2 years ago from Abbotsford, because people would rather watch Canucks, Surrey Eagles and Vancouver Giants games, than the local team.

Edit:  Forgot to mention that driving distance from Abbotsford to literally anywhere in Greater Vancouver is 1-2 hours, depending on traffic, so tells you how fickle and loyal the fans are out there, that they'd be willing to drive ALLLL the way to downtown Van to watch the Canucks / Vancouver Giants, than something much closer to home

I've enjoyed the arguments for a downtown Toronto team over a Mississauga team, and the argument for a downtown Montreal team from Ansem just above. I lived in Vancouver for a few years and I really enjoyed the Caps/CanMNT matches at Swangard. I think the stadium is on the original SkyTrain line, and with the historical footy significance that location holds, if an ownership group that can be found in the billionaire range would commit to completely revamping the stadium, then I would argue for it wholeheartedly over Surrey or any of the burbs further out.

The waterfront stadium would have been pretty damn sick, I don't know the history on why that bid failed..

I'd also like to quickly mention, not for this decade, but for expansion purposes 10-20 years from now, that creating a rivalry between a club each in Ottawa and Gatineau would be pretty amazing to watch. I've lived on both sides of the river, and I could just feel that rivalry in the air.

[mpg_29]

5 hours ago, Ansem said:

Anyone gets the feeling if down the road the 3 MLS clubs becomes a barrier to CPL or it`s viability, CSA could evict MLS from the 3 cities so that CPL has sole monopoly in Canada?

I think as long as

• the 2 Toronto teams can thrive and co-exist
• A Surrey team can be founded and co-exist with the Whitecaps
• A Montreal team is Implemented and working
• MLS doesn't oversteps its boundaries and challenge CPL outside the 3 markets

They could coexist, but down the road, CPL will need to be present in the 3 markets.

 

 

 

It's a barrier right now.

[baulderdash77]

I wonder if we could look at the A-League when it formed from a structure perspective.

They had 8 teams to start with 20-26 player rosters.  They were allowed 5 foreign visa players and had to keep 3 players under 20 on their roster.  The salary cap was A$1.5 million with 1 "International Marquee player" who didn't count against the cap.

Over the past 10 years they've expanded to 11 and back to 10 teams and their salary cap has increased to A$2.6 million with 3 Marquee players and 1 Junior (U-23) Marquee player exceptions to the salary cap.  They have had 13 franchises in their league history with 7 of the original 8 still in existence and 2 expansion teams that failed as well.

I wouldn't be shocked if we end up with a similar setup.  8 teams, hard cap, 1 salary exception etc.

[Complete Homer]

28 minutes ago, baulderdash77 said:

I wonder if we could look at the A-League when it formed from a structure perspective.

They had 8 teams to start with 20-26 player rosters.  They were allowed 5 foreign visa players and had to keep 3 players under 20 on their roster.  The salary cap was A$1.5 million with 1 "International Marquee player" who didn't count against the cap.

Over the past 10 years they've expanded to 11 and back to 10 teams and their salary cap has increased to A$2.6 million with 3 Marquee players and 1 Junior (U-23) Marquee player exceptions to the salary cap.  They have had 13 franchises in their league history with 7 of the original 8 still in existence and 2 expansion teams that failed as well.

I wouldn't be shocked if we end up with a similar setup.  8 teams, hard cap, 1 salary exception etc.

I expect similar outside of an increased number of internationals. A-league's quality meantess because of the lack of existing teams. I think the rosters have to be at least 50% foreign with at least 50% of each starting 11 to be international (maybe more) for people to consider it "watchable." If teams fill depth positions with L1O/PLSQ/NCAA standouts than we can probably have a reasonably high domestic quota, but more than 5 internationals are a must at launch, IMO

Remember that it isn't just about giving playing time canucks, otherwise L1O/PLSQ would be enough. It's about having to more spots at a reasonable level

[mpg_29]

Honestly looking at the A-league the smartest thing about that model is clustering teams in or near major metro cities. That would cut down on travel costs and probably also creates good rivalries.

Sydney has two teams and two more are within a 150km. Also Melbourne has two teams. Right there you have over half the league..

An equivalent would be like GTA having two teams + Hamilton + London or Kitchener having a team. Also Montreal having two teams. Possibly Vancouver having two teams. With Ottawa, Calgary and Edmonton having one team. 

That would be 10-11 teams right there.

Obviously Canada's situation with MLS creates a different dynamic...

[Complete Homer]

27 minutes ago, mpg_29 said:

Honestly looking at the A-league the smartest thing about that model is clustering teams in or near major metro cities. That would cut down on travel costs and probably also creates good rivalries.

Sydney has two teams and two more are within a 150km. Also Melbourne has two teams. Right there you have over half the league..

An equivalent would be like GTA having two teams + Hamilton + London or Kitchener having a team. Also Montreal having two teams. Possibly Vancouver having two teams. With Ottawa, Calgary and Edmonton having one team. 

That would be 10-11 teams right there.

Obviously Canada's situation with MLS creates a different dynamic...

The scheduling idea suggested by someone ( @Hammer ?) of 2 home/aways intra-conference and 1 home/away inter-conference cut down on travel a lot. Ignoring one or two exceptions, it would mean teams only have to fly 4 times a year as most intra conference teams are within a day or two busing (obviously Winnipeg - > Vancouver/Surrey/Victoria isn't busable, but overall most games wouldn't require flights). 

Regardless, my understanding is that the markets outside of one or two are already lined up, so I assume these discussions are a bit in the past, unless we are talking about advocating for where expansions should be  

[zen]

45 minutes ago, mpg_29 said:

Honestly looking at the A-league the smartest thing about that model is clustering teams in or near major metro cities. That would cut down on travel costs and probably also creates good rivalries.

Sydney has two teams and two more are within a 150km. Also Melbourne has two teams. Right there you have over half the league..

An equivalent would be like GTA having two teams + Hamilton + London or Kitchener having a team. Also Montreal having two teams. Possibly Vancouver having two teams. With Ottawa, Calgary and Edmonton having one team. 

That would be 10-11 teams right there.

Obviously Canada's situation with MLS creates a different dynamic...

Australia is a lot like Canada yeah. About 70% of their population is around their east coast between the Melbourne and Sydney areas. A similar percent of our population is actually distributed in the Quebec City-Windsor Corridor. The other 30% is where I think things are different, that part of population is clustered around cities that are spread out, our 30% basically forms a chain along the rail road lines. It should make it easier for us to travel but it doesn't, Canada is much wider. The A-league still doesn't have teams in some of the other cities that are spread out. Hopefully, the investors for the CPL are able to put up with some crazy travel costs until the league is sustainable. 

[mpg_29]

50 minutes ago, zen said:

Australia is a lot like Canada yeah. About 70% of their population is around their east coast between the Melbourne and Sydney areas. A similar percent of our population is actually distributed in the Quebec City-Windsor Corridor. The other 30% is where I think things are different, that part of population is clustered around cities that are spread out, our 30% basically forms a chain along the rail road lines. It should make it easier for us to travel but it doesn't, Canada is much wider. The A-league still doesn't have teams in some of the other cities that are spread out. Hopefully, the investors for the CPL are able to put up with some crazy travel costs until the league is sustainable. 

I think if we used both east/west conferences + clustering teams around metro regions +  lower inter-conference games you could really cut down on the disadvantages of being in a large country. 

East Conference:

1. Toronto 1

2. Toronto 2

3. Mississauga

4. Hamilton

5. Kitchener

6. Ottawa 

7. Montreal 1

8. Montreal 2

 

West Conference:

1. Vancouver 1

2. Vancouver 2

3. Victoria

4. Calgary 1

5. Calgary 2

6. Edmonton 1

7. Edmonton 2

 

Have 2 or even 3 home/away games intra-conference and 1 home/away game inter-conference game between teams.

 

It's different way of thinking in how to set up leagues in North America. But we are a big country and it would simultaneously cut millions out of travel costs and allow us to have more teams. 

 

[Viruk42]

Okay, so the problem with a West and East conference split is very simple. 

Typical definition of West is Manitoba and west (not including territories): combined population (2011 census) ~10.2mil
Typical definition of East is Ontario and east: combined population ~23mil

Alternatively, as I've suggested elsewhere (quoted below) on this forum, a 3 way split might make more sense.
West remains Manitoba -> West, ~10.2mil
East becomes Quebec -> East, ~10.2mil
add in Ontario on its own, ~12.9mil

Suddenly things are balanced. 

Can I just say, I stand by my earlier assertion that the league would be best with 3 clusters. West, Ontario, and East. Travel costs get reduced by playing more games within the cluster (I want to highlight calling it a cluster, not a division, because it would simply be for scheduling, not rankings, playoffs, etc). Assuming we'll have playoffs (because that's what we're used to in Canada), the top 4 teams could play home-home semi-finals, followed by a pre-determined neutral venue final. 

3-5 teams in each cluster for 9, 12, or 15 total.
West could eventually be Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Regina or Saskatoon, Winnipeg.
Ontario, start with Hamilton, a GTA team, and Ottawa, add two of Windsor, London, Kingston kind of thing. 
East would involve a second Montreal team, Quebec City, Moncton, Halifax, and St. John's. 

I know it's weird, but it's an easy way to reduce travel costs, which are often cited as one of the biggest impediments to a league here, or even just the continued existence of FC Edmonton. Furthermore it prioritizes likely rivalries - as an Ottawa native, I honestly don't care about seeing the Fury play FC Edmonton anymore than I care about Rayo OKC. But I'd love to see us beat a GTA team or Kingston 4 times a year . So you have 1 home-home against every team, but extra games in-cluster.

More/stronger rivalries get more fans, the reduced distances get more away fans, and money is saved on travel.

 

[Gopherbashi]

8 minutes ago, Viruk42 said:

Okay, so the problem with a West and East conference split is very simple. 

Typical definition of West is Manitoba and west (not including territories): combined population (2011 census) ~10.2mil
Typical definition of East is Ontario and east: combined population ~23mil

Alternatively, as I've suggested elsewhere (quoted below) on this forum, a 3 way split might make more sense.
West remains Manitoba -> West, ~10.2mil
East becomes Quebec -> East, ~10.2mil
add in Ontario on its own, ~12.9mil

Suddenly things are balanced. 

 

The traditional east/west divide will definitely be a problem if the league looks at putting teams outside your traditional big 8 cities.  Ontario especially just has too many mid-level cities to keep the balance.

[matty]

25 minutes ago, Gopherbashi said:

The traditional east/west divide will definitely be a problem if the league looks at putting teams outside your traditional big 8 cities.  Ontario especially just has too many mid-level cities to keep the balance.

I honestly don't see them expanding out side of the "Big 9"+ Moncton. They'll stick as close to the CFL map as possible

[GuillermoDelQuarto]

39 minutes ago, Viruk42 said:

Okay, so the problem with a West and East conference split is very simple. 

Typical definition of West is Manitoba and west (not including territories): combined population (2011 census) ~10.2mil
Typical definition of East is Ontario and east: combined population ~23mil

Alternatively, as I've suggested elsewhere (quoted below) on this forum, a 3 way split might make more sense.
West remains Manitoba -> West, ~10.2mil
East becomes Quebec -> East, ~10.2mil
add in Ontario on its own, ~12.9mil

Suddenly things are balanced. 

 

You know, this actually does make quite a bit of sense.  The optics aren't great initially, but if you base it on population, it's hard not to see the logic in it.  

And we all want to see the "secondary" cities in ontario have teams, but it would be a little mental if some team in ontario was somehow considered west.

What about calling it West, Central and East?  Winnipeg could go west or central depending on how things shake down, after all, they are the "Gateway to the West", makes sense that they would be on the edge

edit: grammar

[GuillermoDelQuarto]

also, because I can

[matty]

16 minutes ago, GuillermoDelQuarto said:

You know, this actually does make quite a bit of sense.  The optics aren't great initially, but if you base it on population, it's hard not to see the logic in it.  

And we all want to see the "secondary" cities in ontario have teams, but it would be a little mental if some team in ontario was somehow considered west.

What about calling it West, Central and East?  Winnipeg could go west or central depending on how things shake down, after all, they are the "Gateway to the West", makes sense that they would be on the edge

edit: grammar

If this league does the MLB model I'll be pissed. First it's unlikely to go passed 10 teams for years and second the league and teams might lose a lot of money because it could result in less games between the big money rivalies that cross those lines.

[Complete Homer]

I like the 3 conference/division model, but I think it would have to wait for decent amount of expansion. A 9 team league with 3 teams in each conference would get boring quick playing those two other teams too much. 

[Ansem]

My dream Canadian Premier League table

I'm using StatCan 2015 census as a reference since I believe that CPL needs a team in the top Metro area in the country.

A-Single table CPL Cup

1. Toronto (Metro pop. 6.1M) *CONCACAF Champions League*
2. Montreal (4M) *CONCACAF Champions League* Usually runner up gets a spot
3. Vancouver-Surrey (2.5M)
4. Calgary (1.4M)
5. Edmonton (1.36M)
6. Ottawa (1.33M)
7. Quebec City (806k)
8. Winnipeg (793k)
9. Hamilton (771k)
10. Tri-City (Kitchener-Waterloo-Cambridge) (511k)
11. London (506k)
12. Halifax (417k)
13. Oshawa (389k)
14. Victoria (365k)
15. Windsor (335k)
16. Saskatoon (305k)
17. Regina (241k)
18. Sherbrooke (214.5k)
19. St.John's (214.3k)
20. Moncton (148k)

B-Canadian Championship

• Round 1 (Enters D4 and lower teams)
• Round 2 (enters D3 Teams)
• Round 3 (Enters Previous year "Memorial Cup" D3 champion and Division 1 CPL+MLS)

Winner: CONCACAF Champions League (For a total of 3 spots)

[Viruk42]

1 hour ago, Complete Homer said:

I like the 3 conference/division model, but I think it would have to wait for decent amount of expansion. A 9 team league with 3 teams in each conference would get boring quick playing those two other teams too much. 

Yes and no, just depends on how you structure it / how many total games were wanted. The A-League's 10 teams played 27 games last year, for reference; the champions, Adelaide United, played 33 total games (27 league, 2 in the finals, 3 in the FFA Cup, and 1 AFC champions league). The NASL played 30, with a few CCL or US Open games added in, so I think this is likely the range we'd be looking at.

So the easiest option with 9 teams would be one home-home with each non-cluster team (i.e. 12 games) and, say, four home-home with each in-cluster team (i.e. 16 games) for a 28 game regular season. If they did two home-home with the non-cluster teams, that's 24 games, so you might as well just do two with each team (i.e. 32 game seasons). It's not perfect, since more than half the games would be against just two teams, but it would certainly cut down on travel costs.

Expansion to (or starting with) 12 teams would be ideal, the one home-home game against each non-cluster team makes for 16 games, dropping the in-cluster down to two home-home (12 games total), so the travel costs are still lower than playing each team 3 times, like the A-League presumably does, but not as low as with a 9 team league. 

Alternatively, a 9 team league could play fewer or more regular season games (two vs non-cluster + 3 vs in-cluster would be 24+12; one vs non-cluster + 3 vs in-cluster would be 12+12), in order to off-set the issue of over-playing in-cluster teams.

Is it ideal? No, but until we have bullet trains that go from Vancouver to Toronto in ~3 hours, very little will be.