Canadian Premier League

[Complete Homer]

15 hours ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

Complete Homer, "wait and see" as a logical response, and lack of evidence as no justification for negativity: you have just described the exact formula of Canadian failure to put together a league for a few decades now. 

But you construe it the opposite way. Suggesting you are living in a lovely iridescent bubble.

All you are basically doing is saying affirm, norm, logic, reason, right, sane, when you have absolutely nothing but air in your hands. And are completely ignoring the fact that the only evidence we have so far, of any substance, is history, a history of glaring, screaming in your face failure.

That past chronology sets up another pattern, standard, norm, internal logic -- an affirmation that is much more solid ground than your wait and see servile message, waiting for the bosses.

The whole idea that an elected president of a sports association has no reason to deceive his constituency, so is ergo telling the truth--well there's another example of having no idea of reality, past or present. 

What are you on about? 

We have seen Bob Young's letter, a local billionaire, to Hamilton city council. We have seen his representative stand up in front of city council and explain that infrastructure spending is necessary to support a team in CPL (lying here would certainly have consequences, misrepresenting facts in front of a government body for the sake of infrastructure approval).  We have the same person who broke that Vancouver and Montreal were getting MLS teams breaking that CPL was being developed. We have seen MLSE taking it seriously enough to schedule a meeting with the CSA. We have had multiple leaks from multiple sources regarding ownership groups. We have seen the CSA acknowledging the project in several places in the mainstream media. We've even had members of this board have face to face conversations with stakeholders. That's just off the top of my head, and it amounts to a lot more than nothing. 

Your argument basically boils down to:

1. "Not as many leaks have happened as would have happened if the league were real." I would counter that you really have nothing but an opinion on that. You've sat with CEOs? Congrats, I've chatted with the Governor General at formal functions at my medical school, that doesn't make me politically competent any more than it makes you business savvy. 

2. "Montagliani is lying to boost his image."  I've already broken down why this is a ridiculous statement. Even if he was going realpolitik on us, lying at this stage would not be in his best interest, especially growing the lie so much in the past month. Your entire argument hinges on this point and I would invite anyone reading this to make a reasonable argument for this. I can only imagine someone with an epistemological block against the idea of CPL finding this argument plausible

3. "We are a rare scenario of a country without a domestic league." This one is a mind bender, as it actually implies that getting a domestic league is almost an inevitablity, I don't know why you think it supports your point. 

4. "We have failed to have a sustained domestic league in the past." Ignoring the fact that the soccer landscape has changed dramatically in the past two decades (don't you live in Spain? Maybe you just haven't been around to notice), and ignoring that the wildly successful MLS came on the heels of two failed American leagues, this is a prognostic factor for the long term sustainability of the project, not an indicator of whether or not the league is being planned. You could argue that a history of failure might dissuade investors, while I could counter that MLS' success on the heels of failure could have ameliorated those concerns

5. Plugging your ears and shouting "La La La, you have no evidence and you are dumb." Seriously, you almost immediately resort to ad hominen in nearly every post you make. Your complete and utter condescension is laughably unfounded, but given your prior behaviour on this board, maybe this is just an irreparable character flaw of yours (I don't like getting personal, I have been fairly civil to you so far, but this sort of posting behaviour is not new from you). 

[Futballer]

52 minutes ago, Complete Homer said:

What are you on about? 

We have seen Bob Young's letter, a local billionaire, to Hamilton city council. We have seen his representative stand up in front of city council and explain that infrastructure spending is necessary to support a team in CPL (lying here would certainly have consequences, misrepresenting facts in front of a government body for the sake of infrastructure approval).  We have the same person who broke that Vancouver and Montreal were getting MLS teams breaking that CPL was being developed. We have seen MLSE taking it seriously enough to schedule a meeting with the CSA. We have had multiple leaks from multiple sources regarding ownership groups. We have seen the CSA acknowledging the project in several places in the mainstream media. We've even had members of this board have face to face conversations with stakeholders. That's just off the top of my head, and it amounts to a lot more than nothing. 

Your argument basically boils down to:

1. "Not as many leaks have happened as would have happened if the league were real." I would counter that you really have nothing but an opinion on that. You've sat with CEOs? Congrats, I've chatted with the Governor General at formal functions at my medical school, that doesn't make me politically competent any more than it makes you business savvy. 

2. "Montagliani is lying to boost his image."  I've already broken down why this is a ridiculous statement. Even if he was going realpolitik on us, lying at this stage would not be in his best interest, especially growing the lie so much in the past month. Your entire argument hinges on this point and I would invite anyone reading this to make a reasonable argument for this. I can only imagine someone with an epistemological block against the idea of CPL finding this argument plausible

3. "We are a rare scenario of a country without a domestic league." This one is a mind bender, as it actually implies that getting a domestic league is almost an inevitablity, I don't know why you think it supports your point. 

4. "We have failed to have a sustained domestic league in the past." Ignoring the fact that the soccer landscape has changed dramatically in the past two decades (don't you live in Spain? Maybe you just haven't been around to notice), and ignoring that the wildly successful MLS came on the heels of two failed American leagues, this is a prognostic factor for the long term sustainability of the project, not an indicator of whether or not the league is being planned. You could argue that a history of failure might dissuade investors, while I could counter that MLS' success on the heels of failure could have ameliorated those concerns

5. Plugging your ears and shouting "La La La, you have no evidence and you are dumb." Seriously, you almost immediately resort to ad hominen in nearly every post you make. Your complete and utter condescension is laughably unfounded, but given your prior behaviour on this board, maybe this is just an irreparable character flaw of yours (I don't like getting personal, I have been fairly civil to you so far, but this sort of posting behaviour is not new from you). 

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/soccer/canada-to-bid-for-2026-fifa-world-cup-1.2508176 

http://www.canadianbusiness.com/global-report/canada-soccer-fifa-world-cup-bid-2026/ 

Hey  can you all give me some of that kool Aid or Forum (fools rum) you been drinking: 

The CSA had no plans at all to start a  Professional soccer league Canada Wide. There only plans as they have published was to bid for the 2026 world cup.

The CNSL Group had to show the logic and possibility along with the plan to actually get the CSA to consider sanctioning a Business plan for a Canadian Premier League.

Due to the CNSL group persistence the CSA finally wrote us a letter, stating that similar plans for a professional Soccer League are on their agenda.

This topic was the most popular Topic on off the pitch for the past 5 years : world cup or Professional League. 

Discrediting the CNSL Group is denying all Canadians Soccer Supporters our own Pro soccer League. 

Not one soccer executives, Fans or clubs we approach even thought it was possible to even discus a Can Pro League after the last failure.

Guess what !!  the Group you want to say is crap, turned it around and the CSA agreed!!! 

So if you all don't wanna support the CNSL Group, there other`s out there who will. 

[Ansem]

3 minutes ago, Futballer said:

So if you all don't wanna support the CNSL Group, there other`s out there who will. 

Hard to support something we barely know anything about. Maybe you want to highlight in bullet points the main lines of their group and proposal

[Futballer]

1 minute ago, Ansem said:

Hard to support something we barely know anything about. Maybe you want to highlight in bullet points the main lines of their group and proposal

All i am saying is ! Support the Group that develops the Business plan. we know what it takes to operate the CPL.

The CNSL Group is that insurance policy that this edition of  the CPL don't fail.    

 

[Levi Oakey]

Anyone still think the Easton report is the best route to the top? I mean, I will support the CPL without a question, but I still wish we built from the grassroots up.

[Complete Homer]

1 hour ago, Levi Oakey said:

Anyone still think the Easton report is the best route to the top? I mean, I will support the CPL without a question, but I still wish we built from the grassroots up.

I'd argue that the recommendations of Easton report are being partially rolled out in the form of L1O/PLSQ, and I'm hopeful that will be built on in BC eventually. Add a quick playoff and you've got a regionalized semi-pro league

IIRC, the main argument for not fully recommending the national pro league was the idea that there wouldn't be owners willing to take a collective 10 million dollar loss per season for the first decade or so (as was seen in the A-league, etc), lack of appropriate stadia, and that market interest was uncertain. Personally, I'd say the CSA has addressed that well by looking to NHL and CFL ownership, who for the most part have appropriate stadia and are presumably willing to take the hit for long term asset growth (hell, Calgary Sports and Entertainment took that bet on lacrosse). I'd also argue that Ottawa's year over year double digit increases in attendance demonstrates that sufficient interest can be generated over time, though Edmonton is a solid counterpoint as to why not all markets will thrive. 

IIRC, the Easton report also only made passing reference to "modern leagje developments," aka single entity. I know single entity is evil to some, but it's a big factor that went largely undressed by the report that I think makes a difference. 

[Complete Homer]

1 hour ago, Futballer said:

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/soccer/canada-to-bid-for-2026-fifa-world-cup-1.2508176 

http://www.canadianbusiness.com/global-report/canada-soccer-fifa-world-cup-bid-2026/ 

Hey  can you all give me some of that kool Aid or Forum (fools rum) you been drinking: 

The CSA had no plans at all to start a  Professional soccer league Canada Wide. There only plans as they have published was to bid for the 2026 world cup.

The CNSL Group had to show the logic and possibility along with the plan to actually get the CSA to consider sanctioning a Business plan for a Canadian Premier League.

Due to the CNSL group persistence the CSA finally wrote us a letter, stating that similar plans for a professional Soccer League are on their agenda.

This topic was the most popular Topic on off the pitch for the past 5 years : world cup or Professional League. 

Discrediting the CNSL Group is denying all Canadians Soccer Supporters our own Pro soccer League. 

Not one soccer executives, Fans or clubs we approach even thought it was possible to even discus a Can Pro League after the last failure.

Guess what !!  the Group you want to say is crap, turned it around and the CSA agreed!!! 

So if you all don't wanna support the CNSL Group, there other`s out there who will. 

If it is true that you guys are the ones who planted the seed, then we will all owe you a debt. I readily admit that, I would truly be grateful to you guys. I am just relieved that your group isn't the ones actually running it 

As an aside, nothing I said in that post had anything to do with your posts, so your reply confuses me. 

[ironcub14]

13 hours ago, BringBackTheBlizzard said:

...and with a team in Moncton. I can now understand why Bob Young would have wanted to revise the CNSL business plan. Having said that, however, the main reason I reached the conclusion that the CSA were probably on the pie-in-the-sky side were the tweets from Ottawa about the CPL as tweeted and blogged by Duane Rollins being a myth and something that had been discounted from the outset by people that were presumably in the loop in a Fury context. Maybe there are group 1, group 2 and cross-border as possible options on this with the Fury preferring USL-oriented cross-border.

Hey Blizz, I think you might have mistyped here, unless I'm mistaken. The tweets from Ottawa about the CPL possibly being a division or a conference within USL came from Stu M, aka Fury Fanatic, and AJ Jakubec, TSN 1200 Ottawa.

Seeing as how we all know Duane so well, I'm a bit confused as to how you possibly typed the words "...CPL as tweeted and blogged by Duane Rollins being a myth"
 

[ironcub14]

One quick question for everybody, I'm a little bit confused about the 2 groups being discussed here within the past month. The way I have it at the moment is that,

- there's a group there that's led by Bob Young and Hamilton that's pragmatic, but does involve the wooing of and potential but not definitive cooperation of at least 8 seriously financially affluent sporting groups, including NHL and CFL

- there's another group out there supported by Futballer, and calling itself the CNSL, and considered the seriously aggressive one, typos and grammar be damned. I'm not sure which of the two groups I'd label as more pie-in-the-sky, but I would probably label this one as more so.

[ironcub14]

4 hours ago, Complete Homer said:

Not that this is a solid source, it's he said she said, but I've been told by a few Ottawa supporters that FuryFanatic is usually full of it (but again, grapevine). Couple that with the recent fan event where  they heavily implied that a move to a Canadian league is in the works, I don't think that one tweet should push us in one direction or another. Besides, why would a source like FuryFanatic hold up against the other sources we've had, it seems far more in the "bs twitter account" camp than "journalist" camp, even in comparison to Rollins (whose word is not necessarily gold, but he does have some credibility) 

About the cross-border idea, it just doesn't fit with me. It doesn't have an MLS-like business structure (granted that was just Totera saying that), CSA/USSF relations are apparently poor, USL tried to become D2 this past week and adding 8 Canadian teams would have made them fail the D2 American quota (which I doubt they'd risk their first year as D2), fails to ameliorate some of Ottawa and Edmonton's bigger NASL problems (US currency, travel time), adds unnecessary up front costs (4 million dollar expansion fee that escalates with every team added), etc. However, I'll admit that it is plausible and there isn't enough outright evidence to say it isn't happening. 

Just a couple of quick small points to address this one, Homer.

Without getting specific, I know some of the Fury supporters well, and I know that FuryFanatic's never had the easiest of times with either of the two supporter groups. That being said, I've laid out earlier in the thread why I would take both his and AJ Jakubec's words with a pretty good amount of credibility, as I would with Duane Rollins's as well. I know both of them personally, from the stands and from the footy pitch, and I admire the amount of time they've invested into covering their clubs and footy in Canada.

I know BrennanFan (teammate last year, great guy) laid it out for me a few pages ago that the planning process of the CPL may very well already be past this stage. However, I still don't think it's implausible that Duane and Stu (and AJ) are simply relaying forth the two main alternate concepts that the CSA is debating at this very moment, or maybe over the past few months, as to how to best proceed with the launch of the CPL. As you said as well, I don't think the "USL Canada" idea is implausible at the moment, though I have little doubt that the preferred method for most fans and for CSA is a stand-alone CPL.

And I did hear about the Fury staff hinting at a CPL move as well, but that doesn't tell me conclusively whether they are hinting at USL Canada or a stand-alone CPL. Probably CPL, but doesn't tell me conclusively.

I have zero wishes to debate CPL vs USL Canada any further at this moment by the way, we've debated it tons, and besides, I'm more on the CPL side at this point, all is good

 

[Complete Homer]

6 minutes ago, ironcub14 said:

One quick question for everybody, I'm a little bit confused about the 2 groups being discussed here within the past month. The way I have it at the moment is that,

- there's a group there that's led by Bob Young and Hamilton that's pragmatic, but does involve the cooperation of at least 8 seriously financially affluent sporting groups, including NHL and CFL

- there's another group out there supported by Futballer, and calling itself the CNSL, and considered the seriously aggressive one, typos and grammar be damned. I'm not sure which of the two groups I'd label as more pie-in-the-sky, but I would probably label this one as more so.

It's really not that clear, we are extrapolating a lot from Sandor's comments and Futballer. Your framing of the groups matchs my take on it, that the CSA is backing the Young and Co. group

The caveat would be that Futballer is saying that it was his group that put the bug in the ear of Bob Young and the CSA. That doesn't quite mesh with Sandor's report that a second group was going around disrupting a process that had already begun, but it seems at least plausible that Young and Montagliani took elements of a league that was pitched to them and used it for their own purposes. It seems more likely to me that a CPL idea would have arisen during conversations about a WC bid, but that's just speculation on my part

[Complete Homer]

11 minutes ago, ironcub14 said:

Just a couple of quick small points to address this one, Homer.

Without getting specific, I know some of the Fury supporters well, and I know that FuryFanatic's never had the easiest of times with either of the two supporter groups. That being said, I've laid out earlier in the thread why I would take both his and AJ Jakubec's words with a pretty good amount of credibility, as I would with Duane Rollins's as well. I know both of them personally, from the stands and from the footy pitch, and I admire the amount of time they've invested into covering their clubs and footy in Canada.

I know BrennanFan (teammate last year, great guy) laid it out for me a few pages ago that the planning process of the CPL may very well already be past this stage. However, I still don't think it's implausible that Duane and Stu (and AJ) are simply relaying forth the two main alternate concepts that the CSA is debating at this very moment, or maybe over the past few months, as to how to best proceed with the launch of the CPL. As you said as well, I don't think the "USL Canada" idea is implausible at the moment, though I have little doubt that the preferred method for most fans and for CSA is a stand-alone CPL.

I have zero wishes to debate CPL vs USL Canada any further at this moment, we've debated it tons, and besides, I'm more on the CPL side at this point, all is good

 

Yeah someone actually messaged me about the FuryFanatic thing and told me about some of the politics going on, so I adjusted my comment on it. It seems that I'd only heard from one side, and that he does have some credibility. 

I've also got to acknowledge my personal bias in that I don't think a USL division goes far enough. While I do not think the evidence is in favour of it, it remains a possibility, and you can never fully adjust for biases that lead you to discount some pieces of evidence over others. Regardless, like you I will wholeheartedly support whatever form the league takes. You've also argued well for the USL option, I respect your opinions

[ironcub14]

Cheers man, respect back at ya.

On a completely unrelated lighter note, how many of us here are looking forward to actually seriously applying for jobs with the CPL when it does come to fruition?

Totally shoulda studied finance or business or something in school lol

I just checked out the CSA job opportunities site to see if there was anything interesting, but my two left feet ain't going to cut it: http://www.canadasoccer.com/job-opportunities-s16037

A quick advice for anybody in their 20s who would seriously consider a career with CPL or in footy: consider law school. After reading this feature about Neil Davidson, NASL and Traffic Sports from the Miami New Times last year, it really hit home for me.

http://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/aaron-davidsons-stunning-soccer-bribery-case-could-clean-up-fifas-corruption-7862564

[Admin]

There won't be many jobs.  

I suspect a component of what makes this viable is the double duty of existing staff. 

Or in other words, if you want to work in the CPL, go get a job in the CFL now. 

 

 

[Complete Homer]

If we are moving away from debating the existence of the league, I saw some interesting conversation on twitter that is worth a discussion.

Do we think that solidarity payments will be part of the emerging pyramid, and if so, how would they work? Personally, I'd love to see some sort of small payment in the initial setup to ensure that a precedent gets set that lower clubs are entitled to a fee, but small enough that it is no real burden on the CPL franchises.

For example, for free agents, maybe 1.5% of the value of the contract sent to the previous club and 0.5% sent to the penultimate club? Say a kid that played for FC London after a stint at an OSL team got signed for 35k, that would only be $525 sent to FC London and $175 sent to the OSL team, but the precedent is there to make regulation easier for the CSA if the league is ever successful enough to support a larger fee structure. 

Thoughts?

[Pqhbv]

What would happen if the player is signed from a CPL team to a MLS team or USL2 team? Even if we set the precedent I cannot see MLS following suit. 

[Complete Homer]

5 minutes ago, Pqhbv said:

What would happen if the player is signed from a CPL team to a MLS team or USL2 team? Even if we set the precedent I cannot see MLS following suit. 

Pay them I suppose? I don't see a problem paying solidarity fees to an MLS2 team. They obviously don't need the money, but making exceptions wouldn't help the integrity of the system

I could see MLS eventually following suit down the line, they are regulated by the CSA after all, but they would have to wait a while. I assume the CSA has probably spent their political clout on the domestic roster spot issue for the next few years 

It's not exactly a "must have", just something to spitball about

[Viruk42]

3 hours ago, Complete Homer said:

I'd also argue that Ottawa's year over year double digit increases in attendance demonstrates that sufficient interest can be generated over time, though Edmonton is a solid counterpoint as to why not all markets will thrive. 

I've seen you mention this a couple times (unless it was someone else), but the pedantic person I am needs to highlight the above.

Double digit increase means an increase of at most 99 fans, which would be a pitiful ~2% increase overall. 

Unless you're talking percentages, in which case, yes, it has been double digit increases, but the range (an increase of 10% to 99%, or anywhere from ~450 more fans to ~5110, depending on the year) makes it a rather inaccurate way of measuring things.

Year 1: 4492
Year 2: 5164 (increase of 672, or ~15%)
Year 3: 5681, so far (increase of 517, or ~10%)

[Complete Homer]

Just now, Viruk42 said:

I've seen you mention this a couple times (unless it was someone else), but the pedantic person I am needs to highlight the above.

Double digit increase means an increase of at most 99 fans, which would be a pitiful ~2% increase overall. 

Unless you're talking percentages, in which case, yes, it has been double digit increases, but the range (an increase of 10% to 99%, or anywhere from ~450 more fans to ~5110, depending on the year) makes it a rather inaccurate way of measuring things.

Year 1: 4492
Year 2: 5164 (increase of 672, or ~15%)
Year 3: 5681, so far (increase of 517, or ~10%)

Sorry, I meant percentages. I've repeated it enough times that I guess it got shortened in my spiel 

You're correct, it's a big range, I was just using it to denote that it isn't something insignificant like a 2% increase

[Pqhbv]

5 minutes ago, Complete Homer said:

Pay them I suppose? I don't see a problem paying solidarity fees to an MLS2 team. They obviously don't need the money, but making exceptions wouldn't help the integrity of the system

I could see MLS eventually following suit down the line, they are regulated by the CSA after all, but they would have to wait a while. I assume the CSA has probably spent their political clout on the domestic roster spot issue for the next few years 

It's not exactly a "must have", just something to spitball about

You misunderstood me. Either from a CPL team to a USL/MLS2 team or from a CPL team to an MLS team. Would the CPL team be on the hook for solidarity payments to lower teams when the MLS or USL is not paying it out?

[Complete Homer]

8 minutes ago, Viruk42 said:

Glitch

 

4 minutes ago, Pqhbv said:

You misunderstood me. Either from a CPL team to a USL/MLS2 team or from a CPL team to an MLS team. Would the CPL team be on the hook for solidarity payments to lower teams when the MLS or USL is not paying it out?

I see now what you are saying. The idea I was going with was that the team poaching the player would pay all the fees. If the MLS/MLS2 teams refuse to comply, I guess the fees don't get paid. It would suck but I think it would be good for the system, even if MLS refuses to pull its weight 

[ted]

22 hours ago, Futballer said:

For the CPL to operate Successfully and apply the rules of the revenue based model we plan on using, Doug Logan and Don Garber is presently the only two experienced Executives with that Knowledge.

LOL. Well that is an interesting version of the truth. Garber is the only one who made it work, Logan is the one they fired 17 years ago because he couldn't make it work.

By all means pay him for some consulting on what NOT to do when starting a league but a monkey in a business suit would make a better league commissioner for the CanPL in 2018.

 

5 hours ago, Futballer said:

Discrediting the CNSL Group is denying all Canadians Soccer Supporters our own Pro soccer League. 

And there we have it, the death knell of any reasonable discourse.

Since the CanPL is apparently moving ahead without the CNSL group the above statement is not only a logical fallacy, it also contains an outright falsehood: Discrediting one group's plan for a league is, in fact, most assuredly NOT denying Canadian soccer supporters anything.

 

3 hours ago, ironcub14 said:

One quick question for everybody, I'm a little bit confused about the 2 groups being discussed here within the past month. The way I have it at the moment is that,

- there's a group there that's led by Bob Young and Hamilton that's pragmatic, but does involve the wooing of and potential but not definitive cooperation of at least 8 seriously financially affluent sporting groups, including NHL and CFL

- there's another group out there supported by Futballer, and calling itself the CNSL, and considered the seriously aggressive one, typos and grammar be damned. I'm not sure which of the two groups I'd label as more pie-in-the-sky, but I would probably label this one as more so.

Frankly I'm not sure why we got started talking about the CNSL group at all or why Futballer keeps talking like it is somehow relevant? If the CNSL group wants to morph into an ownership group for a team in the CanPL then great. They can bring whatever "expertise" they have to the league that way.

 

 

[matty]

5 hours ago, Futballer said:

All i am saying is ! Support the Group that develops the Business plan. we know what it takes to operate the CPL.

The CNSL Group is that insurance policy that this edition of  the CPL don't fail.    

 

What you've revealed here about your plan makes little sense

[Unnamed Trialist]

8 hours ago, Complete Homer said:

What are you on about? 

We have seen Bob Young's letter, a local billionaire, to Hamilton city council. We have seen his representative stand up in front of city council and explain that infrastructure spending is necessary to support a team in CPL (lying here would certainly have consequences, misrepresenting facts in front of a government body for the sake of infrastructure approval).  We have the same person who broke that Vancouver and Montreal were getting MLS teams breaking that CPL was being developed. We have seen MLSE taking it seriously enough to schedule a meeting with the CSA. We have had multiple leaks from multiple sources regarding ownership groups. We have seen the CSA acknowledging the project in several places in the mainstream media. We've even had members of this board have face to face conversations with stakeholders. That's just off the top of my head, and it amounts to a lot more than nothing. 

Your argument basically boils down to:

1. "Not as many leaks have happened as would have happened if the league were real." I would counter that you really have nothing but an opinion on that. You've sat with CEOs? Congrats, I've chatted with the Governor General at formal functions at my medical school, that doesn't make me politically competent any more than it makes you business savvy. 

2. "Montagliani is lying to boost his image."  I've already broken down why this is a ridiculous statement. Even if he was going realpolitik on us, lying at this stage would not be in his best interest, especially growing the lie so much in the past month. Your entire argument hinges on this point and I would invite anyone reading this to make a reasonable argument for this. I can only imagine someone with an epistemological block against the idea of CPL finding this argument plausible

3. "We are a rare scenario of a country without a domestic league." This one is a mind bender, as it actually implies that getting a domestic league is almost an inevitablity, I don't know why you think it supports your point. 

4. "We have failed to have a sustained domestic league in the past." Ignoring the fact that the soccer landscape has changed dramatically in the past two decades (don't you live in Spain? Maybe you just haven't been around to notice), and ignoring that the wildly successful MLS came on the heels of two failed American leagues, this is a prognostic factor for the long term sustainability of the project, not an indicator of whether or not the league is being planned. You could argue that a history of failure might dissuade investors, while I could counter that MLS' success on the heels of failure could have ameliorated those concerns

5. Plugging your ears and shouting "La La La, you have no evidence and you are dumb." Seriously, you almost immediately resort to ad hominen in nearly every post you make. Your complete and utter condescension is laughably unfounded, but given your prior behaviour on this board, maybe this is just an irreparable character flaw of yours (I don't like getting personal, I have been fairly civil to you so far, but this sort of posting behaviour is not new from you). 

You insisting this way, all you do is write yourself into holes. Your argument is, basically, that, this huge constellation exists because somewhere in space there is a black hole. 

Let's go one by one:

1-The Hamilton reference is precisely a normal reference, what you'd expect, a business leader manifesting his interest and speaking to politicians. Press reporting. Some public discussion. A potential owner can't even dream about making a bid or move without doing do so, checking infrastructure, sounding out possibilities. No politician can hide this since it affects public budgets and infrastructure. It has to come out publicly, and honestly, since as you say, "lying here would certainly have consequences". The point is: if we were anywhere, we'd have 3, 4, 5, equivalent news stories from other cities. It is actually thin as hell, but it's SOMETHING. We don't have any others, because they don't exist. Not even one more. 

2-Your argument about leaks simply proves you know nothing about how things work. It is not, as I argued, a question of just knowing CEOs, who I argued, in fact, can keep secrets. Secrecy is possible, only it is highly unlikely if you consider management teams, families,, lawyers, accountants, architects, politicians, press, soccer community consultants, etc.

Now if you are not arguing there are ownership groups set up, just a league on paper, then you are saying exactly what I am saying: there is nothing, just Hamilton yapping and nothing more. If not, if you believe the ownership structure is in place, you are suggesting only the Hamilton guys are loose-mouthed. So the silent guys no one has seen are amazing, your heroes, and the Hamilton guys are effectively too dumbshit and incompetent to keep a secret? Not very nice.

3-Montagliani is telling the truth, in one sense: they are going to make a statement. That statement may be very dissappointing, but you are going to love it, because it is going to prove you right. Even if it means no real league at all, just hot air. That is pretty weak.

If we were to discuss what CSA presidents have said in the past and failed to fulfill, you would have to put Vic in the same boat. You have no idea of what has gone on in provincial SAs in this country, there has been scandalous stuff. These are the guys who vote in the CSA president. But hey, how convenient to forget what he said about the future of the MNT when they hired Floro. Selective memory there.

4-You are argue that having no domestic league proves that it is almost inevitable, us being the exception. No, having nothing means that, given a history of that nothingness, nothing will be the future. You are just being plain silly. For you every loner in the world is going to find the love of his life tomorrow, because he wants to, so that is inevitable too. Couldn't you consider the possiblity that maybe, being loners, they might continue alone tomorrow? 

5-Resort to a personal attack because I am arguing that a black hole, is, in fact, black and hole. Your argument, which you love, is that it is full of creme brulee or your favourite ice cream. If you don't agree with me, argue your points instead of cowardly jumping up and down screaming the black hole is stuffed with what you want for Sunday dessert.

[Unnamed Trialist]

2 hours ago, ted said:

LOL. Well that is an interesting version of the truth. Garber is the only one who made it work, Logan is the one they fired 17 years ago because he couldn't make it work.

By all means pay him for some consulting on what NOT to do when starting a league but a monkey in a business suit would make a better league commissioner for the CanPL in 2018.

 

And there we have it, the death knell of any reasonable discourse.

Since the CanPL is apparently moving ahead without the CNSL group the above statement is not only a logical fallacy, it also contains an outright falsehood: Discrediting one group's plan for a league is, in fact, most assuredly NOT denying Canadian soccer supporters anything.

 

Frankly I'm not sure why we got started talking about the CNSL group at all or why Futballer keeps talking like it is somehow relevant? If the CNSL group wants to morph into an ownership group for a team in the CanPL then great. They can bring whatever "expertise" they have to the league that way.

 

 

Ted, your arguments are very powerful. But tell me, do you think it is better to have a guy with soccer experience in MLS, or a bunch of guys who are moved over from CFL duties running the league?

I know, probably neither. Me too.

I am asking since this idea that they are going to save money by having execs double up, as Soccer Only has posted, is very troubling. That is also a formula for failure, guys with no knowledge of the product or game or its specificity, and on top of that from the CFL which is extremely endogamic and traditional. Making the future soccer league, if the formula is that, a clumsy surrogate of the CFL model?

All I can say is that if they do go that road, if the CFL owners are into it, then great. But be minimally intelligent enough to hire professional soccer people to run the league.