Jump to content

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Complete Homer said:

If you had an announcement coming before Christmas, would it push back your resentment? Or would you still prefer USL expansion? 

Christmas 2016? 2017? 2018? 2019? .... but I digress.

And if you don't get an announcement before Christmas 2016 would it push back on your refusal to allow expansion of USL in Canada?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 10k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Do you want Soccer or Football? Entertainment or Development? Franchise or Club? Supporters or Consumers?

Celta Vigo Population 300,000 beat Barcelona today 4-3. 
Eibar Population 26,000 tied Real Madrid 1-1.

There is something magical about 1 Division Football. Where the best compete against the best, week in and week out. 

Every week, every selection, every tackle, every play matters, because every game matters, right up until the last week, the last game. You see to play in first division football you need to earn it. You MERIT your way in. You don't buy your way in and get a free pass for life. You need to pit your ideas about the game vs the other guys idea and hope to high heaven your idea was better. You need to be accountable for your team selection and you need your best players available at every game. Which means you are in a constant struggle to not only play the best players, but to develop the future best players if you are to have a future in division 1 football. You need those next players to understand this pressure this relentless drive to excel and to come out on top. You need them emotionally strong, physically fit and mentally agile. 

I hear from Canadians that Brazilians and the like produce great players because those kids need a way out of poverty, as if poverty is an ingredient to talent. How about the Germans? They don't come from destitute conditions yet they produce some of the very best players. Maybe both countries treat football the same way, You PLAY if you can PLAY. In Canada, You play if you can PAY. There is something unjust about that, yet we open arms accept that for corporate franchises. 

This means that each CLUB'S main PRIORITY is to win and remain in division 1 soccer. This moves player development to the forefront. If you can win, then you can play, and if you get to play then you get to make money. You see club's still make money a lot of money, but their main product is on the field. 

In the franchise model, it's upside down, the priority is to make money. So what if you lose? Sure less people come to your matches, but you are the only game in town so it's not like they can leave you for good. You don't need to win to stay, you don't need quality, in fact you start restricting the product, just like the diamond manufacturers do, to artificially inflate your products value. In this case, the product is first division soccer. 

This is why Soccer Franchises have corporate meetings about Average Revenue per Customer. That's where you start selling them gourmet nachos, high priced beer, international friendly games, fluffy mascots for the kids and 50/50 tickets. You start pimping to your local minor soccer clubs offering them a chance to walk around the field and get a blank white t-shirt just so you can get them and their families to come buy tickets. Playoffs and Championships aren't valued for the prestige but for the chance to sell more beers, and more hot dogs. 

Well, don't franchises produce players? Well, no. It's actually quite expensive to produce a player, that is counter-productive to what your main priority is.  You are not worried the next local club will beat you with a group of local lads and steal your customers. You are not worried because you control the product and the right to call yourself Division 1. They can't get in no matter if they are actually better. It's like the jerk kid that owns the ball and takes it home when he doesn't like how the game is going. 

There are over 300 million people in the USA and it's first division has 20 Franchises, that's at most 1000 kids in a merit based academy. 1000 kids that don't have to PAY. I'm frequently told Canada will never have 20 Clubs. So what we are saying is at best we will develop 1000 kids who EARNED their right to play. IS THAT ENOUGH?

What if any club, any organization, any investor had a clearly defined and open way to compete with the best of the best?

Do you not think that would entice investors to start building clubs that would eventually allow them to earn real dollars in our first division? I think it would. 

It would invite anyone to compete if they can earn it. 

You have to ask yourself WHY you want this league. Truly, what purpose does this league actually accomplish for YOU and for your country. Do you want to be entertained or do you want this country to win it's first World Cup?

Some of you can't dream that high and would be content to simply see us AT a World Cup. Myself, I'm more of the first kind. 

I know that the first step towards Canada joining the elite nations of the world in Football, starts with an OPEN SYSTEM. A MERIT based system. Where coaches are held accountable by the media, the supporters, and more importantly by the results their ideas produce. A system that gives legitimate incentives and REWARDS to ANYBODY if they dare to compete.

Now is the time to demand the league be structured in a way that is open to any investor, club or organization to merit their way into DIVISION 1. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/10/2016 at 4:06 PM, Complete Homer said:

I'm aware of the Easton report. Everyone is. The primary reasons for recommending a regionalized semi-pro league over a national pro league was the lack of adequate venues, unlikelihood that ownership groups are available willing to take long term losses, and uncertainty about public interest. 

The former two seem to have been addressed effectively by the CSA, if mixed CFL/NHL ownerships is true. The latter point is always going to be a variable that new teams will deal with, regardless of if they are CPL, NASL, or USL. 

The Easton report really wasn't as damning as you think. It made direct comparisons to the development of the A-league and how a Canadian league would probably have a similar early trajectory. The sticking point was that the authors didn't think there were ownership groups willing to take the hit. Unless, again, lots of people are lying their ass off, ownership groups willing and able to take that hit have been found. 

It's actually good that you brought the Easton report up, because as a well known and publicly available analysis, it proves that the CSA wouldn't be pulling a fast one on any ownership groups. Barring complete incompetence, they know what they are getting into, and are less likely to bail after a couple of seasons 

Raise your hands, brothers, and believe!

Yeah Easton, but. Yeah, a study recommended not doing it, but. Yeah, someone put some thought into it, but. No evidence exists, but. But, but, but believe, brothers, believe!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2016-10-01 at 3:38 PM, Complete Homer said:

If you had an announcement coming before Christmas, would it push back your resentment? Or would you still prefer USL expansion? 

 

On 2016-10-01 at 10:49 PM, TRM said:

Christmas 2016? 2017? 2018? 2019? .... but I digress.

And if you don't get an announcement before Christmas 2016 would it push back on your refusal to allow expansion of USL in Canada?

I know I wrote a number of times here earlier in favour of USL expansion, but at this point, based on everything we've heard so far, even if they are rumours at best in terms of which ownership groups may or may not be interested, and whether all this interest coalesces into something concrete between now and 2020, I think a CPL would be worth waiting for, over the USL expansion route. I'd give 2 years from now for the rumours to turn into something concrete.

I just can't see a 2018 launch at this point, although if there was an announcement imminent, then I think a 2019 launch would make sense. By end of 2018 though, if nothing materializes and we have no formal announcements, I think you'd have to realistically explore other options such as USL. Which really is not that bad in the grand scheme of things.

Edited by ironcub14
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to you all for bringing up the Easton Report. I was aware of it but I had never googled it carefully enough to find it.

I found all the relevant links now, and I'll share it here for anybody else interested. I'll have a read through all the links tomorrow likely.

http://www.thevoyageurs.org/forums/topic/25280-eastonrethink-study-2013/

http://www.canadasoccer.com/canada-soccer-releases-report-on-division-ii-soccer-viability-in-canada-p153255

http://www.wakingthered.com/2013/2/5/3954834/easton-report-canada-soccer-league-of-our-own

https://issuu.com/rethinkmanagementgroup/docs/phase_i___ii_summary/1?e=6798688/3589027

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2016-09-30 at 1:26 PM, Futballer said:

 If you had said yes : a very lucrative deal would be tabled for you: instead you rather fight against the CNSL Group: So much for  brotherly Union:

Wait, what?!?

So, if I had blown smoke up your ass and NOT given my honest opinion I would have a well-paying job with your league?  Dammit, my ethics are annoying. ;)

Brotherly Union cannot be bought and anyone who tells you what you want to hear, no matter the flaws or the mistakes, is certainly not someone you should ever hire for anything.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@reme90

I gotta say, you do get me fired up.  And although I might nitpick on details, I love the passion.

Serious Question:

Do you think it is possible to set up a system that is open, and yet also has some element of revenue sharing in order to prevent the entire thing from collapsing?  Like is there a middle ground in your mind and what would it look like?

I won't stop you from ranting, cause hey, I've been there.  But I wanna see if I can direct your rant in a certain direction :P

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/10/2016 at 10:59 AM, reme90 said:

Do you want Soccer or Football? Entertainment or Development? Franchise or Club? Supporters or Consumers?

Celta Vigo Population 300,000 beat Barcelona today 4-3. 
Eibar Population 26,000 tied Real Madrid 1-1.

There is something magical about 1 Division Football. Where the best compete against the best, week in and week out. 

Every week, every selection, every tackle, every play matters, because every game matters, right up until the last week, the last game. You see to play in first division football you need to earn it. You MERIT your way in. You don't buy your way in and get a free pass for life. You need to pit your ideas about the game vs the other guys idea and hope to high heaven your idea was better. You need to be accountable for your team selection and you need your best players available at every game. Which means you are in a constant struggle to not only play the best players, but to develop the future best players if you are to have a future in division 1 football. You need those next players to understand this pressure this relentless drive to excel and to come out on top. You need them emotionally strong, physically fit and mentally agile. 

I hear from Canadians that Brazilians and the like produce great players because those kids need a way out of poverty, as if poverty is an ingredient to talent. How about the Germans? They don't come from destitute conditions yet they produce some of the very best players. Maybe both countries treat football the same way, You PLAY if you can PLAY. In Canada, You play if you can PAY. There is something unjust about that, yet we open arms accept that for corporate franchises. 

This means that each CLUB'S main PRIORITY is to win and remain in division 1 soccer. This moves player development to the forefront. If you can win, then you can play, and if you get to play then you get to make money. You see club's still make money a lot of money, but their main product is on the field. 

In the franchise model, it's upside down, the priority is to make money. So what if you lose? Sure less people come to your matches, but you are the only game in town so it's not like they can leave you for good. You don't need to win to stay, you don't need quality, in fact you start restricting the product, just like the diamond manufacturers do, to artificially inflate your products value. In this case, the product is first division soccer. 

This is why Soccer Franchises have corporate meetings about Average Revenue per Customer. That's where you start selling them gourmet nachos, high priced beer, international friendly games, fluffy mascots for the kids and 50/50 tickets. You start pimping to your local minor soccer clubs offering them a chance to walk around the field and get a blank white t-shirt just so you can get them and their families to come buy tickets. Playoffs and Championships aren't valued for the prestige but for the chance to sell more beers, and more hot dogs. 

Well, don't franchises produce players? Well, no. It's actually quite expensive to produce a player, that is counter-productive to what your main priority is.  You are not worried the next local club will beat you with a group of local lads and steal your customers. You are not worried because you control the product and the right to call yourself Division 1. They can't get in no matter if they are actually better. It's like the jerk kid that owns the ball and takes it home when he doesn't like how the game is going. 

There are over 300 million people in the USA and it's first division has 20 Franchises, that's at most 1000 kids in a merit based academy. 1000 kids that don't have to PAY. I'm frequently told Canada will never have 20 Clubs. So what we are saying is at best we will develop 1000 kids who EARNED their right to play. IS THAT ENOUGH?

What if any club, any organization, any investor had a clearly defined and open way to compete with the best of the best?

Do you not think that would entice investors to start building clubs that would eventually allow them to earn real dollars in our first division? I think it would. 

It would invite anyone to compete if they can earn it. 

You have to ask yourself WHY you want this league. Truly, what purpose does this league actually accomplish for YOU and for your country. Do you want to be entertained or do you want this country to win it's first World Cup?

Some of you can't dream that high and would be content to simply see us AT a World Cup. Myself, I'm more of the first kind. 

I know that the first step towards Canada joining the elite nations of the world in Football, starts with an OPEN SYSTEM. A MERIT based system. Where coaches are held accountable by the media, the supporters, and more importantly by the results their ideas produce. A system that gives legitimate incentives and REWARDS to ANYBODY if they dare to compete.

Now is the time to demand the league be structured in a way that is open to any investor, club or organization to merit their way into DIVISION 1. 

Hi, I think if you'd divide up this post, by sections and threads, you'd get more response, it is just a suggestion. Because you have a lot of good things to say, but maybe too many for one post. 

For example, pro-releg has been widely discussed here. Almost all agree it is best. Few think it is feasible in North America. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

Hi, I think if you'd divide up this post, by sections and threads, you'd get more response, it is just a suggestion. Because you have a lot of good things to say, but maybe too many for one post.

I know first-hand how exhausting and time-consuming ranting here can get sometimes

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, ironcub14 said:

I know first-hand how exhausting and time-consuming ranting here can get sometimes

:D

I really was being sincere to the guy as I know the feeling, I wonder how, being a writer myself, I can take days to do a column a page long but here just slam it out, hundreds of words some weeks, amazing output. 

Fortunately some people read it, I know because some people tell me I should not be saying it on that thread, at that time, and try to get me to not post at all. Ever. Which is pretty fcking hilarious, imagine that: not posting because it bothers someone!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/1/2016 at 2:29 AM, BringBackTheBlizzard said:

In the build up to the 2015 Women's World Cup, Montagliani and co commissioned a feasility study into the viability of launching a coast-to-coast pro league that was carried out by a former CMNT player called Jim Easton. The conclusion reached was that it wasn't feasible and the recommendation was to focus on regional D3 and leave D1 and D2 to USSF sanctioned leagues. What has changed since then? I doubt there is any compelling overlooked rational reason to believe it would work now, if the three MLS teams can't be forced into it, but the CSA are now ploughing on with this stuff because they prefer the national league option for emotional reasons tied into visceral level nationalism. Much the same happened in the late 1990s when the CSA hired KPMG to do a feasibility study and then ignored the findings that it wasn't viable and ploughed ahead with the CUSL concept that ultimately failed to get anywhere.  

One thing that has changed is 5,000 people showing up regularly to watch NASL caliber football in Ottawa. I think a reasonable case could be made that a Canadian league could be sustainable with 7 other cities targeting that level of support

Link to post
Share on other sites

wouldn't the three mls teams profit over 180 or 190 million if they sold their MLS franchise rights? they bought in for under 5 million? If they joined the cpl they would plush on cash. Can't see the avergae canadains taking it seriously if the whitecaps, tfc, or impact aren't in the league or depends on who tsn covers mls or cpl? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

Hi, I think if you'd divide up this post, by sections and threads, you'd get more response, it is just a suggestion. Because you have a lot of good things to say, but maybe too many for one post. 

For example, pro-releg has been widely discussed here. Almost all agree it is best. Few think it is feasible in North America. 

This is true....including the comments about pro/rel....everyone should really stop talking about pro/rel until we see what happens with the A-League ;)

Edited by matty
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/3/2016 at 7:25 PM, matty said:

@reme90 can you please stop with the rants. we all understand your point and love your passion but you're not adding anything new and you're starting to make claims that make little sense at times.

Rants is the lifeblood of being a Canadian soccer fan. Also, 93.24% of whatever is written on any thread is nothing new - welcome to being a Voyageur.  

20 hours ago, GuillermoDelQuarto said:

@reme90

I gotta say, you do get me fired up.  And although I might nitpick on details, I love the passion.

Serious Question:

Do you think it is possible to set up a system that is open, and yet also has some element of revenue sharing in order to prevent the entire thing from collapsing?  Like is there a middle ground in your mind and what would it look like?

Of course!! Every league in the world (except MLS/Aleague) is an OPEN league, however, each one is run differently to reflect their specific market. 

You only need 1 thing to be an OPEN Market : A Clearly Defined Merit based Path into Division 1. 

You can have: Salary Caps, Revenue Sharing, National League Sponsors, Player Nationality Quotas, Designated Players, Regional Schedules, Conferences and even Playoffs. Whatever you need to make the league financially viable is not only great but necessary. You can even offer founding clubs protection from relegation for say 20 years or until 20 clubs are in the Premier League, (whatever comes first).  

You can even have criteria for teams to enter into Division 1 such as: Coaching Standards, Facility requirements, Financial backing, Sponsors, etc. So to filter out non-viable teams from getting lucky and winning a game into D1. 

14 hours ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

Hi, I think if you'd divide up this post, by sections and threads, you'd get more response,

For example, pro-releg has been widely discussed here.  Few think it is feasible in North America. 

Will take your advice to heart. It's better than being told to shutup, because I have nothing to say. 

Pro/Rel is feasibly being done in almost every country but somehow Canada can't do it. Are you a CANadian or a CANTadian?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, reme90 said:

Rants is the lifeblood of being a Canadian soccer fan. Also, 93.24% of whatever is written on any thread is nothing new - welcome to being a Voyageur.  

Of course!! Every league in the world (except MLS/Aleague) is an OPEN league, however, each one is run differently to reflect their specific market. 

You only need 1 thing to be an OPEN Market : A Clearly Defined Merit based Path into Division 1. 

You can have: Salary Caps, Revenue Sharing, National League Sponsors, Player Nationality Quotas, Designated Players, Regional Schedules, Conferences and even Playoffs. Whatever you need to make the league financially viable is not only great but necessary. You can even offer founding clubs protection from relegation for say 20 years or until 20 clubs are in the Premier League, (whatever comes first).  

You can even have criteria for teams to enter into Division 1 such as: Coaching Standards, Facility requirements, Financial backing, Sponsors, etc. So to filter out non-viable teams from getting lucky and winning a game into D1. 

Will take your advice to heart. It's better than being told to shutup, because I have nothing to say. 

Pro/Rel is feasibly being done in almost every country but somehow Canada can't do it. Are you a CANadian or a CANTadian?

This is what I was talking about when I said "claims that make little sense at times". You want a libertarian league model but are fine with franchise elements being included and with protecting teams.

Would you be happy if the CPL became a franchise based system with say 16-20 teams over two leagues (tier 1 and 2) with the bottom table finishers in each tier 1 conference being swapped out for the top finishers of the tier 2 conferences? That's likely going to be what happens in the A-League soon http://www.foxsports.com.au/football/a-league/head-of-aleague-greg-orourke-maps-out-what-happens-now-for-expansion-to-take-place-in-australia/news-story/fd7b6285712e78acf12acb63a362e0ed

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, matty said:

This is what I was talking about when I said "claims that make little sense at times". You want a libertarian league model but are fine with franchise elements being included and with protecting teams.

Would you be happy if the CPL became a franchise based system with say 16-20 teams over two leagues (tier 1 and 2) with the bottom table finishers in each tier 1 conference being swapped out for the top finishers of the tier 2 conferences? That's likely going to be what happens in the A-League soon http://www.foxsports.com.au/football/a-league/head-of-aleague-greg-orourke-maps-out-what-happens-now-for-expansion-to-take-place-in-australia/news-story/fd7b6285712e78acf12acb63a362e0ed

How does it "not make sense" to suggest that there would be no relegation until there are enough teams to make relegation viable? He's laid it out elsewhere: new teams join the founders until there they reach the goal number of teams (appears to be 20 for him) wanted for the first division and then relegation/promotion starts. Presuming I suppose that there is a second division to relegate too. Not saying I agree or disagree with his specific vision nor do I make any claims as to viability but there is no contradictory or nonsensical logic in this elemental at all. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Gordon said:

How does it "not make sense" to suggest that there would be no relegation until there are enough teams to make relegation viable? He's laid it out elsewhere: new teams join the founders until there they reach the goal number of teams (appears to be 20 for him) wanted for the first division and then relegation/promotion starts. Presuming I suppose that there is a second division to relegate too. Not saying I agree or disagree with his specific vision nor do I make any claims as to viability but there is no contradictory or nonsensical logic in this elemental at all. 

I was referring to protecting the original teams for 20 years part. I have no issue with the 20 teams part

Edited by matty
Link to post
Share on other sites

If Canada can support twenty soccer teams who are capable of turning a profit while maintaining professional pay, professional standards, and being sustainable business models over the long term - regardless of which leagues those teams play in - then yes, Canada will be capable of adopting pro/rel.

Certainly not going to hold my breath on that first criteria.  Seems a bit like putting the cart before the horse when we don't even own a cart yet.  Let's hope we can get a decent league up and running before figuring out how to kick teams out of it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, matty said:

I was referring to protecting the original teams for 20 years part. I have no issue with the 20 teams part

Well he does say 20 years or 20 teams whichever comes first. Kind of weaselly, like saying "I promise you I won't sleep with your wife until you have one" to a single guy, but hey, it is a guarantee.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Gordon said:

Well he does say 20 years or 20 teams whichever comes first. Kind of weaselly, like saying "I promise you I won't sleep with your wife until you have one" to a single guy, but hey, it is a guarantee.

20 years comes first likely.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, matty said:

Would you be happy if the CPL became a franchise based system 

NO, Franchise system is to Club Soccer what Taco Bell is to my Latina grandmothers tacos. Or in other words it's not authentic and the educated fan will reject it. Just like the VAST majority of soccer-first families in the USA have rejected MLS. The Canadian Footy fan is getting more educated, especially now with the availability of World Soccer only a remote control away. 

Franchises are for the Filthy Rich Owners, Clubs are for the Community

1 hour ago, Gopherbashi said:

If Canada can support twenty soccer teams who are capable of turning a profit while maintaining professional pay, professional standards, and being sustainable business models over the long term - regardless of which leagues those teams play in - then yes, Canada will be capable of adopting pro/rel.

If we are realistic in our expectations we can get to more than 20. Maybe not $300million stadiums with 60k fans per team big, but 5k-15k with soccer specific stadiums like those suggested in other threads. That is doable. 

1 hour ago, Gordon said:

Well he does say 20 years or 20 teams whichever comes first. Kind of weaselly, like saying "I promise you I won't sleep with your wife until you have one" to a single guy, but hey, it is a guarantee.

Essentially, the promise promotes club investment, while rewarding initial investors for taking the first plunge. 

47 minutes ago, matty said:

20 years comes first likely.

This is what I don't get about the naysayers to an open system.  On one hand they say

"No Investor will invest knowing he could be relegated and lose his investment"

Then on the other hand

"Canada CANNOT support more than a handful of teams" 

Which is it, then? If you cant dream of having enough teams to EVER relegate anyone, than WHAT is the objection to having an OPEN system where any investor or organization can EARN their Promotion into the Premier League????

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...