Canadian Premier League

[matty]

Alright to move from everything and get back to our conspiracy fantasy talk because this is the funnest thread on the site: i have a feeling if the league comes to be we're getting something similar to pro rugby in the states. A handful of teams (likely 6) in key secondary markets.

Currently there are only 5 markets we have "decent" sources on there being something going on in: Hamilton, Ottawa, Calgary, Toronto and Regina. Aside from these everything is more cryptic. BC is gonna have a team but no one has an idea where, quebec is "up in the air", while winnipeg has been floated there haven't really been any decent rumours about it and Fc Edmonton has said "we're nasl you fuckers" proudly to everyone before inhaling from a strange tank that they carry with them.

Quebec is a borderline dead market for soccer atm so i do question it. It took bringing in drogba for the impact to make an impact in the Quebec market, so i question someone being interested in investing in it there. So i will be bold and say there will not be one. Same goes for winnipeg. These will be expansion markets.

At the current time our talent pool is thin and in order to be "Canada's league" they will need a 50% quota meaning they would need 12~ players on a team of 25 and as @Complete Homer (i think that's who it was, I'm drunk so i might be wrong) points out you can't really do that and have a solid with 8 teams.......but it might be with 6. 6 teams would need 75 players and the current CMNt pool is 100 (on the high end), of that 100 you might be able to get 50-60 in a cpl meaning you could fill 2/3 of the canadian spots with potential national team players and the other third with the closest possible ncaa, l1o, plsq and cis players to being in said pool. Mixed with you skilled concacaf import talent you end up with an ok league.

We've always heard this league is going to be conservative with its actions. So 6 teams makes sense in a lot of ways.....at least to drunk "blue velvet" watching me.

I'll clean this up if it makes zero sense when I'm sober

[baulderdash77]

See Ive thought that @Complete Homer underestimated the player pool when he said we don't have the depth for a 50% domestic quota.  I think that with a 2 year lead time we have enough depth.

With 6 teams we defiantly have enough depth and I doubt that would be disputed by anyone.  I do think we have to see the number of teams but IMO 6 teams, yes for surre, 8 teams, yes but it's a stretch.

 

[Complete Homer]

My argument with the quota was that a 50% quota in an 8 team league was within the realm of possibility without dipping into L1O/PLSQ and only minimally dipping into CIS, but only if substantial numbers of players abroad returned in 2018 (basically anyone whose sole nationality is Canadian in leagues where a 60k salary would be comparable or a raise, 1/4 of dual nationals in similar leagues). I don't think many from the national team will be interested until quality is proven, and even then, upper end players would probably only see it as a place for a victory lap season before retirement. 

Now, you can argue that there will definitely be a lot of L1O/PLSQ guys that will make the jump. I agree. However, since my above assumption that every player abroad is unattached for 2018 is absurd, I think this part is a wash. 

Beyond that, lots of players who are prime candidates for CPL will avoid it year 1 to not give up opportunities to join a league of unknown quality. Lots of guys enjoy living overseas. Lots of guys will be contracted to other clubs long term. To hit 50% with decent quality, you have to have near total buy-in from the talent pool, which isn't guaranteed in the least

To me, there is far greater risk with a year 1 50% quota than reward. You risk a lack of buy-in from the pool and the league starting off as shit. Fans of MLS teams will see it's shit and lose interest, the player pool sees it's shit and become uninterested in coming, ideas of expansion are killed because it looks like the talent is too diluted already, and a league that will already struggle for existence will be forced to go into damage control right away. The reward is a 40 extra spots for Canadians that would have come in time anyway with an escalating quota. 

Starting at 30% and escalating has different risks. You have the risk that owners will back out of the escalation, you have a risk that the pool doesn't expand as expected and quality goes down, and you risk not giving 40 extra Canadians a roster spot for the first few years. The reward is that tapping into the almost unlimited international market allows you to have a more stable and predictable level of quality to build from (good for both fanbase and convincing Canadian players to commit), and a higher level of play for the Canadians to compete at (what's the point of CPL if it is not a huge step up from L10/PLSQ?). To me, that reward is worth the risk, and as long as the quota rises as the player pool expands, the downsides are minimal. 

I also don't think the idea that the pool will expand significantly in the next couple years is accurate. Our pool is largely stagnant in size because players who can't make it overseas or don't want to go overseas retire early, and the pool will only expand when there is motivation to remain in pro soccer via the CPL (though USL may also be changing that). Modest gains in the next 18 months won't do too much. 

[Complete Homer]

And, I'd point out that dropping the quota from 50% to 30% will be a substantial boost to quality. You would be replacing roughly the 40 worst players in the league (bottom of the barrel to reach the quota guys) with the type of guys 60k buys on the open market in CONCACAF. That's 5 more quality guys per team replacing guys at the bottom of the barrel, which I think would be huge for establishing a level of play equal to NASL. 

[rob.notenboom]

To me, the idea of domestic quota has always had more to do with players that are currently in academies and clubs rather than those who would be considered to be in our current player pool. In 2 - 4 years, with a potential pro career as a carrot, how many current 14 - 16 yr olds could become reasonable pros? I don't know for certain, but I suspect the number could be in the 100s at least. 

Not to mention that some of those serviceable pros might end up being quite good ... and one or two might be fantastic ... and so it begins (at least that's the hope, isn't it).

[Complete Homer]

8 minutes ago, rob.notenboom said:

To me, the idea of domestic quota has always had more to do with players that are currently in academies and clubs rather than those who would be considered to be in our current player pool. In 2 - 4 years, with a potential pro career as a carrot, how many current 14 - 16 yr olds could become reasonable pros? I don't know for certain, but I suspect the number could be in the 100s at least. 

Not to mention that some of those serviceable pros might end up being quite good ... and one or two might be fantastic ... and so it begins (at least that's the hope, isn't it).

I agree, but we've got to think of the practical aspect of year 1. How do you put your best foot forward to market the league and ensure it is around for those 14-16 year olds? To me, you drop the quota to the point where it is predictable that the current player pool could sustain the league at a high level for the for first few years while slowly raising it as the kids graduate

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

10 minutes ago, rob.notenboom said:

To me, the idea of domestic quota has always had more to do with players that are currently in academies and clubs rather than those who would be considered to be in our current player pool....

That's not the way things have been spun by people like John McGrane and Anthony Totera from what I have heard as the implication appears to have been that MLS has been deliberately ignoring the pool of available Canadian players to the detriment of their pro level opportunities. The case for that sort of posture was a lot stronger before the USL reserve teams were launched given over 100 Canadians played at that level over the summer this year.

[rob.notenboom]

1 hour ago, Complete Homer said:

I agree, but we've got to think of the practical aspect of year 1. How do you put your best foot forward to market the league and ensure it is around for those 14-16 year olds? To me, you drop the quota to the point where it is predictable that the current player pool could sustain the league at a high level for the for first few years while slowly raising it as the kids graduate

Yes. Agreed. 

[rob.notenboom]

1 hour ago, BringBackTheBlizzard said:

That's not the way things have been spun by people like John McGrane and Anthony Totera from what I have heard as the implication appears to have been that MLS has been deliberately ignoring the pool of available Canadian players to the detriment of their pro level opportunities. The case for that sort of posture was a lot stronger before the USL reserve teams were launched given over 100 Canadians played at that level over the summer this year.

When I reread my statement I realized I left a lot of ambiguity. When I said 'To me the idea of a domestic quota ...' what I meant was, 'Here's how I would deal with a domestic quota.' It wasn't meant in relation to how anyone else was pitching it. 

I agree that part of the common thread is that Canadian players are underserved by pro situations. The USL opportunities certainly help in this regard. But when the next step (be that NASL or MLS) is so closed to you due to roster restrictions, this is an improvement that will only do so much. 

I suppose my point is, will CanPL help the current crop of young professional players? I can't see how more potential professional minutes for Canadians can be a bad thing. However, I think this short-term role, while important, pales in comparison with CanPL's potential role in supporting the development of successive generations of players. 

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

Not sure what the last paragraph has to do with what I wrote? All I pointed out is that the people who are pushing the CPL concept publicly have stated that they want it to be mainly Canadian from the outset in terms of the players, coaching staff and front office. Think you guys know that it is difficult to square that with being NASL quality from the outset if eight franchises are involved all fielding mainly Canadian teams, but from a CMNT standpoint something more on a par with the original CSL back in the late 80s might get the job done better and be a better fit for the secondary markets that are readily available. It didn't do the likes of Devos, Dasovic, Peschisolido, Radzinski, Aguiar, Limniatis, Watson and Aunger any harm a generation ago.

[Complete Homer]

^Totera has certainly been pushing higher Canadian content, but Rollins has recently said that he thinks the quota  be scaled up gradually. No one has said a specific a specific number for a long time

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

Somebody else on twitter has stated that they have been told by people in the know not to take Rollins seriously as it was not how they understood a Canadian league would unfold, so who to believe? The CSA's stated agenda publicly is providing more pro level opportunities for the development of Canadian players and they have stated it involves an inclusive approach that is open to the existing pro teams. Would they go along with a watering down of domestic content to chase higher playing standards given many of their grievances with MLS appear to revolve around how that was implemented post-2007 after fringe CMNT players like Pozniak, Braz, Canizalez and Reda struggled to make the grade in an MLS context with TFC? I suspect they wouldn't see being on a par with the NASL as being the main priority in all of this and would be more concerned about securing jobs for CMNT-eligible players even if that meant scaling back the scale of operations a bit.

[rob.notenboom]

2 hours ago, BringBackTheBlizzard said:

Not sure what the last paragraph has to do with what I wrote? All I pointed out is that the people who are pushing the CPL concept publicly have stated that they want it to be mainly Canadian from the outset in terms of the players, coaching staff and front office. Think you guys know that it is difficult to square that with being NASL quality from the outset if eight franchises are involved all fielding mainly Canadian teams, but from a CMNT standpoint something more on a par with the original CSL back in the late 80s might get the job done better and be a better fit for the secondary markets that are readily available. It didn't do the likes of Devos, Dasovic, Peschisolido, Radzinski, Aguiar, Limniatis, Watson and Aunger any harm a generation ago.

The first paragraph is a response to what you wrote, at least in the sense that I felt I needed to clarify. The last paragraph is merely me continuing to clarify my own thoughts on the matter, but not necessarily in response to anything anyone specifically has said. 

[Complete Homer]

 

1 hour ago, BringBackTheBlizzard said:

Somebody else on twitter has stated that they have been told by people in the know not to take Rollins seriously as it was not how they understood a Canadian league would unfold, so who to believe? The CSA's stated agenda publicly is providing more pro level opportunities for the development of Canadian players and they have stated it involves an inclusive approach that is open to the existing pro teams. Would they go along with a watering down of domestic content to chase higher playing standards given many of their grievances with MLS appear to revolve around how that was implemented post-2007 after fringe CMNT players like Pozniak, Braz, Canizalez and Reda struggled to make the grade in an MLS context with TFC? I suspect they wouldn't see being on a par with the NASL as being the main priority in all of this and would be more concerned about securing jobs for CMNT-eligible players even if that meant scaling back the scale of operations a bit.

The point regarding the quota is fair, and it is definitely possible that the CSA wants a high quota as top priority. I suspect the CSA and Young have always wanted as high a quota as possible since 2013 when they first starting tossing the idea around. However an escalating quota does not negate from that, it just ensures that the league builds towards it more reasonably. With all the talk of better monitoring of the player pool that happened under Floro, I am sure they realize the pool can not yet support a league with a quota as high as  originally being floated (I believe 75%) while maintaining the quality that they reportedly wanted (aiming for NASL). 

With that in mind, they could go the way you suggested (keep the quota, lose the quality), which is a legitimate option. My opinion is that they would sacrifice the quota short/medium term for quality, as maintaining the quality (and importantly, the pay associated with the quality) is the crucial for enlarging the  pool of actually useful players. 

[1996]

Montreal Impact needed Drogba someone mentioned It took bringing in Drogba for the Impact to make an impact in the Quebec market, well true to a certain extent but Montreal was drawing decent crowds for years in leagues they played in before they entered the MLS and their attendance was still pretty good even before Drogba, I think the Quebec market is one of the better ones in Canada and if  done right I believe a team in Quebec City can do well in whatever league they might play in.

[matty]

10 hours ago, 1996 said:

Montreal Impact needed Drogba someone mentioned It took bringing in Drogba for the Impact to make an impact in the Quebec market, well true to a certain extent but Montreal was drawing decent crowds for years in leagues they played in before they entered the MLS and their attendance was still pretty good even before Drogba, I think the Quebec market is one of the better ones in Canada and if  done right I believe a team in Quebec City can do well in whatever league they might play in.

Yes the impact did draw good crowds but prior to drogba they weren't the most popular mls club in quebec (tfc was) and were the least followed team in the League. I agree quebec could be a good market but including it in the launch might be too risky a move for a club. Like you said if done right a quebec city team could be a success and i think holding off on it until the cpl is established would be doing it right.

[baulderdash77]

The advantage a Quebec City team has is a sporting monopoly until the Laval football team begins play in September.  

I think it would be a top market for the CPL to be honest.  

[matty]

1 hour ago, baulderdash77 said:

The advantage a Quebec City team has is a sporting monopoly until the Laval football team begins play in September.  

I think it would be a top market for the CPL to be honest.  

Without doubt it could be but i think we'll see it down the line and not as a launch. Quebec can be a difficult market and this league is going to be conservative with its moves.

[matty]

Hey guys. Sorry dumb question but can someone send me the source for KW having 750,000 by 2030? The only source I can find that's official (from the Region of Waterloo Public Health published in September 2015) projects a population of 650,000 by 2031 and 712,000 by 2041

[Complete Homer]

10 minutes ago, matty said:

Hey guys. Sorry dumb question but can someone send me the source for KW having 750,000 by 2030? The only source I can find that's official (from the Region of Waterloo Public Health published in September 2015) projects a population of 650,000 by 2031 and 712,000 by 2041

The source was from the transit planning committee around their LRT system which I was reading out of curiosity. Admittedly that would probably be a source that trends towards the high side of the prediction, as they're trying to justify their own project. And it was actually 740k by 2031, I rounded. I'll post it if I can find it again

[matty]

4 minutes ago, Complete Homer said:

The source was from the transit planning committee around their LRT system which I was reading out of curiosity. Admittedly that would probably a source that trends towards the high side of the prediction, as they're trying to justify their own project. And it was actually 740k by 2031, I rounded. I'll post it if I can find it again

thanks

[Complete Homer]

Well, this one says 729000 by 2031

https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.regionofwaterloo.ca/en/regionalGovernment/resources/ROPNewsletterVolume2.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwiE8L-KuKfQAhUh24MKHQsOBg4QFggaMAA&usg=AFQjCNFkxgOM2DqicRry6szBkLuuL6gdWA&sig2=kh9uUgNb3aYNhL39DjsqaA

Can't find the particular document from the transit committee I was reading before

I did see a couple environmentalist initiatives saying 740k, but no citations either. Safe to say 650-750k is probably the range 

https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.climateactionwr.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/ClimateActionPlan-Summary.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwir7cuCuafQAhWj0YMKHY--Cv4QFghaMAk&usg=AFQjCNG93FFRnOSpkiBgNSPjBLBdDN-OMg&sig2=2iWOYxxJQEDOV7029evyAw

Edit: this one has 729000 and has proper citations from Statistics Canada, so it is probably the most legitimate 

www.regionofwaterloo.ca/en/regionalGovernment/resources/RTMP_
FINAL_REPORT_PDF.pdf

[Pqhbv]

The Big Move overestimated the KWC population from MetroLinx IIRC...

[Blackdude]

14 hours ago, matty said:

Yes the impact did draw good crowds but prior to drogba they weren't the most popular mls club in quebec (tfc was) and were the least followed team in the League. I agree quebec could be a good market but including it in the launch might be too risky a move for a club. Like you said if done right a quebec city team could be a success and i think holding off on it until the cpl is established would be doing it right.

Where do you get that? If that was true, why did the Impact-TFC matches have more Impact fans?

[matty]

1 hour ago, Blackdude said:

Where do you get that? If that was true, why did the Impact-TFC matches have more Impact fans?

For a while on Facebook, TFC were bigger than the Impact in Quebec. Every other team was the most popular in its region expect for FC Dallas and San Jose who lost to Houston and LA and the 2015 expansion teams. "Popular" might be the wrong word but they were less followed.

The Impact were also the second least popular team from 2012-2014 in terms of Google searches. 2014 also saw the team suffer from a noted lack of media attention.

 http://www.foxsports.com/soccer/inside-mls/fox-soccer-facebook-project-mls-fans-in-united-states-and-canada-maps-030615?cmpid=tsmtw:fscom:foxsoccer

http://worldsoccertalk.com/2015/02/09/ranking-mls-most-popular-teams-new-research-reveals-fascinating-results/

http://www.rds.ca/soccer/impact/reconnecter-avec-son-public-1.1863412

I can understand you rejecting these as merely online nothingness but they are look at by both investors and advertisers.

2015 was the Impact's breakout year in terms of reach and popularity and Drogba was the biggest factor in that. It's also worth noting that the Impact were (as of October 2015) bigger outside of Quebec than in it.

http://www.mlssoccer.com/post/2015/10/22/montreal-impact-feeling-effect-didier-drogba-almost-every-aspect-club