CPL new teams speculation

[Kingston]

6 hours ago, Stoppage Time said:

I wonder. Is professional soccer better off in Ottawa with Atletico, or would the Fury have progressed the game more? This season has been a big improvement for Atletico. Does that bode for a better future than Fury could have provided?

The best scenario would have been for the Fury to move to the CPL.  That would have kept the fan base intact plus added whatever additional attention would have come from being in a Canadian league.  For whatever reason (and I've heard a lot of rumours but never seen anything solid), the Fury ownership wasn't interested.

So now its a few years later with a pandemic in between.  I don't think the specfic ownership matters much, so long as the owners support the team (which Atletico is and I think the Fury would have continued to do).  Now it's just continuing to grow the attendance to get back to where the Fury were and, hopefully, push on past that.

[Ansem]

10 hours ago, phil03 said:

I do think of the macro: the very probable reason that Montagliani tried to force the issue with the Fury (against the preference of Soccer Canada and the CPL I might ad) is that he saw the CPL as a key part of his legacy.

There were words that despite the CSA agreeing to sanction the Fury, they knew Concacaf would deny it. Doesn't sound like parties were happy with the status quo unofficially. Montagliani doesn't hide that CPL is a huge part of his legacy.

 

10 hours ago, phil03 said:

In spite of that he saw the mess (for all the reasons mentioned above on top of the MLS very probably not being happy about it to say the least) that trying to do the same thing with CF Montreal, TFC and the Whitecaps would, in all probability, create and wisely elected to not pursue the matter, or perhaps he once thought of doing it and they saw how things with Fury had turned out and put the breakes on any similar project for the MLS clubs.  If the CONCACAF didn't move a finger or say a word in that direction once it became clear the MLS teams weren't willing with someone who would have had such personal motivations to do it then it won't with someone else at the helm in the future, as they will be quite probably significantly more dispassionate and risk averse about it then Montagliani

Contrarily to the Ottawa Fury, the 3 MLS clubs have a waiver exempting them from reapplying for their sanction in a yearly basis. Once that waiver expires, all 3 of them will be in the same boat as the Fury which means that they will have to demonstrate that they should be exempted from FIFA rule stating that club may only compete in leagues from their own country and that they meet the "exceptional circumstances".

 

10 hours ago, phil03 said:

they'd probably take the easier path and go ''Grandfathered in they were and grandfathered in they remain, at least until the CPL reach a level comparable to the MLS. Best of luck to everyone on the pitch!''

Up until now they qualified under the clause that no other league existed. The best they could hope for now is being grandfathered but in those case, you're talking about situations like the Welsh clubs who've been in the English system for over a century. TFC joined MLS in 2007 and the others 2011/2012. CPL started in 2019... "Grandfathered" is a bit of a stretch in my opinion compared to decades... but we'll see.

As for reaching a comparable level - parity is the exception, not the norm within FIFA. Top clubs routinely crush the rest of their leagues almost everywhere else. There's no such clause under FIFA nor has it ever been a concern.

 

10 hours ago, phil03 said:

The CONCACAF won't go to war with a ton of people (yes the fans but also the owners, the MLS, the contact the owners and the MLS have in FIFA and in the political realm, maybe even Apple, etc...) just to help out the CPL. They won't create a crisis for themselves, or at least a serious issue to handle, when they can just keep the status quo without any problem. 

This isn't about forcing 3 MLS clubs in CPL, it's about whether or not they will be sanction to compete in a US league while being based in Canada. We just witness UEFA stop an attempt to launch a Super League from the most powerful clubs in the world, the notion that concacaf is walking on eggshells around MLS is not entirely accurate.

This is a sanctioning issue, not a legal one - all parties knew in advance all of FIFA statute, rules and conditions. I think that the only surprise in all of this is that no one predicated that CPL would ever exist.

 

7 hours ago, narduch said:

I don't think Concacaf would do that.

Concacaf needs cash and credibility/relevancy.  There's a reason it runs 2 continental tournaments per cycles all out of the US with no plans to move the location in the near future. It needs cash. The latest move points to clubs competition to raise more cash, land more sponsors and better TV deals. The aim is to make the Champions League more relevant and more profitable - ultimately, they care way more about that.

As for credibility - Concacaf is a 2 league confederation. It's Liga MX and MLS... than the rest. It has now a G7 nation with a D1 league in a virtually untapped market. While it would be simply applying FIFA rules, it would also paved the way to have a "Top 3" in terms of leagues.

This means another "strong" league for more concacaf talent to play in --> That's more concacaf players performing at a higher level in a more competitive environment with good infrastructure --> that helps develop more concacaf players --> potentially more of them gets sold to higher leagues --> that helps national teams in the region to upgrade like MLS did --> more competitive Nations League & Gold Cup --> more competitive at the World Cup --> raised relevance and credibility.

Post 2026, a top 3 Canadians league could lead to more than 3 clubs in CCL --> more Canadian markets involved  --> more sponsors from Canada --> more lucrative TV deals --> more engagement (we all love a good old Canada vs USA or Mexico) --> more interesting/competitive CCL --> increase in revenue for the confederation --> more cash to reinvest in infrastructure in nations that just can't afford it --> better infrastructure leads to the development of better talent elsewhere in the region which can help Central American leagues to also upgrade.

As you can see... It has plenty of incentive for concacaf to move beyond the status quo (which most agree isn't great from a regional perspective). Upgrading Concacaf as a whole should rate higher on their list than keeping MLS happy. MLS and Liga MX growing while everyone else stagnate or have a much slower growth is great for those 2 leagues - not so much for Concacaf.

Status quo means more of the same - 2 gold cups per cycle dominated by the same 2-3 countries, CCL dominated by Mexico, the rest of the region not changing much and concacaf remaining a 2 league confederation with an unappealing CCL regionally and globally for the long term.

 

7 hours ago, narduch said:

They basically already lay over for MLS and Liga MX. 

They aren't going to rock the boat on this matter 

Sanctioning the League Cup was their way at making both happy. It now means something and they control that tournament and revenue entirely.

The question is - would MLS cease to be #2 in this region should they no longer compete out of Canada when you have big market waiting for their turn to join in the US?

[Watchmen]

3 hours ago, Ansem said:

There were words that despite the CSA agreeing to sanction the Fury, they knew Concacaf would deny it. Doesn't sound like parties were happy with the status quo unofficially. Montagliani doesn't hide that CPL is a huge part of his legacy.

 

Contrarily to the Ottawa Fury, the 3 MLS clubs have a waiver exempting them from reapplying for their sanction in a yearly basis. Once that waiver expires, all 3 of them will be in the same boat as the Fury which means that they will have to demonstrate that they should be exempted from FIFA rule stating that club may only compete in leagues from their own country and that they meet the "exceptional circumstances".

 

Up until now they qualified under the clause that no other league existed. The best they could hope for now is being grandfathered but in those case, you're talking about situations like the Welsh clubs who've been in the English system for over a century. TFC joined MLS in 2007 and the others 2011/2012. CPL started in 2019... "Grandfathered" is a bit of a stretch in my opinion compared to decades... but we'll see.

As for reaching a comparable level - parity is the exception, not the norm within FIFA. Top clubs routinely crush the rest of their leagues almost everywhere else. There's no such clause under FIFA nor has it ever been a concern.

 

This isn't about forcing 3 MLS clubs in CPL, it's about whether or not they will be sanction to compete in a US league while being based in Canada. We just witness UEFA stop an attempt to launch a Super League from the most powerful clubs in the world, the notion that concacaf is walking on eggshells around MLS is not entirely accurate.

This is a sanctioning issue, not a legal one - all parties knew in advance all of FIFA statute, rules and conditions. I think that the only surprise in all of this is that no one predicated that CPL would ever exist.

 

Concacaf needs cash and credibility/relevancy.  There's a reason it runs 2 continental tournaments per cycles all out of the US with no plans to move the location in the near future. It needs cash. The latest move points to clubs competition to raise more cash, land more sponsors and better TV deals. The aim is to make the Champions League more relevant and more profitable - ultimately, they care way more about that.

As for credibility - Concacaf is a 2 league confederation. It's Liga MX and MLS... than the rest. It has now a G7 nation with a D1 league in a virtually untapped market. While it would be simply applying FIFA rules, it would also paved the way to have a "Top 3" in terms of leagues.

This means another "strong" league for more concacaf talent to play in --> That's more concacaf players performing at a higher level in a more competitive environment with good infrastructure --> that helps develop more concacaf players --> potentially more of them gets sold to higher leagues --> that helps national teams in the region to upgrade like MLS did --> more competitive Nations League & Gold Cup --> more competitive at the World Cup --> raised relevance and credibility.

Post 2026, a top 3 Canadians league could lead to more than 3 clubs in CCL --> more Canadian markets involved  --> more sponsors from Canada --> more lucrative TV deals --> more engagement (we all love a good old Canada vs USA or Mexico) --> more interesting/competitive CCL --> increase in revenue for the confederation --> more cash to reinvest in infrastructure in nations that just can't afford it --> better infrastructure leads to the development of better talent elsewhere in the region which can help Central American leagues to also upgrade.

As you can see... It has plenty of incentive for concacaf to move beyond the status quo (which most agree isn't great from a regional perspective). Upgrading Concacaf as a whole should rate higher on their list than keeping MLS happy. MLS and Liga MX growing while everyone else stagnate or have a much slower growth is great for those 2 leagues - not so much for Concacaf.

Status quo means more of the same - 2 gold cups per cycle dominated by the same 2-3 countries, CCL dominated by Mexico, the rest of the region not changing much and concacaf remaining a 2 league confederation with an unappealing CCL regionally and globally for the long term.

 

Sanctioning the League Cup was their way at making both happy. It now means something and they control that tournament and revenue entirely.

The question is - would MLS cease to be #2 in this region should they no longer compete out of Canada when you have big market waiting for their turn to join in the US?

You are making a looooooooot of assumptions in here.

I don't think this "Canada vs US/Mexico" rivalry is as lucrative as you think it is. Canada likes it, and certainly the US and Mexico don't want to lose to Canada. But I'd say neither of them think of it as a rivalry.

I don't think that forcing out the 3 MLS teams from Canada is a guaranteed boost to the CPL, and certainly not to the levels you seem to think. There is nothing to indicate that the CPL even as a #3 league would move the interest in the CCL across the region or outside of it.

[Ansem]

3 hours ago, Watchmen said:

I don't think this "Canada vs US/Mexico" rivalry is as lucrative as you think it is.

Not yet in club competition especially to the the cross-border situation but it already exist in virtually everything else.

 

3 hours ago, Watchmen said:

Canada likes it,

Looooooots of assumptions here. Over 2/3 of Canadians aren't in an MLS city. I like the potential of multiple clubs in large metro areas like elsewhere that doesn't have lots of 1M+ cities.

 

3 hours ago, Watchmen said:

certainly the US and Mexico don't want to lose to Canada.

It`s about what Concacaf wants not what Mexico and US MLS & Liga MX wants. Concacaf wants to upgrade its club competition via the CCL. Nothing stops Liga MX and MLS to invite Canadian clubs in their league cup whenever they want too.

 

3 hours ago, Watchmen said:

I don't think that forcing out the 3 MLS teams from Canada is a guaranteed boost to the CPL, and certainly not to the levels you seem to think.

I agree with the part in bold. The league would still have a responsibility to capitalize on that, they aren't entitled to anything. It`s anyone`s guess if they succeed or choke on such an opportunity.

What`s factual is that CPL will never reach it`s full potential as long as it`s competing with MLS for the top 3 markets and domestic corporate dollars and media dollars. Talks about "both leagues growing together hand in hands" makes sense on the pitch and for Canadian players overhaul - business-wise, this is flat out a competition for available resources.

 

3 hours ago, Watchmen said:

There is nothing to indicate that the CPL even as a #3 league would move the interest in the CCL across the region or outside of it.

Maybe not across the region at first, it starts within Canada - a huge untapped market. One thing is sure, status quo of Concacaf being a 2 league confederation doesn't help them either. It has a G7 nation with a D1 league that's about to co-host a World Cup with untapped potential in terms of fans, resources and modern infrastructure that could raise its overall status in club competition. Business-wise, hard to pass on that and it's plain fact that our CCL is a joke no matter how much you want to change the format.

All I'm saying is that we should think about what serves concacaf interest long term vs what MLS wants because at the end of the day, the final say comes from concacaf

[phil03]

12 hours ago, Ansem said:

I. There were words that despite the CSA agreeing to sanction the Fury, they knew Concacaf would deny it. Doesn't sound like parties were happy with the status quo unofficially. Montagliani doesn't hide that CPL is a huge part of his legacy.

 

II. Contrarily to the Ottawa Fury, the 3 MLS clubs have a waiver exempting them from reapplying for their sanction in a yearly basis. Once that waiver expires, all 3 of them will be in the same boat as the Fury which means that they will have to demonstrate that they should be exempted from FIFA rule stating that club may only compete in leagues from their own country and that they meet the "exceptional circumstances".

 

Up until now they qualified under the clause that no other league existed. The best they could hope for now is being grandfathered but in those case, you're talking about situations like the Welsh clubs who've been in the English system for over a century. TFC joined MLS in 2007 and the others 2011/2012. CPL started in 2019... "Grandfathered" is a bit of a stretch in my opinion compared to decades... but we'll see.

As for reaching a comparable level - parity is the exception, not the norm within FIFA. Top clubs routinely crush the rest of their leagues almost everywhere else. There's no such clause under FIFA nor has it ever been a concern.

 

This isn't about forcing 3 MLS clubs in CPL, it's about whether or not they will be sanction to compete in a US league while being based in Canada. We just witness UEFA stop an attempt to launch a Super League from the most powerful clubs in the world, the notion that concacaf is walking on eggshells around MLS is not entirely accurate.

This is a sanctioning issue, not a legal one - all parties knew in advance all of FIFA statute, rules and conditions. I think that the only surprise in all of this is that no one predicated that CPL would ever exist.

 

Concacaf needs cash and credibility/relevancy.  There's a reason it runs 2 continental tournaments per cycles all out of the US with no plans to move the location in the near future. It needs cash. The latest move points to clubs competition to raise more cash, land more sponsors and better TV deals. The aim is to make the Champions League more relevant and more profitable - ultimately, they care way more about that.

As for credibility - Concacaf is a 2 league confederation. It's Liga MX and MLS... than the rest. It has now a G7 nation with a D1 league in a virtually untapped market. While it would be simply applying FIFA rules, it would also paved the way to have a "Top 3" in terms of leagues.

This means another "strong" league for more concacaf talent to play in --> That's more concacaf players performing at a higher level in a more competitive environment with good infrastructure --> that helps develop more concacaf players --> potentially more of them gets sold to higher leagues --> that helps national teams in the region to upgrade like MLS did --> more competitive Nations League & Gold Cup --> more competitive at the World Cup --> raised relevance and credibility.

Post 2026, a top 3 Canadians league could lead to more than 3 clubs in CCL --> more Canadian markets involved  --> more sponsors from Canada --> more lucrative TV deals --> more engagement (we all love a good old Canada vs USA or Mexico) --> more interesting/competitive CCL --> increase in revenue for the confederation --> more cash to reinvest in infrastructure in nations that just can't afford it --> better infrastructure leads to the development of better talent elsewhere in the region which can help Central American leagues to also upgrade.

As you can see... It has plenty of incentive for concacaf to move beyond the status quo (which most agree isn't great from a regional perspective). Upgrading Concacaf as a whole should rate higher on their list than keeping MLS happy. MLS and Liga MX growing while everyone else stagnate or have a much slower growth is great for those 2 leagues - not so much for Concacaf.

Status quo means more of the same - 2 gold cups per cycle dominated by the same 2-3 countries, CCL dominated by Mexico, the rest of the region not changing much and concacaf remaining a 2 league confederation with an unappealing CCL regionally and globally for the long term.

 

Sanctioning the League Cup was their way at making both happy. It now means something and they control that tournament and revenue entirely.

The question is - would MLS cease to be #2 in this region should they no longer compete out of Canada when you have big market waiting for their turn to join in the US?

(Numbered for my ease of answer)

I. Maybe, maybe not. What we know is the actual position Soccer Canada took publicly.

II. Of they will get a new waiver, maybe a permanent one, but either way that's just the paperwork. The real reason they have been allowed to play in the MLS, which is also the one reason (rather then the lenght of the time) why some Welsh clubs are still allowed in the English pyramid and, to give an example with a club with a more recent history, the Wellington Phoenix is allowed to play in the A-League is that the new league being created simply cannot give provide the older clubs with what they need on and off the pitch, due to not only parity not existing (which you are right to say doesn't exist anywhere) between the old and the new league but the difference being so big that they simply can't sustain their business and sports model and either need to undertake a rather significant downgrade or cease operation. That is simply not a fair burden to impose to clubs with no other faults then simply pre-existing the CPL.

Now, of course everyone is entitled to their opinion but what I feel is fairly undisputable is that clubs being put in that situation aren't the norm and very much the exemption, that what Canadian MLS clubs face are an almost textbook definition of exceptional circumstances. As a result if CONCACAF is to follow their own bylaws they need to let them stay in MLS. Whether it is a good or a bad thing can of course, be debated but if exceptional circumstances are the metric there is only place that a decision made on the basis of only the rules can land. If Montagliani was to go the other way nonetheless it would be a clear case of him ruling against the rules of the confederation he lead and probably doing so to help his own legacy item. There is just no way this wouldn't cause a massive mess from most parties concern, even if it doesn't go into the legal side of things. Not that it necessarily would stay outside of the legal word either, as I could see an appeal to the Court of Arbitration of Sports with the argument that the CONCACAF is essentially not applying his own rules equitably and his letting undue considerations influence their decision.

The Super League isn't a good paralel as that was essentially a power grab and an attempt to change the statu quo by a few teams. IMO the best paralel would be Wales and IMO it is instructive that while the calls to try to force in or force to disband the likes of Swansea and Cardiff have been around since Cymru Premier has been a thing their ability to stay in the English pyramid has never been threatened.

4 hours ago, Ansem said:

I agree with the part in bold. The league would still have a responsibility to capitalize on that, they aren't entitled to anything. It`s anyone`s guess if they succeed or choke on such an opportunity.

What`s factual is that CPL will never reach it`s full potential as long as it`s competing with MLS for the top 3 markets and domestic corporate dollars and media dollars. Talks about "both leagues growing together hand in hands" makes sense on the pitch and for Canadian players overhaul - business-wise, this is flat out a competition for available resources.

With all due respect you do state that the CPL is entitled to something. You believe that they are entitled to have a monopoly on professional men's soccer in Canada, at least until promotion and relegation are potentially put in, and you believe they are entitled to have its interest be put ahead of the MLS teams, up to and including forcing them to close doors. While I obviously disagree you are, of course, free to believe that the CPL has a right to those things but it nonetheless very much what the argument to withdraw authorization from the MLS clubs is: believing that the CPL has a right to a lack of competition.

On the best case scenario for the CPL being one where the MLS isn't a thing, yeah perhaps but that doesn't mean its automatically the best case scenario for professional men's Soccer in Canada as a whole and, as you say yourself, even less necessarily for the growth of men's Soccer in Canada on the pitch (and probably not for coaches and the like as a result). IMO its the later two that should be our metrics, not the first. Like the MLS clubs the CPL should be seen as a mean for the growth of the game in Canada, not an end in and of itself.

Edited August 31, 2022 by phil03

[Watchmen]

4 hours ago, Ansem said:

Not yet in club competition especially to the the cross-border situation but it already exist in virtually everything else.

No, the rivalry really doesn't exist "in virtually everything else".  

8 hours ago, Watchmen said:

Canada likes it,

4 hours ago, Ansem said:

Looooooots of assumptions here. Over 2/3 of Canadians aren't in an MLS city. I like the potential of multiple clubs in large metro areas like elsewhere that doesn't have lots of 1M+ cities.

What's my assumption?   Are you disagreeing with me?  Yeah, Canada likes the rivalry with the US (but is pretty indifferent to Mexico), and lots of Canadians aren't in MLS cities.  And under the new CCL format, those other cities will already be getting their chance to play MLS and Liga MX sides.  So, you don't need the 3 MLS clubs in Canada to be in CPL for this.

 

4 hours ago, Ansem said:

Maybe not across the region at first, it starts within Canada - a huge untapped market. One thing is sure, status quo of Concacaf being a 2 league confederation doesn't help them either. It has a G7 nation with a D1 league that's about to co-host a World Cup with untapped potential in terms of fans, resources and modern infrastructure that could raise its overall status in club competition. Business-wise, hard to pass on that and it's plain fact that our CCL is a joke no matter how much you want to change the format.

We're about to have 3 clubs (at least) in the CCL under the current format, so there's going to be plenty of opportunity for businesses to get involved if they so choose.  

4 hours ago, Ansem said:

All I'm saying is that we should think about what serves concacaf interest long term vs what MLS wants because at the end of the day, the final say comes from concacaf

I do not think you have made a strong enough case for CONCACAF to force a withdrawal of the clubs from MLS, but that's just my opinion.

[phil03]

20 hours ago, Stoppage Time said:

I wonder. Is professional soccer better off in Ottawa with Atletico, or would the Fury have progressed the game more? This season has been a big improvement for Atletico. Does that bode for a better future than Fury could have provided?

On top of what has already been said I do feel it is worth considering the wider picture here: while we obviously can't know for sure it was probably Canada as a whole who got Athletico interested, not Ottawa in particular so IMO it is perfectly possible to imagine a world where Athletico Québec would be a thing instead and, as the CPL is showing its staying power and therefore assuaged the main concern expressed by the Fury's owners, both sides would be preparing for the transition to happen in a year or two, and I say that as someone who has Athletico Ottawa has his CPL team.

[ted]

8 hours ago, phil03 said:

With all due respect you do state that the CPL is entitled to something. You believe that they are entitled to have a monopoly on professional men's soccer in Canada...

I think you misunderstand the way it works. The CSA has the monopoly and gets to decide what league(s) operate in Canada. They decided that a fully-Canadian first division (D1) was essential to our future development and made it clear that the CanPL was the path forward.

The last time the waiver was renewed CONCACAF and the CSA made it clear that the waiver could be refused and chose NOT to do so based on the situation at the time. The next time the waiver comes up for renewal those same circumstances will not exist and the rationale for allowing teams to play in a cross-border league may not be sufficient.

The only part the CanPL plays in the decision is whether or not they are stable enough, and teams are performing well enough, to deem the exceptional circumstances that allow for the waiver no longer applicable. Continuing to exist, expanding the number of teams, and playing well in Voyageurs Cup and CONCACAF competitions fulfill those requirements.

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

Do you have a url source for any of this? My understanding is that playing out rights have to be done annually so this has already been renewed multiple times since CanPL was founded and FIFA's structure on this is subject to corporate law and would not necessarily withstand a legal challenge just as the player transfer system didn't when Jean-Marc Bosman pursued the matter.

[Unnamed Trialist]

1 hour ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

Do you have a url source for any of this? My understanding is that playing out rights have to be done annually so this has already been renewed multiple times since CanPL was founded and FIFA's structure on this is subject to corporate law and would not necessarily withstand a legal challenge just as the player transfer system didn't when Jean-Marc Bosman pursued the matter.

You can't compare with Bosman entirely as there is such as thing as European labour law. And European courts, and due process; and possible sanctions for not responding to European law in a EU country. So in many ways it was an "easy" case, although there was a similarity: the idea that national federations were protecting national players in their leagues by restricting access of non-nationals, European or not. 

Which is what MLS does, to protect American player development, only that it does it to Canadians as well. 

 

Edited August 31, 2022 by Unnamed Trialist

[Kingston]

6 hours ago, ted said:

The last time the waiver was renewed CONCACAF and the CSA made it clear that the waiver could be refused and chose NOT to do so based on the situation at the time. The next time the waiver comes up for renewal those same circumstances will not exist and the rationale for allowing teams to play in a cross-border league may not be sufficient.

The difference in this whole waiver situation is one of emphasis.  You (and others like Ansem) seem to be approaching it from the perspective of "is there a reason to justify having Canadian teams in MLS rather than just having the CPL".  The idea seems to be that the CSA will keep checking on that and, as soon as they can possibly justify it, they will take steps to rid Canada of MLS for the benefit of the CPL.

Others, like myself and probably Phil03, imagine the CSA thinking more like "is there some compelling reason to upset the status quo".  If not, let it ride.

A strong CPL is good for Canadian soccer but, as Phil03 stated, what is best for Canadian soccer is not simply doing everything possible to advance the CPL.

Canadian soccer overall benefits a lot from having D3, CPL, and MLS teams.  They all offer different levels of play for our players.  Given the rising trajectories of both the CPL and MLS, and the difference in market size and dollar figures, I suspect the answer to the question of "when would Canadian soccer be better off forcing out the MLS teams and focusing only on the CPL for pro soccer" will be "never".

 

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

...or as the Rev. Ian Paisley would have put it:

move beyond something as fringe as the Voyageurs board and the backlash encountered by the CSA if they ever attempted something like that would be ferocious.

[Kingston]

11 minutes ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

move beyond something as fringe as the Voyageurs board and the backlash encountered by the CSA if they ever attempted something like that would be ferocious.

Probably, but that's not really the point.  It isn't about one league or another.  It's about what offers Canadian soccer the best development path.  Having more than one option at more than one level just seems inherently better than a single option at a single level.

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

Being allowed to have your cake and eat it too is definitely not something to be thrown away. After the dark polar night of the 90s into the 2000s domestic pro soccer finally started functioning as a major spectator event again for the first time since the NASL era after Pele's arrival but we have people who claim to be soccer fans who appear determined to risk tearing it all down.

Edited August 31, 2022 by Ozzie_the_parrot

[Ansem]

21 hours ago, phil03 said:

Of they will get a new waiver, maybe a permanent one, but either way that's just the paperwork.

A permanent waiver would have made sense when they arrived and there was a belief that we would never see a national D1 league in this country in our lifetime. With CPL existing - and only 7 years after CF Montreal joined, a permanent waiver is even less likely. Once it expires it's entirely concacaf's call and thus far, they seem keen on applying the rules after what happened with Ottawa.

 

21 hours ago, phil03 said:

The real reason they have been allowed to play in the MLS, which is also the one reason (rather then the lenght of the time) why some Welsh clubs are still allowed in the English pyramid and, to give an example with a club with a more recent history, the Wellington Phoenix is allowed to play in the A-League is that the new league being created simply cannot give provide the older clubs with what they need on and off the pitch, due to not only parity not existing (which you are right to say doesn't exist anywhere) between the old and the new league but the difference being so big that they simply can't sustain their business and sports model and either need to undertake a rather significant downgrade or cease operation. That is simply not a fair burden to impose to clubs with no other faults then simply pre-existing the CPL.

I think you're misunderstanding this rule

**Emphasis on "Exceptional"**

Welsh clubs -->(1) clubs that are in close proximity to another member’s territory and have been long-standing members of the other league. We can debate if 100 years is comparable to 7 to 15 years.

Canadian MLS Clubs -->(3) clubs located in member associations where there isn’t currently a professional league

NZ & A-League --> Reading this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand_National_League, looks like their D1 is the equivalent of something vaguely resembling a prolonged and expanded "Memorial Cup" with clubs qualifying from their regional leagues (what the Parrot has been preaching) with the Wellington Reserves being guaranteed a spot... Hardly the same situation with CPL/MLS. Also, Australia is an OFC nation competing in AFC competitions and WCQ. Perhaps Wellington was the only "real" pro club in NZ (I don't know) - there's plenty of "exceptional circumstances" going on here with an OFC club competing in another nation that's part & competing in another confederation. Not comparable.

Nowhere in the FIFA statute do they address anything else such as the business side of it, parity or spending level. I recall PSG spending more than the bottom half of ligue 1 combined at some point. They routinely crush over half the league - hell, it's practice for the Champions League at this point.

Parity is the exception - not the norm thus hardly a factor outside of North American sport culture.

 

21 hours ago, phil03 said:

Now, of course everyone is entitled to their opinion but what I feel is fairly undisputable is that clubs being put in that situation aren't the norm and very much the exemption, that what Canadian MLS clubs face are an almost textbook definition of exceptional circumstances. As a result if CONCACAF is to follow their own bylaws they need to let them stay in MLS. Whether it is a good or a bad thing can of course, be debated but if exceptional circumstances are the metric there is only place that a decision made on the basis of only the rules can land. If Montagliani was to go the other way nonetheless it would be a clear case of him ruling against the rules of the confederation he lead and probably doing so to help his own legacy item. There is just no way this wouldn't cause a massive mess from most parties concern, even if it doesn't go into the legal side of things. Not that it necessarily would stay outside of the legal word either, as I could see an appeal to the Court of Arbitration of Sports with the argument that the CONCACAF is essentially not applying his own rules equitably and his letting undue considerations influence their decision.

The 3 MLS clubs don't have to join CPL - they can stay in MLS but would have to be based within a USSF city should the special sanction to compete in another country league be denied. Ottawa Fury opted to sell their franchise to Miami instead of joining CPL. The 3 clubs would have a choice to make should it come to that.

This is was the memo from them:

As a follow-up to my call yesterday, I wish to advise you that we have received correspondence from Concacaf indicating that Concacaf will not be in a position to consider sanctioning Ottawa Fury to participate/play in the USL for season 2019. Concacaf have taken the position that, as the CSA has a sanctioned league (the CPL) which is scheduled to play in 2019, the “exceptional circumstances” as described in FIFA Statute, Article 73 no longer apply.

The precedent is there and quite significant

Also, theses aren't CONCACAF bylaws but they are FIFA's.

If there was a case at the Court of Arbitration, why didn't the Fury went there to challenge FIFA Article 73? They had no case.

 

21 hours ago, phil03 said:

The Super League isn't a good paralel as that was essentially a power grab and an attempt to change the statu quo by a few teams. IMO the best paralel would be Wales and IMO it is instructive that while the calls to try to force in or force to disband the likes of Swansea and Cardiff have been around since Cymru Premier has been a thing their ability to stay in the English pyramid has never been threatened.

The Super League was directly in opposition with Article 73. Sure they could still do it but FIFA & UEFA doesn't have to sanction it making it worthless and screwing the players participating in it. They would have been banned from all FIFA competitions including the World Cup, Euro/Copa America and of course - champions leagues.

FIFA sanction is a privilege "not a right".

The best they can hope for is being treated like Cardiff or Swansea who are century old clubs while Cymru Premier got started in 1992 but again, is 7 to 15 years comparable to close to a century?

 

21 hours ago, phil03 said:

With all due respect you do state that the CPL is entitled to something. You believe that they are entitled to have a monopoly on professional men's soccer in Canada, at least until promotion and relegation are potentially put it and you believe they are entitled to have its interest be put ahead of the MLS teams, up to and including forcing them to close doors. While I obviously disagree you are, of course, free to believe that the CPL has a right to those things but it nonetheless very much what the argument to withdraw authorization from the MLS clubs is: believing that the CPL has a right to a lack of competition.

@ted explained it pretty well. I'll add on top of the CSA being entitled to run their territory as they see fit  - of course CPL would want the monopoly at D1 like virtually almost every other leagues in the world.

That's my theory only... How realistic is it to expect hundreds of millions of dollars to keep being invested from private entities losing money and assuming all the risks to build up/upgrade the Canadian soccer pyramid (building it up, improving it etc...) without them expecting something in return at some point? They aren't rich from being idiots or selfless.

I think they did their homework.

 

21 hours ago, phil03 said:

On the best case scenario for the CPL being one where the MLS isn't a thing, yeah perhaps but that doesn't mean its automatically the best case scenario for professional men's Soccer in Canada as a whole and, as you say yourself, even less necessarily for the growth of men's Soccer in Canada on the pitch (and probably not for coaches and the like as a result). IMO its the later two that should be our metrics, not the first. Like the MLS clubs the CPL should be seen as a mean for the growth of the game in Canada, not an end in and of itself.

The best players will still be signed in MLS or overseas, CPL being the only D1 league here won't change that one bit. We're already seeing CPL guys starting on MLS squad. The more this happens, the less solid the argument that MLS needs to operate in Canada holds in my opinion.

Not having EPL clubs in Poland didn't stop them from being finalists the World Cup. They aren't close to EPL but their league produce talents capable at playing higher. Also, it's not like MLS would "disappear" - that's kind of the point of a Champions League.

Edited August 31, 2022 by Ansem

[Ansem]

5 hours ago, Kingston said:

The difference in this whole waiver situation is one of emphasis.  You (and others like Ansem) seem to be approaching it from the perspective of "is there a reason to justify having Canadian teams in MLS rather than just having the CPL".  The idea seems to be that the CSA will keep checking on that and, as soon as they can possibly justify it, they will take steps to rid Canada of MLS for the benefit of the CPL.

Others, like myself and probably Phil03, imagine the CSA thinking more like "is there some compelling reason to upset the status quo".  If not, let it ride.

Ultimately, that's really not up to the CSA. They approved the Fury staying and Concacaf overruled it. You have to approach the question differently - what's in it for concacaf to keep the status quo knowing its current status and reputation?

[Kingston]

8 minutes ago, Ansem said:

@ted explained it pretty well. I'll add on top of the CSA being entitled to run their territory as they see fit 

Up until this point your post was all about the rules of FIFA, CONCACAF, and the CSA.  While acknowledging that there is some grey in the "exceptional circumstances" provision, it is clear that the soccer governing bodied could at least try to oust the Canadian MLS clubs if they wanted to.

8 minutes ago, Ansem said:

of course CPL would want the monopoly at D1 like virtually almost every other leagues in the world.

That's my theory only... How realistic is it to expect hundreds of millions of dollars to keep being invested from private entities losing money and assuming all the risks to build up/upgrade the Canadian soccer pyramid (building it up, improving it etc...) without them expecting something in return at some point? They aren't rich from being idiots or selfless.

But then you switch to this which is an appeal entirely to what is good for the CPL and its owners.

The exact same wording about investing hundreds of millions of dollars can be applied to the Canadian MLS ownership groups who actually built our modern pro system and whose success is the reason the CPL owners think the CPL is worth pursuing.

So for those of us who are focused primarily on Canadian soccer in total, rather than on the CPL specifically, the question isn't so much "could the soccer governing bodies oust the Canadian MLS clubs?" as it is "why would they want to?".  Decades from now, who knows?  In any foreseeable timeframe, there's no way this provides a net benefit to Canadian soccer. 

[Kingston]

6 minutes ago, Ansem said:

Ultimately, that's really not up to the CSA. They approved the Fury staying and Concacaf overruled it. You have to approach the question differently - what's in it for concacaf to keep the status quo knowing its current status and reputation?

The difference between the USL and MLS.

The Fury moving to the CPL would have been an essentially lateral move.  It would not make sense to have seven CPL teams and one USL team operating at basically the same level.  Much like we wouldn't want most teams to be in L1O but, say, Peterborough to be in the PDL.  So they forced the Fury to move and we ended up with Atletico instead.  This wasn't the best way to go about things in terms of fan engagement (Atletico has yet to recapture the same size crowds the Fury drew) but it was pretty apples to apples for Canadian soccer overall.

MLS is well above that in terms of play and literally an order of magnitude above that in terms of dollars.  There's no other group waiting to replace the MLS teams with anything comparable.  Ousting the MLS teams would simply be a net loss and a huge step backwards for Canadian soccer.  Which is probably why we don't actually see the soccer governing bodies threatening to do it.

[Ansem]

1 minute ago, Kingston said:

Up until this point your post was all about the rules of FIFA, CONCACAF, and the CSA.  While acknowledging that there is some grey in the "exceptional circumstances" provision, it is clear that the soccer governing bodied could at least try to oust the Canadian MLS clubs if they wanted to.

They don't need another PR nightmare, that's why they are happy to let CONCACAF do it for them. At the same time, Ontario pull their teams from PDL while BC threatened to do the same befor BC League 1 was launched

 

3 minutes ago, Kingston said:

But then you switch to this which is an appeal entirely to what is good for the CPL and its owners.

Pro sports is a business.

 

3 minutes ago, Kingston said:

The exact same wording about investing hundreds of millions of dollars can be applied to the Canadian MLS ownership groups who actually built our modern pro system and whose success is the reason the CPL owners think the CPL is worth pursuing.

They can move to the US or get a cheque recouping most, if not all of their initial investment when they joined MLS. You talk like they'd lose it all and most agree that's far from the truth.

 

5 minutes ago, Kingston said:

So for those of us who are focused primarily on Canadian soccer in total, rather than on the CPL specifically, the question isn't so much "could the soccer governing bodies oust the Canadian MLS clubs?" as it is "why would they want to?".  Decades from now, who knows?  In any foreseeable timeframe, there's no way this provides a net benefit to Canadian soccer. 

I think Concacaf has a more macro views on this than worrying about upsetting 3 fanbases. We have a precedent and we saw how it played out - they flat out applied the rules. I'm just saying it could happen again

[Ansem]

13 minutes ago, Kingston said:

The difference between the USL and MLS.

The Fury moving to the CPL would have been an essentially lateral move.  It would not make sense to have seven CPL teams and one USL team operating at basically the same level.  Much like we wouldn't want most teams to be in L1O but, say, Peterborough to be in the PDL.  So they forced the Fury to move and we ended up with Atletico instead.  This wasn't the best way to go about things in terms of fan engagement (Atletico has yet to recapture the same size crowds the Fury drew) but it was pretty apples to apples for Canadian soccer overall.

MLS is well above that in terms of play and literally an order of magnitude above that in terms of dollars.  There's no other group waiting to replace the MLS teams with anything comparable.  Ousting the MLS teams would simply be a net loss and a huge step backwards for Canadian soccer.  Which is probably why we don't actually see the soccer governing bodies threatening to do it.

The difference between both is the waiver.

Ottawa Fury had none and were forced to reapply on a yearly basis. CPL existing ended their sanction. MLS waiver was still active, so they aren't required to reapply for a sanction even with CPL existing but it has an expiry date.

The rest of your argument revolves around "parity" which other leagues demonstrate at large how little it factors within reason. Rangers & Celtic kills the rest of their league, PSG can spend more than half the bottom combined and have a trio of Messi, Neymar & Mbappé... I mean how truly does it matters to FIFA or UEFA for that matter? It just makes the Champions League that much juicer and Concacaf knows they need to do better with club competition.

That's up to the leagues to regulate those matters, heck they were willing to let the Fury keep their USL cap. I think I said that before but a scenario where MLSE would want to start a club after a sanction ruling and wants to spend much more on players, I think CPL would be idiots to refuse to discuss their proposal based on all the added value they would bring. That's how business works.

Edited August 31, 2022 by Ansem

[Kingston]

@Ansem:  I think you're missing my point because of all the details.

I acknowledge that the CSA or CONCACAF or FIFA could oust the Canadian MLS clubs.

Why would they want to?  How would that tangibly help the development of Canadian soccer?

Edited August 31, 2022 by Kingston

[ted]

7 hours ago, Kingston said:

...The idea seems to be that the CSA will keep checking on that and, as soon as they can possibly justify it, they will take steps to rid Canada of MLS for the benefit of the CPL.

Others, like myself and probably Phil03, imagine the CSA thinking more like "is there some compelling reason to upset the status quo".  If not, let it ride.

I guess you are new here, or at least you were not really aware of what was happening when the waiver was renewed. The CSA and CONCACAF were very much going down the "justify why we should renew the waiver now that the CanPL exists" path. They seemed ready to, "upset the status quo" at the time but trying to be reasonable they allowed that CanPL was not yet stable and forcing the MLS teams out suddenly wasn't a great idea. They also made it very clear that it would be coming which gave the MLS owners time to make the choice for themselves on a timetable to maximize their profit. At this point, if they were competent, the ownership of the three teams would be planning their exits.

[Watchmen]

1 hour ago, Ansem said:

The difference between both is the waiver.

Ottawa Fury had none and were forced to reapply on a yearly basis. CPL existing ended their sanction. MLS waiver was still active, so they aren't required to reapply for a sanction even with CPL existing but it has an expiry date.

The rest of your argument revolves around "parity" which other leagues demonstrate at large how little it factors within reason. Rangers & Celtic kills the rest of their league, PSG can spend more than half the bottom combined and have a trio of Messi, Neymar & Mbappé... I mean how truly does it matters to FIFA or UEFA for that matter? It just makes the Champions League that much juicer and Concacaf knows they need to do better with club competition.

That's up to the leagues to regulate those matters, heck they were willing to let the Fury keep their USL cap. I think I said that before but a scenario where MLSE would want to start a club after a sanction ruling and wants to spend much more on players, I think CPL would be idiots to refuse to discuss their proposal based on all the added value they would bring. That's how business works.

Right now, one of TFC, CF Montreal, and the Whitecaps have represented Canada at the CCL on an annual basis.  Your theory seems to be that CONCACAF will revoke the sanctioning for these MLS teams because...they want them in the CCL.  That really doesn't make any sense.

[Kingston]

38 minutes ago, ted said:

I guess you are new here, or at least you were not really aware of what was happening when the waiver was renewed. The CSA and CONCACAF were very much going down the "justify why we should renew the waiver now that the CanPL exists" path. 

Do you have links or references for any of that?  I have not ever seen anything solid on any of this.  All I've seen are different people posting on boards like this one with vague statements of their own that they then proceed to spin to support whatever they want to support.  I'd appreciate any published statements from the CSA, etc.

Edited August 31, 2022 by Kingston

[Ansem]

3 hours ago, Kingston said:

@Ansem:  I think you're missing my point because of all the details.

I acknowledge that the CSA or CONCACAF or FIFA could oust the Canadian MLS clubs.

Why would they want to?  How would that tangibly help the development of Canadian soccer?

CONCACAF mandate is to the whole region and to do what's best for all associations not just Canadian soccer or what MLS wants according to some. Being a confederation who virtually has 2 leagues that matters with the rest being significantly weaker or an afterthought isn't great for the rest of the region on so many metric.

You could argue that status quo is great for Canadian soccer - I'd agree with you had the roster rules made reciprocal but that's another debate. You have to consider that Concacaf has another G7 nation with its own domestic league. If there's a way that this new event could fundamentally help the region to improve on all metrics, why would they pass on that opportunity? One thing's for sure, the Ottawa Fury case was a statement.