Jump to content
lazlo_80

CPL new teams speculation

Recommended Posts

Newfoundland doesn’t have the capacity to have a stable professional franchise!

the other thing is people shouldn’t get ahead of themselves with relegation and 3 divisions, the quality/ finances aren’t there for more then a 10-12 team league - if Canadian players return home 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, top cheese said:

Newfoundland doesn’t have the capacity to have a stable professional franchise!

the other thing is people shouldn’t get ahead of themselves with relegation and 3 divisions, the quality/ finances aren’t there for more then a 10-12 team league - if Canadian players return home 

Rome wasn't built in one day. 

It's a long term project and we're still one of the countries with the most registered players in the world.

This is for the future generations  but got to start somewhere 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, top cheese said:

Newfoundland doesn’t have the capacity to have a stable professional franchise!

the other thing is people shouldn’t get ahead of themselves with relegation and 3 divisions, the quality/ finances aren’t there for more then a 10-12 team league - if Canadian players return home 

Pro Rel allows all clubs to find their natural level. The pyramid has to be structured so that they can reach their full potential. If that's 1 national division and a bunch of regional leagues then that must be the way forward. If we can do more, do more. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I am still being utopian, but to me the idea of tiering the structure and making the lower tiers regional (and then maybe provincial) offer a very reasonable path to get there.  Presumably, a D2 club in this environment would have significantly reduced operating costs.  Reduced revenues due to small markets may very well be able to accommodate this.  Sure the Charlottetown AnneOfGreenGablesPotatoLobsters may not draw tons and tons of people (or sponsorship dollars), but it may just be enough to float a D2 team with appropriately scaled salaries, a suitably modest "stadium", and fairly local travel costs.  Similarly, the player pool demands get lower (in terms of accessing a small pool of really skilled Canadian players) as the natural level gets set.   If D2 ends up being close to L1O or its QC sibling, you already have a solid pool of players in place that could help fill the gap - and likely other across the country. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Blackjack15 said:

I prefer Quebec City over Montrel for CPL

Most of the untapped talent is in Montreal though...while you want to cut off the Northern Suburbs from the Impact before they seriously make an attempt at penetrating the "Couronne Nord" which represents over a Million people...Quebec City is around 750k

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 4/8/2019 at 9:36 PM, mtlsab said:

I think the D1 should be 8-10 maximum so the level will be really good and we could compete with other CONCACAF leagues pretty soon

2019:7 teams

2020: 10 teams

2021: 10 (teams)

2022: 10 teams + creation of D2

The first edition of D2 should include the farm team of D1(10 teams), the farm teams of MLS clubs (3 teams), the PDL clubs (5 teams) and some other new markets (6 teams)

An 8-team Div 1 would allow a 28-game double home-and-away balanced schedule. 10 teams would be too large for that, so it would have to be 3 games against every other club.  But that could limit the number of teams to relegate - 2 teams relegated from an 8-team div is a 25% relegation rate when most national leagues have between a 15-20% relegation rate so there could be some heavy strains on clubs to perform or go down, which might have financial repercussions on the owners. At least there would be no middle table malaise: A club would either be fighting for a CL spot or fighting relegation. There would be no middle ground. Might be good for development or might hinder it if coaches feel pressured to play their best players only. 

As for your planned structure, I think there is too much of a gap if you go straight from regional leagues to a national league. A second division should be the bridge that allows clubs to adjust to the demands from regional to national travel. It should require about half the amount of national travelling as Div 1 and a fair amount of the Regional Travelling as Div 3. I wouldn't make it too big either, just enough that you could start instituting pro rel between Div 3 and Div 2 clubs as well.  If you stayed with a 8-team Div 1 with a 28 game season, then to keep a 28 game season in Div 2, you could have 3 conferences of 4 teams each - play home-and-away against every other conference and play double home-and-away matches against in-conference clubs. At the Div 3 level, you will have the professional equivalent of L1O, PLSQ, and whatever western league they manage to cobble together together. It's at *this* level that I'd put any club reserve teams.

So for structure it would be... Div 1: 8-club single table; Div 2: 12-clubs in 3 conferences; Div 3: Three regional leagues with no interleague play, preferably 8 teams each. Does that sound doable?

Edited by Initial B

Share this post


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

An 8-team Div 1 would allow a 28-game double home-and-away balanced schedule. 10 teams would be too large for that, so it would have to be 3 games against every other club.  But that could limit the number of teams to relegate - 2 teams relegated from an 8-team div is a 25% relegation rate when most national leagues have between a 15-20% relegation rate so there could be some heavy strains on clubs to perform or go down, which might have financial repercussions on the owners. At least there would be no middle table malaise: A club would either be fighting for a CL spot or fighting relegation. There would be no middle ground. Might be good for development or might hinder it if coaches feel pressured to play their best players only. 

As for your planned structure, I think there is too much of a gap if you go straight from regional leagues to a national league. A second division should be the bridge that allows clubs to adjust to the demands from regional to national travel. It should require about half the amount of national travelling as Div 1 and a fair amount of the Regional Travelling as Div 3. I wouldn't make it too big either, just enough that you could start instituting pro rel between Div 3 and Div 2 clubs as well.  If you stayed with a 8-team Div 1 with a 28 game season, then to keep a 28 game season in Div 2, you could have 3 conferences of 4 teams each - play home-and-away against every other conference and play double home-and-away matches against in-conference clubs. At the Div 3 level, you will have the professional equivalent of L1O, PLSQ, and whatever western league they manage to cobble together together. It's at *this* level that I'd put any club reserve teams.

So for structure it would be... Div 1: 8-club single table; Div 2: 12-clubs in 3 conferences; Div 3: Three regional leagues with no interleague play, preferably 8 teams each. Does that sound doable?

I still kind of like my regional -> champ/relegation split.

So, 16 team league. Spring Season: split in half East and West, each team plays home and away. Fall Season: Best 4 teams from each conference are placed in a 'Championship Conference' to contend for the title. Worst 4 teams from East and West join the 'Relegation Conference '. 

Might be a bit convoluted/not explaining things properly (tired from a long day's work), but I like this idea given it cuts down on travel costs allowing smaller towns to support teams, and creates more drama. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am going to make a prediction. 

We will never have a properly speaking CPL second division, and there will never be promotion/relegation in CPL.

The clubs we end up with, 12-14, will simply not have the balls to risk the consolidation of their market positions by adding the variable of poor performance as a definitive factor in forced downsizing. Promotion and relegation has to be driven from the bottom up, not top down. What drives the system is ambition of those below, not the monopolistic interests of those sitting on top.

We will have equivalents to L1O Ontario, feeding CPL teams. Hopefully in more provinces in the country. That's it. Hopefully that will also mean more amateur teams in the Voyageurs Cup. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Anywhere between 14-18 has been mentioned recently by David Clanachan and Paul Beirne for how far they can go in numbers terms with a single tier.

If you have something like Victoria, Fraser Valley, Edmonton, Calgary, Saskatoon, Winnipeg, Windsor, London, K/W, Hamilton, St Catherines, Mississauga, York, Durham, Ottawa, Laval, Quebec, Halifax, there's not much left at that point in terms of 200k + markets that couldn't be catered to by simply going to 20.

Think the pro/rel stuff is marketing spin as much as anything else, because that's a project that would probably take a generation to reach fruition, even if things go very well in all seven markets in season one rather than the mixed bag of success stories and strugglers that is more likely to happen.

Edited by BringBackTheBlizzard

Share this post


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

I am going to make a prediction. 

We will never have a properly speaking CPL second division, and there will never be promotion/relegation in CPL.

The clubs we end up with, 12-14, will simply not have the balls to risk the consolidation of their market positions by adding the variable of poor performance as a definitive factor in forced downsizing. Promotion and relegation has to be driven from the bottom up, not top down. What drives the system is ambition of those below, not the monopolistic interests of those sitting on top.

We will have equivalents to L1O Ontario, feeding CPL teams. Hopefully in more provinces in the country. That's it. Hopefully that will also mean more amateur teams in the Voyageurs Cup. 

There's nothing wrong with that though. A nationwide 1st tier. And for 2nd tier regional amateur leagues that would feed the 1st tier. Compared to what we have now that is infinitely better and is probably the most realistic for the foreseeable future. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I guess the implementation of pro-rel depends on how long the CPL keeps a salary cap in place. If the salary cap is permanent, then there should be no reason why any team would be better than any other team in terms of quality, so being top or bottom of the league could be due to good/back luck or injuries. Not exactly fair to relegate in a parity league and the loss of media revenue/exposure could be devastating.

Then again, not having a Division 2 might make it harder for new clubs to enter the league and won't provide an additional pathway for young players to take the next step along the development ladder. However, maybe it's not needed since CPL is scouting L1O for the best talent to promote to their clubs. I remember Anthony Totera mentioning in his Ottawa talk that a lot of players from other provinces are coming to play in L1O for the quality and exposure. And it's not just players, but where are we going to get quality coaches for these teams?

Hmmm... may the pro-rel they're talking about isn't for clubs joining new divisions, but for players purchased/released by clubs instead. Clubs are just a means to an end for player development for the national team, so clubs should be given priority based on geographic location and population density with localized pairs of clubs to develop rivalries. If forced to limit the CPL to 16 clubs, I would choose Pacific-Mainland BC, Cavalry-FCE, Saskatchewan-Valour, London-Kitchener, Forge-York 9, Ottawa-Laval-Quebec City, Moncton-Halifax-St John's. 

Edited by Initial B

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to Clanachan 18 cities are in discussions with the CPL, some more advanced than others. He also said "Toronto is a massive city, there could be many teams in Toronto" as well as "The water's warm" on potential clubs in Montreal and Vancouver. The goal is 14-16 clubs by 2026, and pro/rel after the 14-16 club first tier. Reaching the goal should be fairly easy if there actually are 18 markets with concrete interest. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Initial B said:

An 8-team Div 1 would allow a 28-game double home-and-away balanced schedule...

Gross. ??

I am willing to accept the non-standard schedule for the early years until we build the league, but our goal should be a basic, standard, home-and away schedule. I would much prefer 16 teams in the first division and a knockout-style league cup competition alongside the Voyageurs Cup (which should be expanded to include teams down to D3).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ted, your comment about 16 teams got me to thinking about talent dilution. I agree that 16 teams would probably be ideal, but I'm not sure how much talent Canada has at this point not just in players, but in coaches. I would rather have a smaller number of clubs playing the best against best than games where you may end up with a bunch of blowouts when top and bottom ranked teams meet. As quality increases, *then* increase the number of teams in the first division. Maybe we could someday end up like Sweden's Allsvenskan, with a season that lasts between the April and November International breaks, 16 teams, 30 games, and ranked 14th in the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

OMG, can we stop with the "Canadian self defeating atttitude"?

No CPL won't be an 8 team league after a split in half. How many times can CPL say 16 teams THEN we start D2?

Can someone find me 1 article or official quote talking about splitting the league in half? yeah I didn't think so

Sorry but it would be unbelievably stupid to build up to 16 and then split it in half after all those years. That's a very underwhelming move that would crush the league's momentum. 

Most importantly, no investors in their right minds would invest in such a risky venture. Pro/Rel is a tough sell as it is and now you're telling them that half of them will be cut...

c'mon, let's get back on topic

Edited by Ansem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, KW519 said:

According to Clanachan 18 cities are in discussions with the CPL, some more advanced than others. He also said "Toronto is a massive city, there could be many teams in Toronto" as well as "The water's warm" on potential clubs in Montreal and Vancouver. The goal is 14-16 clubs by 2026, and pro/rel after the 14-16 club first tier. Reaching the goal should be fairly easy if there actually are 18 markets with concrete interest. 

As I see it, you have 18 clubs raring to go, with stadiums to be in the top flight, and a fan base, and of course the money to cover basic costs, and the tv pie---well that is a damn good 34 game season, balanced schedule. I'd stick with it. I'd prefer 18 teams in one top division, to 14 and then another, 2nd with 10 teams, where most likely the tier would not warrant  you paying a living wage to your players.

The only way to set up promotion and relegation, is to set it up at the amateur level by decree at the lower levels of the game, and then create a wide base of ambitious amateur teams who want to dream about making the CPL, even if they only have a 2300 capacity stadium and can't really compete on salary (exactly the same as all leagues the world over, with your Bournemouths and Huescas).

The reason promotion and relegation is great is because it a true expression of meritocracy and the wonders of competition.  But as we stand, if we get to near 20 clubs, we have an amazing league for players and fans in Canada--and we don't really have a motivation to start with the complications of a second tier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, KW519 said:

According to Clanachan 18 cities are in discussions with the CPL

Sorry, but is it 18 cities or ownership groups? Vastly different concepts. Aren't there something like five ownership groups in Montreal area alone (or was it Quebec, didn't look back to that earlier post). So, if it's 18 ownership groups maybe there are only 10 (or whatever number as an example) cities involved. I'm not negative at all on the growth of CPL, but we've seen information being misconstrued before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...