Jump to content
lazlo_80

CPL new teams speculation

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Ams1984 said:

To you, longevity of the USL might mean that it’s a better bet from Ottawa’s point of view, but it’s very unlikely to have any bearing on a court case.

Actually, my point was that if the MLS franchises have a case for exemption then so do Ottawa Fury. CPL is not equivalent to either MLS or USL -- yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Lofty said:

Actually, my point was that if the MLS franchises have a case for exemption then so do Ottawa Fury. CPL is not equivalent to either MLS or USL -- yet.

I get what you’re saying, but I disagree.

1) I think that USL is probably pretty analogous to CPL in terms of attendance, cost structure, and level of play whereas MLS is substantially different in all of those respects; and,

2) I’m not sure that the MLS clubs would have a leg to stand on if their sanctioning were withheld. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point that people don't seem to grasp is that in terms of how FIFA conventionally deals with this issue, if we have a functioning fully pro coast-to-coast league there are no longer any exceptional circumstances that justify having fully pro level teams playing out regardless of attendance, cost structure and level of play. Going after the Fury but not the MLS teams is a case of wanting to have your cake and eat it too and it's that inconsistency and any damage that would be caused to OSEG financially that would no doubt form the basis of any legal action.

FIFA and the various associations under it are still subject to the legal systems of the countries they operate in as UEFA found out the hard way when Jean-Marc Bosman took them to court over the transfer system, so will sometimes avoid taking actions that would not stand up to legal challenge. For example, the CSA and OSA have not been able to do much about the CSL operating as an unsanctioned league in terms of banning people who have been involved in it (at least one ex-player is a Onesoccer analyst at the moment) because their hands are tied by the Canadian legal system.

Share this post


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

The point that people don't seem to grasp is that in terms of how FIFA conventionally deals with this issue, if we have a functioning fully pro coast-to-coast league there are no longer any exceptional circumstances that justify having fully pro level teams playing out regardless of attendance, cost structure and level of play.

He's actually correct. Level of play, finances has truly little to do with the FIFA rules.

1 hour ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

Going after the Fury but not the MLS teams is a case of wanting to have your cake and eat it too and it's that inconsistency and any damage that would be caused to OSEG financially that would no doubt form the basis of any legal action.

You're free to follow "Miki Turner" on twitter who writes about sports and well verse into the law and a contributor to the Atlantic.

I can't find the tweet but you're free to ask him if you dont believe me. During the Fury saga, he tweeted that he knew from sources from the inside that unlike everyone else, there is indeed an exemption for the 3 MLS clubs.

The exception is that they are exempted from filing for sanctioning every year. For a specified amount of year, their sanction is granted automatically which makes sense due to the nature of MLS single entity.

When he was asked how long that exemption was in place for, he wouldn't answer but people threw numbers at him. It's more than 15 years and much less than 40 years. However, if a party decided to revoke said sanction, they could still do it. (Montagliani threat)

All this shows that the "single entity" of MLS is exactly why you can't approach desanction the same way as the Fury. Turner also drew the map to said divorce. The 3 clubs would have to sell back their shares into MLS and vice versa, lose IP (unless there's negotiations or opt-out clause), sell the franchise. Only then would they be able to start over in a Canadian league.

Of course, he doubts it ever happens but such divorce is WAY WAY WAY more complex and takes WAY more time than exiting Fury from USL.

Your logic isn't wrong but getting MLS out of Canada (which is essentially FIFA would be doing more so than removing/transfering clubs), it's not the same process at all which still isn't a justification for the Fury to use in CAS. They would certainly lose.

All this text is informative, there's been reports that said that if they dont get their sanction they would either close shop or join CPL. Haven't heard CAS yet, which they won't. They are at CONCACAF mercy here.

What legal action? Sanctioning is a privilege, not a right.

1 hour ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

FIFA and the various associations under it are still subject to the legal systems of the countries they operate in as UEFA found out the hard way when Jean-Marc Bosman took them to court over the transfer system, so will sometimes avoid taking actions that would not stand up to legal challenge.

Apple and oranges. You're talking 2 radically different things here. Which laws is sanctioning violating? None. Transfers however can raise questions in regards to specific countries labour laws which is ground for court challenges. Sanctioning isn't violating any laws.

1 hour ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

For example, the CSA and OSA have not been able to do much about the CSL operating as an unsanctioned league in terms of banning people who have been involved in it (at least one ex-player is a Onesoccer analyst at the moment) because their hands are tied by the Canadian legal system.

Of course not, but again, that's a poor example here. The CSL tried to fight losing their sanctioning and they lost.

Not sure about the banning of people working in it, but that seems like overreaching.

The bottom line is, sticking to sanctioning matter, sanctioning bodies holds all the cards and courts aren't the appropriate place to fight it. CAS might here your case but most agrees it's a long shot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

The point that people don't seem to grasp is that in terms of how FIFA conventionally deals with this issue, if we have a functioning fully pro coast-to-coast league there are no longer any exceptional circumstances that justify having fully pro level teams playing out regardless of attendance, cost structure and level of play. Going after the Fury but not the MLS teams is a case of wanting to have your cake and eat it too and it's that inconsistency and any damage that would be caused to OSEG financially that would no doubt form the basis of any legal action.

FIFA and the various associations under it are still subject to the legal systems of the countries they operate in as UEFA found out the hard way when Jean-Marc Bosman took them to court over the transfer system, so will sometimes avoid taking actions that would not stand up to legal challenge. For example, the CSA and OSA have not been able to do much about the CSL operating as an unsanctioned league in terms of banning people who have been involved in it (at least one ex-player is a Onesoccer analyst at the moment) because their hands are tied by the Canadian legal system.

I agree with what I believe your larger point to be; MLS and the USL are the same in that they aren’t our Canadian national league, and now that there is such a league, we should disentangle ourselves from both of the aforesaid (or at least, there’s no rationale for keeping Canadian clubs in one but not the other). 

Of course FIFA, Concacaf, and the CSA are subject to the legal systems of the jurisdictions in which they operate, but there is no right to receive sanctioning, and there is also no right to hold third parties to a contract or business arrangement that they aren’t a party to (the sanctioning bodies have no privity of contract with USL or the Fury). 

Bottom line is that the Fury is completely at the mercy of the sanctioning bodies. Their leeway will probably run out soon, and then they’ll either have to fold or join the CPL. Not much more to it than that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I had a chat with my Fury season ticket rep on Friday.  He has heard nothing about a move to the CPL and anyone renewing their season ticket would be buying for the 2020 USL season.  When I asked what would happen if the Fury were forced to play in the CPL next season, he said he was not aware of any contingency for that.  But if it did happen, he'd guess all season ticket holders would be contacted (to get refunds??).  I renewed but said if we went to the CPL, I'd actually buy an additional season ticket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect that if Fury had a strong case it was likely for this year as the CPL hadn’t started and they could claim they didn’t have adequate notice (even though it was claimed they knew their sanctioning was in jeaporady long before the original negative decision). Now the league has started and they were notified that they only have sanctioning for this year, their case is much weaker.  The fact that they themselves have not given notice to USL is their own decision. They still need to get sanctioning and cannot play in the USL next year without it.  

I suspect they won’t get it for this year and will have the option of folding, going to the CPL or taking this to CAS and if the decision is upheld there, to challenge it in Canadian courts.  I guess we will see what happens but frankly given their previous statements they may want to be seen to be pushed into this rather than actually withdraw from the USL and apply to the CPL. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, An Observer said:

....Now the league has started and they were notified that they only have sanctioning for this year, their case is much weaker....

Playing out sanctionings are always for only one year even for the three MLS teams. There was nothing unusual in that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

September it will be defined one way or another, we will hear for sure! Anxious for the outcome, there’s a decent chance it might not go the CPL’s way.

Edited by Blackjack15

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

I'm missing the argument Ansem, what do you mean?

People have been arguing that the finances between MLS and CPL constituted a major roadblock to a future decision to have Canadian clubs compete in Canada only.

"Parity" isn't really the norm in soccer, so assuming that the massive disparity between the 3 clubs and the rest of CPL budgets would be considered in a sanctioning decision is highly doubtful. Such disparities has always existed in most leagues.

However, "if" and "when" the time comes for the CSA, CPL and the 3 clubs to have a sit down (I'm thinking 2028-2029 due to Mediapro deal ending), the 3 clubs will want to do business as usual (spending). The league will have to decide then if they will be allow to do so or not, I'm of the opinion they should.

Edited by Ansem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Ansem said:

People have been arguing that the finances between MLS and CPL constituted a major roadblock to a future decision to have Canadian clubs compete in Canada only.

"Parity" isn't really the norm in soccer, so assuming that the massive disparity between the 3 clubs and the rest of CPL budgets would be considered in a sanctioning decision is highly doubtful. Such disparities has always existed in most leagues.

However, "if" and "when" the time comes for the CSA, CPL and the 3 clubs to have a sit down (I'm thinking 2028-2029 due to Mediapro deal ending), the 3 clubs will want to do business as usual (spending). The league will have to decide then if they will be allow to do so or not, I'm of the opinion they should.

Bang on. ‘Parity’ is MLS and US sports league silliness. The English Premier League, La Liga etc, are the best and most successful leagues in the world, both on and off the field. Given that almost all soccer fans in Canada also likely watch one or more of the European leagues regularly, I’d say most of us aren’t bothered if the biggest markets like Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver are allowed to exploit their larger market potential. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not having parity worked so well with the Cosmos back in late 70s and early 80s and the 86ers in the late 80s and early 90s so what could possibly go wrong. Anyway, winding this back to the reality of what's happening on sanctioning this parity angle is a complete red herring in terms of FIFA regulations and we have been told by someone who would know that the Fury are getting people to renew their season tickets for the 2020 USL Championship season.

Edited by Ozzie_the_parrot

Share this post


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

Not having parity worked so well with the Cosmos back in late 70s and early 80s and the 86ers in the late 80s and early 90s so what could possibly go wrong. Anyway, winding this back to the reality of what's happening on sanctioning this parity angle is a complete red herring in terms of FIFA regulations and we have been told by someone who would know that the Fury are getting people to renew their season tickets for the 2020 USL Championship season.

Its 100% normal for the team to do business as usual and ask for renewal.

They did last year and obviously CONCACAF didn't care about that as they can be refunded. 

Utterly silly to think that the Fury asking for renewal means anything nor would it stop CONCACAF to rule against them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

Not having parity worked so well with the Cosmos back in late 70s and early 80s and the 86ers in the late 80s and early 90s so what could possibly go wrong. 

Original NASL folded because those other teams with poor support tried to spend like the Cosmos or had idiot owners who bought teams such as the Boomers and expected to draw the same amount of support as teams like the Cosmos and Whitecaps had right off the bat.  It wasn't the lack of parity but the lack of intelligence.  If you don't have the money to spend, don't spend it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

Not having parity worked so well with the Cosmos back in late 70s and early 80s and the 86ers in the late 80s and early 90s so what could possibly go wrong. Anyway, winding this back to the reality of what's happening on sanctioning this parity angle is a complete red herring in terms of FIFA regulations and we have been told by someone who would know that the Fury are getting people to renew their season tickets for the 2020 USL Championship season.

The 70s and 80s might as well have been 1000 years ago in terms of the commercial viability of professional sports. TV/broadcast deals, merchandising, corporate partnerships etc are in a whole different universe than they were back then. The failure of a given approach in 1980 means nothing in reference to this new league’s chances. Further, there is zero evidence that a lack of ‘parity’ was responsible for that league’s demise; to ascribe its failure to a lack of ‘parity’ is beyond a subjective normative valuation based on nothing but your own views on the matter. 

Edited by Ams1984
Autocorrect is stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole parity thing is truly silly. 

Golden States were virtually invincible for a few years, has that hurt the NBA? No. As a matter of fact, it allowed other teams to charge more and sellout crowds in other cities.

Montreal, Vancouver and TFC would do the same to other cities. We saw what it did to York9 and Cavalry. Would the 3 clubs lose that much attendance competing in a more robust CPL (post 2026)? Doubtful, winning sell and those three would set themselves to build their own legacies while relegation would be virtually impossible.

Sure those 3 would be the "Barca, Real and Atletico" of CPL as in many other leagues around the world. We have to stop thinking that anything done differently than the major US leagues is bound to fail. 

 

Edited by Ansem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Especially when in football you advance to continental tournaments. NASL and CSL didnt have the benefit of that. I hear the 86ers were set to compete in CCL the year the league folded.  I think if that would have happened we're talking about a completely different soccer landscape in Canada today

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Ansem said:

The whole parity thing is truly silly...

Fortunately, CanPL don't appear to agree with you and are actively trying to avoid many of things that went wrong in the past by having sensible salary caps. When people on here talk about following European clubs most of the time it will be a case of glory hunting Man United, Barca or Juventus from afar rather than anything that resembles genuine support. You don't tend to run into too many fans of Sheffield United, Sporting Gijon or Hellas Verona type clubs unless its first generation people who are actually from there. Good luck getting Canadian sports fans to watch a perennial loser like that. The experience with that in the past has been that most people very quickly lose interest.

Share this post


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

Fortunately, CanPL don't appear to agree with you and are actively trying to avoid many of things that went wrong in the past by having sensible salary caps.

Strict cap is silly. I much prefer a "luxury tax" to a cap. Allows owners to spend if they can, helps to keep them in check to some extend while helping the teams that have less resources or create a stadium fund etc...

There's lots of room for creativity. No need to double down on either extremes

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if you have various accomplishments that can be achieved within the table at different levels. E.g...  pro/rel, cup competitions, cup qualification, darby games, max 20 team league. Parity is not that important. If there are 32 teams staring at 1 accomplishment thats note worthy or worth getting excited about. Yah you need engineer the league to try and make things as equal as possible

My opinion is create a structure that is as organic and close to the traditional football structure as possible. That way the sport is the exciting part not a bunch of other nonsense 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Ansem said:

The whole parity thing is truly silly. 

Golden States were virtually invincible for a few years, has that hurt the NBA? No. As a matter of fact, it allowed other teams to charge more and sellout crowds in other cities.

Montreal, Vancouver and TFC would do the same to other cities. We saw what it did to York9 and Cavalry. Would the 3 clubs lose that much attendance competing in a more robust CPL (post 2026)? Doubtful, winning sell and those three would set themselves to build their own legacies while relegation would be virtually impossible.

Sure those 3 would be the "Barca, Real and Atletico" of CPL and in many other leagues around the world. We have to stop thinking that anything done differently than the major US leagues is bound to fail. 

 

I think with the momentum from the World Cup along with a gradual increase in support of the CPL over the next ten years could potentially lead to a seamless transition for the three MLS teams into the CPL without any loss of support. However, they will still need to be enticed to come over.

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...