CPL General

[Complete Homer]

2 hours ago, BringBackTheBlizzard said:

If playing in an American league is good enough for something as integral to Canadian national identity as hockey, there is no need to ever apologize for it where soccer is concerned. It's not obvious to me why the CSA didn't simply follow through on the Easton Report and stay out of D1 and D2 in sanctioning terms and focus instead on regional D3 with a U-23 development focus to build something comparable to the CHL. I suspect we would have more pro teams by now if they had, because the problems inherent with how to put 8 relatively high budget D2 sort of level teams together while having relatively few large 750k+ cities and the three biggest metro areas already taken by MLS have not gone away, which is why Erie, Pa rather than Cleveland sized markets enter the conversation. The Ticats don't have much longer to make this CanPL thing work in terms of a solid launch date before pressure will build to try another direction. Another year or so maybe.

We've gone over all of this before

1. You're creating a false equivalency between MLS and NHL. Besides the fact that the NHL was a Canadian league that expanded into the US, they simply are not the same. The NHL hasn't stated that they will stop expanding into Canada, the NHL does not prioritize American development over Canadian development, and the NHL developed in a historical context that does not mirror the modern reality. 

What you are advocating for is not the same as the NHL. You're asking for the equivalent of Canadians being happy with the Toronto Maple Leafs, Montreal Canadians, and Vancouver Canucks being the only representatives in the NHL and describing anyone who wouldn't be satisfied with an AHL team as "nationalistic" (thanks for comparing us to the Nazis by the way) or under the influence of an inferiority complex. I doubt many Canadians would be happy with the scenario you are proposing being transposed onto hockey, so I don't think it is valid to say that soccer fans should be happy with it either.

2. The CSA is clearly attempting to follow through with Easton's original recommendation to create semi-pro D3 leagues. L1O and PLSQ are examples of progress on that front, and even if BCT3 hasn't taken off there is a clear attempt being made to head in that direction. Claiming that the CSA is going against Easton's recommendations is not only ignoring the fact that we don't know the full extent of the recommendations (Montagliani made reference to multiple reports from Easton, seems that only the first is public) it ignores the fact that they have already begun to follow through on the known recommendations.

3. Your suspicion that we'd have more pro clubs if we focused on a Division 2 feeding MLS flies in the face of objective evidence. Two of the three Canadian MLS2 sides have folded. Turns out that relying on the benevolence of a system built for another country is a very precarious position.

Being pro CPL is not attempt to lash out at the USA born out of insecurity, it is a statement of support for self-reliance from soccer fans who have witnessed little to no progress from dependence on an system that is ambivalent towards Canadian goals. I don't blame the US system at all, I just recognize that it was built for Americans and continuing to rely on a system where our benefit is, at best, a secondary objective is problematic.

1 hour ago, Rheo said:

Really can't wait for some news just so there will be new dead horses to beat on  

It won't really change with news. The fact that CPL's twitter sends potential fans here to discuss CPL and are they are greeted with a daily tirade of negativity towards CPL should be disappointing for anyone trying to engage the wider community about CPL and Canadian soccer. I'm all for open discussion and dissenting opinions, but when one user seems to spend hours a day rehashing already refuted arguments, trying to find reasons why a league (that this section of the forum is dedicated to) shouldn't exist, and repeatedly using accusations of Nationalism and mental illness to dismiss people he disagrees with, I think that user is safely within the definition of a "troll". Besides not feeding the trolls (oops), it might be time for a little bit more gatekeeping.

Edited December 28, 2017 by Complete Homer

[Gopherbashi]

2 hours ago, 1996 said:

So even in Lacrosse we can’t sustsain our own Canadian only league? We have to play in an American League?

We don't have a Canadian-only lacrosse league because it hasn't been deemed necessary to try.  We're consistently top two in lacrosse worldwide; we can't say the same thing about soccer.

[Rheo]

Just my opinion but I don't see new people really driving the CPL/CSA idea vs USSF Canadian division discussion.  Sometimes yes but mostly just the same old people (old as in on here, not in age) with pretty much the same old talking points.  I don't care so I'm not accused of stifling discussion, just find it funny is all.

Just figure (or hope or pray) that with the drop of some legitimate news, a lot of the discussion will focus onto that.  Which of course will be beaten into the ground lol.  Also I don't really figure the USSF Canadian division fan fiction is going away at any time

Edited December 28, 2017 by Rheo

[Ansem]

6 hours ago, BringBackTheBlizzard said:

A more sensible analogy would actually be with Erie, Pa in terms of market size. Cleveland has a metro area of 2 million and was close to getting an MLS team at one point.

It's the holidays. We all want to stay positive. Why are you so obsessed at driving the same points over and over again?

We know that Halifax is smaller than Toronto. Doesn't mean they won't be viable or be able to put a competitive team on the pitch.

The man from Halifax already said the team would spend up to the limit of the cap. So why are you still posting the same things over and over again?

Can we all agree that CPL will not be MLS? We all know that yet you still need to remind us constantly. Not copying MLS business model doesn't mean it can't work nor that it can't be competitive.

[Complete Homer]

25 minutes ago, Rheo said:

Just my opinion but I don't see new people really driving the CPL/CSA idea vs USSF Canadian division discussion.  Sometimes yes but mostly just the same old people (old as in on here, not in age) with pretty much the same old talking points.  I don't care so I'm not accused of stifling discussion, just find it funny is all.

I've heard from more than a few members of multiple CPL supporters groups who don't use the forum because of its toxicity, and I admit that responding to and feeding the troll adds to it...I'm just saying that it is a shame that anyone who clicks on this forum looking to learn more about CPL is greeted by posts from a user who seems content to spend hours a day using the same talking points to denigrate the idea of CPL. Excellent way to turn off people who could be members of the groups who are actually trying to do the little things fans can do to help.

The forum was actually productive when it was gated by needing a "CPL Supporter" tag to participate in, might be nice to find a way to return to that sort of discussion without creating a paywall for new fans.

Edited December 28, 2017 by Complete Homer

[Rheo]

I agree Homer.  I know I've had to step back on more than a few times due to the negativity.  Really the only reason I'm here so much is because I enjoy checking in it at work.  Barely check here when I'm not working lol.  I've deleted a whole bunch of posts because I figure what's the use especially when valid points are often skipped over, dismissed or ignored if they don't match the contrasting opinion.

Oh well, just try and stay positive and muddle through until we get real news to hopefully solidly discuss the merits of.

[Complete Homer]

21 minutes ago, Rheo said:

I agree Homer.  I know I've had to step back on more than a few times due to the negativity.  Really the only reason I'm here so much is because I enjoy checking in it at work.  Barely check here when I'm not working lol.  I've deleted a whole bunch of posts because I figure what's the use especially when valid points are often skipped over, dismissed or ignored if they don't match the contrasting opinion.

Oh well, just try and stay positive and muddle through until we get real news to hopefully solidly discuss the merits of.

Same, the way my work is structured on many rotations leaves me with lots of 3-4 minute stops throughout the day, you start developing a list of websites to read in those gaps 

At first I tried to provide rebuttals to the negative narrative, but it's tiresome. I think we've seen lots of people join with the same intentions and quickly leave, which sort of illustrates the way the forum could actually help grow interest instead of shrinking it if steps were taken 

Anyway, always nice chatting with you

Edited December 28, 2017 by Complete Homer

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

3 hours ago, Gopherbashi said:

We don't have a Canadian-only lacrosse league because it hasn't been deemed necessary to try.  We're consistently top two in lacrosse worldwide; we can't say the same thing about soccer.

Presumably it should be easier to launch domestic leagues in sports that we dominate in global terms like lacrosse and hockey? The absence of them suggests there is no huge advantage derived from doing so. The main reasons for pursuing it in soccer appear to be that key CSA office holders have been desperate to have something to sanction for empire building reasons and that the CFL owner in Hamilton has an obligation to pro soccer after the PanAm games THF stadium build but wasn't keen on being a minor league franchise operator while TFC are major league given the Ticats see Toronto as the main rival so wants the status of a D1 national league without its substance. Meanwhile the number of pro franchises is actually dwindling and year after year young Canadian players are missing out on pro level opportunities that they might have had if the moratorium on expansion in USSF sanctioned leaguesbhad never been imposed. This whole saga can't drag on forever.

[matty]

10 minutes ago, BringBackTheBlizzard said:

Presumably it should be easier to launch domestic leagues in sports that we dominate in global terms like lacrosse and hockey? The absence of them suggests there is no huge advantage derived from doing so. The main reasons for pursuing it in soccer appear to be that key CSA office holders have been desperate to have something to sanction for empire building reasons and that the CFL owner in Hamilton has an obligation to pro soccer after the PanAm games THF stadium build but wasn't keen on being a minor league franchise operator while TFC are major league given the Ticats see Toronto as the main rival so wants the status of a D1 national league without its substance. Meanwhile the number of pro franchises is actually dwindling and year after year young Canadian players are missing out on pro level opportunities that they might have had if the moratorium on expansion in USSF sanctioned leaguesbhad never been imposed. This whole saga can't drag on forever.

They did launch and canadian league for hockey and it evolved because there was a lot of money to be made by hitting up major markets between both nations. Lacrosse is more related to the sport being too niche to create a non shared league circa 1999.

Bbtb just stop we get your points and your trolling at this point. Just say goodbye to this thread and focus elsewhere on the site till this is ready to go

[LAK]

BBTB, there is no proof that any investors want to put money into a USL type franchise in Canada. What we did have was FC Edmonton (NASL yes I know, don't grab a random fact that doesn't matter to argue so that you don't have to address the real issue) that folded, Ottawa Fury hanging on (again arguing this just shows you won't really address the issues being raised)and....NOTHING ELSE! Even the MLS clubs developmental teams were losing too much money for them to continue to put money into it. Yet...that's your solution (or a version of it). It clearly doesn't work from an economic stand point and there are very few people who want to invest in that. HOWEVER, there are a reported 10-12 interested parties in investing in a National League the way that CPL is presenting. Which we do know is a Div. 1 Canadian league. 

Let me summarize...a lot of interest (investors) in CanPL as a Div. 1 league in Canada/ not much interest (investors) in developmental teams and lower level american leagues.

You may think it's a bad idea (based on evidence 35 years ago) but people with money think it has merit...that is why the Halifax group, Sask group and BCFC group are all willing to invest in modular stadiums etc. and why we've already got Hamilton and Winnipeg ownership groups in place. 

I don't think the idea of this league is holding investors back from investing (there is no longer a CSA moratorium on lower level leagues in Canada) in what you're describing. They've had decades to do something and haven't...probably because they see it as a bad idea.

I leave you with one last thing. I challenge you to post a reply  to the points I've made (not changing the subject) and without sounding self-righteous or condescending. Dig deep you can do it (okay that was condescending...I'm sorry. Just be nice though, K?)

 

 

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

Back in May, if I had predicted there would still only be two franchises by the end of the year with no solid launch date in sight I would have been treated with complete derision on here, because most of you believed that they had lots of applications in place from investors that were ready and willing to sign on the dotted line. Tom Fath has recently made it clear that at least one group that has experience of running a D2 level franchise and has been attending the meetings thinks the business plan is unsustainable in the context of their city. That suggests that it is not a safe bet that this thing will ever be ready to go and that in turn leads to legitimate questions on whether this was the best strategy for the CSA to be pursuing.

[matty]

4 minutes ago, BringBackTheBlizzard said:

Back in May, if I had predicted there would still only be two franchises by the end of the year with no solid launch date in sight I would have been treated with complete derision on here, because most of you believed that they had lots of applications in place from investors that were ready and willing to sign on the dotted line. Tom Fath has recently made it clear that at least one group that has experience of running a D2 level franchise and has been attending the meetings thinks the business plan is unsustainable in the context of their city. That suggests that it is not a safe bet that this thing will ever be ready to go and that in turn leads to legitimate questions on whether this was the best strategy for the CSA to be pursuing.

Likely but that would be more about you bolding proclaiming than actually saying it with evidence which you could could maybe say was there. Had you said "i would not be shocked if they actually go for 2019 and continue being slow with their actions" i doubt anyone would shit on your chest greatly.

Also fath was speaking about his struggles not whether the league could work.

Also no one wanted usl teams. Not just the money men and csa but also local governments

[LAK]

45 minutes ago, BringBackTheBlizzard said:

Back in May, if I had predicted there would still only be two franchises by the end of the year with no solid launch date in sight I would have been treated with complete derision on here, because most of you believed that they had lots of applications in place from investors that were ready and willing to sign on the dotted line. Tom Fath has recently made it clear that at least one group that has experience of running a D2 level franchise and has been attending the meetings thinks the business plan is unsustainable in the context of their city. That suggests that it is not a safe bet that this thing will ever be ready to go and that in turn leads to legitimate questions on whether this was the best strategy for the CSA to be pursuing.

Good point, but there is still zero evidence to suggest that there would be any investors in a USL level league other than a TFC II. Even the Whitecaps and Montreal bailed on that notion. I'd have to see the numbers...but I doubt that TFC II make any money, so the idea of a league at that level assumes owners would be okay losing money indefinitely. That doesn't sound like a great investment and probably the reason they don't have any investors interested in that sort of thing (at least I've seen no evidence of anyone being interested at that level).

You make solid points on the fact that this league as currently planned (or what we think the plan is at this point) might not be the best strategy moving forward, but the alternative is just not viable as we've seen through history and the current lack of interest from investors. These two MLS reserve squads being axed and FC Edmonton ceasing has nothing to do with the new league. With no plan moving forward, they would still have folded and we'd have nothing other than three teams (plus reserve TFC and Ottawa) in the MLS and not even making it out of the hex during qualifying.

Most of us feel like we need to try something...whether it fails or not, we need to try. I think we can safely say that we've tried the lower American leagues and the business case is just not there.

 

[Rheo]

On the Soccer Today pod yesterday they briefly talked about the official CPL tweet about the busy 2018 and Rollins said that 2019 start was necessary "Everyone I talk to in the system recognizes that.  There's no doubt out there.  There might be some cold feet on the investment side and that's where the complications lie but in terms of the people that are actually pushing this agenda and trying to get it done and working behind the scenes, everyone understands how vital it is that they are up and running by a year and a half from now."

 

[matty]

25 minutes ago, Rheo said:

On the Soccer Today pod yesterday they briefly talked about the official CPL tweet about the busy 2018 and Rollins said that 2019 start was necessary "Everyone I talk to in the system recognizes that.  There's no doubt out there.  There might be some cold feet on the investment side and that's where the complications lie but in terms of the people that are actually pushing this agenda and trying to get it done and working behind the scenes, everyone understands how vital it is that they are up and running by a year and a half from now."

 

2019 short season? Either way nice to hear they're aware the clock is ticking. Cold feet more than just Fath I'm guessing.

[Rheo]

5 minutes ago, matty said:

2019 short season? Either way nice to hear they're aware the clock is ticking. Cold feet more than just Fath I'm guessing.

I don't think it was intended to represent a short season for 2019, most likely just rounding up instead of saying a year and a third or a year and quarter assuming a spring start of season.

Edited December 29, 2017 by Rheo

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

45 minutes ago, matty said:

2019 short season? Either way nice to hear they're aware the clock is ticking. Cold feet more than just Fath I'm guessing.

...or people were simply going to the meetings to hear the sales pitch, and never did anything that constitited a formal application for a franchise. Compare and contrast with NISA where eight named cities have already had formal bids accepted, rejected or sent back for further work with another twenty cities said to still be in active discussions. It's not easy to put something like this together, so if the ratio of ready to actually bid on the one hand to in discussions on the other were similar, there would be about three actually ready to rumble in another year or so with CanPL (e.g. Hamilton, Winnipeg and Halifax).

What would make the Edmonton thing so problematic is if the likes of Saskatoon, K/W and Surrey need to see something up and running successfully first to be able/willing to move beyond the discussions stage and proceed with a formal application linked to an expensive stadium build. If the Ottawa Fury are also not fully on board, there still wouldn't be anything to announce by this stage in terms of a projected launch date because there would be no clear pathway even to a soft launch with six given how few viable suitably sized stadia are available with unmarked fielturf from coast to coast that would be ready to use as is. Life was a lot easier in the original CSL era when most university stadiums had grass fields and were under-utilized for most of the year.

[Rheo]

...or all the hints various people related to the league or well connected media people have been dropping the last couple of weeks could mean that an announcement is coming in the not too distant future (and to keep the board joke going, say 60-90 days)

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

Don't think that's an OR in logic gate sort of terms. The standard 60/90 days placeholder statement can easily be interpreted as another way of saying maybe FCE and the Fury will both be on board after the next meeting or new investors will have emerged out of the woodwork and the pathway to six for a soft launch will be clear at that point, if for example the BC branded franchise could launch using Swangard in Burnaby enabling a BC, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Hamilton, Ottawa and Halifax original six with Saskatoon, Calgary, Kitchener/Waterloo and St John's possibilities in the pipeline for 7 and 8.  

The 500 lb gorilla in the room in all of this is the legal dispute with the City of Hamilton over the Ticats lease and soccer exclusivity clause. Until that reaches resolution the depth of Bob Young's commitment to this project won't become fully clear.  Whether he is to put it in MLS terms a Phil Anschutz ready to fund multiple league owned franchises and sink tens of millions in until the league gains traction or a George Soros who bails at the first sign of turbulence when business plan revenue expectations are not met initially may well determine whether it can ever get anywhere.

Edited December 29, 2017 by BringBackTheBlizzard

[Complete Homer]

 

Edited December 29, 2017 by Complete Homer

[matty]

2 hours ago, Rheo said:

I don't think it was intended to represent a short season for 2019, most likely just rounding up instead of saying a year and a third or a year and quarter assuming a spring start of season.

I hope the year and a half is just poor wording cause 18 months would be june/july 2019. I really don't see a 20 game season happening in 3-4 months.

[1996]

20 hours ago, Gopherbashi said:

We don't have a Canadian-only lacrosse league because it hasn't been deemed necessary to try.  We're consistently top two in lacrosse worldwide; we can't say the same thing about soccer.

Not too hard to be top two in a sport in the world where maybe what 3 ? 4?  countries take lacrosse seriously as opposed to soccer where it’s the national sport of so many many countries. 

[Rheo]

11 minutes ago, BringBackTheBlizzard said:

Don't think that's an OR in logic gate sort of terms.

Just putting forward an alternative theory to yours, that's all.

As for the Hamilton thing that is a very valid thing that's lingering.  Just tweeted the CBC reporter who was covering the council meetings to see if there's been any updates that maybe haven't been publicized.  Can't hurt to ask

[Alex D]

At this point I wouldn't imagine we hear an official launch until the world cup this summer. It wouldn't make sense to drop that randomly in the middle of February for example. 

[Complete Homer]

4 minutes ago, Alex D said:

At this point I wouldn't imagine we hear an official launch until the world cup this summer. It wouldn't make sense to drop that randomly in the middle of February for example. 

Agreed. As far as I can tell from the view counts on the "rumour roundup" articles, there's really only a couple thousand people paying much attention at this point. Even CPL's twitter is only at ~4500 followers. People who are concerned the league is losing credibility should ask themselves who they are losing credibility to...a small and probably inconsequential number of diehards who will mostly jump right back onto the hype wagon with a real announcement. Maybe some journalists? 

There's no good reason to announce anytime earlier than the optimum point. Only reason I see it coming earlier than the world cup is if they are worried about getting drowned out and use a quiet newscycle sometime in the news year to garner attention, if they are ready.