CPL General

[Levi Oakey]

Just now, mpg_29 said:

Well that's just it...I'm sure you could grab 200 Canadians from various leagues but what would the quality of the league be like..?

 

Fun.

[Alex D]

I don't believe that "quality" and entertainment are intrinsically attached. I've seen some brilliant matches in the lower leagues and some absolute stinkers in the EPL. 2+2 Doesn't always equal 4 in this case. I'm not as concerned about quality as I am about the style of football these clubs are going to play. 

[Ansem]

25 minutes ago, mpg_29 said:

Well that's just it...I'm sure you could grab 200 Canadians from various leagues but what would the quality of the league be like..?

 

That's why I think there's a disconnect between what the CSA and Paul Beirne wants and what the ownership group wants. Beirne talks about "compromises" and during various podcast said that he would "personally" prefer that rosters be Canadian by a big majority but hints at divergence of opinions on this...mainly, owners

At the end of the day, owners are taking all the financial risks here. In this era of social media, internet and even more worldwide access, you can't fool people into accepting D3 or less level of play as Division 1. NASL initially would be the bare minimum and a level in between NASL and MLS ideal so you can build up on this. Owners, who so far are very successful business people, understands that poor quality would be bad for the product's perception, hurt viewership and attendance, future growth thus their bottom line revenues and return on investment. In turns, it would be bad for Canadian soccer.

The only way to compensate for that is to initially have a high number of imports in the league. Yes, that means that your starting XI would be heavy on imports while most Canadians would be bench and subbed in. That's what Beirne means by "adding a team means a shock to the domestic pool." There's no choice really, you'll need lots of import to make the league fly as a viable product initially and reduce the number of imports as the pool improves.

I don't know about you guys but that Jamaican team at the Gold Cup, who's made of USL, MLS and Jamaican league , is very impressive and beat us, eliminated Mexico (B team) and could upset the USMNT. With the salaries we're talking about, CPL could and should raid CONCACAF leagues of their top talents. That's a very cost effective way to have great quality at a reasonable cost. We'll offer great/better pay and quality of life in the majority of cases.

Luckily, if CPL II happens, then by all mean, go overboard with the domestic quotas (75% or more). That's another way to artificially ensure that the 16 original CPL clubs don't get relegated to CPL II. By playing with different quotas and having the CPL II champion go in a playoff with the bottom CPL team, realistically, CPL bottom should win until the talent gaps narrows like in England. At the same time, if with those said rules, a bottom CPL team loses to CPL II champions, they deserve to be relegated.

Edited July 24, 2017 by Ansem

[Complete Homer]

15 minutes ago, Ansem said:

That's why I think there's a disconnect between what the CSA and Paul Beirne wants and what the ownership group wants. Beirne talks about "compromises" and during various podcast said that he would "personally" prefer that rosters be Canadian by a big majority but hints at divergence of opinions on this...mainly, owners

 

It's worth noting that Bierne entered the discussion on this briefly before.

If I remember correctly, I had reiterated my suggestion to start at a 30% quota and escalate annually by 5% until it hit 70% (or phrased differently, on a 25 man roster that would be a 17 import player cap in season #1, with 1 less foreign player per year until reaching a limit of 7-8 foreign players in season #9)

In response, he said something along the lines of "aiming to be more aggressive than that" or something (rough paraphrasing obviously), so I think they might be aiming a bit higher originally. I think one of the podcasts had him suggesting (probably off hand) to start at ~10 imports and working down from there (which would equate to a 60% quota assuming a 25 man roster)

Edited July 24, 2017 by Complete Homer

[mpg_29]

2 minutes ago, Complete Homer said:

It's worth noting that Bierne entered the discussion on this briefly before.

If I remember correctly, I had reiterated my suggestion to start at a 30% quota and escalate annually by 5% until it hit 70% (or phrased differently, on a 25 man roster that would be a 17 import player cap in season #1, with 1 less foreign player per year until reaching a limit of 7-8 foreign players in season #9)

In response, he said something along the lines of "aiming to be more aggressive than that" or something (rough paraphrasing obviously), so I think they might be aiming a bit higher originally. I think one of the podcasts had him suggesting starting at ~10 imports and working down from there

I'm not sure why this is something you would need to be "more aggressive" on though...especially initially.

[Ansem]

1 minute ago, Complete Homer said:

It's worth noting that Bierne entered the discussion on this briefly before.

If I remember correctly, I had reiterated my suggestion to start at a 30% quota and escalate annually by 5% until it hit 70% (or phrased differently, on a 25 man roster that would be a 17 import player cap in season #1, with 1 less foreign player per year until reaching a limit of 7-8 foreign players in season #9)

In response, he said something along the lines of "aiming to be more aggressive than that" or something (rough paraphrasing obviously), so I think they might be aiming a bit higher originally. I think one of the podcasts had him suggesting starting at ~10 imports and working down from there

10 import would be an absolute minimum initially per teams. The starting XI would be heavy on them I'd assume (6-7) then Canadians being subbed in? It might be like this at first and for a while with our top Canadians coming home or moving up to CPL starting.

[Ansem]

Just now, mpg_29 said:

I'm not sure why this is something you would need to be "more aggressive" on though...especially initially.

I agree.

I also see where Paul is coming from too. When TFC was an abomination on the pitch (if only that was the only problem), fans were still passionate about the team and I can see why he thinks CPL would be no different.

However, I see the owners point of view. Being this bad on the pitch branded TFC as a joke among everyone else, who are the overwhelming majority above the TFC die hard fans and supporters. That kind of damage to their brand via the medias is what really hurt them on TV viewership. Understandingly, they don't want to replicate that approach entirely. There's room for an "in between" and it's smart of them to see that.

[Initial B]

Even if only two Canadians started each week, that would be 16-20 Canadian players getting regular playing time. Say they allow for a 20-26 player team with the prerequisite that at least half the players must be Canadian - would that please both the owners and the CSA? Even if the Canadians would not make the starting 11, at least they'll be practicing with the first team and maybe develop enough to supplant some of them..

[Complete Homer]

10 minutes ago, mpg_29 said:

I'm not sure why this is something you would need to be "more aggressive" on though...especially initially.

Personally, that's how I lean, especially for season 1 when a large number of your targets would already be contracted elsewhere. But I'm willing to believe that they've taken a closer look at this than I have 

Also possible that I'm misquoting, but I'm pretty sure that's what was said

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

Just now, Ansem said:

....Luckily, if CPL II happens, then by all mean, go overboard with the domestic quotas (75% or more)....

The 16 team thing before considering implementing pro/rel looks more like a way to keep pro/rel crazies quiet than anything else.

[Ansem]

2 minutes ago, BringBackTheBlizzard said:

The 16 team thing before considering implementing pro/rel looks more like a way to keep pro/rel crazies quiet than anything else.

I don't know if that's the main purpose. I think they really mean at looking at it. Like I proposed above, there are ways to make actual pro/rel as frequent as total solar eclipse. You end up

• giving hardcore fans what they want
• give players and fans hope that their team might promote
• give the CPL owners what they want (all but guarantee they won't relegate for a very long time)

[Ansem]

25 minutes ago, Initial B said:

Even if only two Canadians started each week, that would be 16-20 Canadian players getting regular playing time. Say they allow for a 20-26 player team with the prerequisite that at least half the players must be Canadian - would that please both the owners and the CSA? Even if the Canadians would not make the starting 11, at least they'll be practicing with the first team and maybe develop enough to supplant some of them..

You're right. The benefits of practicing with the main team on a regular basis (including mock matches) is too often undervalued. That also creates an intense inner competition between Canadians to make the starting XI and being a regular sub for the team.

30-35 Canadians (2019-10 teams ~3-4 starting) playing regular minutes plus an extra 10 Canadians (Assuming 2/3 of the time an import gets subbed in), that's still around 40-45 more Canadians playing more minutes at club level than as of today. For me that's acceptable.

If anything, D2 is where I'd be the most restrictive on imports to ensure even more Canadians plays at a D2 level while battling for a spot to CPL or overseas.

[matty]

WAGER: If K/W are an original 6 I will eat a road map of Ontario purchased at a gas station

[Kent]

I feel like the domestic player issue has been talked to death already in the past but I'm going to foolishly weigh in again.

How is it hard to understand why they would want to be aggressive with the number of Canadians playing? A big part of this league is to have a place for Canadians to play, officiate, and coach. If we fill the rosters with cheap CONCACAF players instead of Canadian players, then we end up developing those countries rather than our own, and our standing within CONCACAF drops even further.

As for the TFC analogy, that really doesn't fit. Sure TFC was a terrible team for a long time, and sure part of that was probably due to the roster rules demanding they have a lot of Canadians. However, the massive difference is that TFC had different roster rules from the other teams in their league. They sucked compared to the teams they were playing against, which meant they didn't score many goals and didn't win many games, which can sap the excitement out of it for a lot of fans. In the CPL, presumably all teams will have the same roster rules, so sure the overall level of play might not be stellar with largely Canadian rosters, but it's not like every team in the league will struggle to win games. Struggle to win against MLS teams in the Voyageurs Cup, sure, but in the league it would be a level playing field.

[Ansem]

2 minutes ago, matty said:

WAGER: If K/W are an original 6 I will eat a road map of Ontario purchased at a gas station

I doubt they are since they need a new stadium to meet CPL norms. My understanding is where they are currently playing is way too small

[Ansem]

9 minutes ago, Kent said:

If we fill the rosters with cheap CONCACAF players instead of Canadian players, then we end up developing those countries rather than our own, and our standing within CONCACAF drops even further.

But if no one watches or goes to CPL game, these imports will play somewhere else and we're back to square 1.5 (CSL 2.0 or we beg USL/NASL to take our teams). Die hard fans and fans like you and me will support it, but to make it a true success, you have to convert casuals and those who aren't even fans of MLS or soccer to buy in. They are the majority you need to get your league to the next level. If you focus initially too much on playing too many Canadians who can't provide the minimum level of play required on their own to draw fans and new fans, it ends up being counter-productive in the long term.

It's the $$$ of the majority casual/non fans that will fund the development of future Canadian stars. More $$$ means more investing in our players, infrastructure, officials and more incentive to start a CPL II where you can make it 90% Canadian if you want, but CPL needs to be a success first and you can't sell poor level of play. It's been tried and it failed.

MLS tried that and it didn't serve them well initially. They almost folded and no one cared until Beckham. All those years of not being taken seriously in their own backward hurt their brand domestically and internationally. Poor TV viewership is a scar of that era. They had to pour money huge amount of capital to survive and overcome that, in term wasting time. They should be bigger today than they are. Not bigger, MUCH BIGGER.

If there's one thing I'm sure of, CPL can't afford nor would survive the same approach

Edited July 24, 2017 by Ansem

[Kent]

5 minutes ago, Ansem said:

30-35 Canadians (2019-10 teams ~3-4 starting) playing regular minutes plus an extra 10 Canadians (Assuming 2/3 of the time an import gets subbed in), that's still around 40-45 more Canadians playing more minutes at club level than as of today. For me that's acceptable.

After the 2014 World Cup, I saw a mention of how many Americans play in MLS. It was 2 or 3 hundred. It opened my eyes a bit. I then looked up the rosters of all the teams (on wikipedia, with varying levels of reliability) for the top level domestic league of all the nations in the World Cup that year (sorry for linking to myself, but I feel it's relevant and I don't get anything from this anyways https://www.wakingthered.com/2014/7/21/5924781/mls-is-not-enough-for-canada?_ga=2.16071219.485658588.1500917529-1883941630.1450363221 )

A recap. The number of domestic players (in 2014) that I counted for each country in the 2014 World Cup ranged from 600 in Brazil (20 team league), down to 136 in Switzerland (10 team league). The median was 287 for Spain and Honduras. The lowest average per team was England with 10.5 and the lowest for any team in a given league was 5 (in England, Australia, and USA).

Obviously we have to start somewhere, but 40-45 Canadians even for a 6 team league isn't very good in my opinion. I'll support whatever shakes out of this, but I hope it's more ambitious than that in terms of domestic players.

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

8 minutes ago, matty said:

WAGER: If K/W are an original 6 I will eat a road map of Ontario purchased at a gas station

I'd be careful on making statements like that as there was talk of the fans being told to be ready for a mid-August anouncement at one point on here from what I remember and if it's not Saskatchewan, there are not that many other possibilities. The only obvious problems with where they are right now are the permanent football markings and running track, but there are ways to fix the former if not the latter, which doesn't seem to be seen as an issue on here whenever Moncton gets discussed. In capacity terms the 6000 listed on wikipedia should be fine.

[Kent]

3 minutes ago, Ansem said:

But if no one watches or goes to CPL game, these imports will play somewhere else and we're back to square 1.5. Die hard fans and fans like you and me will support it, but to make it a true success, you have to convert casuals and those who aren't even fans of MLS or soccer to buy in. They are the majority you need to get your league to the next level. If you focus initially too much on playing too many Canadians who can't give the minimum level of play required to draw fans and new fans, it ends up being counter-productive.

It's the $$$ of the majority casual/non fans that will fund the development of future Canadian starts. More $$$ means more investing in our players and more incentive to start a CPL II where you can make it 90% Canadian if you want, but CPL needs to be a success first and you can't sell poor level of play.

MLS tried that and it didn't serve them well initially. They almost folded and no one cared until Beckham. All those years of not being taken seriously in their own backward hurt their brand domestically and internationally. They had to pour money huge amount of capital to survive and overcome that. If there's one thing I'm sure of, CPL can't afford nor would survive the same approach

Sure, I understand that overall concept of having good soccer to sell to fans. However, I'm not sure how second rate CONCACAF players (which would still result in a level of play below MLS) will somehow draw in fans that are turned off by the low level of play of MLS. If you are going to settle for second rate CONCACAF players, might as well settle for second rate or homesick Canadian players instead.

[Ansem]

1 minute ago, Kent said:

Sure, I understand that overall concept of having good soccer to sell to fans. However, I'm not sure how second rate CONCACAF players (which would still result in a level of play below MLS) will somehow draw in fans that are turned off by the low level of play of MLS. If you are going to settle for second rate CONCACAF players, might as well settle for second rate or homesick Canadian players instead.

I think that CONCACAF has very talented players that I wouldn't be quick to call 2nd rated. CPL will have both imports and homesick guys and if our guys can beat an import to the starting line up, the more power to them.

Canadians aren't turned off by MLS only because of level of play, mostly because they don't know that league, they don't care about it and MLS has done next to zero effort to connect with Canadians beyond the 3 cities. The Raptors and Blue Jays do it but not MLS. On that front, CPL has a huge advantage but you can't let D3 level of play get in the way.

2019 V Cup will be huge. Expect MLS teams to bring their A Squads to get their point across that they are the top tier and CPL is inferior. On the list of "what not to do" to make a bad 1st impression, is to get destroyed by the MLS teams. Losing is OK but losing in a competitive fashion where our CPL teams will be in it until the last 5-10 minutes will have a much more positive effect on perception than you think.

I understand you but our pool is thin and graduating all the USL and D3 players to CPL and expect them to do make the league great when they aren't ready and don't have all the tools to succeed is also very unfair to them.

[Rheo]

5 hours ago, rob.notenboom said:

I usually try to avoid self-promotion on here but I suspect many will want to here this. We have a full interview with Joe Belan coming up on FTBH. It will be on iTunes soon and available through RNO in the next little while also.

Half way through but really good so far.  Thanks for this

[rob.notenboom]

3 minutes ago, Rheo said:

Half way through but really good so far.  Thanks for this

Thank you. Glad it's worthwhile.

[Gopherbashi]

3 hours ago, matty said:

WAGER: If K/W are an original 6 I will eat a road map of Ontario purchased at a gas station

!RemindMe July 24, 2018

[Gopherbashi]

3 hours ago, BringBackTheBlizzard said:

The 16 team thing before considering implementing pro/rel looks more like a way to keep pro/rel crazies quiet than anything else.

It's Paul Beirne's way of saying that they'll never in a million years go above 16 teams.

[harrycoyster]

2 hours ago, Ansem said:

I think that CONCACAF has very talented players that I wouldn't be quick to call 2nd rated. CPL will have both imports and homesick guys and if our guys can beat an import to the starting line up, the more power to them.

Canadians aren't turned off by MLS only because of level of play, mostly because they don't know that league, they don't care about it and MLS has done next to zero effort to connect with Canadians beyond the 3 cities. The Raptors and Blue Jays do it but not MLS. On that front, CPL has a huge advantage but you can't let D3 level of play get in the way.

2019 V Cup will be huge. Expect MLS teams to bring their A Squads to get their point across that they are the top tier and CPL is inferior. On the list of "what not to do" to make a bad 1st impression, is to get destroyed by the MLS teams. Losing is OK but losing in a competitive fashion where our CPL teams will be in it until the last 5-10 minutes will have a much more positive effect on perception than you think.

I understand you but our pool is thin and graduating all the USL and D3 players to CPL and expect them to do make the league great when they aren't ready and don't have all the tools to succeed is also very unfair to them.

I think the biggest question left unanswered about the CPL is where the players will come from. There is something admirable about graduating PDL/L1O and lower-end USL players for the majority of the player base and picking players from MLS/USL/NASL as high-end players. That preserves a high number of Canadian players, but also basically gives the CPL no chance at beating an MLS team in the near future.

Building a roster on the USL/NASL level will require a sizable number of foreigners, and with no fully-fledged CPL academies coming anytime soon the league will need to continue to rely on foreigners for the next 5ish years.

The CPL wants to be a league for the Canadian player taken seriously by the Canadian spectator, but in the short-term they will likely have to lean in one of those two directions.