Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Cavalry won the Spring Season and therefore are qualified for the CPL final. What is special about also winning the Fall season for them? Do you think this format is good? Would you modify something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, xabuep2 said:

Cavalry won the Spring Season and therefore are qualified for the CPL final. What is special about also winning the Fall season for them? Do you think this format is good? Would you modify something?

Whats special : prestige and being the first club to win both spring and fall in a year would be special. 

Format : Yes, I think its good and a competitive format and like a championship final. Would like semi finals as well, maybe next year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, CDNFootballer said:

Whats special : prestige and being the first club to win both spring and fall in a year would be special. 

Format : Yes, I think its good and a competitive format and like a championship final. Would like semi finals as well, maybe next year.

The league have said they will NOT be having play offs and I for one think it is imperative that they stick to this.

There are many reasons but one of the most important is that in a necessarily short season you don't want clubs twiddling their thumbs when they could be playing matches, entertaining fans, and earning revenue. That makes no sense at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, xabuep2 said:

What is special about also winning the Fall season for them?

You're not a very competitive person, are you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Tigers said:

I don't really like it. Regular, year-long season with a top four, two round playoff would be preferred. 

Also, @Lofty, the championship game IS a playoff.

Agreed. It is definitely inconsistent of the league to say "no play offs" and then use this format. However, with this format, a play off does make sense: two champions playing off to determine who is THE Champion.

It is not like the typical North American losers playoff, where teams who have been beaten over a lengthy regular season suddenly have the chance to be "champions" by winning a much shorter knock out competition, thus totally devaluing the much longer "regular" season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Lofty said:

Agreed. It is definitely inconsistent of the league to say "no play offs" and then use this format. However, with this format, a play off does make sense: two champions playing off to determine who is THE Champion.

It is not like the typical North American losers playoff, where teams who have been beaten over a lengthy regular season suddenly have the chance to be "champions" by winning a much shorter knock out competition, thus totally devaluing the much longer "regular" season.

I have no issue with the two champions playing off but I would then have a rule that if one side wins both seasons they are declared champion

Share this post


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

I have no issue with the two champions playing off but I would then have a rule that if one side wins both seasons they are declared champion

League's not going to miss out on the potential revenue and exposure of the championship playoff.  That would just be terrible business.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Shortdutchcanuck said:

League's not going to miss out on the potential revenue and exposure of the championship playoff.  That would just be terrible business.

 

Diminishing the importance of hundreds of regular season games  seems like terrible business to me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Aird25 said:

Diminishing the importance of hundreds of regular season games  seems like terrible business to me

How does it diminish the importance of hundreds of regular season games?  You are playing to win the spring or the fall  (or both) or to be the 2nd best team overall if one team wins both.

I don't think fans are going to stop going to regular season games because the team that won spring and fall has to play  the second best team in a championship.  

I'm the wrong guy to argue with this about though:  I love knockouts of all kinds-the NCAA tournament, the World Cup, Champion's League, the NBA Playoffs, the Voyageurs Cup.  The EPL season wows me with its fantastic soccer but ultimately bores me with its regular season Champion (though I love relegation).  Half the time some high spending team has it all sewn up with weeks to go.

I know the soccer purists hate playoffs but I think there are plenty of CanPL fans, maybe even a majority, who love soccer and playoffs, and can't wait for the possibility of a championship home and home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Shortdutchcanuck said:

How does it diminish the importance of hundreds of regular season games?

Since you can be the best team throughout the regular season and still not win the title, not win entrance to continental play, and not receive any prize money, would that not indicate diminished importance?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/2/2019 at 11:38 AM, Shortdutchcanuck said:

I'm the wrong guy to argue with this about though:  I love knockouts of all kinds-the NCAA tournament, the World Cup, Champion's League, the NBA Playoffs, the Voyageurs Cup.  The EPL season wows me with its fantastic soccer but ultimately bores me with its regular season Champion (though I love relegation).  Half the time some high spending team has it all sewn up with weeks to go.

I know the soccer purists hate playoffs but I think there are plenty of CanPL fans, maybe even a majority, who love soccer and playoffs, and can't wait for the possibility of a championship home and home.

Well, the number of people who pay to watch English football both live and on TV would seem to put you in a small minority.

That is how it works in most of the football world where the sport is quite popular. Cup competitions provide the "sudden death" drama you crave, so in football you can have your cake and eat it too. Without the need for play offs.

Edited by Lofty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Lofty said:

Well, the number of people who pay to watch English football both live and on TV would seem to put you in a small minority.

That is how it works in most of the football world where the sport is quite popular. Cup competitions provide the "sudden death" drama you crave, so in football you can have your cake and eat it too. Without the need for play offs.

Believe me I know I'm in the minority.

But I generally attribute the popularity of EPL to the simple fact that soccer is an incredible sport and EPL is one of the best leagues.  I've just always assumed most soccer fans in traditional soccer countries like the crap format with no playoffs because they don't know any better 😉  And that as incredibly popular as EPL is, if they added playoffs and gave the idea a chance, it would be ten times better and grow more popular still.

This is sacrilege, I know, but it illustrates the difficulty of convincing North Americans to adopt European traditions.  Which is exactly why I think MLS made the right decision going with playoffs.

Share this post


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

Believe me I know I'm in the minority.

But I generally attribute the popularity of EPL to the simple fact that soccer is an incredible sport and EPL is one of the best leagues.  I've just always assumed most soccer fans in traditional soccer countries like the crap format with no playoffs because they don't know any better 😉  And that as incredibly popular as EPL is, if they added playoffs and gave the idea a chance, it would be ten times better and grow more popular still.

This is sacrilege, I know, but it illustrates the difficulty of convincing North Americans to adopt European traditions.  Which is exactly why I think MLS made the right decision going with playoffs.

I'm not sure there is a right or wrong.

I think that in European football, the journey is appreciated far more than in North America, so that play off "candy" is not needed. The value is in the enjoyment of all the equally valued matches, not the possible trophy at the end of the road, which very few clubs reach anyway. Every regular season match matters and those matches against near rivals are passionate affairs where far more than 3 points is at stake. And in the end, fans appreciate and understand the inherent fairness and finality in declaring as Champions the team that has been the best over the entire season, match in and match out, through many ups and downs, through injuries and suspensions, through red cards and dubious pens, through 38-46 matches played where every single one of them counts.

That said, I understand that North American geography can make a balanced schedule either impossible or undesirable and in that case, a play off between regional champions may be necessary. But when you finish 12th overall and can be declared "Champions" via the vagaries of a knock out competition that is one quarter the length of the regular season, it looks a lot like trading honesty and truth for fakery and false, manufactured excitement. For me, there is no way around the fact that such a team are clearly not true champions and to celebrate them as such is to leave the fans hoodwinked, albeit happily so. But so long as the "organization" is making money, I guess the happy delusions will continue.

Here is a regular season match I was at in 2011. QPR were top of the Championship but had been faltering and Norwich were closing the gap. A win was desperately needed and a strong Leicester City were up next. I promise you this hard fought and intense regular season match was as good as any play off match you will ever see, and that would not have been the case if there were play offs to determine the Champion.

 

Edited by Lofty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Lofty said:

I'm not sure there is a right or wrong.

I think that in European football, the journey is appreciated far more than in North America, so that play off "candy" is not needed.

There is also the romance of the cup(s) which are essentially playoffs.  As the leagues have become international this has waned some and old school fans complain about weakened sides in them.  But it is still for many, an emotional even semi-hallowed experience: they sign a hymn before the FA cup after all.  There are significant minority of vocal supporters of my club that would take relegation to win a cup again.  

Share this post


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

Makes more sense in logistical terms than trying to have two coast-to-coast national divisions.

Ugh. I mean, I understand why, but ugh... Loving the single table, and hoped to one day see it along with a balanced schedule. Looks like that might not be in the long-term plans of the league, sadly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Sébastien said:

Ugh. I mean, I understand why, but ugh... Loving the single table, and hoped to one day see it along with a balanced schedule. Looks like that might not be in the long-term plans of the league, sadly.

I see it as a very reasonable way to structure a D2 when it appears, but I want CPL1 to always be national in scope. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps they could do it in a way where you still play teams from the other conference but twice a year.

So for example you have 7 teams per conference.  You play 4 times against teams in your conference = 24 and then 14 matches against the other conference = 38.

This would also simplify the whole issue of regional promotion/relegation.  

Edited by CanadaFan123

Share this post


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

Home and away.

Are you sure about that? I thought it was a single game, but wasn’t sure who hosts.

Edit: Looks like you are correct. Fall champ to decide which leg to host.

Edited by Kent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my ideal world there are 16 teams in CPL D1 and they all play each other once home and once away for a 30 match schedule. One table, top team are Champions.

Yes, some of the travel will be arduous. That is called home advantage.

D2 is regional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Sébastien said:

Ugh. I mean, I understand why, but ugh... Loving the single table, and hoped to one day see it along with a balanced schedule. Looks like that might not be in the long-term plans of the league, sadly.

I agree, and further: the more teams you have, the less the pressure on travel. You could do a Moncton + HFX road trip. You could do Saskatoon and then Edmonton. You raise the density by regions, and the travel affects clubs less. 

Anyways, you would think our travel sponsor and the MediaPro deal would make travel a lesser evil in terms of cost. 

What does make sense, possibly, is to go to regional divisions in the period when the number of teams makes a balanced schedule hard to work. If you have 14 teams, it is clear, a 26 match season, if it is 13, you have a 24 match season, a bit short but viable. If you have 12, well maybe you have doubts about a 22 match season, it seems too little. So you do one set of home and away balanced, and another 5 games from your region of six teams, to push it up to 27 in total. Same if you have a ten team league, you cannot leave it home and away at 18 matches. But you could add home and away in your region, and that would be eight games more. And so on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

What does make sense, possibly, is to go to regional divisions in the period when the number of teams makes a balanced schedule hard to work. If you have 14 teams, it is clear, a 26 match season, if it is 13, you have a 24 match season, a bit short but viable. If you have 12, well maybe you have doubts about a 22 match season, it seems too little. So you do one set of home and away balanced, and another 5 games from your region of six teams, to push it up to 27 in total. Same if you have a ten team league, you cannot leave it home and away at 18 matches. But you could add home and away in your region, and that would be eight games more. And so on.

I very much like this idea. Using regional areas to "top up" the total number of games increases the chances of "nearby" rivalries developing, while keeping a good total for the number of matches.

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...