CPL General

[Bison44]

Yeah whats the problem??  I agree with the top 2 spots anyway.  

[Ansem]

 

 

[m-g-williams]

Beat me to it! 

https://canpl.ca/article/canadian-soccer-business-appoints-dino-rossi-as-president-of-league1-canada

"Rossi has led League1 Ontario (L1O) since its launch in 2014. He served as commissioner for its first seven years and was appointed Executive Chairman in April 2021. Rossi will continue to serve as Chairman of the Board of Directors for L1O, but his day-to-day operational responsibilities will be absorbed by the league’s management team, led by Managing Director Matthew Braithwaite."

"Rossi will nurture partner and stakeholder relationships, lead the process of aligning rules/standards and operational best practices, promote the development of players, coaches, and match officials and develop critical inter-league competitions. He will also work with provincial soccer associations in Atlantic Canada and the Prairies, as well as other stakeholders in those regions, with the intention of expanding the League1 Canada footprint nationwide."

[narduch]

 

[narduch]

2 hours ago, m-g-williams said:

Beat me to it! 

https://canpl.ca/article/canadian-soccer-business-appoints-dino-rossi-as-president-of-league1-canada

"Rossi has led League1 Ontario (L1O) since its launch in 2014. He served as commissioner for its first seven years and was appointed Executive Chairman in April 2021. Rossi will continue to serve as Chairman of the Board of Directors for L1O, but his day-to-day operational responsibilities will be absorbed by the league’s management team, led by Managing Director Matthew Braithwaite."

"Rossi will nurture partner and stakeholder relationships, lead the process of aligning rules/standards and operational best practices, promote the development of players, coaches, and match officials and develop critical inter-league competitions. He will also work with provincial soccer associations in Atlantic Canada and the Prairies, as well as other stakeholders in those regions, with the intention of expanding the League1 Canada footprint nationwide."

Interesting. 

This reminds me that there is still no actual commissioner for the CPL.

[Ansem]

1 hour ago, narduch said:

Interesting. 

This reminds me that there is still no actual commissioner for the CPL.

That's one hiring that CSB cannot afford to mess up. The biggest challenge for the new guy in my opinion is getting the league mainstream which could impact overall revenues/attendances.

To everyone else
 

• What should be the new commissioners top 5 goals by 2026?

[Unnamed Trialist]

1 minute ago, Ansem said:

That's one hiring that CSB cannot afford to mess up. The biggest challenge for the new guy in my opinion is getting the league mainstream which could impact overall revenues/attendances.

To everyone else
 

• What should be the new commissioners top 5 goals by 2026?

Get French Canada fully engaged in the CPL, leading to club or clubs in Québec.

Recognise the Players' Union but also ensure 12-month medical coverage and contracts, regardless of the union.

Solve Edmonton and establish the protocol to avoid future scenarios of league bail-outs.

Convince the CSA to establish a rule whereby all Voyageur Cup single-game knockouts are played in the stadium of the team in a lower league.

Consider how a higher tier women's league might be created in Canada and if the CPL should be leading that or not.

 

 

[Cheeta]

^ 100%

Not to be that guy but I'd also suggest not being unrealistically ambitious with goals.  Resources are not infinite.  Define what's where in the strategic scope and keep focus on the priorities until its job done.

Of course the hard part is determining what's realistic.  Nothing wrong with being able to check boxes and crow about accomplishments but everything can't be easy.  If it is then you aren't aiming high enough.

[Kingston]

15 hours ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

Convince the CSA to establish a rule whereby all Voyageur Cup single-game knockouts are played in the stadium of the team in a lower league.

Consider how a higher tier women's league might be created in Canada and if the CPL should be leading that or not.

I like your first three items.

On the Voyageurs' Cup, I get where you're going and I had pondered this idea myself, but I disagree for a couple of reasons:

1.  Money. I'm not sure how the tournament handles revenue sharing, but I assume it exists somehow.  I'd like the tournament to take advantage of at least some larger crowds to help offset costs for the smaller teams.

2.  Fairness.  If the lower tier always hosts, you're telling fans of MLS teams, "be supportive of this tournament but understand that you'll basically never get to see a home game".  I'm already not a big fan of the single elimination format because it means half the fans don't get home games to attend.  

My fifth item would be getting average attendance over 5000.  I see this as more important than trying to establish a women's league when the existing men's league still isn't stable.

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

 

[Aird25]

17 hours ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

Convince the CSA to establish a rule whereby all Voyageur Cup single-game knockouts are played in the stadium of the team in a lower league

How is the hosting stadium decided now?

Based on everything to date, I can't see CPL getting on board with being defaulted as a lower league in this tournament, even though that would benefit their clubs at the gate. I think they'd push to use tournament results to decide the lower rated teams. I was quite surprised to see Vancouver's recent turnout considering their recent history in the tournament.

[narduch]

2 minutes ago, Aird25 said:

How is the hosting stadium decided now?

Based on everything to date, I can't see CPL getting on board with being defaulted as a lower league in this tournament, even though that would benefit their clubs at the gate. I think they'd push to use tournament results to decide the lower rated teams. I was quite surprised to see Vancouver's recent turnout considering their recent history in the tournament.

It was actually part of the draw this year. So everything was on the up and up. Home team has been decided all the way up to the final 

Last year they did coin tosses behind closed doors and were ripped for it

Edited May 17, 2022 by narduch

[Ansem]

2 hours ago, Kingston said:

1.  Money. I'm not sure how the tournament handles revenue sharing, but I assume it exists somehow.  I'd like the tournament to take advantage of at least some larger crowds to help offset costs for the smaller teams.

I'm starting to think that IG Field would have had a better attendance than Vancouver. This tournament needs to build/expand its fanbase across the country. The 3 MLS teams (who mostly played one another for over a decade) hosted for years. Going to CPL venue to get new fans to the competition might pay off medium to long term down the road

 

2 hours ago, Kingston said:

.  Fairness.  If the lower tier always hosts, you're telling fans of MLS teams, "be supportive of this tournament but understand that you'll basically never get to see a home game".  I'm already not a big fan of the single elimination format because it means half the fans don't get home games to attend.  

2 legged series should be coming back, this is temporary. MLS fans had it for over a decade, I don't think it's too much to ask for single leg games to be played in D3 and CPL venues so they get their turn to host MLS clubs.

 

2 hours ago, Kingston said:

My fifth item would be getting average attendance over 5000.  I see this as more important than trying to establish a women's league when the existing men's league still isn't stable.

Hard to do without mainstream attention. I think the commissioner needs to figure out how to get their scores and highlights on TV and a section in major newspapers who to be fair, have done better than sports channels. Also, get the CRTC to have Onesoccer (mainly Canadian content) on cable packages.

I think the 5000 will come after that and in times

[Kingston]

19 minutes ago, Ansem said:

I'm starting to think that IG Field would have had a better attendance than Vancouver. This tournament needs to build/expand its fanbase across the country. The 3 MLS teams (who mostly played one another for over a decade) hosted for years. Going to CPL venue to get new fans to the competition might pay off medium to long term down the road

 

2 legged series should be coming back, this is temporary. MLS fans had it for over a decade, I don't think it's too much to ask for single leg games to be played in D3 and CPL venues so they get their turn to host MLS clubs.

I'm not suggesting giving all the hosting to the MLS teams.  I'm just suggesting we don't deliberately arrange things so that they effectively never host.  What we have now (a mix of hosts from different levels) is fine.

[Unnamed Trialist]

9 hours ago, Kingston said:

I like your first three items.

On the Voyageurs' Cup, I get where you're going and I had pondered this idea myself, but I disagree for a couple of reasons:

1.  Money. I'm not sure how the tournament handles revenue sharing, but I assume it exists somehow.  I'd like the tournament to take advantage of at least some larger crowds to help offset costs for the smaller teams.

2.  Fairness.  If the lower tier always hosts, you're telling fans of MLS teams, "be supportive of this tournament but understand that you'll basically never get to see a home game".  I'm already not a big fan of the single elimination format because it means half the fans don't get home games to attend.  

My fifth item would be getting average attendance over 5000.  I see this as more important than trying to establish a women's league when the existing men's league still isn't stable.

The reason for 1. is this: I've seen it working here in Spain in recent years.

Used to be always a pure draw and home and away, all rounds up to the final. Then they finally went to single matches, always in the stadium of the lowest tier team. When teams were from the same division, pure draw to decide where. This has worked marvellously, and does a few things: 

-drives gate up for the lesser team which will get a higher level team, who fans want to see. May also raise tv and merchandising revenue.

-creates a very intense atmosphere, as the underdog tries to win. When a higher tier team hosts, few fans come out, the atmosphere is one of just expecting to win.

-provides an incentive for stadium, pitch, seating, press-box, locker room improvements for the home side.

-avoids previous situations where, if the teams played 2-leg and the first leg was a blowout in the superior team's stadium the return match would be less interesting for fans, taking away from the host team's motivation and that of its fans.

[maccaliam]

If I’m not mistaken, the coupe de France does the lower ranked team hosts. I didn’t realize Spain as also doing it. Love that idea. 

[K Edgar]

2 minutes ago, maccaliam said:

If I’m not mistaken, the coupe de France does the lower ranked team hosts. I didn’t realize Spain as also doing it. Love that idea. 

If I recall correctly CS Mont-Royal Outremont asked not to host a game in the 2022 Canadian Championship.  Not sure of their reasoning.

[JamboAl]

7 minutes ago, K Edgar said:

If I recall correctly CS Mont-Royal Outremont asked not to host a game in the 2022 Canadian Championship.  Not sure of their reasoning.

Probably because their park is not up to standard to host any type of crowd.

[youllneverwalkalone]

5,000 is so arbitrary as a target. Here's a ranking of top leagues in Europe:

https://www.transfermarkt.us/wettbewerbe/europa

Multiple clubs in leagues 11, 12, 13 (Belgium, Austria, Greece) below 5,000:

https://www.transfermarkt.us/verein-statistik/zuschauerrangliste/statistik/stat/plus/0?verein=19&wettbewerb=liga

https://www.transfermarkt.us/verein-statistik/zuschauerrangliste/statistik/stat/plus/0?verein=127&wettbewerb=liga

https://www.transfermarkt.us/verein-statistik/zuschauerrangliste/statistik/stat/plus/0?verein=56&wettbewerb=liga

You aren't going to average 5,000 across the board without the MLS clubs. Assuming that's not happening I'd prefer a goal like: earned $10m league wide in player transfers. This is one area you can beat MLS by being smart with investment.

 

 

 

[Trois Reds]

16 minutes ago, youllneverwalkalone said:

5,000 is so arbitrary as a target. Here's a ranking of top leagues in Europe:

https://www.transfermarkt.us/wettbewerbe/europa

Multiple clubs in leagues 11, 12, 13 (Belgium, Austria, Greece) below 5,000:

https://www.transfermarkt.us/verein-statistik/zuschauerrangliste/statistik/stat/plus/0?verein=19&wettbewerb=liga

https://www.transfermarkt.us/verein-statistik/zuschauerrangliste/statistik/stat/plus/0?verein=127&wettbewerb=liga

https://www.transfermarkt.us/verein-statistik/zuschauerrangliste/statistik/stat/plus/0?verein=56&wettbewerb=liga

You aren't going to average 5,000 across the board without the MLS clubs. Assuming that's not happening I'd prefer a goal like: earned $10m league wide in player transfers. This is one area you can beat MLS by being smart with investment.

 

 

 

5,000 fans in a country that is the size of New Brunswick isn't an issue.  They don't have to pay for flights, hotels for a night or two, food, etc.  Just bus to the game and be back by dinner.  It's not the same here in Canada.

[Ansem]

10 hours ago, Kingston said:

I'm not suggesting giving all the hosting to the MLS teams.  I'm just suggesting we don't deliberately arrange things so that they effectively never host.  What we have now (a mix of hosts from different levels) is fine.

They should be promoting Canadian Championship games they are hosting against CPL just as much as when they host MLS clubs.

The difference is is quite obvious 

[Bison44]

21 minutes ago, youllneverwalkalone said:

5,000 is so arbitrary as a target. Here's a ranking of top leagues in Europe:

You aren't going to average 5,000 across the board without the MLS clubs. Assuming that's not happening I'd prefer a goal like: earned $10m league wide in player transfers. This is one area you can beat MLS by being smart with investment.

It is totally arbitrary.  Us goobers have latched onto these attendance figures based of guesses...No one knows exactly how much revenue is coming in from where.  Which is why we cant hang our hats on that number.  It would be a damn good start if in year 3 (which is about what this is) we get get a few more clubs up to that level.

[Watchmen]

4 hours ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

The reason for 1. is this: I've seen it working here in Spain in recent years.

Used to be always a pure draw and home and away, all rounds up to the final. Then they finally went to single matches, always in the stadium of the lowest tier team. When teams were from the same division, pure draw to decide where. This has worked marvellously, and does a few things: 

-drives gate up for the lesser team which will get a higher level team, who fans want to see. May also raise tv and merchandising revenue.

-creates a very intense atmosphere, as the underdog tries to win. When a higher tier team hosts, few fans come out, the atmosphere is one of just expecting to win.

-provides an incentive for stadium, pitch, seating, press-box, locker room improvements for the home side.

-avoids previous situations where, if the teams played 2-leg and the first leg was a blowout in the superior team's stadium the return match would be less interesting for fans, taking away from the host team's motivation and that of its fans.

The difference here is that there's 3 "top tier" teams in Canada and 20 in Spain, so you're much more likely to get the chance to host a game in Spain than you would be in Canada.  And I don't see this tournament being an incentive for any stadium improvements from the CPL sides.  In fact League 1 sides have gone so far as to not host, rather than improve the stadium because they simply can't afford it.

I think the format this year worked fairly well. 

[Watchmen]

3 minutes ago, Bison44 said:

It is totally arbitrary.  Us goobers have latched onto these attendance figures based of guesses...No one knows exactly how much revenue is coming in from where.  Which is why we cant hang our hats on that number.  It would be a damn good start if in year 3 (which is about what this is) we get get a few more clubs up to that level.

We didn't latch on to it as a guess.  It's the number the CPL initially provided as their basis for break even.  I'm not saying the break even number couldn't have changed, just that it's not random.

[Bison44]

4 minutes ago, Watchmen said:

We didn't latch on to it as a guess.  It's the number the CPL initially provided as their basis for break even.  I'm not saying the break even number couldn't have changed, just that it's not random.

Where was that??