2024 Voyageurs Cup

[Kingston]

Just now, jonovision said:

They have no regular season home games until June to accommodate the installation of a new Field Turf pitch.

Although presumably they could find a different venue for a single match?

[jonovision]

Just now, Kingston said:

Although presumably they could find a different venue for a single match?

A different venue in Winnipeg? Assuming there are some requirements related to TV broadcast, likely not. 

[saladroit]

pleasantly surprised at how good this format is, they've solved several issues here

[Kingston]

3 minutes ago, jonovision said:

A different venue in Winnipeg? Assuming there are some requirements related to TV broadcast, likely not. 

I'd assumed University Stadium would work if nothing else.  I hadn't considered TV, though, so maybe not.

[narduch]

21 minutes ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

Good to see the CSA held firm on that principle.

That was the correct move.

They did accept the CPL suggestion for 2 leg series in the quarter finals and semi's. Which is also great

[Cheeta]

51 minutes ago, jonovision said:

If Valour make the quarterfinals (unlikely), there is a good chance they will be unable to host.

Assuming the week of the 12th was reserved for Vs Cup.  Valour's schedule looks custom built for a mid week fixture (away to York the 10 and away to Wanderers on the 20th).  Unless something dramatic changes with the weather we're going to have a very early spring/summer.  Even if everything else were in place (materials, install crews) seems a big ask beating the deadline by better than 2 weeks.  And knowing that you will far enough in advance!

Can always dream.

[jonovision]

21 minutes ago, Cheeta said:

Assuming the week of the 12th was reserved for Vs Cup.  Valour's schedule looks custom built for a mid week fixture (away to York the 10 and away to Wanderers on the 20th).  Unless something dramatic changes with the weather we're going to have a very early spring/summer.  Even if everything else were in place (materials, install crews) seems a big ask beating the deadline by better than 2 weeks.  And knowing that you will far enough in advance!

Can always dream.

I thought the last week of May looked good for a second leg, which would only be a few days ahead of the scheduled opening. Bomber training camp also opens around then, which I would imagine to be the firm deadline.

Edited February 22 by jonovision

[Watchmen]

I've much preferred the single leg format. I've much preferred the single leg format in the MLS playoffs as well.

[Kent]

I like single leg and 2 leg formats in different ways. Single leg has the win and your in factor, and it's easier to have upsets which are fun as well. But you have the chance of your team making a deep run, even winning the entire tournament, without ever having a home game, which sucks. 2 leg series let's fanbases from both teams get to see a home game. Which means teams CPL or L1C teams have a chance to play in an MLS stadium, but also bring MLS teams to their home stadium and potentially draw more fans than normal.

The new index makes deciding byes more statistical and less mystical. I mean, right now with 2 byes it's easy to say the 2 finalists from the previous year. But what if we have a 17 team tournament in the future? Or a worse situation, down to 13 teams in the future. Not sure I love the index being used for deciding home teams, but I'm not really against it. It's ideal for deciding the order of home games in 2 game series.

The one negative is the lack of being able to watch the draw(s). Leaves things open for shenanigans, or at least speculation of shenanigans. Plus I like watching a draw. Even if it's done without the usual showiness. I'd settle for a zoom meeting put up on Youtube, as long as we can see names being drawn as it happens.

[Kingston]

12 hours ago, Watchmen said:

I've much preferred the single leg format. I've much preferred the single leg format in the MLS playoffs as well.

What do you like about it compared to the two leg format?

[Watchmen]

2 hours ago, Kingston said:

What do you like about it compared to the two leg format?

I think single leg provides more chance for an interesting upset, and that drives interest more than simply hosting. And I find too often that at least one of the two legs is either boring or pointless (ie the series was decided in the first game or both teams are happy with a 0-0 draw).

[gator]

 

[Alex]

Looked like a good “draw”

[themodelcitizen]

1 hour ago, Watchmen said:

I think single leg provides more chance for an interesting upset, and that drives interest more than simply hosting. And I find too often that at least one of the two legs is either boring or pointless (ie the series was decided in the first game or both teams are happy with a 0-0 draw).

I think they saw the drama of the TSS upset last year and have sort of compromised with the single-leg prelims. Once in the QFs, though, the seeded teams need that extra insurance of a home game... have they said who will host the final? Is that one leg?

[Watchmen]

2 minutes ago, themodelcitizen said:

I think they saw the drama of the TSS upset last year and have sort of compromised with the single-leg prelims. Once in the QFs, though, the seeded teams need that extra insurance of a home game... have they said who will host the final? Is that one leg?

I don't think they should be seeding teams beyond the round you start in the competition. A higher seed shouldn't have the insurance of a home game.

Final is one leg and they haven't done the draw for that yet.

[narduch]

27 minutes ago, Alex said:

Looked like a good “draw”

That Pacific v Highlanders matching does feel fixed.

To be fair I think based on the way the draw was set it had a 33% chance of happening

[Kent]

1 hour ago, narduch said:

That Pacific v Highlanders matching does feel fixed.

To be fair I think based on the way the draw was set it had a 33% chance of happening

To me what makes this seem fixed is that there doesn't seem to have been any pots aside from teams that can host and teams that can't (and East West of course). Out of the preliminary round teams in the East, the top 3 by the index were:

Toronto FC, Forge, York United

And yet York United drew Forge. I think they said Highlanders and Pacific have to play each other so Highlanders don't have to travel. That automatically puts Cavalry vs Vancouver in the other West prelim game. Then they paired up St. Laurent with HFX so neither has to travel very far. So they just had to pick if York or TFC get Simcoe County. Maybe because York has a history of getting the L1O team in this tournament, or maybe a concession to give the game to TFC (which they can likely handily win with their reserves) to make up for forcing the 2 leg matches later.

Anyways, once that was all decided, York and Forge have to go together and that's basically everything. Maybe there was a draw between TFC, Forge, York, and Atletico to see who plays Valour. After that you can decide who gets Simcoe County and put the leftovers in a match against each other. I don't feel like anything else was really left to chance.

[phil03]

The Atletico fan in man love that draw! We basically get to have our cake and eat it too: between Valour's troubles, Pacific not being what they once were and the two semi-pro clubs we have a fairly easy path to the semis and with the rest of the draw we are very likely to get a high profile MLS matchup once we get there!

The Impact fan in me? He... its more complicated. On the plus side we have dispatched better versions of Forge with lesser versions of MTL, with little trouble except for 2021, and while York has made some progress with their recent signings they aren't nearly to the point where I'd genuinely fear an upset.

On the minus side, most of our hopes that the draw would force the clubs who are likely to give us the most trouble (ATO, Cavalry, TFC, Whitecaps) to battle and eliminate each other have been dashed. Sure, the dream scenario (TFC set to face the Whitecaps in the quarter-finals) was always pretty unlikely with this format (if not impossible? I am not sure) and the Whitecaps and Cavalry being likely to face each other is good but the Impact fan in me would have liked TFC to have a tougher path (and Ottawa too, but then the ATO fan in me ensure I can't be disappointed that it isn't the case).

[themodelcitizen]

They've used geographical zones the last few years (I think last year Forge were a sort of "odd one out" and transferred to the west to make up the numbers), wouldn't surprise me if those mechanisms are even more regionalized now. It makes sense, at least for now, we can see some rivalries built up and avoid stretching travel budgets too much

[Kent]

6 hours ago, themodelcitizen said:

They've used geographical zones the last few years (I think last year Forge were a sort of "odd one out" and transferred to the west to make up the numbers), wouldn't surprise me if those mechanisms are even more regionalized now. It makes sense, at least for now, we can see some rivalries built up and avoid stretching travel budgets too much

It was York last year, although they got to host both games they played (against Vancouver FC, and Vancouver Whitecaps). The year before that (2022) it was the winner of York vs Atletico that moved to the West. That year York played at Pacific and Whitecaps.

[Kingston]

On 2/23/2024 at 8:05 PM, phil03 said:

On the minus side, most of our hopes that the draw would force the clubs who are likely to give us the most trouble (ATO, Cavalry, TFC, Whitecaps) to battle and eliminate each other have been dashed. Sure, the dream scenario (TFC set to face the Whitecaps in the quarter-finals) was always pretty unlikely with this format (if not impossible? I am not sure) and the Whitecaps and Cavalry being likely to face each other is good but the Impact fan in me would have liked TFC to have a tougher path (and Ottawa too, but then the ATO fan in me ensure I can't be disappointed that it isn't the case).

The teams get re-drawn for the semis to eliminate the geographic factor.  Otherwise the Whitecaps would always have a straight shot to the final only ever having to face L1 or CPL teams.

So, barring upsets, there will be three MLS teams and one CPL team going into a hat for a random draw for the semis.

[Kingston]

On 2/23/2024 at 2:22 PM, Kent said:

To me what makes this seem fixed is that there doesn't seem to have been any pots aside from teams that can host and teams that can't (and East West of course). Out of the preliminary round teams in the East, the top 3 by the index were:

Toronto FC, Forge, York United

The index didn't factor in to Forge and York drawing each other.

In the west, there are a whole bunch of constraints.  For the teams that get drawn in the east, the only constraint is that the two L1 teams can't be drawn against each other.

So you draw those first and they happened to go into slots E2b and E3b.  Now you have TFC, Halifax, York and Forge in a random draw for the remaining four slots.  That gives a 33% chance of a York/Forge matchup.  (Nothing in the CSA's information said this was the case but if Halifax was constrained to be against the LIQ team then it is 50%.)

I don't think we need fixes to get the results we did.

(And stats aren't really my thing so maybe someone with better math can review the percentages.  My point, though, is that they aren't tiny.)

[Watchmen]

3 hours ago, Kingston said:

The teams get re-drawn for the semis to eliminate the geographic factor.  Otherwise the Whitecaps would always have a straight shot to the final only ever having to face L1 or CPL teams.

So, barring upsets, there will be three MLS teams and one CPL team going into a hat for a random draw for the semis.

I don't mind regionalization for the first round, but would have preferred blind draws with no restrictions for the quarterfinals onwards. Two MLS teams meet in the quarters? Oh well!

[Kingston]

11 minutes ago, Watchmen said:

I don't mind regionalization for the first round, but would have preferred blind draws with no restrictions for the quarterfinals onwards. Two MLS teams meet in the quarters? Oh well!

We could have had two MLS teams in the quarter finals this year.  There was a 33% chance for TFC and Montreal to meet up in the quarters, for example.

I think the current arrangement is a pretty good balance of geography and chance.  Things will presumably change at least a little bit next year anyway with the addition of a team from L1A.  With CPL expansion and a possible L1M soon, it will be a few years before the Canadian Championship settles on a "permanent" format.

Edited February 26 by Kingston

[Watchmen]

50 minutes ago, Kingston said:

We could have had two MLS teams in the quarter finals this year.  There was a 33% chance for TFC and Montreal to meet up in the quarters, for example.

I think the current arrangement is a pretty good balance of geography and chance.  Things will presumably change at least a little bit next year anyway with the addition of a team from L1A.  With CPL expansion and a possible L1M soon, it will be a few years before the Canadian Championship settles on a "permanent" format.

There's some aspects that will keep changing as the number of teams increases (#of rounds, where teams start, etc) but there's parts of it they should lock. Flipping back to 2 legs was unnecessary, for instance.