Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't like the idea where an MLS team from the East faces a Western team only one time in the league and can face an Eastern team three times, Doesn't make sense for me.
like DC United (Last place in East) beat RSL (First in West) 1-0 in RFK
There is no match in Rio Tinto this year (except the cup final) How is this fair for RSL to not gain home advantage although I'm a United fan.
The way the 23 home and away games will go is 46 games/team each season. The current format is 34 games per regular season/team + 4 games playoffs
The fact that the US is a really big country is irrelevant when it comes to deciding on the size of our D1 league. I hear people say "we are a big country , we can have 30 teams in MLS!" That is moronic. Anyone saying that doesn't know anything about this sport.
You really don't get it, do you?
This is about adding revenue and expanding to other untapped markets, NOT about trying to be a traditional Association league. If it did, it wouldn't be called Major League Soccer. If a nation or region has the resources and demand to add more than 20 teams to a professional sports league, then it could happen regardless of what anyone who doesn't own anything in said league has to say about it.
And if I were you, I wouldn't be throwing words like "moronic" around in topics like this seeing how a lot of big time soccer fans in this country have a reputation for being a bunch of uptight snobs who insufferably keep trying to push this thought that American/Canadian soccer should conform to every single thing Europe is doing and that's pretty much another example of it. Just because YOU PERSONALLY don't like the idea of MLS going past 20 teams doesn't make it neither a good or bad idea.
Quote:
It's a moot point now isn't it? Garber wants 24. And Garber doesn't know anything about soccer either. Heck, when he took the job as Commish of MLS he admitted not knowing much about soccer. MLS plucked him out of the NFL. If he knew anything about soccer we wouldn't have a league that decides we need to have an unbalanced schedule to encourage rivalries (lol..idiots!!!) and that having 12 out of 18 teams make the playoffs to decide the regular season champion is a good idea. There are stupid stupid people running MLS. They think MLS = NFL.
Considering that the MLS has been growing pretty well in the last decade in two countries where the sport isn't even close to being #1, I'd say he's doing a fairly decent job, so I wouldn't be complaining or calling him an idiot. And I'm pretty sure no one here thinks of the MLS as the NFL. Maybe not even MLB or the NBA. But unlike past pro soccer leagues, this one actually has a legit shot at sticking around for at least 35 years. Maybe you should just let these guys do their job and be happy with the fact that there is a "D1" soccer league north of the Mexican border that's NOT failing.
(P.S., if Garber really did want to make the MLS anything like the NFL as far as the postseason goes, only about 6 out 18 teams would make the playoffs... just an fyi)
This is about adding revenue and expanding to other untapped markets, NOT about trying to be a traditional Association league. If it did, it wouldn't be called Major League Soccer. If a nation or region has the resources and demand to add more than 20 teams to a professional sports league, then it could happen regardless of what anyone who doesn't own anything in said league has to say about it.
And if I were you, I wouldn't be throwing words like "moronic" around in topics like this seeing how a lot of big time soccer fans in this country have a reputation for being a bunch of uptight snobs who insufferably keep trying to push this thought that American/Canadian soccer should conform to every single thing Europe is doing and that's pretty much another example of it. Just because YOU PERSONALLY don't like the idea of MLS going past 20 teams doesn't make it neither a good or bad idea.
No actually, you don't get it. There's nothing unique enough about America that we cannot handle a proper football league. I can always tell when someone is an MLS shill when they refer to cities and fans as "markets".
Lets just look at your argument about demand and then use another sport in America. Look at baseball. There's certainly enough demand in America to have more than 30 baseball teams in MLB. If you just went by demand you could have twice that many. But that wouldn't make for a good league now would it? It would dilute the talent pool and cheapen the quality on the field. So it's not about demand. It's about setting standard of quality for the top league in the country.
99% of the football world has copied the English model. Yet the USA wants to do it their way. It's all about 'MERICA. So you better have a pretty good argument for going it your own way. And what is your argument? That Americans prefer conferences, playoffs, salary caps, no free agency, and single entity? EPIC FAIL. The fact that just a three years ago the MLS Cup final got beat in the TV ratings by college women's volleyball should tell you that the majority of American soccer fans have rejected this nonsense.
I don't like the idea where an MLS team from the East faces a Western team only one time in the league and can face an Eastern team three times, Doesn't make sense for me.
like DC United (Last place in East) beat RSL (First in West) 1-0 in RFK
There is no match in Rio Tinto this year (except the cup final) How is this fair for RSL to not gain home advantage although I'm a United fan.
The way the 23 home and away games will go is 46 games/team each season. The current format is 34 games per regular season/team + 4 games playoffs
Yeah it doesn't make sense to a lot of people. Supporters of this format would say that conferences and an unbalanced schedule where a team like DC United plays Philly three times a year and RSL once promotes rivalries. To be honest, it's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. All it does is weaken the prestige of the Supporters Shield (which should be the real championship trophy).
First off, you shouldn't have to artificially manufacture rivalries. And the idea that playing an opponent three times in the league instead of two promotes rivalries goes against everything we know about rivalries in football. Liverpool and Man United don't need three league games a year for their rivalry. Neither do any rivalries in any of the dozens of football leagues around the globe.
No actually, you don't get it. There's nothing unique enough about America that we cannot handle a proper football league. I can always tell when someone is an MLS shill when they refer to cities and fans as "markets".
There it is, again... the snob thought that there is just one "proper football league".
It's not being an "an MLS shill" when you're not calling yourself a huge fan and realizing that this isn't England. The way pro sports work in this country is through media markets and owners/groups. Hell, the league isn't even 20 years old yet, so I wouldn't expect it to be built the same way as these other leagues. And yes, that's what cities are referred to in professional American sports... MARKETS. I really don't see how or why you would argue that.
Quote:
Lets just look at your argument about demand and then use another sport in America. Look at baseball. There's certainly enough demand in America to have more than 30 baseball teams in MLB. If you just went by demand you could have twice that many. But that wouldn't make for a good league now would it? It would dilute the talent pool and cheapen the quality on the field. So it's not about demand. It's about setting standard of quality for the top league in the country.
So for your example, you use a league that has been around since just a decade after the Civil War... had more than a full century to build up, most of which being a time when the internet and television weren't even in the foreseeable future... and btw, you completely left out my mentioning of REVENUE being a factor in a league's expansion. The reason why the WNBA and and Arena Football League are failing or just barely hanging on is because their business model is trash compared to The Big Four. There's also the factor of marketing and again, those two are trash when it comes to getting people interested. The MLS is at least growing and showing no signs of stopping anytime soon. That's why it's still currently expanding and WILL eventually expand to more than 20, whether you want it to or not.
By the way, it's more than ridiculous to think that (1.) more than 10 other cities in America and Canada are begging for a baseball team. I count around 7 with only 4 of them that's even slightly capable of supporting a Major League baseball team. And (2.) you honestly think for one second that 60 teams would work for any league right now? You were kind of reaching on that one...
Quote:
99% of the football world has copied the English model. Yet the USA wants to do it their way.
And what's wrong with that? Seriously, why the hell is that an issue? This country has gotten along just fine without the Metric system, so what harm will it do for this region of the world build its soccer leagues its own way? It's not about "'MERICA being 'MERICA", it's about going with what you know. Again, the MLS is a modern professional league with the resources and marketing to go to 24 teams or more somewhere down the road. And about this delusion of talent, dude, there will always be weaker teams regardless of how many are in a league or division. But it's still the pros, so you'll still have those playing hard against each other.
Quote:
So you better have a pretty good argument for going it your own way. And what is your argument? That Americans prefer conferences, playoffs, salary caps, no free agency, and single entity? EPIC FAIL.
This time 10 years ago, not nearly as many people cared about this league, there were 10 teams, and attendance was around 2.2 million at the gate. A lot of the teams were playing in NFL stadiums, old facilities, or even high school football stadiums (eventually Dallas left the Cotton Bowl and played in Southlake Carroll's stadium for a while) with barely that much mention.
Now there are going to be 20 in the next couple years, already announcing 24. State of the art Soccer Specific Stadiums are becoming more and more common. Attendance at the gates are now more than 6 million on average, and even a dish network just for MLS, like the other major pro leagues. There's no sign of it slowing down in growth or interest, so WHAT exactly is failing? There could be no Major League Soccer at all, so I don't get the complaints.
Quote:
The fact that just a three years ago the MLS Cup final got beat in the TV ratings by college women's volleyball should tell you that the majority of American soccer fans have rejected this nonsense.
Keywords: THREE YEARS AGO. Meaning that this happened in the past. Considering the numbers, and that ONE example you presented, I think you're exaggerating a bit.
I suggest you just let these guys do their jobs because the MLS isn't exactly getting less popular.
I think MLS should kick the canadian teams out of the league. I know that in the other major sports the 2 countries share the league but for soccer I think each country should have their own league.
I think MLS should kick the canadian teams out of the league. I know that in the other major sports the 2 countries share the league but for soccer I think each country should have their own league.
For American Soccer i think each coast should have their own league.
2x45 minutes non-stop is not the same thing as 4x12 minutes with a time-out every 3 minutes.
The traveling is to hard on players.
I think MLS should kick the canadian teams out of the league. I know that in the other major sports the 2 countries share the league but for soccer I think each country should have their own league.
I do think the playing a team 3 times and another team 1 is bs and a forced false rivalry. I couldnt care less about the Rocky Mountain Cup that comes with beating Fake Salt Lake, obviously I want to beat them every time we play but its not for some fake cup its because there is 3 points on the table. Rivalries should be natural not forced upon somebody, it does make the league look bad imho to people who support English football which a majority do as we all know.
I think MLS should kick the canadian teams out of the league. I know that in the other major sports the 2 countries share the league but for soccer I think each country should have their own league.
They already have a cup but only Four teams compete The Three Canadian teams from MLS + FC Edmonton. I don't think they can make a Four team league work but Canada should have their own league because Ive never heard of two countries sharing a league
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
