How to make MLS a top league

[Sean Miller Fan]

OK, yea, first and foremost, then need to greatly increase the payroll. Where does the money need to come from, mostly? TV. How do you increase TV money? Get better players. Its a chicken/egg scenario. But, if you look at the size of this country, the amount of other major pro sports to compete with, and the worldwide talent pool of soccer players, I believe that MLS needs to grow to 40 teams with quasi-promotion/relegation.

Why 40 teams? I think you need to involve as many major cities as possible. Soccer in the USA is similar to hockey in some ways. If your town doesn't have an NHL team, people don't even know what hockey is. Now, yea, soccer is more popular than hockey in non-NHL, non-MLS markets, but people in Pittsburgh arent going to pay a great amount of attention to MLS unless they had a dog in the fight. So, here's how it would work of it were up to me:

MLS would have 4 divisons of 10 teams

MLS Premier
MLS 2
MLS 3
MLS 4

Using college basketball as a reference point, think of MLSP as the ACC, MLS2 as the Big Ten, MLS3 as the A10, and MLS4 as the CAA but they are all "NCAA" and have representation in the NCAA Tournament but of course no promotion/relegation and all 40 teams would share the MLS TV contract evenly.

MLSP: 7 playoff teams
MLS2: 5 playoff teams
MLS3: 3 playoff teams
MLS4: 1 playoff team

16 team 2 legged-playoff series. 1 MLS Champion. The 3 top and bottom teams from each division are promoted/relegated. In MLS 4, the 3rd promoted team is decided by a 3 vs 6, 4 vs 5 playoff like they do in the English 2nd Division.

Not counting playoffs, teams would play a 36 game schedule, playing 18 games in your own division (home and home) and 6/10 teams in the other divisions so a team like Pittsburgh would host a Ronaldo-like or Messi-like player annually and 2nd tier players like a Harry Kane or Antoine Griezmann several other times.

MLS will have 26 teams with the addition of Nashville, FC Cincinnati (and their unbelievable Seattle Sounders-like fanbase), and Miami. So, who should be the other 14 be:

By population rank:
Detroit
San Diego
Tampa
Baltimore
St. Louis
Charlotte
San Antonio
Pittsburgh
Sacramento
Las Vegas
Cleveland
Indianapolis
Norfolk/Hampton/VA Beach
Milwaukee

 

[Fk_Pitt]

OK, yea, first and foremost, then need to greatly increase the payroll. Where does the money need to come from, mostly? TV. How do you increase TV money? Get better players. Its a chicken/egg scenario. But, if you look at the size of this country, the amount of other major pro sports to compete with, and the worldwide talent pool of soccer players, I believe that MLS needs to grow to 40 teams with quasi-promotion/relegation.

Why 40 teams? I think you need to involve as many major cities as possible. Soccer in the USA is similar to hockey in some ways. If your town doesn't have an NHL team, people don't even know what hockey is. Now, yea, soccer is more popular than hockey in non-NHL, non-MLS markets, but people in Pittsburgh arent going to pay a great amount of attention to MLS unless they had a dog in the fight. So, here's how it would work of it were up to me:

MLS would have 4 divisons of 10 teams

MLS Premier
MLS 2
MLS 3
MLS 4

Using college basketball as a reference point, think of MLSP as the ACC, MLS2 as the Big Ten, MLS3 as the A10, and MLS4 as the CAA but they are all "NCAA" and have representation in the NCAA Tournament but of course no promotion/relegation and all 40 teams would share the MLS TV contract evenly.

MLSP: 7 playoff teams
MLS2: 5 playoff teams
MLS3: 3 playoff teams
MLS4: 1 playoff team

16 team 2 legged-playoff series. 1 MLS Champion. The 3 top and bottom teams from each division are promoted/relegated. In MLS 4, the 3rd promoted team is decided by a 3 vs 6, 4 vs 5 playoff like they do in the English 2nd Division.

Not counting playoffs, teams would play a 36 game schedule, playing 18 games in your own division (home and home) and 6/10 teams in the other divisions so a team like Pittsburgh would host a Ronaldo-like or Messi-like player annually and 2nd tier players like a Harry Kane or Antoine Griezmann several other times.

MLS will have 26 teams with the addition of Nashville, FC Cincinnati (and their unbelievable Seattle Sounders-like fanbase), and Miami. So, who should be the other 14 be:

By population rank:
Detroit
San Diego
Tampa
Baltimore
St. Louis
Charlotte
San Antonio
Pittsburgh
Sacramento
Las Vegas
Cleveland
Indianapolis
Norfolk/Hampton/VA Beach
Milwaukee

Yeah. I’d have to digest your playoff scenario...but the simpler the better. Americans can’t even figure out the concept of extra time/injury time...so soccer needs to be made idiot proof.

It’s funny because I was thinking the same thing the other day about 40 MLS teams (or even 60), and have an MLS1, MLS2, and MLS3, complete with promotion and relegation. The Hounds, who no one cares about, including myself, would be fighting for promotion right now, and the money generated through promotion can be put back into the club for stadium upgrades. A system like that would also get me watching MLS on tv. I don’t currently.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

The Hounds, who no one cares about, including myself, would be fighting for promotion right now, and the money generated through promotion can be put back into the club for stadium upgrades.

Of course the money removed through relegation would be lost in the form of bankruptcy, which is why no MLS owner will ever go for a promotion/relegation system.

If you want the league to get better then you simply cannot have anywhere near as many as 40 teams in the league. Most MLS teams have little to no depth as it is, and adding that many teams is going to make it that much worse. The way that MLS turns into a top level league is through slow and steady progress, not by declaring that it is going to be so and then attempting to throw around enough truckloads of money to try to make it happen. The NASL tried that model years ago, and it was a spectacular failure.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

The Hounds, who no one cares about, including myself, would be fighting for promotion right now, and the money generated through promotion can be put back into the club for stadium upgrades.

Of course the money removed through relegation would be lost in the form of bankruptcy, which is why no MLS owner will ever go for a promotion/relegation system.

If you want the league to get better then you simply cannot have anywhere near as many as 40 teams in the league. Most MLS teams have little to no depth as it is, and adding that many teams is going to make it that much worse. The way that MLS turns into a top level league is through slow and steady progress, not by declaring that it is going to be so and then attempting to throw around enough truckloads of money to try to make it happen. The NASL tried that model years ago, and it was a spectacular failure.

Which is why my system adds the element of promotion/relegation while still being in MLS, still sharing MLS TV money equally, and still playing the other top teams.

If baseball, football, and hockey can have 30 teams with a very limited supply of players, I see no reason why MLS couldn't have 40 teams, given the worldwide talent pool.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

If baseball, football, and hockey can have 30 teams with a very limited supply of players, I see no reason why MLS couldn't have 40 teams, given the worldwide talent pool.

The worldwide talent pool in baseball, football and hockey is entirely or almost entirely concentrated in leagues in the US (and Canada). The worldwide talent pool in soccer is split up into leagues in literally hundreds of countries. And even if you throw out all the smaller nation's leagues there are still at least five other leagues in competition for the very top players, all of which have historical and geographic advantages over the MLS. Do you really think that any, for instance, elite, top level, in their prime German player is ever going to leave Germany to come to the US and play in Kansas City? Or a similar English player is going to come to the US and play in Salt Lake City? Or a similar Italian player is going to come to the US and play in San Jose?

The only way those elite players are coming here in their prime any time soon is for MLS to overpay for them. In most cases by a pretty good margin. For example, what the Chinese league is trying, and for the most part failing, to do. Or what the NASL tried in the late 70s - early 80s. How'd that work out for them?

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

If baseball, football, and hockey can have 30 teams with a very limited supply of players, I see no reason why MLS couldn't have 40 teams, given the worldwide talent pool.

The worldwide talent pool in baseball, football and hockey is entirely or almost entirely concentrated in leagues in the US (and Canada). The worldwide talent pool in soccer is split up into leagues in literally hundreds of countries. And even if you throw out all the smaller nation's leagues there are still at least five other leagues in competition for the very top players, all of which have historical and geographic advantages over the MLS. Do you really think that any, for instance, elite, top level, in their prime German player is ever going to leave Germany to come to the US and play in Kansas City? Or a similar English player is going to come to the US and play in Salt Lake City? Or a similar Italian player is going to come to the US and play in San Jose?

The only way those elite players are coming here in their prime any time soon is for MLS to overpay for them. In most cases by a pretty good margin. For example, what the Chinese league is trying, and for the most part failing, to do. Or what the NASL tried in the late 70s - early 80s. How'd that work out for them?

Uhhh....yes, that is the whole point. To get a kid like Mbape to come play for Kansas City for as much or more money than he can make in Europe because the hope would be that a world-class MLS would generate a worldwide TV contract to pay the bills. The goal would be to become a Top 3 league with the EPL and Bundesliga ahead of La Liga (besides Real Madrid and Barca) and Serie A. I mean MLS is definitely going to try it in 2026 by making huge investments in players. The question is how can they sustain it. I think its with a 40 team league which involves as many American potential fans as possible

 

[Fk_Pitt]

Uhhh....yes, that is the whole point. To get a kid like Mbape to come play for Kansas City for as much or more money than he can make in Europe because the hope would be that a world-class MLS would generate a worldwide TV contract to pay the bills. The goal would be to become a Top 3 league with the EPL and Bundesliga ahead of La Liga (besides Real Madrid and Barca) and Serie A. I mean MLS is definitely going to try it in 2026 by making huge investments in players. The question is how can they sustain it. I think its with a 40 team league which involves as many American potential fans as possible

You keep saying this about 2026. Can you link?

 

[MattP31]

You keep saying this about 2026. Can you link?

It’s everywhere. 2026 is two WC’s from now and the one in America. Hosting a WC improves interest a great deal at least for a short time. Having the league as strong as ever to capitalize on the interest boom is just very important.

It can easily surpass hockey in the US if it plays 2026 the right way. If it doesn’t then it may have a hard time ever doing it. 2026 is make or break for them nationally even though I know it does well in cities where teams are

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

Uhhh....yes, that is the whole point. To get a kid like Mbape to come play for Kansas City for as much or more money than he can make in Europe because the hope would be that a world-class MLS would generate a worldwide TV contract to pay the bills. The goal would be to become a Top 3 league with the EPL and Bundesliga ahead of La Liga (besides Real Madrid and Barca) and Serie A. I mean MLS is definitely going to try it in 2026 by making huge investments in players. The question is how can they sustain it. I think its with a 40 team league which involves as many American potential fans as possible

The whole point is to bankrupt the league trying to do something that obviously isn't going to work?

Wow. Who knew?

 

[PeetWeet1]

Of course the money removed through relegation would be lost in the form of bankruptcy, which is why no MLS owner will ever go for a promotion/relegation system.

If you want the league to get better then you simply cannot have anywhere near as many as 40 teams in the league. Most MLS teams have little to no depth as it is, and adding that many teams is going to make it that much worse. The way that MLS turns into a top level league is through slow and steady progress, not by declaring that it is going to be so and then attempting to throw around enough truckloads of money to try to make it happen. The NASL tried that model years ago, and it was a spectacular failure.

No reason why MLS couldn’t go to a closed relegation system. Right now, it could be an open one with the USL where getting into the MLS would also require an expansion fee.

Of course, being a top league in anything other than attendance isn’t going to happen so long as the Champions League exists. What is realistic is for the MLS to become the best league in the Western Hemisphere.

A salary cap gets the owners a license to print money, so I doubt that is going anywhere. What I think could help everyone is if the teams could spend salary and net acquisition money as eash sees fit (get rid of DPs, etc.).

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

A salary cap gets the owners a license to print money, so I doubt that is going anywhere.

But that's the thing. MLS owners aren't printing money. Not even close. Last year Forbes had the LA Galaxy as the leading money maker in the MLS. They estimated they had a $9 million profit. According to their numbers a total of eight teams in the whole league made a profit last year. If you added up all the profits and losses for the individual teams you actually come to a total of $20 million in LOSSES. And yet SMF thinks that they are going to suddenly start spending tens of millions more per team on salaries in the hope that eventually their television viewership will catch up which will eventually cause them to make a lot more in television money.

The contract that Ronaldo just signed, and I mean just the contract, not the transfer fee, is for in the neighborhood of $35 million per season. According to the Forbes estimates the total number of MLS teams with $35 million in revenues last year, not profits, total revenues, was five. Now let's prorate (even though that's not the way the actual payout works) the transfer fee over the life of the contract and that adds another almost $34 million per season to the bill. And the total number of MLS teams that had revenues that would cover that amount of money is exactly zero.

But yeah, MLS is going to become a player for the top players in the world any minute now. Just you wait and see.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

A salary cap gets the owners a license to print money, so I doubt that is going anywhere.

But that's the thing. MLS owners aren't printing money. Not even close. Last year Forbes had the LA Galaxy as the leading money maker in the MLS. They estimated they had a $9 million profit. According to their numbers a total of eight teams in the whole league made a profit last year. If you added up all the profits and losses for the individual teams you actually come to a total of $20 million in LOSSES. And yet SMF thinks that they are going to suddenly start spending tens of millions more per team on salaries in the hope that eventually their television viewership will catch up which will eventually cause them to make a lot more in television money.

The contract that Ronaldo just signed, and I mean just the contract, not the transfer fee, is for in the neighborhood of $35 million per season. According to the Forbes estimates the total number of MLS teams with $35 million in revenues last year, not profits, total revenues, was five. Now let's prorate (even though that's not the way the actual payout works) the transfer fee over the life of the contract and that adds another almost $34 million per season to the bill. And the total number of MLS teams that had revenues that would cover that amount of money is exactly zero.

But yeah, MLS is going to become a player for the top players in the world any minute now. Just you wait and see.

Not any minute now. 8 years from now. And the league, not the individual teams pay transfer fees.

There is no doubt that MLS is going to have make promises and guarantees on player spending to ESPN/FOX or whoever and be very creative in how it spends but its 2026 or never for MLS. They're going to try it.

What would help the most, though the least likely to happen is if US Soccer is let into UEFA. It would then share in the Champions League contract and MLS teams would play Champions League football, a great recruiting tool. There are some examples of countries playing outside their continent for various reasons:

Suriname and Guyana play in CONCACAF instead of CONMEBOL

Australia play in AFC instead of Oceania

Israel play in UEFA instead of AFC

Might be worth at least trying.

The other idea, if not enough TV money can be generated, is to allow 4-8 super clubs, subsidized by the league (which would be highly controversial and owners from KC and Cincinnati would have to agree to subsidize the super clubs for the sake of the league) which would potentially spend like the top clubs in the world while the KC's and Cincy's would become 2nd tier.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

The league does not pay the transfer fees now when the fees are rarely more than a couple million dollars, they sure as heck aren't going to start paying the fees when they start topping $20 or $30 million for one player.

If a majority of the teams have less than $30 million in revenue just how much money do you think the league office has laying around and just where do you suppose it's all coming from?

 

[PeetWeet1]

Not any minute now. 8 years from now. And the league, not the individual teams pay transfer fees.

There is no doubt that MLS is going to have make promises and guarantees on player spending to ESPN/FOX or whoever and be very creative in how it spends but its 2026 or never for MLS. They're going to try it.

What would help the most, though the least likely to happen is if US Soccer is let into UEFA. It would then share in the Champions League contract and MLS teams would play Champions League football, a great recruiting tool. There are some examples of countries playing outside their continent for various reasons:

Suriname and Guyana play in CONCACAF instead of CONMEBOL

Australia play in AFC instead of Oceania

Israel play in UEFA instead of AFC

Might be worth at least trying.

The other idea, if not enough TV money can be generated, is to allow 4-8 super clubs, subsidized by the league (which would be highly controversial and owners from KC and Cincinnati would have to agree to subsidize the super clubs for the sake of the league) which would potentially spend like the top clubs in the world while the KC's and Cincy's would become 2nd tier.

Time zone differences make any UEFA cooperation/ membership almost impossible. What I won’t rule out in the future is increased cooperation with South America. The USMNT would get a real competition every two years, and the South American teams and players would get more exposure to the US market.

Due to politics, I am not holding my breath.
However, it wasn’t that long ago when the club Champions of Europe played the Champions of South America in somewhat meaningful games for a ‘world’ title.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Not any minute now. 8 years from now. And the league, not the individual teams pay transfer fees.

There is no doubt that MLS is going to have make promises and guarantees on player spending to ESPN/FOX or whoever and be very creative in how it spends but its 2026 or never for MLS. They're going to try it.

What would help the most, though the least likely to happen is if US Soccer is let into UEFA. It would then share in the Champions League contract and MLS teams would play Champions League football, a great recruiting tool. There are some examples of countries playing outside their continent for various reasons:

Suriname and Guyana play in CONCACAF instead of CONMEBOL

Australia play in AFC instead of Oceania

Israel play in UEFA instead of AFC

Might be worth at least trying.

The other idea, if not enough TV money can be generated, is to allow 4-8 super clubs, subsidized by the league (which would be highly controversial and owners from KC and Cincinnati would have to agree to subsidize the super clubs for the sake of the league) which would potentially spend like the top clubs in the world while the KC's and Cincy's would become 2nd tier.

Time zone differences make any UEFA cooperation/ membership almost impossible. What I won’t rule out in the future is increased cooperation with South America. The USMNT would get a real competition every two years, and the South American teams and players would get more exposure to the US market.

Due to politics, I am not holding my breath.
However, it wasn’t that long ago when the club Champions of Europe played the Champions of South America in somewhat meaningful games for a ‘world’ title.

They still have the FIFA Club World Cup which almost always winds up as UEFA vs CONMEBOL.

I disagree that time zones will prevent USA from joining UEFA. There are many reasons it wont happen but time zones arent one. European teams already play 3-4 time zones away in Eastern Europe.

 

[anon_4dfwm2pijbr0a]

Here is 1 simple and single reason why MLS will never be a top league.

UEFA Champions League.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Here is 1 simple and single reason why MLS will never be a top league.

UEFA Champions League.

Which is why if I were US Soccer, I'd lobby UEFA and FIFA to get into UEFA. Maybe they can cite cultural reasons, or safety concerns playing games in Central America, or the Caribbean.

 

[anon_4dfwm2pijbr0a]

Which is why if I were US Soccer, I'd lobby UEFA and FIFA to get into UEFA. Maybe they can cite cultural reasons, or safety concerns playing games in Central America, or the Caribbean.

Too expensive. No MLS team would make it into the group stages. In addition, the US would very rarely make a World Cup having to qualify through UEFA.

The fact is MLS is lame, not as lame as it used to be though. The English Championship is a better league from top to bottom and I'd even go as far as to argue League 1 is on par with MLS.

 

[Pitt79]

The other idea, if not enough TV money can be generated, is to allow 4-8 super clubs, subsidized by the league (which would be highly controversial and owners from KC and Cincinnati would have to agree to subsidize the super clubs for the sake of the league) which would potentially spend like the top clubs in the world while the KC's and Cincy's would become 2nd tier.

As a fan, I would hate that! Propping up places like NY and LA as if they need more help. MLS is a way better league than America deserves anyways, it's sick that we have only taken soccer seriously for maybe 10-20 years and people act like we should be on par with countries that have focused on it as their #1 sport for 100 years. I like MLS, USL and even NPSL and maybe eventually we can pass Liga MX, which would be great, make us top league in North America. Passing Europe, I don't see in my lifetime, and I'm OK with that, because really, America is NOT exceptional, it's arrogant to think we should be best at everything, just because we're America.

There are different kinds of fans, there are fans who embrace their local teams and leagues, like myself, and most Europeans, and there are fans that only want to see the best quality play, and care less about local. Me? I want to attend games and have an in person experience, if I wait for MLS to be world class, I might die and never go to any events.

Serious Question? if say in 50 years, MLS had surpassed everyone and was clearly the #1 league in the world, do you think Liverpool, Barcelona and Bayern fans would quit following their teams to stay up late and watch MLS games online

 

[Pitt79]

The fact is MLS is lame, not as lame as it used to be though. The English Championship is a better league from top to bottom and I'd even go as far as to argue League 1 is on par with MLS.

Serious question, would you rather watch teams from English minor leagues than support a local team just because they may be better "quality"? This is part of the reason the sport doesn't grow in America, a pretty good % of American fans won't support their local teams.

 

[anon_4dfwm2pijbr0a]

Serious question, would you rather watch teams from English minor leagues than support a local team just because they may be better "quality"? This is part of the reason the sport doesn't grow in America, a pretty good % of American fans won't support their local teams.

Yes. I live outside of Philadelphia and have tried to watch the Union play. I cannot make it through a whole game.

Pulisic is a great example...do you think he'd be the player he is right now if per say he'd be with the Union or DC United? I don't think he would.

 

[Pitt79]

Yes. I live outside of Philadelphia and have tried to watch the Union play. I cannot make it through a whole game.

Pulisic is a great example...do you think he'd be the player he is right now if per say he'd be with the Union or DC United? I don't think he would.

Does it matter? I went to 5 NPSL games this year, became a fan of FC Baltimore, who won their division and had fun being there in person, it was easy to watch the entire game, I can't sit and watch an EPL game between 2 teams from English cities because I don't care who wins. The quality of play means less to me than having an attachment that you can only get by being close to it.

 

[Pitt79]

It would be great if MLS was a "top league", but personally, I'm going to enjoy the domestic leagues now, as they are, because I want something local, in AMERICAN cities, NOW, and also because it might never happen.

 

[pitt90seven]

The goal would be to become a Top 3 league with the EPL and Bundesliga ahead of La Liga (besides Real Madrid and Barca) and Serie A. I mean MLS is definitely going to try it in 2026 by making huge investments in players. The question is how can they sustain it. I think its with a 40 team league which involves as many American potential fans as possible

love you but this is an absurd goal. just no way. ahead of la liga? you mean the league that wins almost every club competition nearly every year for the past 10 years? the EPL is their b!tch. it's not even close. the mid table teams in la liga destroy them, annually.

MLS is light years behind these leagues. the dutch league is light years ahead of MLS and they're an also-ran at this point.

MLS will have a natural growth. it's getting better every year. let it grow organically. yes, i want a pro-rel situation. and the owners don't realize how they're being short-sighted about it. but it's also not reality that it will happen any time soon.

re: growing the # of teams - i don't think that's such a bad idea. you could do a sort of MLB thing where one conference plays the other in a championship, with a few cross-conference games here and there. just an east-west type of thing where if you're in DC, you'll get to see the sounders at some point but not all the time. i actually do think it'd be a better league if it was more regionalized to: 1 - create real, intense rivalries, and 2 - cut down on travel problems (costs and fatigue for players).

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

yes, i want a pro-rel situation. and the owners don't realize how they're being short-sighted about it.

They aren't being short-sighted about it. They are being completely, utterly rational in their thoughts on pro-rel. Which is why there is no chance, and I mean literally no chance at all, that pro-rel is going to happen.

Pro-rel simply isn't the way sports are done here. None of the leagues here grew that way. And if a league doesn't grow that way then it isn't going to change to that, because it's not in the best interest of the stakeholders for it to happen.

 

[pitt90seven]

They aren't being short-sighted about it. They are being completely, utterly rational in their thoughts on pro-rel. Which is why there is no chance, and I mean literally no chance at all, that pro-rel is going to happen.

Pro-rel simply isn't the way sports are done here. None of the leagues here grew that way. And if a league doesn't grow that way then it isn't going to change to that, because it's not in the best interest of the stakeholders for it to happen.

they are being short-sighted. pro-rel would grow the interest in the sports massively. yes, you may get relegated but the pot would grow overall. see how other soccer leagues are? the 2nd half of the season is about the teams a the top and the next topic is the teams at the bottom.

 

[PeetWeet1]

They aren't being short-sighted about it. They are being completely, utterly rational in their thoughts on pro-rel. Which is why there is no chance, and I mean literally no chance at all, that pro-rel is going to happen.

Pro-rel simply isn't the way sports are done here. None of the leagues here grew that way. And if a league doesn't grow that way then it isn't going to change to that, because it's not in the best interest of the stakeholders for it to happen.

We’ll see. A closed pro/eel system almost has to happen. The expansion fees are like crack. At some point the only way to keep them coming is to have 2, or more, levels.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

They aren't being short-sighted about it. They are being completely, utterly rational in their thoughts on pro-rel. Which is why there is no chance, and I mean literally no chance at all, that pro-rel is going to happen.

Pro-rel simply isn't the way sports are done here. None of the leagues here grew that way. And if a league doesn't grow that way then it isn't going to change to that, because it's not in the best interest of the stakeholders for it to happen.

We’ll see. A closed pro/eel system almost has to happen. The expansion fees are like crack. At some point the only way to keep them coming is to have 2, or more, levels.

This is why I say you can have promotion/relegation without really having it. Everyone is still "MLS," just in different tiers. Everyone would still have a chance to be MLS Champs. Lets say LA Galaxy suck for a few years and end up in the 4th tier. They'd still be in MLS, still play some of the top tier teams, can still win the 4th tier and advance to the playoffs. It would be like Duke basketball being relegated to the Big East, then to the A10, then to CUSA, winning CUSA and winning the NCAA Tournament from there while being promoted back to the A10.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

This is why I say you can have promotion/relegation without really having it. Everyone is still "MLS," just in different tiers. Everyone would still have a chance to be MLS Champs. Lets say LA Galaxy suck for a few years and end up in the 4th tier. They'd still be in MLS, still play some of the top tier teams, can still win the 4th tier and advance to the playoffs. It would be like Duke basketball being relegated to the Big East, then to the A10, then to CUSA, winning CUSA and winning the NCAA Tournament from there while being promoted back to the A10.

So in other words you don't actually want promotion and relegation, you just want a system that you can call promotion and relegation.

I mean you understand that your system isn't what you are supposedly advocating for, right?

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

they are being short-sighted. pro-rel would grow the interest in the sports massively. yes, you may get relegated but the pot would grow overall. see how other soccer leagues are? the 2nd half of the season is about the teams a the top and the next topic is the teams at the bottom.

Sports in the US are different that soccer in most other countries in the world. The fact that some people really, really want to pound the square peg of soccer leagues around in the world into the round hole that is the American sports scene won't make that any closer to a reality.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

We’ll see. A closed pro/eel system almost has to happen. The expansion fees are like crack. At some point the only way to keep them coming is to have 2, or more, levels.

In a true promotion/relegation system the would never be another expansion fee ever.

Why would anyone pay for a expansion team when they could simply promote their way to the same place without having to pay the fee?

 

[pitt90seven]

In a true promotion/relegation system the would never be another expansion fee ever.

Why would anyone pay for a expansion team when they could simply promote their way to the same place without having to pay the fee?

into the lower league. you pay a fee and start there. so obviously you don't start in the highest level league.

 

[anon_d97v9o3a8b6xr]

The only way for MLS to become anything relevant in the world of soccer is to have the NFL fold, and drop college football and college basketball, and college soccer.

Soccer is growing, but it would need to be on the level of NFL to be relevant. That will never happen. The best football players in the world play in the NFL. The best soccer players in the world don't play in the United States.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

This is why I say you can have promotion/relegation without really having it. Everyone is still "MLS," just in different tiers. Everyone would still have a chance to be MLS Champs. Lets say LA Galaxy suck for a few years and end up in the 4th tier. They'd still be in MLS, still play some of the top tier teams, can still win the 4th tier and advance to the playoffs. It would be like Duke basketball being relegated to the Big East, then to the A10, then to CUSA, winning CUSA and winning the NCAA Tournament from there while being promoted back to the A10.

So in other words you don't actually want promotion and relegation, you just want a system that you can call promotion and relegation.

I mean you understand that your system isn't what you are supposedly advocating for, right?

It is not pro/rel in the European sense but there is an element of pro/rel. An Americanized pro/rel. You can never have a traditional pro/rel in this country because the owners would never vote for it. But in my system, I think they'd be more open to it.

 

[PeetWeet1]

In a true promotion/relegation system the would never be another expansion fee ever.

Why would anyone pay for a expansion team when they could simply promote their way to the same place without having to pay the fee?

Closed, not open. Need to pay the fee to get in.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

into the lower league. you pay a fee and start there. so obviously you don't start in the highest level league.

But what does a team pay to join the PDL? Zero, or essentially zero.

I mean do you really think that someone is going to pay an expansion fee of $150 million for the right to join the fourth or fifth tier of American soccer? Hell, even the second or third? No way, no how, not ever. If you really think that's happening you have to be the most delusional pro/rel fan ever.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

It is not pro/rel in the European sense but there is an element of pro/rel. An Americanized pro/rel. You can never have a traditional pro/rel in this country because the owners would never vote for it. But in my system, I think they'd be more open to it.

It's not pro/rel in any meaning of the term. Just because you call it that doesn't make it that.

UCF can call themselves the football national champions all they want, but no one really thinks that they are, and no matter how many times they say it it won't make it so. No matter how many times you call a system that allows a team that has been "relegated" to the fourth tier to still play teams in the top tier and still win the overall championship a pro/rel system it still won't be one.

 

[pitt90seven]

But what does a team pay to join the PDL? Zero, or essentially zero.

I mean do you really think that someone is going to pay an expansion fee of $150 million for the right to join the fourth or fifth tier of American soccer? Hell, even the second or third? No way, no how, not ever. If you really think that's happening you have to be the most delusional pro/rel fan ever.

obviously they don't pay THAT fee to get into a 2nd division. you pay based on the level of entry.

it's really not that hard to figure out.

instead of atlanta just buying their way into the MLS, they pay $XX into whatever league and they work their way up.

honestly, the minute i learned of a pro/rel situation (of course i never heard of it as a kid growing up) i thought it was the greatest idea ever, for sports.

and let's apply this to baseball since we already have several levels. you couldn't have the pirates owners bagging cash and being a dumpster fire for years on end. you HAVE to invest and compete. so what if the pirates get relegated here and there. overall, the sport is that much better all around. when you go down, you have the interest of the fans to claw your way back up. it's brilliant and grows the pot massively. that's what the MLS owners are missing. they think the exclusivity keeps them safe but it just limits them.

 

[CMUandPitt]

Never, ever going to happen.

The MLS is a Ponzi scheme that require constant expansion to be viable. Owners who pay the insane expansion fee will never agree to a promotion/relegation system.

The biggest systemic problem with MLS - and I say this as an ardent soccer fan - is that the product is garbage. It's what, maybe the 15th best league in the world? American sports fans have the best league in just about every single sport that matters. Asking them to support crap like MLS when they can just as easily follow an EPL team is just never going to fly.

 

[CMUandPitt]

The only way for MLS to become anything relevant in the world of soccer is to have the NFL fold, and drop college football and college basketball, and college soccer.

Soccer is growing, but it would need to be on the level of NFL to be relevant. That will never happen. The best football players in the world play in the NFL. The best soccer players in the world don't play in the United States.

I read the twenty other odd posts in here, and this is the only one that you really need to read.

It will never happen here, period. The product will always be crap, in a country that has the best in everything else. It will never compete for entertainment dollars.