Dreams of a Single Table are Really a Nightmare
So many euro footie fans express desires for the mythical single table (Setting the Table shows the league as if it were). They like how the standings would look, they would be simple and remind everyone of the EPL, etc. These dreams of a single table are generally expressed by the same people who desire MLS to be the top league in North America representing the entire United States, a league that doesn't interfere with the US Open Cup and certainly not with World Cup qualifying.
A single table with an unbalanced schedule is patently unfair to teams that play more games vs tougher opponents, and a single table with a balanced schedule destroys the quest for expansion beyond 22 teams with current schedule demands.
Should MLS really go to a single table? Or should it find other ways to improve the league, its schedule and its overall level of representation on the international stage?
What are the issues that face MLS now and in the near future, as pertains to the Single Table?
Desire for a 28-38 game regular season (Current season is 30, most leagues play 38)
Fixture congestion
- National Team Competitions: World Cup, Gold Cup, Olympics, etc
- US Open Cup
- CONCACAF Champion's League
- SuperLiga (an exhibition contest with a decent prize for ownership)
- Preseason Tourneys (Pan Pacific Championship)
- Playoffs
Available relative sunshine (ie the distinct feeling that fans won't show in the Winter)
Expansion: A truly National League can't only have 17 teams in the USA
All of these are issues due to scheduling concerns, sporting fairness and the success of the league in establishing itself on the international stage through its development of players for their national team and through the teams' performance on the international stage.
I'm going to operate under the assumption that everyone wants a league where the teams that advance to the playoffs are not determined by their strength of schedule, but on their performance on the pitch. If you didn't want that you'd be an NFL or NCAA football fan. Fairness in scheduling matters, and so for this reason single table must be either a double or single round robin. This is also a reason why the number of wild cards matters, because mediocre teams should rarely make the playoffs. And yes, I'm operating under the assumption that the playoffs are here to stay. I like them for one reason, and one reason only, they correct for scheduling inadequacies of conference/division/derby play.
There's one other assumption that I will operate under, and that's that promotion/relegation will not be a factor in MLS, as no owner will buy into a team that is ever in danger of being relegated. Think about it this way, would you buy a car if there was any chance that a single year would turn it into a bicycle? Didn't think so.
You may have questions as to why the league can't just stop at 22 teams and be a single table as some of the European leagues do. Quite simply it comes down to geography, population density and the nature of MLS as the top league of Canada and the United States of America.
Take a look
That handy little map shows the population density of the lower 48 and Southern Canada. No just visualize for me the current known teams over that. There are 16 that will be playing in 2010 as our Sounders and Philadelphia both join the league. Now think to Garber's short list for the 17th and 18th slots. Visualize even the five most likely to get in next - Vancouver BC, Portland, Montreal, New York 2 and St Louis.
Look back at the map.
Did you notice that there are enormous swaths of population that have absolutely no reason to care about MLS even if they are soccer fans? Even by expanding to 21 teams in the US and Canada the South is devoid of a team. The midwest has three. We'd literally be attempting to have a national league that left half of the nation without a team outside of a day trip to and from a game.
That effects TV ratings, driving them down as there isn't local investment in the product. (link) Locally you can see this in the late growth of baseball in Seattle. It didn't being a dominant option for sports entertainment until a second generation was exposed to the sport locally.
The other effect of gaining a truly national footprint is that the number of youth who grow up thinking they can play professionally increases. That growth is key to long term success of the league, and of the US (and Canadian) National teams.
In short, expansion past 22 teams will happen, because it is the only way the league will truly be a national league and not just pockets of regional interest.
So what's are the solutions to the table v conference dilemma, how do enough games get fitted into the sunny months, and how does the league avoid as many FIFA international dates as possible?
1 - Expand the regular season window. Currently the league's season goes from the last weekend of March through the 3rd week of October. With minimal weather impacts around the league the season could start in the 3rd week in March through the 1st week of November. That 34 week period allows for bye weeks (often matching up with FIFA dates, to include having the Group stages of the Gold Cup and World Cup completely off from league play). Depending on Conference/Division/Derby structure that could even still fit a single game a week strategy.
2 - Shorten the playoff window. Don't play every playoff game on the weekend. Have two match-ups in the Quarterfinals meet for a Wed/Sat Home and Away, and the others on Thurs/Sun. Continue in the Semis. This, combined with the expanded regular season window, would have a season that in total only lasts two more weeks than currently.
3 - Change the SuperLiga qualification. Recognize that this is an exhibition tournament, recognize that by having the teams that qualify for the SL be those that perform the best in preseason action, possibly to include the best performers from MLS in the PanPacific Championship and three other similarly styled tourneys. This would reduce the likelihood that there would be overlap between the SL, the Playoffs and the CCL. In effect it creates a secondary parallel tournament that would be of interest like the League Cup vs the Champions League for the EPL.
4 - Emphasis that the league structure creates the opportunity for the team that wins the regular season or any playoff qualifier to compete in the World Club Cup.
5 - Increase roster depth in order to allow greater ability to compete multiple times in a week in competitions like the US Open Cup/Canadian Championship and the CCL. MLS must prove itself as internationally capable and the relatively compressed schedule that MLS has forces deep rosters. Small changes like growing from 18/10 to 21/15 so that the Developmental Roster can field a full team in a Reserve Match would be a start. Having Developmental players make more than they could by working as a shift supervisor as Starbucks would be kind of necessary in improving depth as well. Small but significant increases in overall player salary could help stem the losses to 4th and 5th tier Euro leagues as well.
With changes like this the league could exist as a national entity with 24/27/30/32 total teams when expansion is all done. The playoff reward would only go to the winners of the Conferences and the next X teams to make 8 total, regardless of team size. What MLS needs to do in its next expansion and scheduling discussion is show that the structure at 16 and 18 and whatever will not be dramatically different than it will as a complete and total league in English speaking North America.
These ideas don't solve every issue facing MLS, but they start to address the multiple layers of competition that make the sport itself so intriguing.
0 recs |
8 comments
Comments
A- A single table is respectable and internationally recognized.
B- Multiple conferences is a joke of a backwater nation.
C- If a single table can only hold 20 teams, (a home and away for each team makes 38 regular season games) This makes it easier to build a second division and eventually promotion/relegation.
by soundersfan on Oct 7, 2008 8:48 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
For a single table to be fair, each team must play every other table twice; once at home and once on the road.
It’s great for other “respectable” but it all comes down to geographic logistics. Plain and simple.
The entire UK is the size of Oregon.
France is smaller than Texas.
Germany about the size of Montana.
Spain, twice the size of Oregon.
Italy? Arizona.
Netherlands? New Jersey times two.
See, these leagues are confined to very small geographic locales compared to the USA. If Sounders FC has to travel to NY twice, New England, Philly, and DC each year you will begin to hear complaints of “time on the road”.
That complaint is impossible to use in any of the European Leagues.
Just look at this map overlay of the US with the continent of Europe. Hopefully, this works…
by GoSounders.com on Oct 7, 2008 9:20 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Still trying (sorry Dave!)
http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/maps/jpg/EUR_THEM_USComparison.jpg
by GoSounders.com on Oct 7, 2008 9:23 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
lame, lame, lame excuses. These leagues formed at a time when transportation was train based. There are planes these days, expand the roster and allow the teams to carry more players.
The conference system does not result with the best team winning. It produces those debates, which conference is better? oh, you play in a weak conference so you are gifted entrance into the playoffs. The single table eliminates this, and don’t give me the bullshit wild card issue. The only reason for the conference is for the playoffs, which I also think should be separated from the Supporter’s Shield. The winner of the league is the winner of the league not some carnival sideshow event at the end of the season.
Hmmn, USL plays in Canada, and Puerto Rico. they are a second division league I would imagine the major league should be able to play in the same geographical region.
by soundersfan on Oct 7, 2008 2:17 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
sounders fan,
I have just a few simple questsions for you;
Which top 25 metropolitan areas should children not grow up in with top flight soccer?
Is the goal of the league to do the following – develop talent for the National Teams, compete on an international scale and turn a profit?
The USL had an unbalanced schedule with a single table. If the schedule had been balanced the USL Sounders likely would not have made the playoffs as they wouldn’t have faced Portland that extra time. I agree that a single table is ideal if a league can truly stop at 18-22 teams. MLS and the USA can’t succeed though if that happens, as huge markets will be without a team within a 4 hour drive. We are literally talking about 10s of millions of people who will never become a fan of the sport because they don’t have a local club in the top flight league. No Country in Europe faces that issue.
by Dave Clark on Oct 7, 2008 6:28 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
If you are suggesting that there are 25 top metropolitan areas without top flight footie, you are assuming 45+ top metropolitan areas? Name me 45+ metropolitan areas.
I am suggesting that the top 20 / soccer friendly metro areas get MLS, and the second level USL, but then you institute a relegation/promotion system. Excellence is rewarded and failure.
I have some concerns about your argument about local teams. How many major league baseball teams are in the northwest?….Seattle, and Seattle only. There are people in eastern Washington who choose Seattle as their home team and they are way more than 4+ hours away, but there are plenty of minor league teams between them and the big city. They still get their baseball fix and every so often might make a trek to Safeco.
The US soccer landscape is currently fractured, MLS at the top and USL off to the side. USL luckily has a decent pyramid started, USL-1, USL-2, PDL, USL-super 20. As separate entities they function independently but if they are integrated, like Drew Carey suggested on the World Soccer Daily show on 9/23.
Oh, and finally, if MLS keeps with the two conference system, I never see MLS expanding beyond 30 teams, MLB has 30 teams and it has been around for 100+ years with a great farm system established I don’t see soccer surpassing that in my lifetime.
by soundersfan on Oct 8, 2008 8:47 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
No, what I am suggesting is that if the league cuts itself off at 22 the following markets with teams in other top level US pro-sports will NOT have an MLS team, thereby hurting the league’s ability to make money, to compete on the international stage and to help the national teams win.
I am not talking about towns like Spokane, or Bend, or Eugene I am talking about major metropolitan areas that will be without the game. Places like Detroit, Miami, Minneapolis, Phoenix, Indianapolis, Tampa, Raleigh, Charlotte, Nashville, New Orleans. I’m not saying that all of these cities deserve MLS, but many of them will have a team at some point, because truly national leagues have more than 20 teams.
Look at the growth patterns of every other team sport league in American history, they didn’t become national until they actually had a national footprint.
The league could get to 36 teams with scheduling creativitiy and a form of conference/division that reduced travel somewhat. Say 4 Conferences of 3 Divisions each with 3 teams. The divisions play 4 games against teams in div, 2 games against other teams in Conference and one game against each team in two of the remaining three conferences. This would be a 38 game season and each team would play every team at least every other year, and would host every league opponent every third year at a minimum.
I actually think that MLS should stop at 27 teams with a similiar model of 3/3/3 for 38 games. Have the “division” or “derby” winner get crowned with a minor cup (Similar to the Cascadia Cup) and have the only guaruntees for playoffs be the Conference winners and then taking the next five best teams.
That structure mitigates the impact of the unbalanced schedule. It also maximizes the importance of the regular season. Starting and ending the season with the division/derby matches would ensure that the season starts with peak attendance and that the season would end with matches that have impact on the playoff picture and allow the maximum attendance from the regional opposition.
Locally, imagine that every year ended with the last two games against PDX and VBC with a cup and a playoff spot on the line? Think about that impact on attendance for the league as it occurs in 8 other regional derbies (and in 2 cases crosstown derbies).
I recommend that Garber at the end of the owner’s meeting announce that MLS will have X teams by its 20th anniversary in 2016 and X by its 25th. Every expansion, scheduling and roster rules decision will be made with those goals in mind and in a manner that ensures the league’s success on the following three tiers (profitability, international performance and national team improvement).
by Dave Clark on Oct 11, 2008 10:12 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
News from today’s NFL games has pointed out something that is a problem with having too many divisions.
It is likely that this season a team that won 68% of its games will not make the playoffs and a 50% team will.
MLS can avoid this mistake by not have tiny divisions (3,4,5 teams). By having Derby/Division/Conference break downs of at least 6 teams competing for an automatic spot it would be extraordinarily unlikely that team’s with GREAT records miss the playoffs.
Or they could go single table and ensure that the league is never national in scope.
by Dave Clark on Dec 21, 2008 12:24 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

by 








