MLS Unbalanced Schedule for 2012, MLS Cup Final Hosted By Highest Remaining Seed
by Dave Clark on Nov 20, 2011 11:16 AM PST
in Major League Soccer: News & Analysis
Email
PrintThat the 2012 Major League Soccer season will be unbalanced comes as little surprise. The surprise is that MLS' Board of Governors decided to go with the least balance they could thereby creating enormous strength of schedule differences both for the overall standings and within the Conference. When MLS Executive Vice-President Nelson Rodriguez says "We have established a fair and compelling format for the 2012 season," one must wonder what the definition of fair is that he's using.
His next statements concerning regional rivalries is quite true.
This regular season will include more games between regional rivals and less total travel than we have seen in recent years. Because of the wide geographic distribution of MLS clubs, this structure should improve the quality of play, while continuing to give every club an equal chance of qualifying for the MLS Cup Playoffs.
And considering that hyperunbalance hasn't killed of the Cascadia Rivalry (despite it being the norm in all but a handful of seasons) MLS attendance and even tv ratings should go up through this move. A dramatic reduction in travel time and distance could even lead to a higher quality of play. In no other soccer league do teams travel as much as MLS. Reducing overall travel could even spur some players to choose to play in some of the more remote cities (say Cascadia?) as this is an issue that looms in other North American sports leagues. There are some positives about the schedule, but the dramatic level of unbalance leads to issues about MLS Cup Playoff qualification.
MLS is attempting to answer that by having the Playoffs be Conference only affairs until the Final. The top three teams from each Conference will advance to the Conference Semis while the 4th and 5th seed compete in the Play-In Round. This is a generally positive change particularly in a lightly unbalanced schedule, except that isn't the schedule they chose. Instead this format will lead to strength of schedule being the primary determinant of playoff entry rather than quality of the team. MLS also moves to eliminate home-field advantage by making the Conference Final a two leg affair. To compensate for that bad idea they then add a great idea by having the MLS Cup Final hosted by the highest remaining seed.
To paraphrase Jeremiah on twitter last night, it seems like every idea related to competitive format that is good was answered with a bad idea as well. Less travel is good. More regional might be good. Hyperunbalanced is bad. MLS Cup Final at highest seed good. Two leg Conference Final is bad.
Read the full press release to see just how convoluted the East schedule is going to be.
MLS Announces Competition Format for 2012Revised Format Provides Greater Reward for Regular Season PerformanceLOS ANGELES (Sunday, Nov. 20, 2011) – Major League Soccer today announced that the competition format for the 2012 regular season and MLS Cup Playoffs. Included in the revised competition format is a change with MLS Cup. Beginning in 2012, the League’s championship will be hosted by the finalist that finished the regular season with the most points in the standings. Complete details are below.CONFERENCES:· The Montreal Impact begins its inaugural MLS season as the League’s 19th team and will be the 10th team in the Eastern Conference. The Western Conference will consist of the same nine clubs as in 2011.REGULAR SEASON:· Each of the 19 MLS clubs will play 34 games, 17 at home and 17 away.o All clubs will play an equal schedule within their respective conference.Western Conference – 24 in-conference + 10 out-of-conference games:· Western Conference clubs will play each West opponent 3 times (24 games):o West clubs will play 4 conference opponents twice at home and once awayo They will play the other 4 conference opponents once at home and twice away.o The home and away games will be reversed in 2013.· Western Conference clubs will play each East opponent once each (10 games):o 5 of these will be at home and 5 will be away.o The East opponents each team faces at home and away will be reversed in 2013.Eastern Conference – 25 in-conference + 9 out-of-conference games:· Eastern Conference clubs will play 25 games against other East clubs:o East teams will play 7 conference opponents three times each (21 games) ando 2 conference opponents twice each (4 games).· Eastern Conference clubs will play each West opponent once each (9 games):o Some will play 4 at home and 5 away while others will play 5 at home and 4 away.o The West opponents each team faces at home and away will be reversed in 2013."We have established a fair and compelling format for the 2012 season," said MLS Executive Vice President Nelson Rodriguez. "This regular season will include more games between regional rivals and less total travel than we have seen in recent years. Because of the wide geographic distribution of MLS clubs, this structure should improve the quality of play, while continuing to give every club an equal chance of qualifying for the MLS Cup Playoffs."MLS CUP PLAYOFFS:· 10 clubs will qualify for the MLS Cup Playoffs – the top five in points from each conference at the end of the regular season.o The 4th- and 5th- place teams will play a single knockout game, the winner of which will advance to the Conference Semifinals and face the 1st-place team in the conference.o The Conference Semifinals will be decided by a two-game, aggregate-goal format (same as 2011).o The Conference Championships will be decided by a two-game, aggregate-goal format (change from recent years).o MLS Cup will be hosted by the finalist that finished the regular season with the most points in the standings.SCHEDULE FOOTPRINT:· The 2012 MLS regular season will begin in March and end in October; specific dates to be announced at a later date.· The 2012 MLS regular season schedule will be announced prior to early February, when it has been announced in recent years."The MLS Cup Playoff format in 2012 gives increased reward to clubs that fare well in the regular season and removes the possibility of clubs winning the opposite conference championship," Rodriguez said. "Having a competitively-determined site for MLS Cup is one of the most exciting improvements our Board of Governors has adopted. We believe this provides every club a tremendous incentive during our regular season and ensures a festive and boisterous setting for our championship game."
235 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Here's a thought
Which five Eastern Conference teams do you want to see here? Which on the road?
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
I want to see Montreal home and away.
Which is why this is BS.
DEF KC in SEA, and Houston in their new stadium.
My preferences
Away – Montreal, KC, Toronto, Houston because I love Canada or want to see the stadiums. And DC because winning at DC doesn’t get old
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
As little travel as possible
Therefore,
Home
New England
Montreal
Philadelphia
NY Red Bulls
DC United
Away
Toronto
Columbus
Chicago
Sporting KC
Houston
Then again, that would mean a lot more travel in 2013, so maybe split it up evenly.
by Randy Meeker on Nov 21, 2011 10:15 AM PST up reply actions
Columbus is actually one of the worst for travel
There are no direct flights from Seattle.
Well this kinda screws the supporters shield
With such a odd mix of home and away games it makes it difficult to make the case anymore that the Supporter’s Shield winner is the best team in MLS.
The SAH Links Guy
Which was also true when there were only 14 teams
And the schedule was unbalanced.
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
How
was the SS handled back when there was only 14 teams?
The same way as it always was
The team with most points after the regular season got it.
agree
Maybe they are trying to diminish the importance of the SS to bring more relevance to the post season and MLS cup. Surely this isn’t about the impact an airpline has on the players performance. I will be sending TFC a X-mas card for making last years mls cup a complete disaster. A positive change resulted. I can’t wait to participate in whatever protest results from the unbalanced schedule decision.
There are very smart people who actually do think the reduced travel will help players
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
So does resting a player a match.
Do you really think that’s what this decision was based on? I don’t. Maybe reduced travel expenses for owners? Maybe an overt attempt to delegitimize the SS? I can only theorize since the Don didn’t elaborate on the other factors.
I can honestly say that other Seattle teams have lost free agent possibilities due to travel
And yes, a primary driver of this decision is to reduce travel
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
Wouldn't
this potentially be easier on travel for Seattle with CCL play if we make it into group stage. Like play an away game like against Dallas or Houston maybe LA before traveling for CCL play?
Houston is in the East
but this does reduce chances of games away to Toronto, New England, Montreal, New York prior to heading down to central America
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
Houston is very lucky
that they were not returned to the Western Conference for the 2012 season. They will certainly be back when the 20th team enters the league. They would have had a much tougher road to the MLS Cup final had they been in the Western Conference this year.
by Randy Meeker on Nov 21, 2011 10:21 AM PST up reply actions
I know I'm in the minority here...
…but I actually enjoy the East Coast games. Gives a good opportunity to travel to away games, rack up a few miles on the way. Who knows what 2012 has in store for personal/work travel though, so I’m not terribly broken up.
#ThoughtsFromMyGulfstream
Home & Home for playoffs
Finally a change I like. The play-in isn’t needed, but it’s a way to expand from 8 to 10 which just seems like a cash grab to me.
Two legs removes importance of regular season
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
Regular season delivers higher seed
Which gets home field advantage in 2nd leg.
Home-home doesn’t remove the importance, but it may diminish it slightly.
Homefield advantage is worth nearly half a goal
That’s gone unless there is a tie.
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
On the bright side, tw games diminishes individual match luck
I still want to see the best-of-three playoff format, though. Higher seed gets twice the amount of time at home, more if it goes to extra time, and there’s enough minutes played that the match is less likely to be unduly swayed by luck.
MLS has to bow to the eurosnobs on the one thing they’re catastrophically wrong about and completely ignore them when they’re right…
.
MLS has to bow to the eurosnobs on the one thing they’re catastrophically wrong about and completely ignore them when they’re right…
How are the Eurosnobs catastrophically wrong on the two-leg game issue? I think it’s a fantastic method of eliminating home-field advantage in cups where there is no regular-season buildup. Now, if you mean for the MLS, that’s a different story…
I met a possum.
by s0merand0mdude on Nov 20, 2011 3:46 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
"eurosnobs"
“eurosnobs” are those that turn their nose up at MLS or their local club in favor of BIRGing with an elite European team.
the people you seem to be referring to are what I call “American soccer-football fans”
...and you will hear us scream
by malcontentjake on Nov 20, 2011 5:12 PM PST up reply actions
Don't get caught up in the verbiage...
I met a possum.
by s0merand0mdude on Nov 20, 2011 5:34 PM PST up reply actions
so you're saying I'm a "eurosnob"
I call myself a “Supporter”
...and you will hear us scream
by malcontentjake on Nov 20, 2011 9:05 PM PST up reply actions
They've done a lot of things that diminish the regular season
Having playoffs is the biggest of those. This is minor in comparison.
There will need to be a change to how the Cascadia Cup is awarded
The last time a similar schedule existed it was the final two home/away games between the teams.
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
In 2008 the Cup was awarded not on overall record
But based on performance in final two matches.
So why are you disagreeing?
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
What am I missing
In 2008 the clubs reverted back to playing each other an equal three times each. The Cascadia Cup competition once again included all scheduled regular season USL-1 matches played between the three rivals.
3 games against PDX, 3 against VAN. That makes 6.
It didn't though
Seriously. Not according to the groups that came up with the trophy. They held a vote.
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
Odd, that the scheduled number of games between Cascadia teams in 2007 and 2008 was the same
and yet awarding of the trophy was different.
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
Yes, it was handled differently in 2008 than in 2007
Nobody seemed to like the 2007 decision to remove matches from the Cascadia Cup.
In 2009 we won SJ twice and lost once
But SJ won the Heritage Cup, because one of our wins did not count. Sigi was so confused in his post match comments.
That would actually work for me in the Cascadia Cup, with one small change.
The winner would be based on the final home/away games, with the first tiebreaker being the result of the first game.
by Agent_J on Nov 20, 2011 4:14 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
For it to matter, it would be nice to see the Impact, Timbers, and Whitecaps participate
As well as the Cosmos if they ever come to fruition. It would be fun to have NASL throw-back kit nights like the old ABA and AFL teams do in the NBA and NFL.
I think all 6 should count
Larger sample size means the better team (Sounders) should win out more easily than, say, this year. I could care less if we go to Jeld-Wen twice. We’ll just have to beat the trees twice.
And yes, the team playing 2 in Vancouver instead of Portland might have an advantage. But as a college football fan I live with the fact that every other year my team has to go on the road with just one game to try and win a rivalry trophy.
Writer: CougCenter Twitterer: @Grady_WSU
Something bad just occurred to me
There is nothing that says that MLS will no schedule these such that one team plays 4 Cascadia away matches and the other two play just 2 away matched.
Nothing stopping them,
But I suspect the league will take this into account when making the schedules. We’ll see, I guess.
Let's say the Sounders play 4 away Cascadia matches this year
Then they would get 4 home matches in 2013.
But as Tohoya wrote, the league will hopefully schedule 3 home and away Cascadia matches for each club.
honestly
i am not surprised MLS would go this route. It was eventually going to happen at some point.
I agree that MLS was going to an unbalanced schedule, but disagree as to the implementation
But no where did it say it had to be so unbalanced.
They could have gone the route of keeping 2x games against teams in your own conference and then 1 or 2 games against teams in the other conference. When the league got big enough, you’d be at 2x against your own conference and 1x against the other conference(s).
Two-legged conference finals are a good thing, IMO
I’d rather see the best team move on then the one that had a hot March-July.
I met a possum.
by s0merand0mdude on Nov 20, 2011 12:19 PM PST reply actions
After seeing how the Sounders were rewarded by starting on the road in the playoffs
I understand the desire people have to eliminate two-legged playoff rounds.
If you want to reward the higher seed, single elimination home games or aggregate 3 game series would better reward the better regular season team.
March-July are still part of the regular season.
I want no part of 3 games series
The more matches we add, the less meaningful each match becomes. I really enjoy the one and done nature of the NFL playoffs. Garber loves to emulate the NFL. This is actually one area where I wish he would do it the NFL way.
As a fan, I want each round to be a single leg. It’s more exciting and the need for two legs (from a competitive perspective) is zero. I know two legs allows every team to host a playoff match, but I think that honor should be earned, and not just handed out to a team that finished with 20 fewer points than the winner of the Supporters Shield.
by Randy Meeker on Nov 21, 2011 10:32 AM PST up reply actions
In a single match playoff the role of chance/luck is too high
But I also want no part of 3 game series.
Why not?
It gives home field advantage and smooths out individual match variance.
Because
I disagree that smoothing out individual match variance is a good thing.
Think the Sounders v RSL series for example. It would not be a good thing if the Sounders could have gotten away with having a disastrous showing in the first match. A complete collapse needs to hurt more than a one goal loss after a tightly fought match.
I like the idea of 3-game aggregate series,
Which I think answers your concern while still mitigating luck
Now that would be an interesting idea
Not sure what to think about it. Wonder if it has ever been done anywhere?
Early MLS did first to 5 points in 3 games
that’s the closest.
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
Still helps teams that lose 4-0
I met a possum.
by s0merand0mdude on Nov 21, 2011 5:13 PM PST up reply actions
Playoffs
They do 7 games in basketball and baseball and every game is very tense and exciting.
I think a 3 game series, even for the final, makes the playoffs epic. MLS right now is trying to please everyone. The “don’t make the regular season less important because it is fair” crowd and me the “love the playoffs because they are exciting” guy. They really need to chose. The other side will get over it eventually.
Don't you mean March-October?
The team that played the best throughout the season deserves an advantage.
by Randy Meeker on Nov 21, 2011 10:27 AM PST up reply actions
Hyperlame
The Western Conference team(s) that end up with lots of these…
- at Colorado twice
- at Salt Lake twice
- at Portland twice
(or basically having to play twice at any venue where the home team dramatically outperforms their road form)
… are going to be at a huge disadvantage when it comes to seeding in the playoffs. Now that the highest seed gets homefield advantage all the way through MLS Cup, the integrity of both MLS Cup and Supporters Shield are tainted by this scheduling change.
The schedule change is going to help the Eastern teams not look as pathetic compared to the West teams
As they did this year. They will be able to put up similar point totals and may be advantaged for the SS just because they get to play a weaker schedule.
That may be one of the biggest reasons for the change
Garber and the MLS front office don’t like seeing the big market teams struggling. Playing Chicago, Toronto, Montreal three times a year and only playing Seattle, LA, RSL once each year ensures that teams in the East will have a better shot at more respectable records. It sounds like a conspiracy theory, but I think it was a major factor for the change (after travel).
by Randy Meeker on Nov 21, 2011 10:36 AM PST up reply actions
This was the wrong time to insist on the highest seed hosting the MLS Cup
In this format the neutral site should be preferred when you now have incommensurable records.
-Ben R.
This makes me nauseous
I know it’s just hyperbole in the heat of the moment, but I’m not even sure I’m going to be watching the Sounders next year
It's just so dispriting to see this team underachieve thanks to the league format
It’s been bad enough to see us bounced from the playoffs these past few years by playing teams significantly better than they should have to play, thanks to their being in a stronger conference, but at least that was only one tournament at the end of the season. Now we’ve gotta deal with that bullshit all year long? We’re not even going to be able to get a decent readon the strengths of the various teams or conferences thanks to this.
Oh well, at least the USOC format is still ridiculously stacked in our favor.
I don't like the unbalance either, but this is just going too far.
These things are cyclical. Eventually the east will be better.
by Aaron Campeau on Nov 20, 2011 1:16 PM PST up reply actions
Are new owners on the way for NYRB, TFC, NE, and DCU?
Otherwise I don’t see the East as a whole being better than the West any time in the near future.
History
Just four years ago LA was one of the worst teams in the league and Eastern teams were dominating. LA did not make the playoffs in 2006-2008, and finished 11th (of 13) in 2007 and 13th (of 14) in 2008.
I bet the current domination of LA and the West was not seen by many back then either.
That is obviously true
That’s the problem of the American conference based sports model.
No guarantee they'll be as good next year.
I hear LA may have to replace one of their midfielders in the offseason. I think it was mentioned 5000 times last night.
Bloggin' at JoePasDoghouse.com
I also heard..
that this David Beckham guy may or may not be back.
DCU's ownership isn't bad
The current owner is actually quite good. He’s picked a decent group for the Front Office and is generally hands off. The problem is he doesn’t have big pockets since his two co-owners left after they didn’t secure city funds for a stadium.
That’s DCU’s biggest problem. They need to get out of RFK and have no support from the city to do so. They’ve been open about looking for another owner to join the group that would have more funds to help get a stadium deal done.
The SAH Links Guy
Very true, I should have written ownership/stadium situation as the stadium/money is DCU's problem
TFC also seems to be on a road back to respectability if they keep Winter and let him build the team back up.
This is not really accurate
We do not compete against Eastern Conference teams for playoff spots, and each Western Conference team has to play as many matches against Western teams as we do.
by AAAA on Nov 20, 2011 1:19 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
That doesn't change the fact that Eastern conference teams have a significantly easier time of qualifying for the playoffs
or winning the shield thanks to their conference affiliation.
What? No, they wont.
Maybe the Shield, but most assuredly not making the playoffs.
by Aaron Campeau on Nov 20, 2011 1:28 PM PST up reply actions
That depends on the point of view
I suppose you are saying that in the east 5 of 10 teams go to playoffs, and in the west it is 5 of 9, making it easier for western teams.
But wouldn’t you say that if the Sounders were moved to the east, they’d have an easier time getting into the playoffs because the teams there are weaker than in the west?
Say you're a Houston fan right now
And your conference affiliation is up in the air. If you’re only concerned about qualifying for the playoffs and winning it, which conference do you want to be in?
The answer is easily the East. Take the same team and plunk them in one conference or another, and it’s clear that they’ll have an easier time of qualifying in th East. The teams you have to beat in order to get into the playoffs are weaker.
If you're a bad team you have a better chance of making the playoffs
But then you’re also a bad team.
Writer: CougCenter Twitterer: @Grady_WSU
Not all teams in the east are necessarily bad
If you are a good team in a conference where most other teams are bad, the conference based system gives you an easy route to the MLS Cup Final.
These things are cyclical.
Just because the West has had a better record in the past two years doesn’t mean it will be the same next year. Most years MLS is fairly balanced by conference. In 2008 the East was the more challenging conference.
Bloggin' at JoePasDoghouse.com
And oh yeah, Eastern conference teams will also
Have an easier time of making it to the cup final, especially now that there’s no conference switching.
But those were always true as long as we have conferences
See 2011 MLS season for an example.
Not to the same extent
Cross-conference playoff seeding, made possible by the balanced schedule, at least ameliorated the problem.
I stopped at hyperbole
which makes me happy
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
hyperbole probably understates that
Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.
by Jeremiah Oshan on Nov 20, 2011 4:23 PM PST up reply actions
yeah me too. In fact I may not be able to watch sports at all anymore
I am going to give it a week before I decide if life is still worth living.
to be fair
I learned a while ago to not waste my time watching regular-season NHL games… and once upon a time the Canucks were my favorite professional sports team…
jus’ sayin’
...and you will hear us scream
by malcontentjake on Nov 20, 2011 9:32 PM PST up reply actions
Oddly, I didn't mention this
but part of why they are doing this is to honor the FIFA dates for qualifiers and friendlies.
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
except now Garber now says the might not be able to do that
Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.
by Jeremiah Oshan on Nov 20, 2011 4:29 PM PST up reply actions
The math is really bad
everybad every team has a “fair and equal chance” of making the playoffs? There is going to be 10 teams in one conference and 9 in the other, yet 5 teams from each conference get in. Seems to me teams in the 9 team conference have an advantage just by simple probability.
by PeterJH on Nov 20, 2011 1:05 PM PST via mobile reply actions
Until the 20th team arrives, sure.
After that, a team in the inferior division has a great advantage.
I still think the MLS Cup should be a home-and-home aggregate
It’s fair, it gives both teams a marquee game for ticket sales AND it adds more premium content for television.
Writer: CougCenter Twitterer: @Grady_WSU
Actually I should say home-and-away
Higher seed hosts the second game.
Writer: CougCenter Twitterer: @Grady_WSU
Ask the World Series how it does when competing with the Super Bowl.
Or March Madness, for that matter.
I met a possum.
by s0merand0mdude on Nov 20, 2011 3:39 PM PST up reply actions
Fair and playoffs should not be in the same thought process
Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.
by Jeremiah Oshan on Nov 20, 2011 4:30 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Two games instead of one means less excitement and buildup
One match is straight forward. Just win. In two leg matches, a lot of teams play more conservatively in the first leg. If it’s just one match, all bets are off. There’s a reason why the most respected tournaments in the world have one leg finals.
by Randy Meeker on Nov 21, 2011 11:08 AM PST up reply actions
How about Don threatening to walk out.
I’ve generally supported Garber’s job but that was out of place.
He was constantly booed and interrupted with catcalls
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
that is so full of win
to hear that warms my heart
...and you will hear us scream
by malcontentjake on Nov 20, 2011 2:15 PM PST up reply actions
Yes, the best way to get your way is to treat people like crap
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
by Dave Clark on Nov 20, 2011 2:29 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
sometimes, yeah
people in positions of power need to have their authority questioned. I didn’t hold a gun to Garber’s head and tell him to accept a mult-million dollar salary to be a professional sports league commissioner. Unfortunately, in these types of relationships, where one man (and his regime) holds all the cards, often the act of shaming that person can be very effective.
...and you will hear us scream
by malcontentjake on Nov 20, 2011 2:31 PM PST up reply actions
There are ways to question authority professionally and there are ways to do it unproffesionally.
One is likely to help your cause. One is a way to hurt it.
hmmmm...
and yet, there are times angry outbursts are perfectly legitimite…
sometimes its messy, so what, let your balls drop; if folks like Garber can’t handle it then they can get out of the business…
...and you will hear us scream
by malcontentjake on Nov 20, 2011 3:02 PM PST up reply actions
or they can stop granting special access to people who don't appreciate it
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
"don't appreciate it"?!
a quote from a friend’s message board post on an un-related topic (the third kits) actually sums up my feelings on that statement:
“I think among Sounders fans there is also a severe lack of a sense of ownership of the club. How often have you heard somebody say that the FO can do whatever they want and the fans should not whine if they don’t like it. Yeah: very often.”
and that’s just it… we DO appreciate it, and that is why we speak out. Garber knows this, and we know that Garber knows this. It’s not always going to be holding hands and singing “Kumbaya”, and if anyone believes otherwise they are just being naive…
...and you will hear us scream
by malcontentjake on Nov 20, 2011 3:25 PM PST up reply actions
One can disagree
and still allow someone to finish their own statement. I’ve never asked for Kumbaya, just treating people with respect and in partnership around the game.
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
Normally I'd agree
But in this case, I feel like voicing displeasure worked better than what everyone has been doing for the last several months since we heard unbalanced schedules were unlikely.
This coming from a guy that thinks Garber is the best commissioner in American sports .
I really don't think anything is wrong with booing
and I’m a pretty reasonable person, I think.
Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.
by Jeremiah Oshan on Nov 20, 2011 4:32 PM PST up reply actions
You seem to miss the distinction between winning a debate and merely outshouting your opponent.
Screaming at someone you disagree with is not “shaming them”, at least not from the viewpoint of anyone with an ounce of intelligence. Interrupting someone and preventing them from stating their case gives the impression that you couldn’t properly rebut it and certainly does not make you look intelligent yourself.
What you describe as “getting messy” seems to just mean acting juvenile. Kind of like claiming anyone who disagrees with you has yet to hit puberty. It’s not the type of statement that will make anyone gain respect for you or your position.
Sounders 'til I die
by SounderJunkie on Nov 21, 2011 2:26 PM PST up reply actions
I don't think we are talking about outshouting or not letting somebody make their point
In a speech to an audience setting giving applause to indicate approval and booing to indicate disapproval can be quite effective and useful.
Such a procedure is actually common in many national parliaments. The UK parliament is a great example.
And one might argue
a few cat calls is professional and throwing a shoe at him is unprofessional.
if we hurt Garber's feelings
he can cry himself to sleep tonight on his giant pillow stuffed with money from his obscene $3+ Million /year salary while many of the rest of us struggle to find full-time living-wage jobs in our occupational fields we have 10+ years experience in…
we are the 99%
(we are also the fun%, and we are organized… we are the fun mafia!)
;-)
...and you will hear us scream
by malcontentjake on Nov 20, 2011 2:38 PM PST up reply actions
I think it's legitimate
to make him feel the intensity of fan opposition to the status quo as well as some of the changes he has made. I also think he should be applauded for the good decisions he’s made.
I don’t think it’s legitimate to heckle him just because he’s the commissioner and you want to “stick it to the man”. $3 million is actually very reasonable for his position, considering the unique challenges the league faces (in comparison to other American sports leagues). This isn’t politics. This is sports. While I agree with your particular political viewpoint, I don’t think a soccer league is the appropriate outlet. Besides, he’s not like a Wall Street executive making hundreds of times more than his employees. In fact, there are many MLS employees that make more than him.
That being said, I would boo him over the heavily unbalanced schedule, too many teams in the playoffs, two leg conference finals and semifinals. I would applaud him for most of the rest of what he has done. I definitely prefer 2011 MLS to 1999 MLS (when he became commissioner).
by Randy Meeker on Nov 21, 2011 11:21 AM PST up reply actions
no, it's clearly to sit by quietly and hope the other side capitulates to your warm gestures
Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.
by Jeremiah Oshan on Nov 20, 2011 4:31 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
No other league commissioner does what Garber just did
Why should he do it again if this is going to be how he’s treated?
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
because he knows he needs to
he doesn’t have the luxury of mistreatment that have been heaped upon fans by the NFL, NBA, MLB of the world. He knows he runs a niche sport and those people booing him are the most ardent fans in that niche
to quote Lisa Simpson: they have the Plant, but we have the Power
...and you will hear us scream
by malcontentjake on Nov 20, 2011 5:15 PM PST up reply actions
basically this
Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.
by Jeremiah Oshan on Nov 20, 2011 6:00 PM PST up reply actions
Barf
Why is it so hard? 36 games 18 home and 18 away. Sold!
The league
can’t keep on adding more and more games to the schedule.
Its not easy oh lets add 2 more games to each team more games and call it good.
They have other stuff that has to be taken into account like Open cup, CCL, Fifa dates never mind NFL, CFL and College football towards the end of the season.
They can't keep doing it indefinitely
But I don’t think they’ve reached the point at which they can’t afford to add two more matches. I think you can’t do it after the league expands beyond 20 teams. This could easily be fixed by eliminating the second leg from the conference semifinals and finals, not to mention the play in games. This option makes way more sense than the unbalanced format they’re switching to.
I think once the league expands beyond 20 teams, we’ll be looking at divisions of 5 or 6 teams each. This should make unbalanced schedules easier to do, and we won’t be able to complain about the lack of unbalanced schedules anymore because the league will be too big.
I also think Garber might see expansion as a way to build soccer up to the point at which promotion and relegation would be possible. If we get to where other pro sports leagues are now, we could create a second division of MLS that could possibly absorb the remaining USL Pro/NASL teams into a true second division of US soccer, in which all teams would be ready for promotion to a 17, 18, 19 or even 20 team MLS first division league.
by Randy Meeker on Nov 21, 2011 11:31 AM PST up reply actions
I like it.
If it saves the team two trips to the east coast, great! Now if we qualified outright into group play of CCL, that would save us two games AND a trip to central america.
That could add up to over 10,000 miles less traveled depending on who and where they’d be playing. Which would be a very good thing.
I don’t get the hand-wringing about this though. Yeah, the East is the weaker division by far, FOR NOW. The transfer window comes pretty quickly and you may see some marginal teams get a whole lot better fast.
Every team has to play by the same rules, and really, no matter how you schedule anything, it comes down to one simple thing. Win your games.
Do that and the format is irrelevant.
by DaveValleDrinkNight on Nov 20, 2011 2:46 PM PST reply actions 5 recs
+1
Few people remember that in 2008 the eastern conference had 5 of 8 teams in the playoffs, ultimately things balance out, and the best remedy to a temporary disadvantage in a parity league is getting good results.
by Karlito Vargas on Nov 20, 2011 3:27 PM PST up reply actions
i'm
happy that they finally solved one of the issues i had with the playoffs.
Req'd
I was skimming through the comments about to say something very similar. The balanced schedule could have probably been limped along for another season or two, but as the league expands to 20 and beyond, the balanced schedule idea has a limited shelf life in MLS. Glad to see them bight the bullet on this one and just move on. I honestly think the quality of play will improve with teams having to travel less. I can live without seeing NY every season (and Eastern teams can live without seeing LA every season).
Less controversially, I’m glad to see the conference finals turned into 2 legged series. I’d love to see the away goals rule used as well, but you take what you can get.
With the MLSCup being played at the higher seed, a couple of questions arise. What if SJ has to host (10,000 capacity currently)? What if Seattle has to host and the Seahawks already have a game scheduled? Can things like the supporters summit be scheduled and planned on 1-2 weeks notice?
Simple solutions
Each MLS team will be required to reserve their stadium for a potential MLS Cup final.
Cities with small stadiums can reserve an alternative larger stadium. For example, San Jose has played some home matches in bigger stadiums than Buck Shaw. This season they played their regular season match against the Red Bulls in Stanford Stadium with over 40,000 in attendance.
Just watched this
First few seconds of this segment: http://www.mlssoccer.com/videos?catid=112&id=21232
Garber says they’d play the final at Buck Shaw if San Jose wins SS and makes the final. How emberassing it would be for the league if that were to happen.
San Jose gets a new, larger stadium soon
I’m more concerned about teams like Columbus or Dallas filling their stadiums in a cup final.
by Randy Meeker on Nov 21, 2011 11:34 AM PST up reply actions
would have rather seen mls really "bight" the bullet and go to divisions
Play three games in division (9-12 games), two games against in-conference, out of division (8-10 games). That leaves 15 games to play out of conference games. Enough to preserve home-and-away rivalries for random teams. Plus, it preps us for 20 teams.
Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.
by Jeremiah Oshan on Nov 20, 2011 10:01 PM PST up reply actions
Ouch
Jeremiah, I would really appreciate it if you’d add spell check to the sight. At least I’d stop embarrassing myself. “bright” fail.
Regional Conferences, Regional Divisions, either way is fine. The goal was to reduce travel and fit the calendar. That results in 34 games again, no more balanced schedule, and more regional games. I’m okay with this.
If you use Chrome, enable the built-in spellcheck
Works in all text fields. Link
by lemonverbena on Nov 21, 2011 8:33 AM PST up reply actions
so you really don't like home-field advantage do you?
Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.
by Jeremiah Oshan on Nov 20, 2011 10:03 PM PST up reply actions
Wait, wait, wait
Either I’m misunderstanding something, or you are. As far as I understand, we’ll still have 17 home games. What home field advantage have we lost with these changes?
Are you alluding to some eventuality that we won’t be able (or won’t be likely) to earn home field advantage in the playoffs as a result of this? Are you saying that the away goals rule takes away any home field advantage? Or, are you saying that a 2 game series has no home field advantage, so the changes have removed that? I need more context for your question.
Home field advantage was reduced by making Conference Finals two-legs
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
On the last point about stadium conflicts.
I think Grant Wahl mentioned on twitter that they’re considering scheduling the 2012 MLS Cup on a Tuesday night to eliminate conflicts.
Bloggin' at JoePasDoghouse.com
MLS Final conflicting with Sunday Night Football = yuck ratings
by lemonverbena on Nov 21, 2011 8:34 AM PST up reply actions
And Tuesday is usually a pretty decent day for ratings
MLB aims to have games 1/2 and 6/7 of the WS during the week, rather than the weekend, to boost ratings.
With the changes to the rule guiding who hosts
Black Friday could be explored. Attendance would be fine. Competition is lighter than Saturday and Sunday in November.
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
That could work, too
I’m not sure it would be a great day for ratings, but it might be worth looking into. My worry would be that general sports fans are likely to only spend a fraction of their day watching television, and there are usually a bunch of college football games that day.
I'd prefer ONLY playing West teams over this split.
After they get to 20 teams, it might be time to divide the conferences permanently, and have each league go for 20 teams again. Kitsap could be one of the new pro teams.
That'll
never work. I just don’t see that many teams willing to spend a couple hundred million or so for a 20k+ stadium to were they may or may not get close to hitting in attendance. Same reason why pro/reg won’t work either.
10 years ago, 19 teams seemed like wishful thinking
If all you need is a city big enough to get ~20K for 17-19 home games a year, and you get the US and Canada, plus you double up in LA, NY, SF/Oak/SJ, and maybe Chicago, then it’s not that hard to get to 30-40 teams by, say, 25-30 years from now.
if the markets
were like NCAA football cities i can see it happen.
I don't see any reason to expand that far
But I do kinda like the idea of separating the conferences from each other in the regular season. Make each conference championship like a sort of mini-Supporter’s Shield.
Even better if paired with a group stage playoff system that mixes up the conferences (something like W1, E2, W3, EWC in one group and E1, W2, E3, WWC in the other), to maximize the excitement of interconference play.
I like it too...
basically it is old school MLB.
This is a lot to digest...
and there are many pieces to this that are just not what I would have chosen, so I’ll hold my judgements for now until I have a chance to metabolize.
One thing I am excited about: this guarantees us a chance to host the MLS Cup finals next year. As great as it’s been to witness winning the USOC final live in person, being part of us hosting, playing in, and winning the MLS Cup final at home in 2012 is going to be SWEET!!!
supporters shield is now a two year deal really
The schedule is balanced home and away if you look at the two season schedule as one whole. The shield is diminished for sure, but america is a play-off crazy country, and I like more rested players, better play and less injuries. Now, gotta have new turf! How many hawks and sounders are going have to get hurt out there? ugh!
Club World Cup Champions 2012
it's not balanced after two years
you’d still have played six games against your conference and two against the other conference
I met a possum.
by s0merand0mdude on Nov 20, 2011 5:43 PM PST up reply actions
Obviously we need a RPI (or BCS) type system!
That will fix everything. :)
The SAH Links Guy
by Dizzo on Nov 20, 2011 5:19 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
sidereal will be providing a strength of schedule tracker
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
by Dave Clark on Nov 20, 2011 5:21 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
funny that you bring that up
biggest reason for resistance for playoffs: the “every game matters” argument
which makes perfect sense, until you realize that major-college tackle-football has an incredibly short season and absurdly unbalanced schedules…
...and you will hear us scream
by malcontentjake on Nov 20, 2011 5:23 PM PST up reply actions
well, yeah, that was implied... I'm confused now
as season length and schedule balance increases, need for playoffs to determine champion decreases.
this is an argument I have been making for 2 years. It seems pretty simple to me…
...and you will hear us scream
by malcontentjake on Nov 20, 2011 9:10 PM PST up reply actions
Student athletes + frequent concussions = win!
FYI – Last two posts may involve heavy sarcasm. :)
Aside from an occasional Huskie game I almost never watch college football. I’m much more of a college basketball fan.
The SAH Links Guy
Having moved to New York
I was really excited to do the circuit of Away games in NY, Philly, DC, and Boston. Now I may not get to see the Sounders at all. For that completely personal reason I’m pissed.
I also think the format sucks in terms of having a meaningful and fair league. Seems like they really want New York to win an MLS Cup.
-Ben R.
sorry didn't see this..
basically the same point I make down below
by BaltimoreIslander on Nov 20, 2011 6:47 PM PST up reply actions
If MLS is hell-bent on a 34-game season (which makes sense, all things considered)
They should’ve done it this way:
*Balanced home-and-away against all teams in your conference (16 or 18 games)
*Unbalanced schedule missing a home and an away game against two different teams from the opposite conference (16 to 18 games)
*Playoff qualification entirely off of in-conference points
This makes it so each conference is distinctly separate yet allows for plenty of inter-conference play. It also removes SOS from the question of playoffs qualification. However, this means that, for Western conference teams, over half of your games do not matter, so I don’t like that entirely. It’s still the only way to eliminate SOS as a factor in the playoffs.
I met a possum.
it's a fun idea, I guess
But no pro league anywhere does it anything like that.
Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.
by Jeremiah Oshan on Nov 20, 2011 6:02 PM PST up reply actions
Nor do I really want them to, in the end.
I met a possum.
by s0merand0mdude on Nov 20, 2011 6:04 PM PST up reply actions
It's still more fair
than the shit they’re doing now. 3 years ago we played Chivas 3 time, the 1 team we couldn’t beat.
-Ben R.
missing something?
What would the point of the out of conference games be then? It seems like they would essentially be 16 freindlies.
No, I said so
However, this means that, for Western conference teams, over half of your games do not matter, so I don’t like that entirely.
I met a possum.
by s0merand0mdude on Nov 20, 2011 9:53 PM PST up reply actions
Huge
I am not the only one on this site and I am in the majority. Having looked up to see how much to fly to Toronto and LA. Where to stay, can I get a vacation, etc ?
In a way, don’t you WANT you conference to be the strongest, so that when you win it you host tonights game that year ? I hope it is next year. Please be next year.
It does not go like that
Your conference might be stronger, but if the weaker one has one or two good teams, those teams can easily get more points than you in the regular season, and therefore get to host the MLS Cup Final if they make it there.
yes and no
You are correct, if it one strong team and the rest weak, but I don’t see that happening to a huge degree because there is still parity.
So, the West still play Eastern teams, so if they are stronger, they will have more points after winning those games.
As a Sounders fan in Baltimore
this severely limits the opportunities that I will have to see the Sounders live next year
pretty bummed about this. At least I knew they’d be in DC, Philly, NY (reachable destinations for me) once throughout the year.. but gotta figure the MLS isn’t trying to please fans of west coast teams that live on the east coast.
by BaltimoreIslander on Nov 20, 2011 6:46 PM PST reply actions
I do not like this new format
24 games in our conference and 10 against east? To all due respect to local rivalries, I do not want to watch Vancouver or Timbers more than two times per season. When is one home and one away, it is like some kind of holiday, you are waiting for it. When you play them more times, it becomes just one of the games. Plus, local rivalry games are the toughest to win, so this format does not benefit any of PNW teams.
The great benefit of the previous league schedule and playoff format was that it meant that the results of each MLS game affected in some way the fortunes of everyone else. It kept the fans of one team invested in what was happening in the league as a whole. There was a reason for a Sounder fan to watch an early season DC – Philadelphia game, even if you didn’t care about either team, because both teams would show up in Seattle at some point, and both teams were competing with the Sounders for a playoff spot. Later in the year, after the Sounders had pretty much clinched the playoffs, games involving New York, KC, Houston and DC still mattered because there was the possibility the Sounders would play them in the first or second round of the playoffs. To a Timbers fan, a late season game between Columbus and Toronto mattered a lot. Under the new schedule and playoff format, it’s hard to see a Columbus – Toronto game mattering to anyone in the northwest ever again.
It’s almost as if MLS split into two leagues. Take a look at Toronto – they will play 9 games against the west, 25 versus the east, 26 percent. That’s not much more than the Blue Jays will play against the National League. With that kind of imbalance, and the fact that none of the results of the west inter-conference games will matter to Toronto’s playoff drive, why should anyone in Toronto care who wins a RSL – Seattle game? Why should a Sounder fan care who wins a New York – Philly game? It’s like the American League – National League setup, with the downside that only the hardcore care enough about the other league to watch it.
Maybe some sort of imbalance was necessary, as the league expands, but from a league interest and season-ticket holder standpoint we’re getting too much at once. Almost half the Sounders home games (8/17) are going to be against four teams. Almost a quarter of the games, and probably most of the games in the last couple months, are going to be reruns, teams we’ve seen already. (I expect a lot of bailing by season-ticket holders in my section, a lot of selling on the secondary market.) It’s possible for the Sounders to play the Galaxy 7 or 8 times in 2012 (2 or 3 in the league, 2 in playoffs, 2 in ccl, 1 in open cup), and probable for them to play the entire east only 10 times total.
by drax on Nov 21, 2011 1:48 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
this ^^^
MLS has just given me permission to tune out half the League for all but 1/4 of the games. These last two season I’ve kept single-table spreadsheets and obsessively tracked the PPM and where teams are trending. Now, do I have ANY reason to give a shit about the East except for when we play those teams?
As an STH holder I LOVED the idea that we were going ot get to see EVERY team come onto our grounds. It’s a GOOD THING to have a disappointing draw at home to your biggest rival stick in your craw for 2 months before you get to play them on the road. The fact you only have 1 shot at home and one away is what makes it so intense [less is more, people]
...and you will hear us scream
by malcontentjake on Nov 21, 2011 9:22 AM PST up reply actions
How does this effect CCL tiebreaking procedures.
Because we just went through this and got into the group stage, what will happen next year? It would not be very fair to keep the same procedure when everyone plays such a different schedual.
On that same topic.
Since the SS becomes so diluted by this new procedure, should they still get a Group Stage CCL bid?
What if both the group stage bids went to MLS cup finalists? (Both conference champs), Should the re-structured Open cup get a group stage bid.
My vote is this:
Group stage: West and East Conference champs
Prelim stage: Open Cup Winner, SS winner
What do you think?
I think it makes the most sense...
…to give one spot to the best record in the West, one spot to the best record in the East, one to the USOC winner, and one to the MLS Cup winner. I’d send the best record in the West and the best record in the East straight to the group stage—this would be very similar to how Mexico sends the winners of the Apertura/Clausura straight to the group stage. MLS Cup and USOC winners go to the prelims.
Except that in Mexico they do not give any CCL berths based on regular season performance
They have playoffs in both Apertura and Clausura, and the two winners of the playoffs get the group stage berths and the two runners-up get the preliminary round berths.
One item that concerns me greatly:
o MLS Cup will be hosted by the finalist that finished the regular season with the most points in the standings.
What if the teams have the same number of points? Normally I would assume you would go with head-to-head record, but with a single game played it would provide a decided advantage to the team that hosted the match. Also, what if the result of that game was a draw? Whatever decision at that point would be largely arbitrary—and we’re talking about a MAJOR benefit for one side in hosting the cup.
Bloggin' at JoePasDoghouse.com
ding, ding, ding
Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.
by Jeremiah Oshan on Nov 21, 2011 8:55 AM PST up reply actions
My solution. Play it exactly halfway between the two stadiums.
The 2012 MLS Cup between Kansas City and Seattle should be played in Southwest Wyoming.
Bloggin' at JoePasDoghouse.com
Why not just use GD or something?
I’m not sue why the tiebreaker rules are more intractable here than they are elsewhere.
One other option would be to use an SoS indicator
In the event of a point tie, figure out which conference did better in interconference play. Then you know which team played the better schedule and which deserves the home field advantage.
That could be a good tiebreaker
It would be pretty straightforward, too: what is the W/L record in East vs. West games?
Head-to-head
Surely head-to-head is the most widely used first tie-breaker.
Again, with only one game it's most likely that the regular season home team would host the final.
It should be more than just a quirk of scheduling that determines who hosts a final.
The best solution would be a 2-leg final.
Bloggin' at JoePasDoghouse.com
by J.Schnauzer on Nov 21, 2011 12:33 PM PST up reply actions
I totally agree
I was just commenting on the claim that “tiebreaker rules are more intractable here than they are elsewhere.” Also the suggestion of using GD would not improve it.
This holds true for intra-conference tie breakers as well...
as each team plays each other conference foe 3 times (at least in the West)…so how do you handicap the advantage/disadvantage of and additional home/road game? It would almost have to go to goal diff, goals scored…even records against common opponents won’t work (for the same reasons).
In the past they have used head-to-head
even when there was a home-away unbalance.
Better than I had expected
I like this schedule better than the 2008 schedule, and I had expected the league to do something like that. And with all the talk of rivalries, I had figured we’d play PDX and Vancouver more than anyone else in the league, which is not the case.
To me, the most important thing is that we have the same schedule that every other team in the West has. Do the teams in the East have a better chance at getting to the playoffs? Maybe, maybe not. But we’ve got just as good a shot as every team in our conference and that’s good enough for me.
Taking a step back and looking at other US pro sports, this still represents a more balanced schedule than MLB or the NFL, and it’s pretty close to the system the NBA has. (I’m not sure about the NHL’s schedule.) And selection for the playoffs makes a lot more sense than in MLB or the NFL, where there are wild card spots determined by comparing the records of teams with vastly different schedules.
Whatever the 2012 schedule was going to be, it’s not going to last very long. Even once you get to 23-24 teams, then this system is no longer feasible (too many games) and at that point, we’ll likely see the creation of two divisions in each conference.
But the Sounders won't have the same schedule as everyone else in the West
half the West will play 2 games at RSL while the other half host. A team could also play 2 on the road at the Rapids.
If a team double dips road games in the Rockies they likely drop 10 or more points.
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
Look at last season
There were 7 teams with a better HFA than RSL last season and there were 14 teams with a better HFA than Colorado last season. At most, teams with a good HFA are maybe .5 points/game better at home than on the road. It’s not nearly as dire as you make it out to be. Vancouver and Portland had the 2nd and 3rd biggest home/away point differentials, which I would chalk up to travel, except that the Sounders managed to earn more points on the road than at home(!).
HFA matters in the sense that you don’t want to play more away games than home games, but determining the actual magnitude of a specific team’s HFA is tricky, and I think HFA in RSL and COL has been overstated.
Clarification
At most, teams with a good HFA are maybe .5 points/game better at home than on the road.
Should read: At most a team with a good HFA has a HFA that is maybe .5 points/game better than a league-average HFA.
I'm guessing he's talking about the delta between home field and road performance
Which makes sense. The Sounders were a great team last year, but because their home and away records were so similar, you’d prefer to have them be one of your 2-away game teams. Conversely, Portland wasn’t that great either home or away, but the difference between their home and away performances were one of the greatest in the league, so you’d prefer to have them be one of the teams you welcome to your home pitch twice.
The important thing in determining SoS isn’t how good a team is at home in the abstract, but how much better they are at home than they are away, compared against the other teams in the conference.
Basically, yes
More details in your fanpost.
You guys have a match simulator, right?
I’d love to see a post detailing the difference between the worst and best case scenario for scheduling, based on last year’s performance. How different the Sounders’ results would be if we double dipped on road trips to the Rockies and other places with significant home field advantage. My intuition is that even the worst case scenario won’t be anywhere near as bad as 3 points and that the schedules as they actually exist will be less, but I could be completely wrong.
Never mind, I've done some of the work myself
Not using the match simulator, but just using a league average team and comparing the HFA differentials between the top half of the league and the bottom half of the league. You can find it here:
Garbage
You can take your deltas on HFA and throw them in the garbage when the Sounders take COL and RSL and do the same to them, while going undefeated next year.
How many days ?
On the bright side, HFA means close to nothing to the Sounders
This past year our home and away records were nearly identical. We actually had a slight home field disadvantage, scoring .06 PPG better on the road than we did at home.
The Supporters Shield is DEAD
If you are still a EPL wannabe, please give up. This country is too big and we have to do it differently here. We are at an in-between era, too big for h&a against every team and too small for conference championships to mean very much. It is what it is. When there are 18 teams in each conference then you can get your precious balanced schedule back, for now, get over it.
Club World Cup Champions 2012
Brazil is roughly the same size as USA
And they manage a double round robin balanced schedule. Russia and China have balanced schedules too, and they are both bigger than the USA. Australia has a triple round robin.
Predicted league expansion is the reason why we are not going to have a balanced schedule in the future, not the size of the country.
Brazil's teams are almost entirely on the coast..
If you look at the map here: http://www.albionroad.com/articles/brazilian-football-map.html …you’ll see that the travel time between any of these teams by plane is Chicago to NYC at most.
only 16 teams each in russia and china
and australia? I didn’t even bother to look it up…good point about predicted expansion as part of the reason to go unbalanced, but, size of the our country is the reason for the predicted expansion so… San Diego 2014 We need to go jedi mind trick on Garber! “The droids you’re looking for are in San Diego…”
Club World Cup Champions 2012
by seattle dude on Nov 21, 2011 1:35 PM PST up reply actions
No
The reason for the predicted expansion is the lack of promotion/relegation.
promotion/relegation is for EPL wannabes
do want a league with only four good teams and everybody else just trying to stay in the top flight? I don’t. The sides in Europe that bounce up and down are playing in hundred year old venues. You can’t ask an american city to build a stadium for soccor if Kitsap Pumas(no offence, KP) could be the best team you see next season because your team has been relegated. If relegation worked in the USA, they would have it in baseball, which is the closest sports analog to euro-futball history that we have here
Club World Cup Champions 2012
by seattle dude on Nov 21, 2011 2:04 PM PST up reply actions
I do not get the focus on English Premiership
Promotion and relegation is common in all team sports around the world.
Anyway,. I was not arguing for promotion/relegation. I was just pointing out that the lack of it is the reason why MLS needs to expand beyond 20 teams.
I’m also not sure what the emergence of the Big 4 has to do with promotion and relegation.
It is a long coastline
The longest trip there is 2000 miles. Seattle to New York is 2400 miles. Both as the crow flies.
Brazil is in the same time zone
And even then, a vast majority of their teams are in a space the size of the US NorthEast
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
There are three time zones in Brazil
And the teams change from year to year, so sometimes there are longer trips. I believe that currently the longest trip right now is between Figueirense and Avaí in Florianópolis and Ceará in Fortaleza, which is about a 2300 mile trip.
There are teams also in Brasilia, which isn’t really close to anything.
Twentieth MLS franchise awarded to Beckham and San Diego
Set to start play in 2014!
Not really, but why not massage the future a lil. I want the next franchise to be in our time zone and we can push some other mountain time zone team to the east conference. Less travel for our boys plus another warm place to travel to for an away game!
Club World Cup Champions 2012
I'd like to see the Cosmos return, for real.
I met a possum.
by s0merand0mdude on Nov 21, 2011 6:04 PM PST up reply actions
I think there are other plans for San Diego.
When the Chargers get their new stadium done, I think it is very likely that Chivas USA will be a co-tenant.
by Derek Markgraf on Nov 22, 2011 1:56 PM PST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
