• Hello Guest. We are upgrading the server's XenForo versions. This has to be done in stages. 1.5.18 ---> 1.5.23 ---> 2.0.0 ---> 2.0.12 ---> 2.1.0. I will likely upgrade each one and leave it for a day or so to see if there's any kinks. When moving from 1.x to 2.x, our add-ons will cease to work. Much of the functionality of said add-ons is now native within XenForo 2.x, so I don't think we'll miss much if anything. IF we are, we can try out new 2.x XF add-ons.

Major League Soccer Thread

DeadMan

aka spiker or DeadMong
Is it the USA's favorable tax structure that is luring them?
Probably more the $$$$. Some (maybe most?) MLS clubs are in much better financial positions than clubs in South America. I bet Martinez is going to make significantly more money at Atlanta than he did at River Plate.
 

NML

Well-Known Member
100% of MLS clubs are in a better financial position than 80% of first division, South American clubs, IMO.

MLS is closing in on a billion dollars a year in revenue. My guess is that once expansion gets to 28, they’ll surpass that (if not sooner).

I think right now, they are behind the big five in Europe and Brazil (and maybe China?). But a lot of bigger clubs, both in SA and Europe, get huge paychecks from continental competition, so there’s a tier of clubs who they are still behind financially. River Plate is probably ahead of 90% of MLS, but not Atlanta (apparently)
 

doh

THANK YOU Dermott McHeshi
Cincinnati signing lots of USL players including a few of their own. Keeping same manager as well. I wonder if they'll be Minnesota part II until they open their reel stadium.
 

Snorky's Shame

Well-Known Member
New playoff format:

Top seven in each conference get in, conference winners get byes to the next round.

Every round is single elimination to be played between the October and November FIFA breaks.

I hate this format. Guaranteed we will be complaining about two things next year.

1) The games being less entertaining since the road team will sit back hoping for PK’s.

2) When (not if) a conference winner loses its first game suggesting giving them three weeks off isn’t a good idea.
 

NML

Well-Known Member
MLS is between a rock and a hard place.

They pretty much had to get rid of two-leg rounds because of the two international windows. They could have the semi’s before the Nov window, with the finals after, but then you’ll have players leaving, playing two games elsewhere, and then coming back four days before the final.

Going earlier doesn’t really help, since you just move into the same issue between September and November windows. Certainly can’t go later without having possible terrible conditions in the north. They even moved up the end of the season a few weeks to sneak this in between.

The way to make it work is to have less teams make the playoffs (and have less matches), but then MLS is tossing money out the window. That’s never going to happen.

My guess is that, in the end, the “solution” will be moving to a fall-spring season
 

NML

Well-Known Member
I’d also have to disagree that games will be less exciting. The reality is the two-legged rounds are watched about as often as a regular season match. Personally, I didn’t watch the first leg of either, and if MLS isn’t even getting me to tune in, then I’ll question just how “exciting” the product is.

I think making each match “win or go home” will do a lot for ratings. People don’t tune into march madness for the quality on the court.

Now if your main concern is getting the best team to win, then yeah this isn’t a good move. But that’s not really the goal of any domestic cup in the world (that’s what the league is for). I think it gives more value to the regular season since seeding will be massive (much in the same way it is in the NFL), which adds intrigue the whole way

I’m not excited for the change, but it makes sense from a MLS perspective
 

Snorky's Shame

Well-Known Member
I get not wanting the playoffs getting interrupted by FIFA breaks, but basically MLS Cup will be decided on who gets hot for only four games.

I would have kept the two leg series with midweek games after the knockout round and conference semifinals. Admittedly two leg series takes away the home field advantage for the higher seed, I actually like the Liga MX rule where after 180 minutes if the series is tied, the higher seed advances. I just think you’re going to see a lot of cynical soccer with single elimination.

I really don’t think giving the top seed three weeks off is a good idea either. Would not be shocked to see a conference champion lose early next year because they were shaking off rust after the layoff.

It’s also rumored that the season will start in February in 2020 to accommodate the new format. They can’t do it this year because you can’t have an off-season of less than three months under the CBA.
 

doh

THANK YOU Dermott McHeshi
New playoff format:

Top seven in each conference get in, conference winners get byes to the next round.

Every round is single elimination to be played between the October and November FIFA breaks.

I hate this format. Guaranteed we will be complaining about two things next year.

1) The games being less entertaining since the road team will sit back hoping for PK’s.

2) When (not if) a conference winner loses its first game suggesting giving them three weeks off isn’t a good idea.
I like this more than old format. Too many games in old format and too little time meant that teams couldn't sell tix. And breaking for FIFA kills any momentum the playoffs had. I like how if you are a lower seed, you don't get any of the match at home. Rewards winning a conference a lot more too.
 

NML

Well-Known Member
Last year showed Jozy - not Gio - is/was the most important player on that team. Probably why they sold Gio and will wait and see on Jozy.

Boyd seems like an obvious Jozy replacement but of worse quality, so he could be more of a insurance policy if he doesn’t come back 100%. I can’t think the market for him is that great unless he comes out on fire next month
 

NML

Well-Known Member
To be fair, that was the best game of the weekend.

Actually every match I watched was entertaining from a competitive standpoint. Still tough to go from EPL in the morning to MLS quality, but I enjoyed the slate of games yesterday.

Cincinnati is going to have a long season.
 

NML

Well-Known Member
Zelalem to SKC is cool, but somehow he’s only 22? My god he’s been around forever

I don’t think he’s played since he got hurt at the 2017 U20 World Cup
 

kella

Smug know-it-all
Staff member
Administrator
Operations
I watched some of this non-retirement league this weekend and saw Rooney, Nani, and fucking Chris Wondolowski.
 

doh

THANK YOU Dermott McHeshi
Cincinnati signing lots of USL players including a few of their own. Keeping same manager as well. I wonder if they'll be Minnesota part II until they open their reel stadium.
And FCC already fires the manager. Just seems like a half assed year like Minnesota until they open real stadium.
 

Snorky's Shame

Well-Known Member
And FCC already fires the manager. Just seems like a half assed year like Minnesota until they open real stadium.
That roster is so bad. I still don’t think having teams in Columbus and Cincinnati is a good idea.

Pretty much confirmed the Fire are moving back to Soldier Field next year. I’m conflicted to be honest.
 

doh

THANK YOU Dermott McHeshi
Good question... he just got fired. His "IN MY DAY WE PLAYED HARD" act was hilarious.

MLS parity problem is taking care of itself. League turning into 6-7 clubs and everyone else quick.
 

Snorky's Shame

Well-Known Member
MLS parity problem is taking care of itself. League turning into 6-7 clubs and everyone else quick.
New York City
New York (this one is debatable)
Toronto
Atlanta
D.C. United (?)
Los Angeles
LA Galaxy
Seattle (they won’t be on this list in 5-10 years, they’ve basically admitted they won’t be able to spend as much as Atlanta and the Los Angeles and New York teams)

Miami will most likely be on this list and I have no idea how the move to Soldier Field will work out for the Fire.

That’s what worries me about MLS Expansion right now, they’re going into a lot of markets they don’t really need to be in. I don’t think Sacramento and St. Louis are must have markets.

The funny thing regarding the latter is that whenever Detroit gets mentioned, stuff like dying city, no money, crime, etc... gets brought up. Thing is THE EXACT SAME SHIT IS HAPPENING IN ST. LOUIS! In my experience, people from Detroit readily admit their city has problems. People from St. Louis are either too stupid to figure it out, are in denial or just say “at least we are not East St. Louis”. Basically Detroit is the alcoholic in this scenario and St. Louis is the drunk.

I think the best test of a market is when the first time the team becomes bad after being good because the “new car smell” has worn off and the team isn’t competing for championships. Philadelphia’s attendance has gone down since 2010. Houston’s has plummeted since BBVA opened. You see a lot of purple seats in Orlando now. Chicago’s problems have been well documented. Salt Lake aren’t drawing what they used to. I worry how Montreal and Vancouver are going to compete long term (especially Montreal if the rumors are true).

MLS has to figure out what to do with teams 10-15 years down the line from when they started. I’m not sure what the answer is to that question.
 

goblue96

Disney and Curling Expert
Philadelphia’s other problem, besides being Philadelphia, is the stadium is in a terrible location. Have to drive through a couple of not too friendly neighborhoods to get to the stadium and there’s no mass transit that drops off at the stadium without having to walk through the shitty neighborhoods.
 

doh

THANK YOU Dermott McHeshi
New York City
New York (this one is debatable)
Toronto
Atlanta
D.C. United (?)
Los Angeles
LA Galaxy
Seattle (they won’t be on this list in 5-10 years, they’ve basically admitted they won’t be able to spend as much as Atlanta and the Los Angeles and New York teams)
I'd half put Portland on the list. They give a shit and seem to be run very well. But as the money gets larger, they are handcuffed by their market and stadium. They've been awful this year but have had rough starts and will pay to get better. Kansas City is half on the list but they're handcuffed by the same things.

Seattle's trending downward quick. They aren't going to buy guys like Dempsey anymore it seems. They do have insane economic explosion in the city going for them. But I think they eventually need their own stadium.

NYRB I'd half put on. They've gone away from big DP signings and spending as much. But they've spent a bit on YAs.

The only market left really is Las Vegas IMO. I think you could put a team there and get stars to go there. Could use Raiders stadium. They're going to want to fill events. Load schedule up early/late in the season. I think Miami could be decent especially if Beckham is all in.

The one place that would absolutely mint money, have a great fanbase and I think kick ass: San Francisco or Oakland. San Jose is just too far away for people like me. The stadium was half assed. The team is run by a cheap ass owner. The problem is building a legit stadium in Oakland or SF would be impossible. But if some billionaire who loved soccer wanted to do it, it'd be awesome. It'd be similar to LA: Galaxy are away from LA, stadium is dated, etc. and LAFC exploded.
 

Snorky's Shame

Well-Known Member
I'd half put Portland on the list. They give a shit and seem to be run very well. But as the money gets larger, they are handcuffed by their market and stadium. They've been awful this year but have had rough starts and will pay to get better. Kansas City is half on the list but they're handcuffed by the same things.

Seattle's trending downward quick. They aren't going to buy guys like Dempsey anymore it seems. They do have insane economic explosion in the city going for them. But I think they eventually need their own stadium.

NYRB I'd half put on. They've gone away from big DP signings and spending as much. But they've spent a bit on YAs.

The only market left really is Las Vegas IMO. I think you could put a team there and get stars to go there. Could use Raiders stadium. They're going to want to fill events. Load schedule up early/late in the season. I think Miami could be decent especially if Beckham is all in.

The one place that would absolutely mint money, have a great fanbase and I think kick ass: San Francisco or Oakland. San Jose is just too far away for people like me. The stadium was half assed. The team is run by a cheap ass owner. The problem is building a legit stadium in Oakland or SF would be impossible. But if some billionaire who loved soccer wanted to do it, it'd be awesome. It'd be similar to LA: Galaxy are away from LA, stadium is dated, etc. and LAFC exploded.
Yeah, you’re absolutely right about Kansas City and Portland. I got into a big argument with fellow Fire fans when I said Kansas City and Portland would be screwed if MLS ever got rid of relegation. That’s why I didn’t put them on the list.

As for Philadelphia, yeah Chester is rough. It sounds like the same problems the Fire have in Bridgeview although some people think it’s just as dangerous as Chester. That’s not true, Bridgeview is safe but there’s nothing to do around the stadium.

Las Vegas would be interesting late in the season as there’s the Raiders and UNLV you have to schedule around not to mention the unique situation of UNLV playing on FieldTurf and the Raiders on grass. At least there is a roof.

I’m not too well versed on the Bay Area but I’ve a lot complaints about access stadium to the 49ers stadium in Santa Clara and I’d imagine the same problems exist at Avaya. Does BART serve the stadium.

Speaking of public transportation, I’m not that inclined to take it when the Fire are at Soldier Field even though “in theory” it would be easier. Actually it would take me 30 minutes longer to get home by public transportation than driving home from Bridgeview. Driving to Soldier Field isn’t great either and I’ll probably get killed for parking. All that said, I’m glad the Fire are out of Bridgeview. The municipality never should have made the deals it did to build that stadium.
 
I think Phoenix also makes sense since its such a big metro, but then again, that doesn't play into the Phoenix teams in the Big 4 leagues having lots of money to play with.
 

doh

THANK YOU Dermott McHeshi
Yeah, you’re absolutely right about Kansas City and Portland. I got into a big argument with fellow Fire fans when I said Kansas City and Portland would be screwed if MLS ever got rid of relegation. That’s why I didn’t put them on the list.

As for Philadelphia, yeah Chester is rough. It sounds like the same problems the Fire have in Bridgeview although some people think it’s just as dangerous as Chester. That’s not true, Bridgeview is safe but there’s nothing to do around the stadium.

Las Vegas would be interesting late in the season as there’s the Raiders and UNLV you have to schedule around not to mention the unique situation of UNLV playing on FieldTurf and the Raiders on grass. At least there is a roof.

I’m not too well versed on the Bay Area but I’ve a lot complaints about access stadium to the 49ers stadium in Santa Clara and I’d imagine the same problems exist at Avaya. Does BART serve the stadium.

Speaking of public transportation, I’m not that inclined to take it when the Fire are at Soldier Field even though “in theory” it would be easier. Actually it would take me 30 minutes longer to get home by public transportation than driving home from Bridgeview. Driving to Soldier Field isn’t great either and I’ll probably get killed for parking. All that said, I’m glad the Fire are out of Bridgeview. The municipality never should have made the deals it did to build that stadium.
BART is no where close to Avaya. CalTrain goes kinda close but still not that close. It used to be right across from Buck Shaw. So to get from Oakland/SF to Avaya you have to drive or take $100 Uber. It is a similar situation. Parking around stadium isn't great. When I've gone I've parked in residential neighborhood maybe a half mile away.

The biggest problem the Quakes have is the stadium is not good. The huge bar behind the one goal is by far the best part. They built it in a bad spot for a bunch of reasons. There's nothing close. The stadium feels cheap. No roof and a wide open side means the atmosphere is never good. The way they structured the stadium too is weird.

Beyond the stadium, the team has been awful for years. They have no stars or anyone you'd come to see. They'll never sign a big DP. The good news is they spent on the manager and he seems to be leaving his mark and they have a pretty good YA.
 

DeadMan

aka spiker or DeadMong
Went to a Rapids game for the first time in a while this weekend. God damn, the Rapids are really bad. It took them 43 minutes to have an attempt on goal. Their midfield could not build up play at all, although it improved slightly when Acosta went from right wing to midfield. Kamara created everything for them by holding up the ball and moving it to the wing. It was pretty brutal to watch, even though there were 5 goals.

Also, VAR kind of sucks. The whole time they're doing the review, there's no video in the stadium of what the ref is looking at. What looked like a stone-cold red card was overturned, and they ran one replay of it.
 

NML

Well-Known Member
Arena to the Revs as corch and football director

Firing Burns and Freidel was good, that needed to be done. Hiring Arena, and giving him all the power is questionable.

Arena strengths are his man management and domestic scouting. But the issue is 1) domestic scouting is all but dead as the draft is about the fifth option for acquiring talent and 2) the Revs don’t have any big egos that need managing

He also burned some bridges with USMNT guys who may have considered the Revs, namely Geoff Cameron
 

Snorky's Shame

Well-Known Member
Las Vegas is making a big push to get a team. You got the Las Vegas Lights pushing to get a soccer-specific stadium at Cashman Field while the Vegas Golden Knights owner wants to put a team at the new Raiders stadium.

If only they can get the stadium in the Lights’ plan near the Raiders’ stadium. There just doesn’t seem to be much around Cashman when I went there.
 

doh

THANK YOU Dermott McHeshi
I've been to Cashman... that would be a terrible site to have a team.

Just put them in the NFL stadium. It's right near the strip, it's state of the art, other teams have made it work.

Or maybe partner with a casino to build a SSS. The stadium would get smaller acts that want to be outside/can't do the Raiders stadium. Could get a small bowl there, some other events.