re: NASL is seemingly doomed

quote:

---

statements like this is why no one listens to you.

---

Clearly MLS is growing in popularity but the EPL boom and the love for Barca and Madrid has hurt its potential growth.

quote:

---

MLS is already on the brink of being way to big of league

---

No they aren't.

quote:

---

if they got that route at least give us MLS I and MLS II.

---

You are going to get MLS and USL I and USL II in the future. Hopefully further down the road you get pro/rel. But not now.

quote:

---

Other things like the unbalanced schedule allocation rules are absurd.

---

You're just wrong here and don't have the pulse of soccer in the US, what the fans want, or what the players want. One of the top problems of MLS, as stated by all the players, is the size of the US and travel. They want less travel. A balanced schedule increases travel. Portland and New England playing each other the same amount as Portland plays Seattle or Vancouver is flawed. The fans don't want it, the players don't want it. They want rivalries where they don't have to travel from coast to coast. Fans want rivalries so they can travel and take part.

This is a perfect example of you trying to fit your Eurocentric round peg into a square hole. The Premier League has a balanced schedule, therefore the MLS should have a balanced schedule. And if they don't its wrong. You take zero consideration of the fact that the US is nothing like England, the realities of geography, the populace, the economics, or the fan situation that must be considered in growing a solid, good, professional soccer league in the US.

A professional club. Top training grounds and facilities. Stadia. Sponsorships. Top academies. Coaching. Education. All of these things take money. Lots of money. They require investors willing to plump down hundreds of millions. And MLS is getting it. They are establishing clubs. That's a good thing. It's great for soccer in the US.

Are you going to sit there and tell us that it's not a good thing that Atlanta United being established is not a good thing for soccer? That the academy being built there is not a good thing? That the thousands of people, including kids, that will be watching MLS soccer there is not a good thing? That the training ground being built there is not a good thing?

Are you going to say that Sacramento and everything they are doing there, building all that infrastructure, growing their academy, building that stadium, bringing soccer on the level they are to all those fans, are you going to say that's not a good thing? That somehow that is hurting soccer?

Are you going to say the same about LAFC? Minnesota? All these clubs are going to bring more soccer to more people. They will produce more quality players through their academies, which MLS is pouring money into. USL is growing with help from MLS and it keeps players playing that otherwise would not be playing. That is good. It's establishing a stair step.

But it all takes tons of money and investment. And MLS is doing it, and doing it well. It's so much better in every way than it was even just ten years ago. It's not perfect, it can't be right now. But it will continue to grow and evolve. And it's all positive.

quote:

---

No they aren't.

---

what other first division is this big already?

The depth is already lacking, so sure lets have 30 teams

quote:

---

You are going to get MLS and USL I and USL II in the future. Hopefully further down the road you get pro/rel. But not now.

---

um the comish already said no thats never going to happen.

quote:

---

You're just wrong here and don't have the pulse of soccer in the US, what the fans want, or what the players want. One of the top problems of MLS, as stated by all the players, is the size of the US and travel. They want less travel. A balanced schedule increases travel. Portland and New England playing each other the same amount as Portland plays Seattle or Vancouver is flawed. The fans don't want it, the players don't want it. They want rivalries where they don't have to travel from coast to coast. Fans want rivalries so they can travel and take part

---

over 9 months it can be done with the logistics.

quote:

---

This is a perfect example of you trying to fit your Eurocentric round peg into a square hole. The Premier League has a balanced schedule, therefore the MLS should have a balanced schedule. And if they don't its wrong. You take zero consideration of the fact that the US is nothing like England, the realities of geography, the populace, the economics, or the fan situation that must be considered in growing a solid, good, professional soccer league in the US.

---

pretty much ever league in the world has a balanced schedule

quote:

---

A professional club. Top training grounds and facilities. Stadia. Sponsorships. Top academies. Coaching. Education. All of these things take money. Lots of money. They require investors willing to plump down hundreds of millions. And MLS is getting it. They are establishing clubs. That's a good thing. It's great for soccer in the US.

---

Yes the MLS is doing but making it hard for anyone else.

quote:

---

Are you going to sit there and tell us that it's not a good thing that Atlanta United being established is not a good thing for soccer? That the academy being built there is not a good thing? That the thousands of people, including kids, that will be watching MLS soccer there is not a good thing? That the training ground being built there is not a good thing?

Are you going to say that Sacramento and everything they are doing there, building all that infrastructure, growing their academy, building that stadium, bringing soccer on the level they are to all those fans, are you going to say that's not a good thing? That somehow that is hurting soccer?

Are you going to say the same about LAFC? Minnesota? All these clubs are going to bring more soccer to more people. They will produce more quality players through their academies, which MLS is pouring money into. USL is growing with help from MLS and it keeps players playing that otherwise would not be playing. That is good. It's establishing a stair step.

But it all takes tons of money and investment. And MLS is doing it, and doing it well. It's so much better in every way than it was even just ten years ago. It's not perfect, it can't be right now. But it will continue to grow and evolve. And it's all positive.

---

No all those clubs should be there but there becomes a point the league will be too big and it make the quality of play worse.

quote:

---

'm not sure I buy that. I became interested in international soccer, then the EPL, then American soccer as my interest grew and I wanted to pay more attention to our domestic league. I really enjoy MLS. That Seattle vs LA game yesterday was good entertainment. The product is getting better and it's kind of amazing the speed at which it's improving, compared to just 5 years ago.

---

People are not packing bars around the country to watch MLS.

If Arsenal or your favorite MLS side where playing at the same time. Who would you watch?

Me I'm taking Man United over DC with out a question.

quote:

---

Yes the MLS is doing but making it hard for anyone else

---

NASL is failing because they have poor leadership and sketchy ownership investment. MLS is developing because they have better leadership and investment.

And they aren't making it hard, they just have standards because you need deep, solid investment. Otherwise you end up like NASL.

You got a ton of cash? Get in a market, establish a club, get real bona fide plans for a stadium, a training ground, an academy, bring in other diverse investors, get a marketing campaign, establish corporate sponsorships, establish working relationships with the community and political leadership, and you will get serious consideration from MLS. That is what Sacramento, Atlanta, Minnesota, San Antonio, LAFC, and other clubs are doing.

Look SCH I'm passionate about soccer in the US. Sorry if I get animated. You're good people. We disagree on some things. That's fine. Good people can disagree.

I'll still drink an Augustiner with you. I'll even buy you a pint when City beats United again.

I think the NASL is a joke

I'm looking at it from a grass roots perspective. That's why it's more than just pro/rel to me. 20 so MLS academies isn't enough and then relying on pay to play set ups out side of that is going to hinder development. Pay to pay is just there to line the pockets of the USSF.

Nice detailed article about what likely will happen to NASL. If they even live I think they've burned too many bridges to stay D2. I can see a couple other clubs also jumping ship or a merger is forced. The Cosmos will likely die again LINK